Yes, quite. #131 is worded nicely but is an interpretation or opinion.
Nor does #131 address the fact that, according to the Church, one can vote for a choice candidate as long as he/she has done thoughtful introspect into the moral reasons for voting as he/she chooses and has a clear conscience in doing so. For example, if someone votes for a pro-choice candidate because they feel he/she will do more to better economic conditions which are directly related to the rate of abortion, then, they can justifiably have a clear conscience on the matter.
If some politician were to authorize the professional and hygienic dismemberment of a moderate number of Free Republic members, but were "good" on the economy, I doubt that any of us would support him on the grounds that with a really good economy, hardly anyone would want to dismember FReepers.
One may only vote for a pro-abortion candidate if both candidates are pro-abortion. Then consideration of other factors are relevant. Abortion is the first of the five non-negotiables.
Through good economies and bad, since 1973 the number of abortions has remained fairly constant. Some years up and some years down. It has quite simply become a form of birth control for millions. The best and most effective way to reduce the numbers is to once again make it illegal. Millions of women have had abortions because of legality. Illegality will remove the option and then more babies will be born or “gasp” some women might even amend their sexual activity. You know, only have sex with men who are their husbands or at the very least, men they have known longer than a few weeks.
I have a niece who got pregnant but didn’t want to marry the father. She claimed that “marriage was just too big of a commitment”. Funny. After all, an abortion is over and done in a couple of hours. One might actually have to work at a marriage and if there is a divorce, then oh boy, that could be really uncomfortable.