We believe that a consistent ethic of human life is a religious issue. Do the candidates' positions on abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia, weapons of mass destruction, HIV/AIDS-and other pandemics-and genocide around the world obey the biblical injunction to choose life?In other words, unless a candidate opposes capital punishment and favors ever-greater funding for AIDS relief, the candidate is inconsistent on the life-issues and needn't be taken seriously as "pro-life." Interestingly, Pax Christi USA, the national Catholic peace group, has a nearly-identical petition framed with exactly the same goals in mind. It is available here.
Good post. When I read that statement, again, I think it can be construed as a left leaning statement. But thinking for myself, I would separate each issue out: abortion: pro life, capital punishment: pro, because you're protecting society from psycho killers; euthanasia: con...although, this isn't an easy one...
What the main thing seems to come down to is this, and this is where this whole thing can be isidious: How much of these world problems are for the government to be involved in? IE...of course we want a cure for AIDS or help for the hungry. But I want to do it myself or with efficient groups dedicated to the task...I don't want to have my $$$ taken from me to fill the coffers of bloated and corrupt government and quasi-government (UN) programs that will offer little, if any, help for those problems.