Thank you.
I do believe it’s important to continue educating on this point as this delusional and ultimately evil line of reasoning seems to come up every election among those who claim they are “highly principled.”
It seems clear that it is a morally culpable act to refuse to do what is available to you to do (no matter how seemingly futile) to stop evil. Even if it means faciliating a lesser evil.
It is no different than the law allowing one to kill a human being (standing alone, an evil act) in order to protect your own life or the life of an innocent (in short, to try to prevent a greater evil).
Standing by and letting someone be murdered when there is an act available to you to do to try to stop that murder is reprehensible. Then to claim it’s “not my fault because my principles didn’t allow me to act” is even worse.
In moral terms, it is no less culpable to refuse to vote (in an effective way) against Obama (by voting for the only viable candidate who could have defeated him, McCain) than to vote directly for him.
The news just reported that Obama also intends to lift Bush’s order limiting stem cell research ASAP.
That's the explanation of an irresponsible coward, and one with no principles or morals. Even Gandhi, the ultimate arbiter of peace to the leftists, said: "Between violence and cowardly flight, I can only prefer violence to cowardice."
http://www.mkgandhi.org/epigrams/contents.htm
Now we know, Obama got blood money. May the wrath of God and the blood of the slaughtered innocents come down on every last one of them.
These people take God for a fool at their peril.