Why I can’t Vote for Joe Biden (and Why You Shouldn’t Either)

joe biden, Kamala Harris, presidential candidate, vice-president

I love Joe Biden, just as I love all my fellow human beings.  But Joe seems to be really confused.  Maybe 47 years in politics, in the swamp, have muddled his thinking.

Ask any sane, rational person if it is okay to murder a baby and the answer will be “no.”  Anyone who committed such a horrendous, intrinsically evil act would be guilty of infanticide. The murder of an innocent baby is the gravest of sins.

Thanks to Roe v. Wade, however, it is okay for a woman to murder a baby that is still in her womb.  Somehow abortion is not infanticide, even though 38 states have “fetal homicide laws” and 29 states even “have fetal homicide laws that apply to the earliest stages of pregnancy (“any state of gestation/development,” “conception,” “fertilization” or “post-fertilization”).”

Such is the world in which we live.  This is what happens when men (and women) think they are smarter than God, that they can replace God’s laws with manmade laws.

Biden says he is personally against abortion, but he also thinks women should be allowed to murder their unborn babies.  This is either very confused thinking or hypocrisy of the highest order.

Joe Biden and his running mate, Kamala Harris, also think that your tax dollars and mine should be used to pay for these barbarous, heinous acts, thus making us unwilling accomplices in this evil.  And now Biden even says abortion should be the law of the land.

New Man-made Rights

Babies are truly gifts from God.  Having been conceived, the baby receives a soul and becomes one of God’s children – just like the baby’s mother and father.  So murdering a baby is the same as murdering any human being.

While the Bible makes no mention of abortion, the Didache does address abortion.  It clearly states in Chapter 2:2 “. . . you shall not murder a child by abortion . . .”

Yet because of Roe v. Wade a mother has been given “reproductive rights.”  And these rights somehow outweigh her baby’s right to live.  Note too, that it is women who have reproductive rights.  Men’s “reproductive rights” are still being debated.  More on that further on.

‘Reproductive’ Rights?

Try Googling “reproductive rights.”  Discounting Wikipedia, the closest thing you’ll find for a definition without doing an awful lot of digging is at findlaw.com.  “Reproductive rights” are the rights of individuals to decide whether to reproduce and have reproductive health” says findlaw.

Of course human “individuals” are not capable of asexual reproduction.  No one can reproduce all by his or herself.  And two “individuals” of the same sex cannot reproduce.  Reproduction requires a man and woman, not just any one or two “individuals.”  So this definition is a pretty poor one.

This is typical of the problems activist judges run into when they find new rights that are not specifically stated in the Constitution.  Inevitably they have to play word games in an attempt to justify the new rights they’ve discovered.

“The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity.” This statement is from the majority opinion on Obergefell v. Hodges, wherein SCOTUS codified same-sex ‘marriage.’

As R.R. Reno stated, “This is an unworkable, intellectually bankrupt concept of freedom.”  Because we now get to “define and express” our own identities, we now have men saying they are women and women saying they are men.  There are even some people who are saying they are neither male nor female.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, who disagreed with the ruling, also say the ruling is posing problems for religious freedom.  Way to go SCOTUS.

More Word Games

And just what is “reproductive health?”

The World Health Organization (WHO) defined reproductive health:  “Reproductive health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity, in all matters relating to the reproductive system and to its functions and processes.”

It sounds like the WHO is also playing word games.  How can someone be in a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being in regard to bodily systems and functions?  Can an individual also have complete mental and social well-being in all matters relating his or her circulatory system?  Or how about ‘digestive health?’  Hey, I have digestive health!  Yessiree Bob, I’m in a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being in all matters relating to my digestive system.  Just excuse me if I pass gas.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that God intended that we procreate.  He created us and told us to “Be fertile and multiply” [Genesis 1:27-28]. It is part of Natural Law.  Reproductive rights, however, are a brand new, man-made right.

Hidden Rights

SCOTUS has proclaimed that procreation, and the subsequent reproductive rights, are rights that are in the Constitution of the United States!  Well, not really, but kind of, sort of.  Kind of like the new “right” that allows two men or two women to get ‘married.’

More from findlaw.com:

“The U.S. Constitution does not explicitly mention a right to reproduce, however, the Supreme Court has recognized it as a personal right that is deemed “fundamental” . . .

“Moreover, a person’s right to privacy is expressed in the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and was the subject of the precedent setting case of Roe v. Wade in 1973.”

The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was one of three amendments passed during Reconstruction following the Civil War.  Its intent was to abolish slavery and establish civil and legal rights for black Americans.  But this amendment was used by five SCOTUS legal giants to legalize abortion.

Who could have thought that hidden in the 14th Amendment was an unstated right to privacy that included a hidden, unstated right for women to murder their unborn babies?  I guess only the five Supreme Court Justices who ruled in favor of Roe v. Wade knew that.  For almost a hundred years no one was able to figure this out until the activist Justices Berger, Douglas, Brennan, Stewart, Marshall, Blackmun, and Powell came along.

Complications

Of course, these smart, legal giants ignored all the complications this new “right” raised.  Is an unborn baby a human being?  If not, at what point does a baby become a human being? And if an unborn baby is a human being, doesn’t the baby have a right to privacy and a right to life as well?

Since the 1973 ruling, medical science has repeatedly stated that human life begins at conception.  (See “Further Sources” at the end of Guy McClung’s recent CS article on abortion for more information on this.)  But this inconvenient truth is ignored by Joe, Kamala, and most Democrats who continue to endorse this evil.  Apparently science can be ignored when it does not support your cause.

So what about Men?

And, as findlaw.com notes:

“The question whether men have reproductive rights is a hotly debated topic in the U.S. While reproductive rights have been legally recognized as a woman’s right – especially in matters involving abortion, adoption, and procreation – men’s reproductive rights have been less certain.”

This is because, as findlaw.com points out, “All in all, the Court has not ruled a definitive answer to support a broad allegation of such rights for men. Constitutionally, laws must only guarantee that men and women are treated the same if they are “similarly situated” – which they are not in matters of reproduction.”

Whoa!!! Women have a right that men do not have because women and men are not “similarly situated?”  Imagine that!  Women and men are different!  Who knew?  Isn’t this just a bit contrary to everything we’ve been hearing from the women’s libbers and the progressives for the last 50-plus years?

Innocent, Unborn Babies Have Zero Rights

So where do unborn human babies fit in?  What legal rights do these most vulnerable and innocent of human beings have?  None.  And not just in the U.S. but globally as well.

Read the UN Human Rights Committee’s General comment No. 36 (2018) on Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, on the Right to Life.  Right at the beginning, in point No. 2, this 26-page document says the right to life for every human being is absolute.  And then six points later it contradicts itself.  A mother’s right to murder her baby trumps the baby’s right to live.  Even the UN, that august body that deems itself the highest arbiter of rights does not understand that unborn human babies have a right to life.

Irrational Thinking & Lunacy

Anyone who agrees with all this irrational thinking, this legal mumbo jumbo and immoral lunacy, is clearly not thinking rationally.  And anyone who thinks the Federal Government should pay for abortions (i.e., take the money you and I pay in taxes and funnel it to baby killers) is also not thinking rationally or clearly.

The pro-abortion crowd is always quick to ask ‘how can you deny a woman who has been raped or is the victim of incest the right to an abortion?’  But rational Catholics and other orthodox Christians know the very simple answer to this question:  Two evil acts – two wrongs – do not and cannot make a right.  A baby conceived through rape or incest can be put up for adoption.  Problem solved.  One evil act should not be compounded by a second evil act.

If an individual cannot see that abortion is murder, it is doubtful that such an individual can clearly and rationally think through other issues that are far more complex.

As Bishop Donald Joseph Hying, Bishop of the Diocese of Madison, WI, put it, “If a candidate is fundamentally wrong on such a basic and preeminent human rights issue of grave consequence to the most innocent in our society and to our own future, how can I trust the candidate to make moral and prudent decisions on many other important social justice issues pertaining to the common good?”

Say ‘No’ to Joe & Kamala

There are certainly many other issues besides abortion to consider when voting this November, as the USCCB’s Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, points out.  Jobs, taxes, the economy, immigration, education, health care, eliminating poverty, and caring for the environment are issues in every election. I tend to think both Biden and Trump take these issues seriously.  They just disagree on how best to address them, as do many people, and even many good Catholics.  But no matter how these other issues are addressed, there is no way any action or lack of action will result in the deaths of 61 million innocents in the U.S. or 1.5 billion innocents worldwide.

Abortion is a clear cut case of doing evil.  No other issue today approaches the evil and the horror that is abortion.

It is our “preeminent priority” as faithful Catholic citizens to say ‘no’ to anyone who would allow, continue, or expand this horror.  Every other issue pales in comparison.

If Joe and Kamala cannot figure out that abortion is murder, they are hopelessly confused.  They are not thinking rationally.  And that is why I cannot vote for Joe and Kamala.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Pinterest

17 thoughts on “Why I can’t Vote for Joe Biden (and Why You Shouldn’t Either)”

  1. One of the reasons that Bernie Sanders attracted so many voters is that even though he is totally wrong. he is also completely transparent. In contrast, Harris-Biden is duplicitous to the max. It seems strange but many voters are fine with knowing certain unpleasant prospects rather that vague and unclear promises of hope. The stated plans of Harris-Biden combine the worst of both approaches; future. bad events that won’t hurt.

  2. Gene-Thank you, thank you. And your title says it all-great title. It must be comforting that now there are priests, pastors, and bishops in the USA publicly echoing your message. Guy, Texas

  3. Pingback: Why I can’t Vote for Joe Biden (and Why You Shouldn’t Either) | ROMAN CATHOLIC TODAY

  4. Pingback: THVRSDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit

  5. Captcrisis, your arguments would be more persuasive if they weren’t strawmen, irrelevant to the Catholic dogma that the Right to LIfe, from conception to natural death, is the most important of all rights. Without life all other rights are irrelevant. 60 million deaths (over a third black) of the unborn, advocating murder of children just out of the birth canal, is not a position any good Catholic should be comfortable with. Forcing doctors and religious to violate their religious convictions is not a position any good Catholic should advocated. Yet these are the positions taken by the Democrats and Biden.
    I urge reader to do a web search for the homily by Fr. Ed Meek, “Staring into the
    abyss” at the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter website. I would give the url, but prevents my comment from being printed.
    Pray for our country!

  6. Donald Trump is the only candidate for any serious Catholic believer to consider. We’ll all need to answer for our decisions when we get to our particular judgement. I’ll be proud to say that I voted pro-life.

  7. There is the problem of President Trump’s overbearing personality, never mind his checkered sexual behavior background. Republicans and independent voters who dislike him personally will not vote for Biden, but will write in a name. That in effect is like not having voted in the election.

    1. But such a vote is a vote against Pres-to-be Harris and running mate and against the Democrats of Death who now publicly advocate for and promote the extension of the court-created “right” to abortion to include the female’s [almost erred and use the word ‘mother’] “right” to infanticide, the right to murder a child who has survived an abortion attempt and is alive outside the womb of the female, who is no longer her ‘property’ – location , location, location – who by law is a living US citizen. So such a vote is NOT without effect and is a vote for life. If you view Trump as Stalin, that is no justification for voting for Hitler. Guy, Texas

    2. I agree with you Josephine. A write in vote or a vote for a third party candidate is a wasted voted. The only way to promote the greatest good and avoid the greatest evil is to vote for Donald Trump.

    3. A cartoon in a liberal publication is a real poor example. ICE’s detainment and detention policies have been basically the same for 40 years or more. You can’t blame that on Trump.

      Four years ago I said Trump was the lessor of two evils. That’s a criticism. But I’ve actually tempered my opinion of him. He has shown himself to be egotistical, a loud mouth, and uncouth, but so far there hasn’t been much to criticize regarding his job performance.

      You’ve been drinking too much Kool-Aid. Let me try to open your eyes and explain how things work. One liberal publication makes a charge of hatred, racism, or cruelty based on out of context remarks or anonymous sources and then other liberal publications pick it up and keep repeating it, referring back to the original out of context remark or anonymous source if needed to support the on-going and never ending charges. And in case you haven’t heard the Russia collusion garbage was all Hilary Clinton’s doing.

      Wake up captcrisis. Trump is not a racist, or a hater, or cruel. He is hard-nosed, often times ill-tempered businessman who is upsetting the apple cart. He’s certainly not a slick, two-faced politician like most of those in the swamp, who are getting richer all the time, just like Joe Biden’s family, which you won’t hear about at CNN or MSNBC or Huffpo or from any of the mainstream media. The elite and their socialist progressive and often atheistic lapdogs in the media (and academia), HATE Trump because he is a threat to both their gravy train and their on-going crusade to turn the country into a secular-socialist utopia. Stop drinking the Kool-Aid captcrises.

  8. Excellent analysis. I have already shared it with Facebook pages and friends. In response to those who hate Trump, I simply respond that I don’t really like him either. As a matter of fact, I was a never Trump voter before changing my mind after more thoroughly studying his positions. After all, that is more relevant than his personality and character flaws. That is what affects our country.

    Cosmetics and personality never accomplish much of substance. I am grateful that Trump made and kept promises, Especially where it counts most. After all, Pope Francis as well as the Church from her inception, firmly teaches that life is the ‘Preeminent Issue’. Without our God-given right to life, no other right has any value. Further, as science has confirmed, life begins at the very beginning. An embryo (little one in Latin) is always fully human. What else could she be? Even abortion giant, Planned Parenthood acknowledges that by harvesting and selling the organs of the unborn. So, as the Fifth Commandment states, “Thou shalt not murder”.

    One of my social media memes states “I’m not voting for a canonization or a Valentine. I am voting for the right to LIFE.” I am also, voting for religious freedom and for someone who keeps his campaign promises. What a blessing to have voted for him after researching his positions. I knew well what he was promising, that’s what I voted for. The other candidate would have kept her promises too – to the detriment of humanity, especially the unborn.

    After 3.5 years his success rate on moral issues is stellar. Look at his accomplishments from a neutral source with actual facts and links. Yes, there are smear mongers out there who deny and twist, but the facts and tangible proof stands. This is the first President to have publicly stood so firmly as a pro-life advocate. We have had others with more genteel manners, more promises (yet unkept), and seemingly better character. Yet, even with a Republican Senate and House, have not accomplished even half of what has been done in the past 3.5 years. With our prayerful support, tens of thousands of us have prayed many 54 Day Rosary Novenas for him. I even believe our president has grown in faith himself. From Joe Biden to President Trump, I will continue to pray for all of our leaders. However, my vote will be cast for the one who kept his word.

    1. I’m mystified as to what “positions” Trump holds aside from abortion that would attract Catholic support.

  9. 1. If you’re going to use the word “murder”, then (if you’re like most pro-lifers) you are in favor of the death penalty. Who gets sent to the chair? The doctor? The woman? Both? “Murder” is a serious word to throw at people, and if you haven’t already worked this out then you’re not being serious.

    2. The party of abortion is the Republicans, whose policies will result in more abortions. Legal or not, there will always be a demand for abortion and you have assigned yourself the task of how to minimize that demand. Yet you don’t seem interested.

    3. If Republicans are opposed to abortion, why don’t they do something about it? Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey were decided by Republican-appointed judges. From 2017- 2019 Republicans were in control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency. They could have defunded Planned Parenthood in a stand-alone bill (instead of guaranteeing defeat by inserting it into a massive health care bill) and could have changed Senate rules to disallow a filibuster. But they didn’t introduce a stand-alone bill until 2019 after Democrats had taken over the House.

    1. 1. I agree with Pope St. John Paul II on the use of the death penalty. I am not saying that someone who performs an abortion or the woman who asks to have her baby murdered should receive the death penalty. You are making a fallacious argument (called an Appeal to Ridicule). Both individuals are, however, complicit in Capital Murder. And, yes, murder is a serious word.

      2. The DNC party platform calls for defending a woman’s ‘right’ to abortion. The RNC party platform does not. Regardless, your statement about demand for abortion is a fallacious argument (Perfectionist Fallacy), and I have not assigned myself “the task of how to minimize” the demand for abortions. You really should stop throwing out Red Herrings.

      3. I agree that the Republicans are not lily white when it comes to abortion. This, among other reasons, is why I am an Independent.

    2. 1)) 102 countries have abolished the death penalty for murder. If I call abortion murder, I do not necessarily approve of the death penalty. The US should abolish it too.
      2) How would the repeal of Roe v. Wade “increase” abortions? I think people would rather think twice before. And abortionists too if they would go to jail and pay also hefty fines.
      3) I agree that Republicans in Congress could have been more forceful in fighting legalized abortion. However, the membership of the Supreme Court was the final arbitrator in the abortion question.

  10. I agree 100% with this text. I don’t even want to mention abortion, because that alone is enough reason not to vote for Biden-Harris. For a Christian it is essential to be able trust, in fact trust is not only a Christian prerogative, it is the right of any human being to be told the TRUTH. Joe Biden has had 40 years to show who he is and his actions show that he is not honest. What is going on right now in the Senate is a disgrace. A Muslim woman in Congress is almost never questioned about any absurd position she has taken in public. Her religion doesn’t matter. But a fine catholic Judge with an impeccable record is criticized in the Senate and accused by democrats of being a RELIGIOUS FANATIC. Such tendencies reflect on the ticket Biden-Harris and their false narratives. One day they are for something and the next day they deny it. That undermines the trust and it is not good for any nation. Sorry to be political, but I base my thoughts on the simple rules of the bible. “Thou shall not lie”. Trump may be having his faults, but he comes mostly through with what he says he will do. He has proven that in the last four years.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.