He’s by no means perfect, and I would never vote for him for the presidency, to take one example. But he’s pretty good for Massachusetts.
I’m waiting to see just how pro-choice he will be in his new job. To give him credit, he is far less so than Coakley. He voted for parental notification. He voted against partial birth abortion. And he tried to introduce an amendment to a state bill that infringed on freedom of conscience of medical personnel and Catholic Hospitals. That’s why Coakley put her foot in it when she said she didn’t think Catholics should be allowed to work in emergency rooms.
With all due respect -- sincerely -- this kind of talk is nonsense -- it's relativistic modernist babble. There is no such thing as degrees of choice. One either defends the sanctity of all human life or one does not. Degrees in absolute matters are for fools. He certainly does not represent those of his constituency who do.
It is my opinion that one who does not understand the sanctity of life has no business being a position of influence over it.