[sinkspur]

Since Pres. Bush favors significant limitations on abortion, and would not rule out nominating pro-life judges, as Kerry has already ruled out, a vote for President Bush is a vote to limit evil, which constitutes a proportionate reason, and is clearly allowable.

I agree.

One would not, however, be able to vote for someone who wholeheartedly supports evil, and is no better than the Democrats on life issues, such as Gov. Schwarzenegger.

Wrong. If two pro-choicers are running, one may, according to the Church, vote for the one who represents the lesser of two evils. Thus, a vote for Kay Bailey Hutchison versus a pro-choice Democrat is perfectly allowable. A voter for Schwarzenegger over a Cruz Bustamante would also be allowable.

To declare unequivocally that voting for Kerry, in this instance, rather than Bush is a mortal sin is simply not supported in moral theology. Bush is less pro-choice than Kerry, but he is still, according to the prohibitions on abortion outlined by the Church, pro-choice.

[B Knotts]

A voter for Schwarzenegger over a Cruz Bustamante would also be allowable.

On what basis? There must be a proportionate reason. There was a pro-life candidate running in that election, as well.

[B Knotts]

To declare unequivocally that voting for Kerry, in this instance, rather than Bush is a mortal sin is simply not supported in moral theology.

Unless someone can come up with a proportionate reason for doing so, I cannot agree.