I’m a single-issue pro-lifer in a swing state, and I cannot vote for Trump

197 thoughts on “I’m a single-issue pro-lifer in a swing state, and I cannot vote for Trump”

1. Is abortion murder ? Yes, enough said and by the author talking in circles changes nothing.

2. Pingback: Smart, Well-informed Pro-life Catholics Chose Clinton? - St. Joseph's Vanguard

3. “Speaking of the Hyde Amendment and Obamacare, if the fate of tens of thousands of babies really does come down to funding, as I keep hearing from the “But the Hyde Amendment!” crowd, then riddle me this: The Hyde Amendment (and I keep accidentally typing “Hype Amendment,” which is pretty accurate) means that federal tax dollars can’t go for abortions. And it’s completely bogus. ”

   The lion’s share of federal money going to the abortion industry comes via an annual half billion block grant via HHS and ObamaCare. There is only one recipient: Planned Parenthood. Otherwise, much smaller sums may go towards abortion via indirect funding via The United Way grants, or other federal contributions. But, by far the Planned Parenthood grant is the largest.

4. Pingback: Thought-Provoking Reads, vol. 4: Election Aftermath – work in progress

5. Simcha –

   Do you really think it is better to vote for the party machine and candidate who think our Church needs a “Catholic Spring”? These people, Clinton’s closest associates and handlers, have admitted in private that they think our holy Church is in need of upheaval in order to conform to their view of what constitutes an acceptable religious organization, and that they have the right to push for it.

   And Hillary NEVER apologized or distanced herself from these statements.

   I cannot understand your line of thinking on this, and how you can justify backing such people. How can you support people who want to undermine our sacred beliefs and principals? The Nazis tried to do the same, and failed, thanks to the grace of our good God.

   The vote is over now. Trump is very far from ideal presidential material, but at least we have been saved from a worse fate.

   I hope you reconsider your view of American politics. From following your blog, I can tell you are an exemplary mother and wife, and that, like the rest of us, you are trying to be a good Catholic.

   God bless you and your family, sister.

6. That was a lot of cerebral muscle gymnastics that you did. Not convincing one bit, because it lacks logic. Yes, it does. At best, your “logic” consists of a pretty wild bet. You are really losing your mind. As a somehow well-known catholic blogger you should know better than to publicly announce your vote for someone like Hillary. At least you wouldn’t scandalize any souls, just your own. Don’t want to vote for Trump? Don’t do it! But that doesn’t make voting for Hillary a moral decision. Hillary, by the way, is married to a Trump-like herself. You are indeed losing your mind, and dare I say, your soul. Hopefully God will give you plenty of extra years in this life to reflect more on what you did, maybe history will show you, if you let that be, hopefully you will eventually repent and learn not to publicly lead others through ways that are not moral,, in the future. I only came here to check what was the latest of you on this Election Day and I won’t be coming back after this, sadly!
   Maybe one day you will realize life is grander than politics. Don’t compromise your life, soul and work because of unworthy candidates.

7. 3 words: Partial Birth Abortion.

8. Simcha – you are the only reason I haven’t lost every shred of respect for the conservative anti-abortion movement, which I can no longer call pro life, because it isn’t. The comments on this post show that clearly. I almost hope you don’t read this, because you would have to wade through PRIESTS calling people names.
   Guys…scandal much? I was raised traditional-style Catholic, Baltimore catechism and all. I am no longer practicing. Every comment I’ve seen on *this post alone* drives me farther from even considering returning to Catholicism.

9. It’s always sad to see this type of mental gymnastics and moral pretzels. What’s worse is how many loyal readers you will lead down this path. Unfortunately, I’m not surprised.

10. Shame on you, Simcha. Hillary is the most pro-baby-murder candidate for president we have ever had. May your irrational public defense of your murderous vote help you sleep at night.

11. Simcha, thanks for saying this and I’m sorry for all the horrible comments you are getting. No matter who you said you were voting for, no one deserves to be told they are going to hell (and all the other nasty things assumed). I mean gosh, we can’t read other’s souls. This comment thread makes me feel sick to my stomach. Anyway, I appreciate your writing (even when I’ve disagreed with it) and have found a lot of wisdom in it over the years. I’m glad you are carrying on despite the haters.

    1. You know, calling people with whom you disagree “haters” is a sign of limited reasoning ability, as well as a classic tactic of liberal progressives.

       1. Normally I disagree the term “haters” for the reasons you mention. However, in Beth’s defense, she’s not using it on people who disagree with her. There are truly hateful comments on this thread, and I’m assuming it’s those commenters she’s referring to when she uses the term.

12. I see a pattern here that is being commonly used these days and has also been used by those associated with Liberation Theology, and Marxism. You set up a situation whereby you attack the good of a person or movement as not being really good or perfect enough! Samantha and Shea, who I think are good people, are actually being used as tools to help maintain the status of abortion. The Communist called these types useful fools. People who do the bidding of the communist while not being actually communist themselves. They set up an impossible standard to meet. Anything short and you are not truly pro-life at all. So I would like to ask, just what person would meet the Shea and Simcha standard for pro-life? You guys didn’t like any of the candidates like Santorum, or Bush, or McCain, or Romney. So just who? The package she lists above would be great, but that ain’t happen in the near future. Saint John Paul II said it was permissible to vote to move the agenda forward, even in small steps. Is it not moving the agenda backwards, maybe for a long time, to allow the Democrats control? And where in the history of mankind have we found one perfect person to lead a movement, short of Jesus Christ? Constantine? Nope, we should not have followed him. Charlemagne, the first Holy Roman Emperor? Nope, he was not perfect? How about St. Joan of Arc’s King Charles? Nope, he betrayed Joan, and yet God desired he rule France. This most imperfect person, was hand picked by God. How about World War II? We beat the Evil of Hitler with very flawed men using very flawed tactics at times. Should we have not done so? Should my father not have fought in the South Pacific because McArthur was not a perfect man. Neither was Eisenhower, nor war Roosevelt. I could go on and on. So just who is a viable person to lead the pro-lie movement? and the Country? You guys throw stones, but there is nobody, at this moment to lead the charge other than this one person. If you don’t vote for him, you permit a greater evil, not a greater good, to take control for maybe all our life times. Instead of throwing stones, give us real answers this side of Heaven. We have to live here and now while looking toward Heaven. We will never reach perfection on this side. We will never feed all the poor. We will never completely overcome our sins, we will never do away with suffering and death on this side. Not until He comes again! This will never be a utopia! The Marxist promise the Utopia here. The Christian knows that will never happen here, only in the next life. So until then we have to work with what we have, the imperfect.

13. Trump’s not pro-life. I’ve never believed him for a second. Thank you for bravely and insightfully giving a voice to those of us who are Catholic and who believe that a Clinton presidency (like Obama’s presidency) will continue to reduce abortion rates. God bless you, Simcha Fisher. You are a treasure!

    1. Abortion rates have been declining for 30 years under both GOP and Dem presidents. Try again.

       1. Interesting. 12 hours post-election and Trump’s already scrubbed any mention of his opposition to abortion from the policies on his website . . . https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

14. Here’s a memorable quote from the woman you support, Hillary Clinton:
    “I admire Margaret Sanger enormously. Her courage, her tenacity, her vision.”
    Yeah, no red flags there, right?
    Did you happen to notice that under this Democrat administration, the U.S. spent $23 million dollars to get the new constitution of Kenya written to include legalized abortion? But tell us again how who is president doesn’t affect the number of unborn being killed.

15. Anyone who openly espouses the pro-abortion position (i.e. that it is acceptable to allow an innocent unborn child to be killed) is not worthy of a Catholic’s vote. Period. Full stop. Even IF Killary caused abortion rates to go down more than Trump (very dubious), you are voting for a candidate who is using the bully pulpit to advocate for baby slaughtering and is in bed with a horrendously evil organization, Planned Parenthood. Trump, at least, would not do that. The Democrat platform is explicitly anti-life, anti-family, and anti-God…and you are going to vote for their leader.

    I’m voting third party, but I cannot understand the calculus that would lead a Catholic to consider a vote for Killary. I can understand those voting for Trump.

    (Oh, and by the way, Catholic social teaching does not require either huge government handouts or a huge federal government. It simply requires supporting the common good, and the best way to accomplish that is a matter for prudential judgment. Catholic social teaching does suggest that actions should be taken at the most local level possible. If you think the federal government has proven itself to be an effective, efficient steward at helping the poor, sick, etc., I have a bridge to sell you….)

16. Dear Simcha Fisher,
    I do not blame you for refraining from voting for Trump. However, I would beg you to reconsider your vote for Hillary simply for your own soul’s sake. It is not morally permissable to do evil so that good may come of it. Being in a swing state is irrelevant. Vote for someone you know to be pro-life regardless of their chances. You are not responsible for how other people vote, only for yourself. God bless.

17. Always great to have the heretical hose beast perspective. Where’s Shea to give us the 4K calorie in one sitting perspective?
    You’re both symbols of the fat, perverted, dying America. It’s no wonder that you hate the Church.

18. What a great witness it would be to our Catholic faith if the comment thread here was a contrast with those on secular posts. A thread of people disagreeing respectfully, without personal attacks and insults, without judging the state of the blogger’s soul. This election has put many voters between a rock and a hard place. There are no easy answers, and there are valid arguments on each side. If only those arguments could be delivered charitably…

19. You are simply morally bankrupt. Stop writing publicly and repent. When you stand before the judgment seat of our Blessed Lord, you will answer for every baby murdered due to a Clinton presidency.

20. Thank you, Simcha. I feel much the same way and will be voting third party because it’s that or abstain, and if I abstain I won’t make myself go vote for all the local issues that I can actually influence.

21. Doesn’t this beg one rather obvious question: if the office of President is really as irrelevant to the rights and protections of the unborn as you suggest it is, then why should a pro-lifer even waste their time voting at all?

    And how could Trump be worse for the unborn than Hillary Clinton if the Presidency is as powerless to effect change as you say it is?

    The only way this line of reasoning – about voting for Hillary Clinton as a way to protect the unborn – actually makes any logical sense is if the role of presidency really does carry with it the power to effect change, and influence outcomes for the unborn.

    And if it does actually carry with it the power to effect change (as your reasoning necessitates that it does), then how could any serious pro-life person ever support a candidate who is so staunchly committed to the most extreme variants of pro-choice ideology?

    1. If I’ve understood Ms Fisher and Mark Shea correctly, what they mean when they say that a vote for Hillary Clinton is more pro-life is that *she* will offer more social programs for the poor, will not reject or eject refugees and immigrants, and in general will be a more active humanitarian. I do not agree with this approach myself; I see no possible way to make out that Mrs Clinton is more pro-life than Donald Trump, even supposing that he only adopted the pro-life position for cynical reasons. Trump’s stated policies, assuming he is able to implement them, might well benefit more poor Americans than the social policies favored by Mrs Clinton, which have done nothing in the Obama years to stem the rampant drug abuse and declining life expectancy among poor whites. On the other hand, I do think there is a case to be made that Mr Trump is too volatile to be a good President.

22. I like Simcha. Quips like “hang a millstone on your ballot and throw it into the sea, remind me why. I don’t read her regularly, but came across this post through Mark Shea’s Blog. I was only going to comment there, but after considering how influential she is, decided copying my post here is worthwhile if it influences either her or her readers away from two bad choices.

    As an initial disclaimer to Simcha and other’s still struggling with an intention to vote for Hillary in a few hours: please don’t take the following personally. This election has tried us all. I could scarce resent you for struggling with the same question I can only come up with futile-seeming answers to, even though I believe it necessary to bluntly challenge your conclusion.

    I whole-heartedly agree that Trump is not the pro-life champion millions of us have spent months trying to deceive ourselves into believing he is, and I will not vote for him (my own efforts at rationalizing such a vote failed), but if she thinks Clinton is the answer, it seems the madness of this election and perhaps the vile of some of the Trump supporters who harass her must have gotten to her; the logic offered here is simply bizarre:

    – Voting for a pro-abortion president is the way to get pro-life laws passed?

    – Choosing a president who’s only consistent political position over the last 2 decades has been killing babies, rather than being treated as a veritable mandate against regulations by the electorate, will instead energize the nation and its representatives against abortion?

    – Somehow, making a figurehead out of a champion of unfettered abortion, an apologist for a serial perpetrator of workplace sexual harassment, and a proponent of “sexual liberation” will reduce the sexual objectification of women and therefore reduce pressure on pregnant women to use abortion as response to responsibilities created out of this false “liberation”?

    – The Republican establishment is hypocritical in its prolife stance, and therefore, after the self-destructing party miraculously holds on to its four seat Senate majority for the next 4-8 years, we can count on them to block pro-abortion Supreme Court nominations? Even if the nominee is pro-abortion but favorable to a handful of other Republican priorities in order to woo their votes, we won’t see numerous swing votes like with Sotomayor’s confirmation?

    – A candidate renowned for her multi-decade long spree of corruption allegations (consistently dismissed under peculiar circumstances) will fix the waste in our healthcare system, thereby giving low income mothers better access and more hope?

    The last one is the most absurd, narrowly beating out the line preceding it (not that ranking complete fantasies is productive). Are we imagining lower deductibles or lower premiums here, or perhaps as long as we’re daydreaming, both? Clinton is every bit as big-business as Trump and even more lobbyist-oriented (Trump’s offensiveness is a liability to businesses he makes little effort to hide, even to his own detriment – hence why Clinton has unprecedented support among Fortune 100 CEOs and Trump has none).

    Look at the facts. We already know the US spends significantly more per given measure of healthcare (quantified in ways such as doctor and nurse hours, medicine, facilities, and equipment) than any other nation. Despite popular impressions, higher care provider salaries and American oddities like skyrocketing malpractice insurance rates are only a small part of the difference – combined, they’re about 1/10th of all healthcare spending. Drug costs, both legitimate and gouged (Epipens, anyone?) also add slightly less than 1/10th. The main difference is our staggering inefficiency. But money wasted through inefficiency doesn’t actually disappear. People are getting rich off this waste. A lot of them.

    This probably sounds ridiculous (as it should) to any normal, well-adjusted human who hasn’t given in completely to political cynicism. So let me give you some very simple (large, but simple) numbers that start to hint at the real magnitude of what I’m talking about. We spend $3 trillion a year on healthcare in the US (you can easily fact check me). The next closest nation (Norway) spends less than 2/3 as much per person despite being one of the few nations with a higher overall cost of living than the US, and the OECD average is less than half (Again, you can easily fact check me. They also receive more care and achieve better health outcomes). That $1+ trillion pro rata difference works out to roughly $1.2 million per year for each and every one of the 850,000 doctors in our entire country, beyond the salary they actually make and all the other costs that compromise the presumably more justifiable $2 trillion remainder.

    We’re talking about literally hundreds of thousands of one-percenters feeding parasitically off the corpulent financial host that is our healthcare system. The vaunted military industrial complex looks like pathetic amateurs compared to the rate-hike justifying, claims processing, benefits administering, lawsuit filing, merger negotiating, campaign contributing, broken website building middlemen we are mandated by law to do business with.

    If anybody really thinks they can make a convincing argument that Hillary Clinton of all people is going to in any meaningful way harm all those wealthy campaign donors and lobbyists for the sake of the poor, please, share your argument with me. This election has ruined my sense of joy, and I would love the laugh. However, if your argument is that she’ll simply make the US healthcare system more like Europe’s, don’t bother. Her own website defies you and instead promises to further strengthen the status quo that is giving the nation a projected average 24% cost increase for 2017. That’s not funny, and it most certainly doesn’t help the poor feel secure about raising a family.

    Simcha has written a lot of good stuff in the past on why she can not in good conscience vote for Trump, but I’m aghast at her conclusion that voting for Clinton will somehow better the plight of the unborn.

23. How about this? If you promise not to vote for Clinton, I will promise not to vote for Trump and cancel out your vote. This way both of us can support a third party without helping either major party. (This will only work if you’re also in Florida as I am…) Please let me know by 6 PM.

24. You cannot vote for Hillary Clinton and retain communion w/ the Catholic Church. You absolutely cannot.

25. I tried to leave a reply…que pasa amiga mia?

26. THANK YOU.

    Many will not agree with you (the comments so far have already shown that). But then, doing the right thing and doing the popular thing aren’t always the same … there are plenty of examples of that in Jesus’ life.

    “Good Catholics always vote Republican” or “Good Catholics always vote Conservative”? True faith is not blind faith and I fear we too quickly fall into that trap these days.

    You ask why people might consider an abortion in the first place, rather than rushing to judge them. You look at the way Trump represents everything in our culture that de-values women. You consider how Obamacare helps those truly in need, including pregnant women in distress and babies born into difficult situations. These things matter. They matter so so much more than an empty promise by someone without the power to deliver on it anyway. And these things help pregnant women make a different choice in the first place – imagine a world where abortions don’t happen, not because they are not available, but because there is no demand for them.

    We need more critical thought like you’ve shared here, and we need an environment where it is welcomed. The lack of these spaces, and the rush to judgment, make it difficult to be Catholic sometimes, and I thank you for your courage. It has helped strengthen my faith.

27. Dear Simcha,
    Voting for the actively pro-choice candidate is wrong. Don’t vote for Trump, but a vote for Hilary is wrong.

28. Obamacare doesn’t pay for babies. It is extremely expensive with high deductibles so you pay for your own baby. We were the uninsured low income family that still couldn’t afford obamacare on the lowest bronze plan and if your on the lowest plan. Your deductible is so high (over $10,000 per year for a family) still can’t afford to go to the doctor. It’s a lie. Birth control is free. Having babies is not. I had 2 babies uninsured and it was expensive but cheaper than if I had been on obamacare. Medicare takes care of the truly poor women for free NOT Obamacare.

29. Thanks for some much needed common sense, Simcha.

30. Perhaps this is over-simplifyimg this, but perhaps it isn’t. This is from the DNC 2016 platform:

    “We will support sexual and reproductive health and rights around the globe. In addition to
    expanding the availability of affordable family planning information and contraceptive supplies,
    we believe that safe abortion must be part of comprehensive maternal and women’s health care
    and included as part of America’s global health programming. Therefore, we support the repeal
    of harmful restrictions that obstruct women’s access to health care information and services,
    including the “global gag rule” and the Helms Amendment that bars American assistance to
    provide safe, legal abortion throughout the developing world.”

    That is what they put in their published platform. This is *literally* what you are voting for when you vote for the Democratic candidate.

31. I see your game:

    List a bunch of PARTICULAR evil actions, and point out that there is not 100%, metaphysical certitude that Hillary will be able to do each and every one.

    List a bunch of PARTICULAR good actions, and point out that there is not 100%, metaphysical certitude that Trump can accomplish each and every one.

    Result: a phony-baloney “argument” that it just doesn’t matter who wins.

    Hillary will bring about 5,000 pro-abortion people to Washington with her.

    Trump will bring mostly pro-life people with him.

    What makes a vote for Hillary A MORTAL SIN is her decades of pro-abortion fanaticism, not any certainty that she will be able to do EVERY evil thing she wants to do.

    “Pro-life is so much more than abortion.” This is the battle cry of the “Catholic” Yellow-Dog Democrats. From there it’s more of the old “Republicans want to blow up the world,” “Republicans want to throw Grandma into a snow bank,” “Republicans don’t care what happens to babies after they’re born.”

    Then there are the outright LIES: “Trump mocked a reporter’s disability.”

    And the ultimate fallback: “I just don’t FEEL that Trump is TRULY pro-life.”

    Here’s my own totally rational argument for voting for Trump: So-called “Catholics” who concoct sleazy arguments for voting for pro-aborts (or giving pro-aborts HALF a vote by failing to vote for the opponent who can win), make me want to puke.

    1. Father, with all due respect, I have serious doubts about Trump being the pro-life candidate. He’s encouraged at least one woman to abort his child, he described himself as “very pro-choice” until the moment he announced he was running for President, he’s in favor of the death penalty, he encourages violence against his opponent and her supporters, he’s in favor of war crimes like killing terrorists’ families and torturing suspects, and he talks about using nuclear weapons as if he’s discussing his kids’ soccer games. That last one is why I can’t vote for him; whatever damage Hillary might do, it won’t be that!

       Vote Evan McMullin – the only REAL pro-lifer in this race!

       1. Trump is not the issue; Hillary is. And I find it absurd that anyone can equate Trump to Hillary. HRC has a 35 year record of defending abortion in all circumstances. Trump, until last year, was a private citizen who rarely spent time advocating any position. And his Pro-Abortion stances are well known. But, equating his position to Hillary’s is nonsense.

32. Wow. I used to have a lot of respect for you, but this is just extremely misled. Maybe you’ll come to you senses by tomorrow? You and your family are in my prayers.

33. This is a beautiful story that you sent. I am extremely happy that she chose life. However, you and I know that the majority of abortions are not for the child’s heath. Here is the question I asked of Google: “What percentage of abortions are for medical reasons?” This was the first statement made at top of page. “Actual percentage of U.S. abortions in “hard cases” are estimated as follows: in cases of rape, 0.3%; in cases of incest, 0.03%; in cases of risk to maternal life, 0.1%; in cases of risk to maternal health, 0.8%; and in cases of fetal health issues, 0.5%.Jan 18, 2016″ Everyone knows that we all pay for Obamacare and I am happy to pay for this young
    woman’s child’s treatment. However I am not willing to pay for the many, many other abortions that are paid for by
    Obamacare. And I should not be forced to pay for this so called, “medical treatment”.
    I am a deplorable and i will vote for Trump for many other reasons. For the second amendment, illegal immigrants, but most of all —
    HE IS NOT FROM THE ESTABLISHED POLITICAL PEOPLE WHO CURRENTLY RUN OUR COUNTRY. I WILL GIVE HIM A CHANCE
    & HOPE THAT HE MAKES THE CHANGES TO MAKE OUR COUNTRY GREAT AGAIN AND NOT GIVE IN TO THE WHIMS OF EVERY
    ISSUE SEEKER WHO THINKS THAT WE MUST ALL COWTOW TO THEIR LIFE STYLE. JUST SAYIN’…………….

    Here is more data:

    http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html
    ​ AND MORE:
    ​
    92% of Women Cite “Social” or “Other” Reasons
    New Study Examines Reasons Women Have Abortions
    By Randall K. O’Bannon, Ph.D.

    Why do women have abortions? For over 15 years, those asking that question have had to rely on a 1987 study that some were concerned might have become outdated in light of the declining number of abortions and shifting abortion demographics.

    Now a new study from the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI), Planned Parenthood’s special research affiliate, brings our understanding of women’s abortion decisions up to date. While showing that women’s basic reasons have largely remained the same, the study presents some compelling new data that those reaching out to abortion-prone women will want to consider.

    A couple of conclusions are very apparent from this data. First, those who wish to use the so-called “hard cases” of rape, incest, life of the mother, and genetic disability to argue for the necessity of abortion on demand will continue to find it difficult to make that case based on the reasons women offer for their abortions. Ninety-two percent cited what might be termed “social” or “other” reasons, rather than medical reasons or sexual assault, as the primary basis for their abortions.

    And those who cited medical reasons often appear to have been stating their own opinions (fear that drug or alcohol use may have harmed the baby, inability to handle morning sickness, etc.) rather than reporting any formal diagnosis by a doctor. Less than a percent each of women even mentioned rape or incest as a factor in their abortions at all.

    The 2004 study, which appeared in the September 2005 issue of Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (formerly Family Planning Perspectives), surveyed 1,209 abortion patients at 11 large abortion centers across the country. The survey was then followed up with in-depth interviews with 38 women at four centers.1

    Women in the first group filled out an eight-page survey identifying their reasons for coming to the clinic, hospital, or doctor’s office to have an abortion, and listed their demographic characteristics, such as age, race, income, marital status, etc. Women from the first group who agreed to sit for 30–60 minute recorded interviews discussing those decisions in more detail constituted the second group.

    There were a number of responses women gave to the question as to what was “the most important reason” they had their abortions: they were “not ready for a(nother) child/timing is wrong,” cited by 25%; they “can’t afford a baby now,” cited by 23%; feelings that they had “completed my childbearing/have other people depending on me/children are grown,” cited by 19%; and “having relationship problems/don’t want to be a single mother” was cited by 8%.

    An additional 7% identified not feeling “mature enough to raise a(nother) child/feel too young,” while 4% cited their view that the child “would interfere with education or career plans.”

    Notably, only 4% cited a “physical problem with my health” as the main factor in their abortions, while 3% identified “possible problems affecting the health of the fetus” as the most important reason behind their decisions.

    Less than 0.5% cited each of the following reasons as most significant: rape, a husband or partner’s desire that a woman have an abortion, parental wishes, or a desire to keep others from knowing the woman had sex or got pregnant. AGI listed the remaining 6% as “other.”

    Authors of both the 1987 and 2004 studies took the long list of reasons that women cited and tried to assign them to general categories, though they did not necessarily combine these in the same way. As a consequence, reasons that were grouped together in one category in 1987 may have ended up in different categories in 2004.

    To try and make comparisons possible, authors of the 2004 study went back and recalculated and re-reported the 1987 reasons as they would have been categorized in 2004. Consequently, numbers would not seem to match up for anyone looking at the original 1987 study and the numbers reported for 1987 in the new study, but this is not necessarily a mistake.

    Economic reasons, a feeling of being unable to afford to have a baby, were cited by 23% as the most important reason in 2004 and 21% in 1987. Those citing childbearing concerns or concerns about other dependents as most important jumped from 8% to 19%, while those identifying relationship issues as primary declined (from 13% to 8%).

    Women who cited immaturity as the most important reason also dropped from 11% in 1987 to 7% in 2004 as did educational and career interference (from 10% to 4%). “Other” reasons jumped from 1% to 6%. For the most part, the remaining primary reasons were close to what they were in the 1987 survey.

    While we have concentrated on women’s most important reason for their abortions, most women in AGI’s survey cited more than one factor in their decisions. Among women citing at least two reasons, the claim of inability to afford the child repeatedly showed up.

    High numbers of women also mentioned concerns for how the baby would change their lives (74%), in regards to education, employment, career (38%), or other family members (32%). Relationship issues–that a woman was unsure about her relationship, didn’t or couldn’t marry the father, etc.–totaled 48%. At least 38% mentioned that they had abortions, at least in part, because they had “completed my childbearing.”

    Note
    1. Lawrence B. Finer, Lori F. Frowirth, Lindsay A. Dauphinee, Susheela Singh, and Ann M. Moore, “Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives,” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 37, no. 3 (September 2005): 110–18.

34. I wrangled with myself all day over this. I live in a blue state so I don’t stand to lose anything by writing in a protest vote.

    I hope I wake up on Wednesday morning and find out that Hillary won, but not because less babies will die. No way. Middle class people abort and contracept out of desperation too, and the pie charts show that they are backed up to a wall too. The only reason I hope she wins is because I think that while both she and Donald Trump are just as greedy and power hungry as the other, Donald Trump is mentally unstable, bordering on crazy. She almost has more culpability before God for being greedy and *sane*.

35. Are you writing for George Soros now? Now I can understand why Shea thinks you’ll “make millions” on your own…..Soros can well afford another “useful idiot.”

36. I thought you were Catholic!?!?!?! A Catholic cannot vote for a pro-abortion candidate when there is a pro-life candidate on the ballot. To do so would be a mortal sin, and to encourage others to do so like you have done here is a VERY, VERY serious mortal sin. My advise is to retract your statements publicly so that you don’t fall into mortal sin and put your salvation at risk. If I were you I’d get myself to confession ASAP! If you choose not to do that, it would be best for you to leave the Church in fact, since you already have in deed.

    1. “A Catholic cannot vote for a pro-abortion candidate when there is a pro-life candidate on the ballot.”

       That’s the problem, there isn’t one, at least not from the major parties.

37. Planned Parenthood is mainly in the abortion business. Nope. It’s not.

38. This is great- well said Simcha!

39. The one thing I will enjoy is being able to tell people who voted for Hillary – because they couldn’t stomach Trump – to stop whining when religious freedom is restricted – to stop complaining when the Supreme Court is filled with pro aborts who will force abortion down our throats for the fun of it – to stop crying when euthanasia is actually covered by Medicare.

    Just wait, and watch.

    I spent 15 years on Capitol Hill. I know Her side well enough. The hell that we will be put through could not compare to Trump’s. In point of fact, Trump is so lazy, he would, by and large, accept 90% of the House Republican legislative plan. (And if he won, the R’s would certainly still have the Senate.) Ironically, the House, the Senate and Courts would act as a gigantic check.

    So go ahead, vote for Her, the one whose name is unmentionable. Then, shut the Hell up.

    1. Much of what you say about Hillary I agree with. However, if you think Donald Trump cares one bit about stopping abortion, or protecting our religious freedom, or anything other than Donald Trump, I have a bridge to sell you.

       1. Why would a very rich, famous man of 70 run for office if his only wish was to serve his own interests? The only explanation that makes sense is that, as a businessman (even if he is as some say a bad one) he saw a constituency that was not being served and thought that perhaps he might serve it.

          Few of Trump’s Catholic opponents appear to have noticed that his economic platform was the opposite of a pro-business quasi-libertarian Republican. He is anti-globalization and anti-immigration, views that are inimical to ‘establishment’ Republicans, who favour both (as does Hillary Clinton) and could well have cost him the nomination, if he had not correctly inferred that many Americans wanted a little more economic protectionism. Whether he’ll be able to follow through on any of his program, for good or ill, is anyone’s guess, but the same is true of Hillary.

40. I get the feeling from a lot of Catholic pro-life Trump voters, that it’s less about saving babies, than about saving their own skin. I’ve heard countless pro-lifers give the usual Supreme Court justification, but the discussion usually includes something like “Trump will protect us” vs “Clinton will persecute us!” I talked to a pro-life Trump supporter who basically agreed with all my objections to Trump, but her bottom line was that a Trump presidency would give her time to prepare her kids to be martyrs. Another pro-life woman thought that Trump could turn literally turn everything around and we Catholics could avoid future unpleasantness. Delusional! I don’t relish the idea of suffering anymore than the next person, but voting Trump out of fear is just plain cowardice and lack of trust in Christ.

    1. As a pro life Catholic Trump supporter I have to push back at your caricature of why we are voting for him. This is not a vote for his canonization. This election is only about two candidates.Two. A die hard leftist and someone who is conservative on a whole host of issues. Is he flawless on all his positions? No of course not but no election is about perfection of a sainthood. The believing and obedient Catholic has no alternative to vote in this and all elections for the one who will do the most to extend Christian values on life.

       Trump has called out Clinton for her defense of abortion and partial birth abortion. He has given his list of Justices who are originalists and would very likely overturn Roe. You dismiss it so flippantly but the Supreme Court is a very real factor in all our lives.

       I cant evaluate your discussions with those Catholics that you spoke to so I dont know if you exaggerated their claims. I agree that overblown claims about what Trump or any candidate can do is unjustified and absurd. That doesnt change the importance about whats at stake here. If what the person said bout time for their children to be martyrs is correct that I also agree that that is absurd.

41. My God have mercy on all our souls. Aren’t we all in need of it?

    I’m still(!) not sure who I’ll vote for tomorrow. I feel like I’m being asked to choose between what’s right for the good of my country, i.e., selecting the less evil of these two horrible choices, and what I’d be comfortable with in terms of the state of my soul, i.e., going third party.

    As my pastor described it in confession, it feels like we have Russia 1917 vs. Germany 1934.

    My sincere hope is that, whatever I choose, all of the reading and thinking, my utter despair at all this, the lost sleep, the months of prayer and fasting will make a difference–ideally having led me on the right path or at least witnessing my desire to do right.

    Thank you, Simcha, for your honest searching, for your attempt to do what is right for the right reasons.

    I don’t know what is right here, but I do know that there are no easy answers this time.

    1. Perhaps this will help you to decide?
       https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=em-subs_digest&v=Rf-foyOmNFQ

       1. Not certain this will help Simcha. Since she prefers to simply tear down Trump and not give any info re: HRC. This video says it all. Seriously this woman HRC does not love anyone except herself. She has done everything possible for years on end (lie, cheat, steal) to reach this point. Now here she is — and you say don’t vote for Mr. Trump? Tell me more about HRC — real stuff! Take my word for it she is not the least penitent for the many crimes she has committed. Again, and you say vote for HRC? All those children must be making you stark raving mad. IF you have time, read the following.

          By Richard A. Baer Jr. – – Sunday, November 6, 2016
          ANALYSIS/OPINION:
          Mr. Trump’s flaws are obvious. But Hillary’s are more serious politically, for she has corrupted the very office of secretary of State itself. She colluded with others to sell access and shake down foreign and domestic donors who knew that they were expected, not just to make large gifts to the Clinton Foundation, but also to enrich Bill and Hillary personally. All of this has become a millstone around her neck that could virtually incapacitate her as president.
          But what most decisively tips the balance for me toward Mr. Trump is not his character but his policies. Hillary will appoint Supreme Court justices who will turn the Court into a superlegislature. Mr. Trump will not. She will give us an economy that is basically the same — perhaps worse — than the past eight years. She will be soft on religious freedom and will oppose enlightened policies like school choice and charter schools, both of which are important to African-Americans and other minorities. She will jeopardize our safety by keeping the borders wide open, a move than also makes it harder for unskilled American workers to find jobs.
          I know that Mr. Trump’s character makes it difficult for thoughtful and morally-sensitive Americans to vote for him. But voting is not about you or me. It is about the well-being of the nation as a whole. And whether we like it or not, sound morality sometimes requires us to practice damage control by choosing the lesser of two evils.
          Three additional factors make supporting Mr. Trump easier for me. First, he is more impeachable than Hillary. If he gets too far out of line, establishment Republicans would likely join Democrats to give him the boot. Second, Hillary is more “blackmailable” than Mr. Trump. Both domestic and foreign friends and foes with access to her emails could pressure her to act in ways antithetical to America’s interests. And finally, Mr. Trump’s superb choice of Mike Pence for vice president and his intention to to rely heavily on Mr. Pence’s expertise and experience in day-to-day governing is a strong plus.
          Jesus, the Bible tells us, emptied himself and, as the Greek text says, “pitched his tent among us.” He condescended to live in a messy world full of sadness and disappointment, but also a world where, by God’s grace, love and peace and courage can flourish.
          So consider the possibility that voting for Donald Trump on November 8, rather than burdening your conscience, may be one of the ways God makes such good things come to pass.
          Mr. Trump’s flaws are obvious. But Hillary’s are more serious politically, for she has corrupted the very office of secretary of State itself. She colluded with others to sell access and shake down foreign and domestic donors who knew that they were expected, not just to make large gifts to the Clinton Foundation, but also to enrich Bill and Hillary personally. All of this has become a millstone around her neck that could virtually incapacitate her as president.
          But what most decisively tips the balance for me toward Mr. Trump is not his character but his policies. Hillary will appoint Supreme Court justices who will turn the Court into a superlegislature. Mr. Trump will not. She will give us an economy that is basically the same — perhaps worse — than the past eight years. She will be soft on religious freedom and will oppose enlightened policies like school choice and charter schools, both of which are important to African-Americans and other minorities. She will jeopardize our safety by keeping the borders wide open, a move than also makes it harder for unskilled American workers to find jobs.
          I know that Mr. Trump’s character makes it difficult for thoughtful and morally-sensitive Americans to vote for him. But voting is not about you or me. It is about the well-being of the nation as a whole. And whether we like it or not, sound morality sometimes requires us to practice damage control by choosing the lesser of two evils.
          Three additional factors make supporting Mr. Trump easier for me. First, he is more impeachable than Hillary. If he gets too far out of line, establishment Republicans would likely join Democrats to give him the boot. Second, Hillary is more “blackmailable” than Mr. Trump. Both domestic and foreign friends and foes with access to her emails could pressure her to act in ways antithetical to America’s interests. And finally, Mr. Trump’s superb choice of Mike Pence for vice president and his intention to to rely heavily on Mr. Pence’s expertise and experience in day-to-day governing is a strong plus.
          Jesus, the Bible tells us, emptied himself and, as the Greek text says, “pitched his tent among us.” He condescended to live in a messy world full of sadness and disappointment, but also a world where, by God’s grace, love and peace and courage can flourish.
          So consider the possibility that voting for Donald Trump on November 8, rather than burdening your conscience, may be one of the ways God makes such good things come to pass.
          After strongly opposing Donald Trump in the primaries, I now plan to vote for him, for I have come to understand that elections are not about demonstrating my moral sensitivity or spiritual maturity. Rather, they entail a very practical decision about what will further the peace (shalom) of the city (Jeremiah 29:7) and most likely enhance the lives of my fellow citizens.
          I am quite clear that Donald Trump is no 21st-century Saint Francis of Assisi or Mother Teresa. He is a flawed human being — as indeed we all are. His vulgarity and occasional coarseness rightly bother us, and we reasonably question whether his inability to guard his tongue ought to disqualify him for the presidency.
          But remembering that Jesus consorted with tax collectors and sinners, my advice for Christians on November 8 is: Do not try to be more pious than Jesus.
          Rather than obsess about Mr. Trump’s flaws, Christians should recall that the God of the Bible often uses less than perfect people to do his will. Moses was a murderer; David an adulterer and a murderer; Rahab, who saved the lives of Joshua’s two spies, a prostitute; Paul a persecutor of the nascent Christian church.
          Politics, like marriage, deals with the needs of people in the here and now, not in the life to come. In the realm of politics, to try to be more pious than Jesus is not just impractical; it is also a mixing of categories, a confusion of what is appropriate for the Kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world. Neither voting nor not voting will save our soul, but how one votes can either strengthen or weaken the integrity of our governmental institutions and the quality of our life together as citizens. Voting for the lesser of two evils, is one way of fulfilling Jesus’ command to love one’s neighbor as oneself. It is neither an endorsement of every aspect of a candidate’s character, nor, rightly understood, does it need to burden the voter with a bad conscience.
          Similarly, this is not the right time to sit on the sidelines because you believe the election “is all in God’s hands.” To be sure it is, but God works in human affairs most often through your hands and mine, not through miracles. Even if we are deeply frustrated with the alternatives before us, this is the time to act and to do so in good faith and with sober-minded realism.After strongly opposing Donald Trump in the primaries, I now plan to vote for him, for I have come to understand that elections are not about demonstrating my moral sensitivity or spiritual maturity. Rather, they entail a very practical decision about what will further the peace (shalom) of the city (Jeremiah 29:7) and most likely enhance the lives of my fellow citizens.
          I am quite clear that Donald Trump is no 21st-century Saint Francis of Assisi or Mother Teresa. He is a flawed human being — as indeed we all are. His vulgarity and occasional coarseness rightly bother us, and we reasonably question whether his inability to guard his tongue ought to disqualify him for the presidency.
          But remembering that Jesus consorted with tax collectors and sinners, my advice for Christians on November 8 is: Do not try to be more pious than Jesus.
          Rather than obsess about Mr. Trump’s flaws, Christians should recall that the God of the Bible often uses less than perfect people to do his will. Moses was a murderer; David an adulterer and a murderer; Rahab, who saved the lives of Joshua’s two spies, a prostitute; Paul a persecutor of the nascent Christian church.
          Politics, like marriage, deals with the needs of people in the here and now, not in the life to come. In the realm of politics, to try to be more pious than Jesus is not just impractical; it is also a mixing of categories, a confusion of what is appropriate for the Kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world. Neither voting nor not voting will save our soul, but how one votes can either strengthen or weaken the integrity of our governmental institutions and the quality of our life together as citizens. Voting for the lesser of two evils, is one way of fulfilling Jesus’ command to love one’s neighbor as oneself. It is neither an endorsement of every aspect of a candidate’s character, nor, rightly understood, does it need to burden the voter with a bad conscience.
          Similarly, this is not the right time to sit on the sidelines because you believe the election “is all in God’s hands.” To be sure it is, but God works in human affairs most often through your hands and mine, not through miracles. Even if we are deeply frustrated with the alternatives before us, this is the time to act and to do so in good faith and with sober-minded realism.Mr. Trump’s flaws are obvious. But Hillary’s are more serious politically, for she has corrupted the very office of secretary of State itself. She colluded with others to sell access and shake down foreign and domestic donors who knew that they were expected, not just to make large gifts to the Clinton Foundation, but also to enrich Bill and Hillary personally. All of this has become a millstone around her neck that could virtually incapacitate her as president.
          But what most decisively tips the balance for me toward Mr. Trump is not his character but his policies. Hillary will appoint Supreme Court justices who will turn the Court into a superlegislature. Mr. Trump will not. She will give us an economy that is basically the same — perhaps worse — than the past eight years. She will be soft on religious freedom and will oppose enlightened policies like school choice and charter schools, both of which are important to African-Americans and other minorities. She will jeopardize our safety by keeping the borders wide open, a move than also makes it harder for unskilled American workers to find jobs.
          I know that Mr. Trump’s character makes it difficult for thoughtful and morally-sensitive Americans to vote for him. But voting is not about you or me. It is about the well-being of the nation as a whole. And whether we like it or not, sound morality sometimes requires us to practice damage control by choosing the lesser of two evils.
          Three additional factors make supporting Mr. Trump easier for me. First, he is more impeachable than Hillary. If he gets too far out of line, establishment Republicans would likely join Democrats to give him the boot. Second, Hillary is more “blackmailable” than Mr. Trump. Both domestic and foreign friends and foes with access to her emails could pressure her to act in ways antithetical to America’s interests. And finally, Mr. Trump’s superb choice of Mike Pence for vice president and his intention to to rely heavily on Mr. Pence’s expertise and experience in day-to-day governing is a strong plus.
          Jesus, the Bible tells us, emptied himself and, as the Greek text says, “pitched his tent among us.” He condescended to live in a messy world full of sadness and disappointment, but also a world where, by God’s grace, love and peace and courage can flourish.
          So consider the possibility that voting for Donald Trump on November 8, rather than burdening your conscience, may be one of the ways God makes such good things come to pass.
          http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/6/sometimes-a-christian-has-to-make-an-unholy-choice/

          May need to read this another day — perhaps when you are mulling over your idea of “What possessed me to promote HRC?”

          Sincha, This is a beautiful story that you blog. “Single issue pro-lifer and won’t vote for Donald Trump.” I am extremely happy that you chose life. However, you and I know that the majority of abortions are not for the child’s heath. Here is the question I asked of Google: “What percentage of abortions are for medical reasons?” This was the first statement made at top of page. “Actual percentage of U.S. abortions in “hard cases” are estimated as follows: in cases of rape, 0.3%; in cases of incest, 0.03%; in cases of risk to maternal life, 0.1%; in cases of risk to maternal health, 0.8%; and in cases of fetal health issues, 0.5%.Jan 18, 2016″ Everyone knows that we all pay for Obamacare and I am happy to pay for this your child’s child’s treatment. However I am not willing to pay for the many, many other abortions that are paid for by Obamacare. And I should not be forced to pay for this so called, “medical treatment”. I am a deplorable and i will vote for Trump for many other reasons. For the second amendment, illegal immigrants, but most of all —
          HE IS NOT FROM THE ESTABLISHED POLITICAL PEOPLE WHO CURRENTLY RUN OUR COUNTRY. I WILL GIVE HIM A CHANCE & HOPE THAT HE MAKES THE CHANGES TO MAKE OUR COUNTRY GREAT AGAIN AND NOT GIVE IN TO THE WHIMS OF EVERY
          ISSUE SEEKER WHO THINKS THAT WE MUST ALL COWTOW TO THEIR LIFE STYLE. JUST SAYIN’…………….

          Here is more data:

          http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html
          ​ AND MORE:
          ​
          92% of Women Cite “Social” or “Other” Reasons
          New Study Examines Reasons Women Have Abortions
          By Randall K. O’Bannon, Ph.D.

          Why do women have abortions? For over 15 years, those asking that question have had to rely on a 1987 study that some were concerned might have become outdated in light of the declining number of abortions and shifting abortion demographics.

          Now a new study from the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI), Planned Parenthood’s special research affiliate, brings our understanding of women’s abortion decisions up to date. While showing that women’s basic reasons have largely remained the same, the study presents some compelling new data that those reaching out to abortion-prone women will want to consider.

          A couple of conclusions are very apparent from this data. First, those who wish to use the so-called “hard cases” of rape, incest, life of the mother, and genetic disability to argue for the necessity of abortion on demand will continue to find it difficult to make that case based on the reasons women offer for their abortions. Ninety-two percent cited what might be termed “social” or “other” reasons, rather than medical reasons or sexual assault, as the primary basis for their abortions.

          And those who cited medical reasons often appear to have been stating their own opinions (fear that drug or alcohol use may have harmed the baby, inability to handle morning sickness, etc.) rather than reporting any formal diagnosis by a doctor. Less than a percent each of women even mentioned rape or incest as a factor in their abortions at all.

          The 2004 study, which appeared in the September 2005 issue of Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (formerly Family Planning Perspectives), surveyed 1,209 abortion patients at 11 large abortion centers across the country. The survey was then followed up with in-depth interviews with 38 women at four centers.1

          Women in the first group filled out an eight-page survey identifying their reasons for coming to the clinic, hospital, or doctor’s office to have an abortion, and listed their demographic characteristics, such as age, race, income, marital status, etc. Women from the first group who agreed to sit for 30–60 minute recorded interviews discussing those decisions in more detail constituted the second group.

          There were a number of responses women gave to the question as to what was “the most important reason” they had their abortions: they were “not ready for a(nother) child/timing is wrong,” cited by 25%; they “can’t afford a baby now,” cited by 23%; feelings that they had “completed my childbearing/have other people depending on me/children are grown,” cited by 19%; and “having relationship problems/don’t want to be a single mother” was cited by 8%.

          An additional 7% identified not feeling “mature enough to raise a(nother) child/feel too young,” while 4% cited their view that the child “would interfere with education or career plans.”

          Notably, only 4% cited a “physical problem with my health” as the main factor in their abortions, while 3% identified “possible problems affecting the health of the fetus” as the most important reason behind their decisions.

          Less than 0.5% cited each of the following reasons as most significant: rape, a husband or partner’s desire that a woman have an abortion, parental wishes, or a desire to keep others from knowing the woman had sex or got pregnant. AGI listed the remaining 6% as “other.”

          Authors of both the 1987 and 2004 studies took the long list of reasons that women cited and tried to assign them to general categories, though they did not necessarily combine these in the same way. As a consequence, reasons that were grouped together in one category in 1987 may have ended up in different categories in 2004.

          To try and make comparisons possible, authors of the 2004 study went back and recalculated and re-reported the 1987 reasons as they would have been categorized in 2004. Consequently, numbers would not seem to match up for anyone looking at the original 1987 study and the numbers reported for 1987 in the new study, but this is not necessarily a mistake.

          Economic reasons, a feeling of being unable to afford to have a baby, were cited by 23% as the most important reason in 2004 and 21% in 1987. Those citing childbearing concerns or concerns about other dependents as most important jumped from 8% to 19%, while those identifying relationship issues as primary declined (from 13% to 8%).

          Women who cited immaturity as the most important reason also dropped from 11% in 1987 to 7% in 2004 as did educational and career interference (from 10% to 4%). “Other” reasons jumped from 1% to 6%. For the most part, the remaining primary reasons were close to what they were in the 1987 survey.

          While we have concentrated on women’s most important reason for their abortions, most women in AGI’s survey cited more than one factor in their decisions. Among women citing at least two reasons, the claim of inability to afford the child repeatedly showed up.

          High numbers of women also mentioned concerns for how the baby would change their lives (74%), in regards to education, employment, career (38%), or other family members (32%). Relationship issues–that a woman was unsure about her relationship, didn’t or couldn’t marry the father, etc.–totaled 48%. At least 38% mentioned that they had abortions, at least in part, because they had “completed my childbearing.”

          Note
          1. Lawrence B. Finer, Lori F. Frowirth, Lindsay A. Dauphinee, Susheela Singh, and Ann M. Moore, “Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives,” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 37, no. 3 (September 2005): 110–18.

    2. If you dont know by now you should probably abstain. Good grief. Vote for the greater good-vote for life. It really is that simple

       1. The problem is, both major party candidates are anti-life.

       2. I agree with JoAnna. Trump is a man who encouraged at least one woman to abort his child (Marla Maples – thank Heaven she didn’t do it!), described himself as “very pro-choice” for most of his life but also says he’s never needed to ask God for forgiveness, and wants to put his sister, who ruled *against* a partial birth abortion ban, on the SCOTUS. He supports the death penalty and given the way he treats disabled folks and anyone he sees as “less-than”, I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s for euthanasia! The man is many things, but pro-life isn’t one of them.

          Vote for Evan Mcmullin – the only REAL pro-life candidate!

42. Dear Simcha – stick with food. When it comes to politics, and how a pro-life Catholic with a social conscience should vote, your blog-handle hits the nail on the head – “losing my mind”… Indeed. No Catholic in their right mind can justify voting for a woman who is in bed with Planned Parenthood, who is devoid of integrity and who stuck with a sexual predator so she could ride on his coat tails. Apparently, you are too young to remember the sordid shenanigans of the Clinton machine. I’ll stop in now and then to see how you are feeding the masses but otherwise, dear heart, you’ve lost me.

43. Vote for Hillary? You support intrinsic evil based on her stated policies and therefore cooperate with evil. Don’t go to Holy communion until you repent, and do a great deal of penance for publicly promoting the same.

    1. Oh! You’re her confessor?!

44. God have mercy on your soul.

45. Wow, an awful lot of Simcha-haters have come to spit on her new internet house. Why make such an effort to inflame your anger? It’s really weird. I’m commenting now because I just couldn’t take all the nastiness.

    The hatred spewing out of pro-life quarters this election is alarming. Following around a Catholic Mom of 10 (right? I’m losing count) to tell her you are glad she was fired does not reflect well on the pro-life movement.

    For the record: voting third party, relieved to see writers with the guts to point out that the candidate for emperor doesn’t have any clothes.

    1. A. You can’t fall back on the number of children you have as “proof” of your Catholicism. Nancy Pelosi does the same thing all the time. Spend enough time in the homeschool world, and you will find Wiccans, atheists, and pagans who have plenty of children.
       B. No one hates Simcha. They may find her to be crude, abrasive, and intellectually dishonest. They may disagree with her politics. They may drive trucks through the holes in her flawed reasoning. But they don’t hate her.
       C. As Catholics, when someone who uses their Catholicism to earn a living and to sway other Catholics is in error, we have a duty to rebuke them.
       D. For the sake of her own soul, yes, it is probably a very good thing that NCR no longer publishes Simcha. It’s damage control.

       1. “C. As Catholics, when someone who uses their Catholicism to earn a living and to sway other Catholics is in error, we have a duty to rebuke them.”

          Rebuke? Harsh term. Harsh action. The Pharisees rebuked people. Christ generally forgave the people and told them to sin no more, then rebuked the Pharisees. I’d be very careful pulling out the rebuke card.

          instead of engaging in kind, well thought out conversation, you attack and rebuke and maybe win the argument but lose the person.

          People need to cool their ardor for divisive outrage. Stop treating g people like the enemy and try to win souls.

          Watch someone like Trent Horn talk to people. He stands for the truth without attacking them.

46. I didn’t need any arguments to refuse voting for Trump, but his well documented wretchedness does not make Hillary acceptable by any stretch of the imagination. Nor does it justify this particularly uncharitable bit of prose:

    “So if you really believe that it’s mainly big government funding that makes the difference between life and death, you might as well vote Hillary, because she’s not talking about yanking Obamacare. (But those are ugly, leech-like Obamacare babies, not clean, noble Hyde Amendment babies, so screw ’em, right?)”

47. both trump and clinton are lousy choices. it truly is a choice between a rock and a hard place. my luxury is that, unlike simcha, i don’t live in a swing state (i live on the “left coast”). i’m voting third-party (maturen-muñoz). people in the swing states, however, don’t have that luxury. this is where following your conscience–as well-formed as you can make it–will be the best that you can do.

48. Some truly vile comments in this section, from grown people who should know better, but apparently have never left junior high. To all those who’ve written such things here, and declared that they won’t be sticking around to read Mrs. Fisher’s future work — that’s for the best. Please take your childish, vindictive attitude elsewhere. Comment sections like these are a big reason why I’ll never convert to Catholicism.

    I’ve been following Mrs. Fisher’s blogs for several years now, since well before she left Patheos. She and David Mills are my favorite Catholic bloggers, and I read almost everything they write. However, this is my first comment on any of their work, because I simply could not believe the hatred in these comments.

    I will not be voting whatsoever in this election, but people I respect have, begrudgingly, chosen to vote for Clinton or Trump. And that’s fine. Mrs. Fisher’s argument above is one of the best I’ve seen in defense of a Clinton vote, even if it doesn’t persuade me, personally, to vote for her. Those who’ve responded so nastily here reveal much about themselves, and little about Mrs. Fisher.

    1. People convert to Catholicism because they know it is the one true Church established by Christ. No one said it would make you feel warm and fuzzy all over. Being Catholic means daring to live a radical Faith, not pandering to the feel-good messages of polite society. Unfortunately, even some Catholics have lost their saltiness. Now it’s more about how much free stuff they want the government to hand out.

       1. And some Catholics seem to feel free to pick and choose which teachings they want to follow. For example, they have no problem supporting a candidate who is advocated for intrinsic evils such as torture, the direct targeting and killing/torture of noncombatants, racism, xenophobia, sexual assault, adultery, pornography, and the dehumanization of human beings.

    2. Voting for Hillary is a mortal sin. Giving Hillary half a vote is a mortal sin.

       Pope Pius XII was a participant in plots to assassinate Hitler. Today, bishops cannot bring themselves to say that voting for a mass-murderer is a sin, and people react with shock when a priest makes this self-evident assertion.

49. Thanks for going into the fray here, Simcha, although you likely knew the type of vitriol that would show up in the comments. It’s important that someone talk about what actually can be accomplished via voting this year and the willful dissonance that people display in seeing Trump as aiding causes that they believe in.

50. Wow. So much vitriol. I can’t imagine Catholics talking to one another this way. I cannot vote for either the Republican or the Democrat nominees. I’ll be writing in Mike Maturen and Juan Munoz of the American Solidarity Party. They have no chance to win but I can sleep with a clear conscience.

    1. You will be giving Hillary half a vote. This is a mortal sin. If you sleep well, it will only be because your conscience is deformed.

51. Simcha,
    Planned Parenthood receives $500,000,000 annually from the government, which is funded through tax payers. The truth is now available about this organization that HRC supports. I feel like voting for her is a vote for PP.

52. Yep – Trump’s anti-abortion, wants to make friends with Russia, get out of foreign wars that Hillary’s behind, and get US jobs back. But he called a girl Miss Piggy, so you can’t vote for him. This is why women shouldn’t have the vote at all.

53. You used to be funny and intelligent to read. Slowly it’s just become ugly. Someone here said National Catholic Register did the right thing. Yes. They did. Truth isn’t uncharitable nor is it delighting in “misfortune” but sure it hurts sometimes. Yes, this is sad. Sycophants don’t help you to where you need to go. I hope you figure it out quick. Done reading you.

    1. I think Simcha needs to get herself and her family to an FSSP, ICK, or SSPX parish quickly, before the damage is irreversible. Honestly, is no one speaking hard truths to any of them?

       1. You are advocating that faithful Catholics attend a church with no canonical standing within the Church (SSPX) and you accuse Simcha of scandal?

54. For the first time, the FIRST TIME, we’re going to have a major party candidate who:

    1. is against the unjust wars in Syria, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, and Iraq
    2. is against unjust trade deals that will let the wealthy 1% move jobs away from American workers and onto Vietnamese child laborers
    3. is against abortion, or at least is willing to work with prolifers, reaching out to them more than any GOP candidate in history
    4. is in favor of pro-family tax law, including, for pete’s sake, a stay at home parent tax break!

    And we’re going to blow it because it’s an unsavory orange guy from Queens. Granted, that’s half his fault for being a sexual harasser and making ugly faces at the camera. But none of the other guys stepped up on these four issues. Not even the Catholic candidates, of which we had more than any presidential election in US history.

    And your solution is to vote Hillary. Your theory that she’ll reduce abortions and somehow lead to better abortion law is unsound; but you’re voting for the pro-war candidate who will continue attacking several non-aggressor countries that never attacked us. This is not a prolife or Catholic response at all.

    1. Oddly enough, Trump seems to have several different stances on each issue that you mention. It’s really hard to pin down what exactly he is for or against, because he keeps changing his mind. And considering his track record of lying, I’m not sure how we’re supposed to believe that he’s going to do any of these grand things that he promises, especially because he doesn’t seem to have any detailed, coherent plan for achieving them.

       1. Trump has had his policies listed on his website from the beginning, including how he will accomplish it in detail, and his website has not changed… Yes, he fumbles and doesn’t always speak with 100% accuracy during interviews, but he has always gone back to the platform he originally outlined on his website. I have checked this personally because I wasn’t sure I was going to vote for him in the beginning. Perhaps Trump should have followed Hillary’s lead and just not participate in any interviews with the press, then he wouldn’t have had any fumbles…

          1. Funny, because I’ve been all over his website, and I haven’t seen anything of the kind.

       2. Here is a link on his policy that matters most to me at the moment – his foreign policy and defeating ISIS. We are currently facing a woman that helped cause the crisis in the middle east with overthrowing Ghadaffi and moving on to Syria and Yemen right now, working with those who we know are funding/arming ISIS. Christians are being beheaded, children’s lives our being lost, constant war with us arming the rebels, the refugee crisis… We can look at taking in refugees once they have been properly vetted but why don’t we also look at what’s causing them to be refugees to begin with.

          https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/foreign-policy-and-defeating-isis/

          I have been following this election very closely because even Republicans were not addressing the crisis in the middle east and this biggest issue that our entire world is facing. Even Pence scared me for a bit, I thought it was a sign Trump was flipping, then Trump corrected him and went back to this plan. We should be doing everything we can to keep Hillary out of office. There are SO many human rights issues we will continue to face if she becomes President.

          He also has a great white paper on his site on what his plans on for repealing and replacing Obamacare.

       3. I am unable to reply to your previous replies to me. But, Joanna, you’re just not intellectually honest enough to be commenting on even a pseudo-catholyk site. Love your little attack on the SSPX. Did you happen to catch the fact that Pope Francis granted them faculties to perform Confessions? They are in an irregular canonical situation, however their Masses are valid. The only thing holding up the regularization of the SSPX is the powerful lobby of modernists within the Church.
          As to your regurgitation of Gimmiecrat talking points that Trump is xenophobic, racist, etc…, dare to move beyond CNN and MSNBC for your information. You are woefully misinformed and have committed calumny.

          1. Granting faculties to perform confession does not mean that they have canonical status within the church.

          2. I have not committed calumny. I have listened to what Trump has actually said, from his own mouth.

       4. You are a pro-abortion Hillary shill. You vomit out Hillary’s talking points, and offer not an atom of evidence.

          1. I am absolutely anti-Hillary. I refuse to vote for her, just like I refuse to vote for Trump. They are both evil.

55. Hi Simcha,

    A quick note of thanks for a sound & charitable analysis. It’s painful to witness the divisions and compromises this election is revealing within the Body of Christ. A fresh reminder that we can not give what we don’t have, and how much we need to invite the Holy Spirit in for our own conversion.

    God bless you,
    Fr. Maurer

56. Hi Simcha,

    A quick note of thanks for a sound & charitable analysis. It’s painful to witness the divisions and compromises this election is revealing within the Body of Christ. A fresh reminder that we can not give what we don’t have, and how much we need to invite the Holy Spirit in for our own conversion.

    God bless you,
    Fr. Maurer

57. I am aghast. That is all.

58. I am aghast. That is all.

59. Roe and Doe did not make abortion legal in the US (a number of states already had legal abortion prior to Roe and Doe being handed down in ’73). What Roe/Doe did was to overturn every pro-life law on the books in all states, which is why abortion is legal in the US for all nine months, for any reason, and why abortion is a “fundamental right.” So as much as you’d like to hope that “grassroots” efforts can enact pro-life laws, any legislation will be hamstrung by the “fundamental right” part of all of this. You can’t by definition restrict a fundamental right. SO — the SCOTUS appointments are HUGE (to paraphrase you-know-who) if you are voting as a pro-lifer. So are the lower federal court appointments (which are also done by the President.). All the grassroots legislative efforts in the world mean nothing without federal court judges who will uphold the law once passed.

60. I’m not a Catholic, though I have been in some deep conversations with some Catholic friends and have been asking myself questions I’ve never asked before about what it would be like to be a part of a community of people guided by grace and love and a sense of social justice.

    And then I made the mistake of reading the comments. This nasty name calling is how you treat your co-believers? For those of us who are seeking and wondering about this thing called grace– well, this election and comment sections like this are incredibly disheartening.

    You don’t know me, and you don’t have to care about my opinion, but I just have to say that unbelievers/seekers like myself are watching how you treat each other and how the candidate you support treats the poor, the weak, the outsider — do you think your discourse makes it more or less likely that people will want to be apart of your community?

    1. In all honestly, you should want to be a part of our community because it is the Church Christ founded, and to partake in the Eucharist, which is the true Flesh and Blood of Jesus. If you believe in Christ, and if you believe He founded a Church, then nothing could keep you away. Come on in!

       You surely know that any and all communities have nasty folks, grumpy folks, folks who fight, etc. This is not Heaven yet. You are welcome in our messy, Catholic Family, that is Christ’s Mystical Body, that gave us the Scriptures and give us the saints to emulate.

       God bless you on your journey!

       1. Wow! Talk about a wolf in sheep’s clothing. After trashing Simcha and this post on Facebook, you come here and say this? You are a coward. Why not say what you have said on Facebook here? Can’t take the heat without your bubble followers? Or is it that they have all abandoned you because you’ve turned into a caricature of a Catholic instead of a faithful one?

    2. “This nasty name-calling is how you treat your co-believers?”

       Not really. It is how believing Catholics sometimes treat pro-abortion apostates. I’m not defending it. Just describing it more accurately.

61. 1) Remember, Hillary is married to Bill, a model of respect for women. Hillary accepts him, defends him, and rides his coat tail.
    2) You’ve been possibly suckered by the false compassion of the democratic party.

62. I’m sure you’ve heard it all before but for many of the same reasons you list here, I cannot vote for Hillary Clinton. Especially because of the vehemently pro-abortion plank in the Democratic platform AND the kinship with Planned Parenthood. I do believe we as prolifers are better off with Trump because of the Supreme Court issue- any gains we might make in the States will be struck down with a Hillary Court. We see it already with the shoving of gay marriage down our proverbial throats. I usually love your posts and agree with your wifely and Momly advice, but here I part ways. I’ll look forward to checking back after tomorrow is over. God bless you and may He guide all of us.

63. Comment sections like this make Baby Jesus cry.

    Yowza.

    1. So do people voting for those who actively work to rip out the spines of more children.

64. Wow. Someone wrote an article thinking Hillary is more pro life?! The immoral lying war criminal is the one to vote for? Terrible logic and a disgrace to anyone who claims they are in the true faith. I pray you convert as Alexander the Great told a soldier that was running away ‘either change your name or change your attitude’

65. I really appreciate your thoughts on this Simcha. And I’m sorry for some of the hateful comments you have received.

66. I cannot vote for either in good conscience, so I’m not. #thirdparty

    1. You will be committing a mortal sin by giving Hillary half a vote.

67. The author clearly suffers from depression and more than likely has a drug/alcohol problem.

    1. KKKlassy.

    2. Wow, that’s really an uncharitable comment.

       Yeesh. I’ll be glad when this election is over for no other reason than that the name calling will stop. Hopefully.

    3. Wow, that’s extremely uncharitable.

       1. It’s my opinion, that’s all. The author fits the classic example of someone suffering from postpartum anger issues. The blog posts are actually a cry for help. Most narcissistic behaviour comes from extreme anger issues.

          1. Diagnosis of such issues cannot and should not be done via combox. Also, please read what the catechism has to say regarding rash judgement.

       2. It’s not RASH judgement “opinion that’s all” thats what combox is for….”Read the CC”..pplease
          It’s just a judgement …another judgement would be a working mom with 5 kids spends to much time in combox. Probably because of an unsatisfactory home and spiritual life. I bet your the type who always has to have a say and the last word….on everything. Making a statement that someone might have a drinking or drug problem is not rash judgement. Not definitive

68. Wow. Just wow. I have followed your work for along time, Simcha. And I have defended you, even though I thought the language thing was inappropriate. But I’m a Catholic mom of many too, and you are one of the few writers who get that. This feels like a betrayal. I know I a, just a random internet stranger, but I am actually disillusioned by this. I will most likely not vote Trump. But I would never vote for Hillary, nor counsel others to do so. I beg you to reconsider.

    1. Her true colors show…she’s been talking like this for a while, this is just the most explicit explanation.

    2. She can’t reconsider. The Gimmecrats will rationalize away any moral objections to keep the handouts coming. If a few more hundred thousand babies are killed, they can find a way to live with it, because quite obviously who could possibly expect anyone to bring children into the world unless they can live at a standard higher than most of the human beings who ever existed? Nope. I’ve met too many people who would seek or have had abortions, and money and insurance coverage had nothing to do with it.

69. So this might come as a surprise but abortion is legal. If you’re pro life you should want that to change, and that may not happen with Trump in office but it definitely doesn’t happen with Hillary in office. You are not a single issue pro-life voter, you’re just making excuses.

70. Oh yeah, I forgot my question… How can you possibly think that voting for a woman that is for partial birth abortion and wants to give full support of Planned Parenthood is going to result in fewer dead babies?! If she is elected she will most likely be in office for 8 years! Between her stance on abortion and her stance on going into unjust wars (where we are supporting the same side that is supporting ISIS!) — how can 8 years of this possibly result in fewer dead babies?

71. What a total fraud you are, Fisher. You have a dirtier mind than Trump, and you are nothing but a resentful socialist milking the system for all its worth and voting for those who will keep your handouts coming.

    1. This is unbelievably uncharitable, sir.

       I’m a conservative (ish) voter in a Southern state (still not voting for Trump though…third party), and I disagree with a fair amount of Fisher’s reasoning. But I still respect her as a person, and don’t feel the need to attack her or her family, or insinuate nasty things about her.

       1. Calling “uncharitable” is the last resort of those who are uncomfortable with the plain-spoken truth. It is at the intellectual level of “I know you are, but what am I.”

    2. Hey, now, don’t be a jerk. And yeah, I think Mrs. Fisher’s conclusion is wrong. But that doesn’t make her any of the things you rather rudely called her.

    3. BINGO!

72. Considering the culture we live in, are we at all surprised at the candidates we have as options for President? We live in a sexually exploitative, “give me that”, “not my problem” culture. WE (Christians) have been lazy, WE have not marched on the streets demanding that the Christian values this country was founded on be upheld- at least I know I haven’t REALLY done this. Yes, I have gone on a couple of pro-life marches and casted my vote for what I believe should happen, but that is not enough. I didn’t REALLY fight for it, you can tell by looking at the world around us. Our Christian values have gone out the window a long time ago and we need to live in the world of what actually is.

    Over the past few weeks we also found out the following about Hillary Clinton:

    1. She knew our “allies” Saudi Arabia and Qatar were FUNDING ISIS and said nothing.
    After knowing this, Hillary accepted tens of millions in donations from these terrorist-funding governments (of course they are getting something back in return). She also supported arms deals to them. In 2015 we gave $29B in weapons to Saudi Arabia who we knew were funding ISIS! Let that sink in… She approved giving weapons to the people that we knew were giving weapons to ISIS.

    2. In continuation with the first item on the list – the FBI has had an ongoing investigation of her since Feb 2016 to investigate if she took bribes from foreign leaders in her position as Secretary of State. Bill Clinton received a $1M birthday gift from Qatar. Even Chelsea Clinton said in the email this (receiving money from foreign governments) doesn’t look right. “In accordance with the Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution, you may not accept anything of value from a foreign government, unless specifically authorized by Congress… Spouses and dependent children of Federal employees are also banned from accepting gifts from foreign governments.”

    3. Her campaign team PAID PROTESTERS TO INCITE VIOLENCE AT TRUMP RALLIES. Did you see how some of these people ended up?
    You claim that you care about “fewer dead babies”– what about the babies being killed right now, at our hand, because of the war in Syria Hillary supports 100%. Where we are allying with Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who WE KNOW ARE FUNDING AND ARMING ISIS, and she agreed to give them weapons! We know that US weapons have ended up in ISIS hands at least twice now! This is alone is the cause of so many human rights violation – from people being killed by an unjust war, to the Syrian refugees fleeing their country fearing for their life and a vote for Hillary is a vote for this continuing! Even Huffington Post called her a “war machine”!

    Your logic about the pro-life movement fighting harder if Hillary wins, as it supposedly did under Obama, is ridiculous and insane. It’s what the communists in Germany said about Hitler. Once he gets in, then people will see how much they need us. Instead Hitler wiped them out. To make this gamble when right now we are facing a woman that funded, armed, and helped bring to power those in the Middle East who are gang raping women, persecuting Christians, and throwing gays off of buildings. A woman who stole money from Haitians who were in dire need of help. A woman who silenced victims of sexual abuse because her fame and power were more important. Not to mention the countless other crimes she has committed.

    Yes, it would be great if we had a good candidate running against her for President, who actually held and practiced our Christian values, but we don’t, and I AM NOT SURPRISED. In my opinion, what we as Christians should be doing is preventing the further evil that this woman is capable of by voting for the only candidate who can beat her. Who, yes, has questionable character, but whose policies are exactly what America needs.

73. Taking the known bad instead of the unknown possibility of good.

    yeah, that makes sense.

    Looks like NCR made the right choice.

74. Your understanding of Obamacare is a bit flawed. The notion that you seem to have is that if Obamacare was repealed, the poor would stop receiving care. This is absolutely false.

    The point of Obamacare was never to provide healthcare to the needy. That was always available, which was *itself* the problem that Obamacare wished to solve: that people were getting healthcare, but they didn’t have insurance to pay for it. This resulted in bankruptcies and unpaid medical bills (leading to higher healthcare costs), and skyrocketing Medicaid costs.

    Statements like: “It pays for thing like the delivery of babies, and for healthcare that keeps alive already-born babies (and children and teenagers, not to mention pregnant and non-pregnant women, and men).”
    …are simply false. Obamacare attempts to provide a framework for health insurance for all people.

    1. Obamacare has many problems, but it has helped more people get health insurance who formerly couldn’t afford it or who were disqualified for pre-existing conditions. It is true that the destitute could always get care – but there’s poor and then there’s poor. If Obamacare were repealed there are many working poor or partially employed, who would stop receiving care. That group includes many women in their child bearing years. I know Obamacare is lousy. Because of the size of our family, our insurance is subsidized, but if people think we’re privileged, they are crazy. Really, the only thing it’s good for is the peace of mind that we can bring a child to the emergency room without thinking about the cost and it satisfied the law. There are so many restrictions and so few local doctors take our state insurance, that for care that we can’t put off any longer, we pay out of pocket or put it on a credit card. I don’t think Obamacare needs to be repealed, but it does need a major overhaul which includes an overhaul of the medical industry. I don’t think either candidate has the guts to do it. I’ve already voted mail-in for Maturen/Monoz of the ASP.

       1. The primary purposes of Obamacare are to destroy employment, destroy businesses, rape the middle class, persecute Christians, and enrich the globalists for whom Obama and Hillary are sock puppets.

       2. >>> If Obamacare were repealed there are many working poor or partially employed, who would stop receiving care.

          Please understand that this is not true. People will continue to receive care, just as healthcare was always given to those who need it.

          Again, Obamacare was meant to solve the question of how all of this care gets paid for. It has utterly failed in this capacity.

          I’ll tell you my experience as an anecdote:

          I started with a PPO for my family: $500/month premium, $2500/year deductible per person.

          In 2017, my insurance option is: an HMO for $1270/month premium, with a $6,500 deductible per person.

          We can’t afford this, so will probably be abandoning insurance and switching to a Christian healthcare ministries where we can offset some healthcare costs.

          How is an unsustainable economic system Responsible or Charitable or Catholic?

75. The argument that you cannot vote for Trump because of his objectication of women would be overhwlmingly powerful if Hillary’s Presidency would not bring Bill Clinton into the White House as the first “first gentleman. She aided and abetted his crimes against women, and traded her support for his philandering for his supporting her ascendancy to power. It would be a powerful argument if abortion, for which Hillary has an unsatiable appetite, were not the quintessential objectification of woman, a procedure that makes both her and the baby a “what” and not a “who”. If objectification of women is the argument that says you cannot vote for Trump, please do not turn around and say you can vote for Clinton. They are equally heinous on this count.

76. You used to be Catholic, Simcha, but then the Catholics realized you were really a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Praise God you no longer smear EWTN with your garbage.

    How anyone could possibly “reason” that voting for Hillary is more morally acceptable than voting for Trump is an indication that emotion has taken hold of their intellect.

    We deserve, as a nation, a Hillary presidency for the sins of abortion and liberalism and the scourge of sodomy as well as the silence of the Church on these issues, but I pray for God’s mercy and for a Trump victory.

    1. Wow, this is very, very uncharitable.

       1. “Father Truth”?

          Please, let’s avoid te ad hominem attacks. Address her statements.

          I won’t vote for Hilary. But many are comforted by knowing she is at least the Devil you know.

          Donald Trump is a cypher to me as to what action he will take domestically or abroad. And I doubt very much he won’t chafe at the constraints placed upon the Presidency. He’s a huge crap shoot with a bad history at best.

          As for these comments… wow. It’s the year of Mercy.
          Let us act with mercy and forebearance towards each other, and at least assume good intentions.

          Calling Simcha a wolf in sheeps clothing or a socialist is poor form and a lousy way to seek truth

    2. For the sake of the Catholic Church, I hope your user name doesn’t mean you are really a priest.

       Let’s get real: if Hillary were the one running as a Republican, and Trump the one running as a Democrat (as he has been most of his life), the Republicatholics would all be telling us we’d go to hell if we didn’t vote for Hillary.

       1. For the sake of the Catholic Church, I think it would be great if he is really a priest. I’ve had enough of the effeminate, lukewarm pastors who won’t let their yes be yes and their no be no. You have a deeply flawed view of the Republican platform. (It’s the one that’s pro-life.) Shrillary was mentored by Saul Alinsky, a man who admired Satan. She is a corrupt and morally bankrupt individual who is for abortion with no restrictions. She should be in prison, not the White House. And her scummy husband…do we all need to relive his time in office?

    3. How bold of you to take a stand in attacking her, while hiding behind an anonymous handle that tries to give you an air of authority. Extra points for veiled mysogyny in failing to address the points of the argument but pointing out that “emotion has taken hold” of her intellect.

    4. Let’s not forget, Father, that Donald Trump was a pro-choice friend of the Clintons up until he decided to run for President and he still supports same-sex marriage, the death penalty, and war crimes.

77. You make a fine argument, and I largely agree.

    I won’t, can’t, vote for Hilary. She is openly supportive of abortion and the dehumanizing of the unborn.

    I won’t, can’t, vote for trump for all the reasons you say, and a few more. (I feel he will ignore Congress as much as possible and try to take the ‘preside by executive order’ route to new heights. He is bad for the republic).

    I’m going third party.

    In truth, I’m done with both parties. I’m tired of the republicans false claims at pro life. I’m tired of the Democrats being so firmly entrenched with the abortion crowd you can’t be a pro life democrat and have a party career. I’m tired of them both freezing out anyone that’s not them, especially in debates.

    I will vote. That is my duty. I will not feed the parties any longer though.

    This election is a disgrace.

    1. Me too.

    2. Agreed. I’m voting third-party as well.

78. To pretend that voting for Clinton is somehow less revolting then voting for Trump is dishonest. She is the female embodiment of him. SHE IS TERRIBLE. Standing on a moral high ground for choosing Clinton over Trump is pretty gross.

79. I agree with almost everything you’re saying, Ms. Fisher, but one thing I think you’re overlooking (and that most anti-Trump pro-life people overlook in their arguments) is that the president doesn’t just appoint SCOTUS justices. They appoint justices through the ranks of the entire federal court system. It’s not just about SCOTUS and Roe v. Wade.

    SCOTUS sees a few score cases per year while the federal court system as a whole sees tens of thousands. A pro-choice candidate, one whose party’s platform is more strongly supportive of abortion than any we’ve yet seen, has tremendous power to influence the courts in the direction of undoing laws intended to restrict abortion. These laws may not stop millions of babies from being killed, but they do save lives.

    Having said that, I’m not voting for Trump and I agree with you that his winning the election (and, I’d argue, his winning the nomination) has been bad for the pro-life cause. But HRC winning the presidency and the DNC possibly winning the Senate is a DISASTER for the pro-life movement, too.

    In short, if you’re pro-life, there’s nothing to be won in this election. This is a tragedy for the unborn no matter how you slice it.

    1. You are correct — it is NOT just SCOTUS we need to worry about, it is all the lower federal court appointments, which will have as much if not more impact on abortion laws. (I say this as an attorney who has worked on the pro-life issue for two decades). Between SCOTUS and Hillary’s promise to overturn the Hyde Amendment, her election will result in the deaths of THOUSANDS of additional unborn children.

80. The best stump speech I’ve ever heard was from Cruz in 3 words: “Vote your conscience”.

    Now an informed conscience is all another matter.

    The Catholic guidelines are fairly thorough, though not specific to any candidate, that it is acceptable to vote for the “lesser evil” of two candidates. Perhaps it’s best for us to look at “platform” of a particular party instead of “personality” of a candidate in making our decisions? 1) The Republican party at least has strongly stated platform stand against abortion.
    2) “Abortion” is one of the “5 Non-Negotiables” issue for a Catholic.
    3) We don’t have to “feel” good about voting for any particular candidate OR platform in its totality. (I haven’t “felt good” about any candidate since voting, any more than have I ever “felt good” about all items on any given platform… ever.)
    4) !!! But the killing of innocent life is an abomination to God. And no culture in the history of the world has ever survived that kills its young.
    “Vote your conscience”.
    Mostly, PRAY!!! Be vigilant in prayer. That’s our strongest “vote”… and the most proactive and effective work we can do. Hearts will be converted.

    1. As Pope Francis has said, we shouldn’t use the term “non-negotiables” because that implies there are parts of the moral law that are negotiable. None of them are. We try to pick the candidate we think will do the least harm — not cherry-pick only five issues to take into consideration.

       1. True, moral law is not “negotiable”, therefore abortion is not only not negotiable, it is defined in by Church teaching as an intrinsic evil. An intrinsic evil. Therefore, the issue of abortion should weigh most most heavily on our consciences, our actions and our voting decisions; whether for a 3rd party or a for a platform: Cherry-pick!

    2. Actually, those “5 non-negotiables” everyone mentions was originally from a pamphlet put out by Catholic Answers, not any official Church body. There are more than 5 non-negotiables, but CA decided to concentrate on those for brevity (and probably for political reasons as well). It has led a lot of people to think that that’s all they have to consider when voting. But as Pope Benedict and Pope Francis reminded us, it’s not.

82. Best not vote at all and to let go of the illusion that we’re not ruled by an aristocracy that does whatever it thinks best, which includes abortion. It’s like if we had a king who deliberately allowed abortion. Except that instead of blaming an evil king, “We the People” get to pretend we have the authority and blame ourselves for the king’s evil. It’s a scam. Thanks, George Washington. https://zippycatholic.wordpress.com/2016/10/25/voting-is-perfectly-rational/#comment-36622

83. Wash your hands as often as you like, you won’t remove the blood of the unborn children whose murders you cooperated with.

    1. You might want to direct that message to yourself. Pro-life support of Trump has done more harm to the cause than anything HRC could ever do. The harm to the unborn the Trump supporter has caused will play out for a generation.

       1. That’s retarded. Most especially since “pro-life” literally means pro-choice today. Prolifer conventional wisdom is any woman should be able to choose abortion with no consequences to herself. That’s the definition of pro-choice. Trump even offered prolifers a scrap of integrity when he said that a mother who murders her child should be punished in some way. But prolifers are appalled by anything other than a pro-choice country. Which is stupid and makes no sense, but that’s what the pro-life movement has become. It’s a bunch of pro-choice feminists who funny enough were exposed as such by Trump.

       2. Are you pro-life, Patrick? if you, are you aware of the irony of you using the term “retarded,” given what happens to most D.S. babies in this country? As the mother of a son who is actually retarded, I ask you to find another way to insult people you disagree with.

       3. Do you think a mother who murders her DS child should be punished, or are you pro-choice?

          The correct phrase is special needs, not “retarded.” Saying you have a retarded son is like saying, “I adopted a negro.”

       4. Tell me, Patrick, what exactly is accomplished by insulting people, even your fellow pro-lifers? Do you honestly feel that insulting me and Simcha and anyone else not sufficiently pro-life in your eyes will cause us to reconsider our opinions? Does it make you feel better about yourself? Or are you just (rightly) angry at the state of our country and taking it out on other people?

          And for the record, one of the symptoms of Down Syndrome is mental retardation, also known as intellectual disability. When I used the term, I used it as an (outdated) medical description. You, sir, used it as an insult. That is the difference between you and me.

       5. It’s not an insult to observe that the “pro-life movement” and its adherents are objectively pro-choice.

          You used an outdated medical term, I used outdated slang, and you’re an offended, pro-choice feminist, aka, “pro-life.” Trump is the best thing to ever happen to the pro-life movement.

    2. Thankfully the Church actually doesn’t teach that voting for a pro-abortion candidate *in spite of* their support of abortion constitutes formal material cooperation with abortion.

84. In my opinion, it is absurd for anyone to suggest that I have a moral obligation to vote for a man to be President of the United States when I would be afraid for my seventeen-year-old daughter to ride alone in an elevator with him. How our standards for character have fallen. (Similarly: not voting for Mrs. Clinton either.)

85. Great, thoughtful article, Simcha. I, too, have always been a single-issue pro-life voter. However, the thought of voting for either Trump or Clinton leaves me feeling morally repulsed. I don’t believe Trump is pro-life as he claims; I just think he’s manipulative and opportunistic. I’m in Texas, and I voted 3rd party for Maturen/Muñoz, because my conscience just wouldn’t let me support either R or D this time around. I certainly do hope we can eventually bust out of this dysfunctional 2-party system!

86. Here in England I have been praying a novena so that the right decisions are made, you are between a rock and a hard place, and i feel for you. In all conscience I could not vote for Trump, surely no-one can stop you receiving Holy Communion because of how you vote? Carol.x

87. Simcha, this is such a great explanation of your position. It has me excited to see where you go with your thoughtful take on complicated, messy, controversial topics here in your new space, unhindered by anyone else’s agenda. You’re going to get flack for falling out of line on this one, but I think you will also find that there are many of us grateful for your honesty and clarity.

88. I agree with not voting for Trump, even though that’s probably what I’ll do. Both candidates are rotten; I still can’t get rid of the idea that a loose cannon is better than a heat-seeking missile. A loose cannon will almost certainly hit some things I don’t want it to, but some shots will also fall in the water or open fields. A heat-seeking bomb with GPS, on the other hand, is actively looking to hit things I don’t want hit. And the former has no political clout and will be opposed by pretty much everyone, so his awful ideas won’t get much traction. But she’s got lots of people with the same agenda in the legislative branch and who have favors to pay back; her bad ideas will get somewhere, probably for two terms rather than one (whereas Trump may just chuck the whole thing and we’d have Pence instead who is far saner than his running mate.)
    Anyway, I don’t think there is a clearly obvious Catholic Thing to Do in this election, besides not vote *for* either major candidate. The only thing really to be done is use your best judgement (and, without a crystal ball, we can’t really know who will be worse) about damage-mitigation and vote that way. But anyone who is making excuses for how great either Trump or Clinton is is delusional.

89. makes sense. Pro-lifers should not vote for the pro-life candidate. let’s help the openly pro-abortion candidate instead.

    1. The point was clearly spelled out: he is NOT a pro-life candidate. He is many things, including a woman-hating liar, but not pro-life.

       1. And im saying u are demonic liars.

       2. It wasnt pointed out at all. She FIRMLY advocates and even demands abortion, He has (for whatever value it holds) promised before God and man to uphold life and seek justices who do as well. To ignore this is folly and to ignore CLinton’s replete and astounding lawlessness is bizarre. As someone who knows satanism, she illustrates well secular satanism. Yes, you WILL be held to account for your vote of conscience when you refuse to look at the facts and the totality presented to you

       3. Trump is a “woman-hating liar”?

          Give an example, other than the women Gloria Allred paid (in at least one case, $500,000) or Hillary paid to smear Trump.

          I have never seen so many pro-abortion katholyks crawling out from under rocks as during this campaign.

    2. Neither of the primary presidential candidates are pro-life.

       1. You’re full of shit.

          1. If by “shit” you mean “truth,” then we are in agreement.

    3. I kinda think you missed the ENTIRE point of the article, unless you’re honestly naive enough to believe that simply saying something makes it true. I recall someone wise once saying something about not just calling out “Lord, Lord!”, or that one about wolves in sheep’s clothing, etcetera, etcetera.

90. As an English woman who has looked on with utter bafflement at the thought that anyone in good conscience could ever vote for Trump, this is the clearest and best exposition from a faith perspective as to why it would be acceptable to vote for Clinton. Thanks for explaining things so clearly and charitably-I am praying for the US and for wisdom and discernment for all the voters!

    1. I’m so jealous of anyone who doesn’t have to vote in this crapshoot right now. Thanks for the prayers.

91. I actually burst into tears before communion yesterday because of the times I’ve heard if I don’t vote for Trump or if I don’t stop Hillary, I can’t receive Jesus in the Eucharist. Has it come to this? I am so sick of being bullied by Catholics in the Republican party that I actually fear for my soul? So I will vote. And I will go to confession — again.

    I truly hope Trump loses for the good of the pro life cause.

    Simcha you are going to catch so much flack for this post, but I am so grateful to read I’m not the only one heartbroken over so many Catholics selling their souls into politics.

    1. No one has to go to confession for voting for Hillary., and long as you’re doing it despite her support of abortion, and not because of it. We have two pro-choice candidates to choose from, so we are allowed to make a discernment beyond whose lies we want to pretend to believe.

       1. I’m probably voting for Castle, but even still. Feel guilty for “throwing the vote away” as well, but if I don’t vote then I’m not doing my civic duty etc. Such an unfair catch 22.

       2. So, does her corruption in every other regard mean nothing? Her abject dishonesty and dishonor; her flagrant abuses and violations of the law; her “carelessness” with national security; having the maid print out her classified emails… none of this weighs in the balance? You would choose to give our troops the most dishonorable Commander in Chief in history, a woman who has rightly earned a prison cell? You might as well just spit in the eye of every good military man and woman and their families.

          She is the handmaiden of Moloch. She worships at Planned Parenthood’s steps. How you can say voting for her is the more pro-life decision is incomprehensible.

       3. Simcha, please reconsider your statement that “no one has to go to confession for voting for Hillary..”. That is a judgment that you simply are not in a position to make. Voting for a person who runs under a platform that promotes the slaughter of innocent human life is a serious and grave matter. There is a candidate who is running under a platform that proposes to protect life. You argue that Clinton’s policies to help the poor (via Obamacare) will actually reduce abortions. Then why do so many women who have adequate financial resources still have abortions? The scourge of abortion is never going to be stopped by the economic policies of a pro-abortion politician. It is extremely disingenuous to say so. It is a matter of changing hearts and minds and passing the proper legislation that will ultimately defeat abortion. You hold a great amount of responsibility for the words you write, considering that there are many Catholics who follow you. I would redirect all Catholics to read the teachings of John Paul II in Evangelium Vitae, or listen to one of the many orthodox bishops in our country. Please don’t listen to any so-called Catholic writer, priest, or bishop whose positions are contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

       4. Methinks, dear Simcha, you might be overstepping your authority here.

       5. Except one strongly vowed before God and man to support life and said he had a change of heart. Can we trust that? who knows? But making promises before God affirming life and promising to put in constitutional justices that will affirm life is in open opposition to the other’s strong affirmation of death-cult practices and promising their funding. Murder is at the heart of this all. Secular satanism or Christian ethics and virtues are having a showdown this election

          1. How have his actions upheld this alleged vow?

       6. You CAN’T vote for Hillary “despite” her being pro-abortion, because she IS pro-abortion.

          That’s like saying: I made Grandma sleep naked in the back yard not BECAUSE it was twenty below, but DESPITE the fact that it was twenty below.

    2. I can understand not voting for either. But voting for Hillary and claiming it will do more for the pro-life cause? Well, Simcha is right when she writes “losing my mind.” Only I think she’s already lost it.

       1. “You might as well just spit in the eye of every good military man and woman and their families. ”

          We really need to back off on the hyperbole here.

          I know Military people who are scared to death of Trump, who won’t vote for him. They aren’t fans of Hilary either.

          I don’t agree with Simcha, but the fact of the matter is that we have two lousy candidates here.

          Trump talks a pro life game, but so have a lot of Republicans. And Trump has a history of backing out of deals. He also has a history of being very anti immigrant (illegal or otherwise). He’d be a fine know-nothing candidate. He’s not a ‘flawed candidate’. Ronald Reagan was a flawed candidate. John Kennedy was a flawed candidate. Domestically Trump reminds me more of Huey P. Long and his populism, just with a more conservative bent. Foreign Policy wise he reminds me of Johnson.

          For the longest time I tried to get an honest to goodness platform from trump, but found nothing while he was campaigning. I am very skeptical of his lack of experience in running a Republic. I’m very skeptical of his promises.

          Now, Hilary is her own bag of misfortune. I could never vote for her. But while I think she’ll do a lot of bad things I also don’t think she’ll stumble into anything catastrophic like a major war. I worry Trump and his vitriol might.

          This is a lousy position for us. I loathe it. I wish the parties would wither and die because we are living the dangers of fraction that were warned of in the Federalist papers. People cheer more for their party than for objective truth, and demonize and demoralize their opponents on the other side. Its crap.

          We need to grow up as an electorate and stop acting like soccer hooligans out in force for our team.

          The Church should challenge all of us! NEITHER THE DEMOCRATS OR THE REPUBLICANS PROPERLY FULFILL CATHOLIC SOCIAL JUSTICE. WE SHOULD BE CHALLENGED BY THIS INSTEAD OF DEFENDING THE CANDIDATES AND THEIR FLAWS.

          The Republicans can be horrible at social justice. The Democrats are so tied up with the culture of death its laughable. Both parties court moral relativism. Both parties spend the cash of future generations to stay in power now.

          Want to end abortion? We should start cleaning up our own lives instead of slinging vitriol. We should start evangelizing and trying to convert hearts. We should pray, and fast. THAT is how we will end abortion. Instead we sit her and squabble and name call.
          And, as one poster pointed out, it makes us, the hands and feet of Christ in this world, look horrible.

          Goodness, the way we act it would be as if Paul quit evangelizing and instead tried to line up support for the next Emperor.

          Debate, discuss, but stop the name calling and hyperbole. They’ll know we are Christians by our love, not by the best zingers we have.

    3. A vote for a candidate who advocates abortion and willfully DEMANDS that you and everyone else fully fund the murder of babies IS a mortal sin when you do it knowingly.

       1. JFW, it isn’t hyperbole. It’s the middle finger to integrity and honesty and loyalty. There are military officers in prison right now for lesser violations than Hillary committed as Secretary of State. She has rightly earned a prison cell, so to “promote” her to Commander in Chief is indeed to spit in the eye of every honorable military person.

92. Mostly agree. I voted early in Florida & had to write in Maturen & Muñoz because they weren’t on the ballot here — they were trying to get on in August last I heard but nothing came of it. Protest vote.

    I do wonder how many seats the GOP will lose in Congress. Some. Lots?

    1. Gaining by all accounts-a gross assunption that is really baseless because the GOP had lost most of it member’s confidence-a party in complete shambles

    2. You gave Hillary HALF a vote. This is a mortal sin.

93. The National Catholic register made the right decision.

    1. Do you have an argument in there somewhere, or are you more interested in delighting in someone else’s misfortune?

    2. Considering the culture we live in, are we at all surprised at the candidates we have as options for President? We live in a sexually exploitative, “give me that”, “not my problem” culture. WE (Christians) have been lazy, WE have not marched on the streets demanding that the Christian values this country was founded on be upheld- at least I know I haven’t REALLY done this. Yes, I have gone on a couple of pro-life marches and casted my vote for what I believe should happen, but that is not enough. I didn’t REALLY fight for it, you can tell by looking at the world around us. Our Christian values have gone out the window a long time ago and we need to live in the world of what actually is.

       Over the past few weeks we also found out the following about Hillary Clinton:

       1. She knew our “allies” Saudi Arabia and Qatar were FUNDING ISIS and said nothing.
       After knowing this, Hillary accepted tens of millions in donations from these terrorist-funding governments (of course they are getting something back in return). She also supported arms deals to them. In 2015 we gave $29B in weapons to Saudi Arabia who we knew were funding ISIS! Let that sink in… She approved giving weapons to the people that we knew were giving weapons to ISIS.

       2. In continuation with the first item on the list – the FBI has had an ongoing investigation of her since Feb 2016 to investigate if she took bribes from foreign leaders in her position as Secretary of State. Bill Clinton received a $1M birthday gift from Qatar. Even Chelsea Clinton said in the email this (receiving money from foreign governments) doesn’t look right. “In accordance with the Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution, you may not accept anything of value from a foreign government, unless specifically authorized by Congress… Spouses and dependent children of Federal employees are also banned from accepting gifts from foreign governments.”

       3. Her campaign team PAID PROTESTERS TO INCITE VIOLENCE AT TRUMP RALLIES. Did you see how some of these people ended up?

       You claim that you care about “fewer dead babies”– what about the babies being killed right now, at our hand, because of the war in Syria Hillary supports 100%. Where we are allying with Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who WE KNOW ARE FUNDING AND ARMING ISIS, and she agreed to give them weapons! We know that US weapons have ended up in ISIS hands at least twice now! This is alone is the cause of so many human rights violation – from people being killed by an unjust war, to the Syrian refugees fleeing their country fearing for their life, and a vote for Hillary is a vote for this continuing! Even Huffington Post called her a “war machine”!

       Your logic about the pro-life movement fighting harder if Hillary wins, as it supposedly did under Obama, is ridiculous and insane. It’s what the communists in Germany said about Hitler. Once he gets in, then people will see how much they need us. Instead Hitler wiped them out. To make this gamble when right now we are facing a woman that funded, armed, and helped bring to power those in the Middle East who are gang raping women, persecuting Christians, and throwing gays off of buildings. A woman who stole money from Haitians who were in dire need of help. A woman who silenced victims of sexual abuse because her fame and power were more important. Not to mention her actual stance on funding Planned Parenthood and partial birth abortions, how does this save more babies! She will be in office for 8 years!

       Yes, it would be great if we had a good candidate running against her for President, who actually held and practiced our Christian values, but we don’t, and I AM NOT SURPRISED. In my opinion, what we as Christians should be doing is preventing the further evil that this woman is capable of by voting for the only candidate who can beat her. Who, yes, has questionable character, but whose policies are exactly what America needs.

    3. Hillary thanks you for your Pilate hand-washing vote.

    4. http://www.lifenews.com/2016/10/09/hillary-clinton-i-want-a-supreme-court-justice-who-will-uphold-unlimited-abortion/ Hillary wants a supreme court justice who will uphold unlimited abortion. This is what you’re voting for Simcha – shame on you.

       1. A bit of wolfishness in her commentary. Kinda makes her “open to life” little subtitled motto stomach-churning

    5. I couldn’t agree more. Everyone is welcome to an opinion but if this is Catholic thought then I must be a Protestant.

       1. No worries, Mike. This article IS NOT Catholic teaching. You are a solid Catholic. I have to remind myself of this when I see so many Catholics going astray on this election.

       2. It’s just Gimmiecrat thought. Say a prayer for the author and move on to a better website. Fr. Hunwicke’s Mutual Enrichment is always a good bet.

Comments are closed.