Find essays by keyword, title, or author name

Trump: On Counting the Cost

I cannot vote for Hillary Clinton. I reject her whole approach to the unborn, to marriage, to sexuality.  I am shocked at the recent Wikileaks revelations about her plans to infiltrate the Catholic Church.  I can gladly acknowledge that in some respects she occupies the moral high ground against Trump, as in refusing to torture terrorist suspects and to kill their families, but I think that, all things considered, she would do great damage to our country.

My friends think that if I reject Hillary, then surely I will vote for Trump, who has after all given some half-hearted indications of making good judicial appointments.  But I won’t vote for him either.  I refuse to jump out of the frying pan into the fire.  So I owe my friends an accounting.

The Case Against Trump

I find that Catholics who support Trump don’t face up to the vast and many-sided moral and cultural damage that a Trump administration will inflict on us. They don’t face up to his own toxic mix of incompetence, ignorance, indecency, thugishness, trashiness, and psychological pathology.

Why do they register all of Hillary’s failings but give Trump a pass for his?   Because they say  that the life issues “trump” all others:  if  Trump will nominate some pro-life judges, then we can put up with almost any amount of harm and degradation that he might otherwise cause.

So we don’t have to bother with thinking about that degradation , or asking how great it is, and finding out just what it consists in, and what evil fruit it will bear; we can save ourselves all this trouble by just repeating the mantra, “the life issues surpass all other issues, you have to vote for Trump.”

Let’s rouse ourselves from this dogmatic slumber.

For starters, a Trump presidency would disgrace the office. The White House would be dragged into the gutter of celebrity scandals and tabloids. This is Trump’s element, even more than it was Bill Clinton’s, and he will take it with him wherever he goes.

The disgusting 2005 tape does not just record a few incidents in Trump’s private life, but it is emblematic of Trump’s very public persona.  More tapes are doubtless waiting to come to light, more accusers are about to step forward. With Trump in the White House our public life would be constantly destabilized by some new outrage committed by the president.  Four years of Trump’s trashiness and debauchery would besmirch and degrade the presidency; it would be like dragging the flag through the gutter.

The problem is not exactly that he would push bad policies; it is more systemic than that, it is that he would pollute our national ethos.  Will you say that the good judges Trump may appoint outweigh all this pollution?  How do you know this? How do you compare such a good with such an evil?

But this is only the beginning of the troubles.  Asked why he is so “forgiving” of Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, Trump always answers, “because he says nice things about me.”  This is simply infantile. When Putin occupies and annexes parts of Ukraine, Trump looks the other way because Putin “says nice things about me.”  Do we really want a president who is so self-absorbed that he can be disarmed by empty flattery?

This goes hand in hand with Trump’s vindictiveness.  You cross him, you’re subject to a torrent of intemperate insults. Does any one think that this pettiness and vindictiveness will not show up in his dealings with foreign leaders?  Does anyone think that if Angela Merkel crosses Trump he will be able to restrain himself from calling her to her face a “nasty woman”? This will handicap Trump as leader no less than his vulnerability to flattery.  Whoever represents America on the world stage needs to be an adult. Trump is far more ill-mannered, undisciplined, and self-indulgent than most children.

Look at the trainwreck that Trump has caused in the Republican Party; what if he is similarly divisive and destructive within the community of nations?  Do we turn a blind eye to these menacing omens, just because he might make some positive judicial appointments?

Not Christ But Nietzche

But there’s much worse.  Trump has an anti-Christian love of power and scorn for the weak. His basic mentality is Nietzschean, as a number of critics have observed.  The weak are “losers,” which is the worst thing that can be said of someone in Trump’s universe.  When Hillary Clinton, suffering from pneumonia, became unsteady on her feet at the 9/11 ceremony, Trump mocked her weakness, just as he mocked a disabled reporter.

On the other hand, he exults in flaunting strength and force. His celebrity, he boasts, puts women at his disposal.  He takes delight in making aggressive sexual advances towards them, intimidating them with his fame. He likes to use and then discard them, as his disordered libido prompts him. He talks at his rallies about wanting to punch protesters in the face. He has often said that he wants to torture terror suspects — in violation of U.S. and international law – and has even threatened to kill their families. As for the breakdown in our inner cities, all he can think to do is to incite the police to get tougher. He seems devoid of any Christian sensibility.

If his basic mental makeup is Nietzchean, how can he fail to act like a Nietzschean, how can he not, as president, walk over the weak and vulnerable, like he walked over the widow living next to his casino?  Should Christians just make peace with this anti-Christian ethos, for the sake of possible pro-life judicial appointments? Will not four or eight years of a leader who despises the vulnerable strike a blow at the heart of the pro-life movement?  Will this not undermine our efforts to build a culture of life?

The Final Word

If Trump really does make some good judicial appointments, it will be by political necessity and not by conviction.  His long pro-abortion record (up to at least 2012) corresponds much better to who he is.  This is because his libertine way of life needs to be backed up by legal abortion. Sexual license and respect for the unborn do not go together.

We would be glad, of course, to have pro-life justices, even if they are appointed for the wrong reasons.  But no one should be surprised if he treats his pro-life promises like he treats his marital promises.

I say to the Catholic supporters of Trump: you are paying a huge price for the benefits you are bargaining for.   Have you taken the measure of the manifold malignancy that Trump would bring into our public life?  Have you considered how Trump will disgrace the office, destabilize the world with erratic and reckless behavior, and undercut the pro-life cause with his Nietzschean scorn for the vulnerable?  Count the cost!  At the very least respect your fellow Catholics who cannot support Trump.

 

Readers are invited to discuss essays in argumentative and fraternal charity, and are asked to help build up the community of thought and pursuit of truth that Ethika Politika strives to accomplish, which includes correction when necessary. The editors reserve the right to remove comments that do not meet these criteria and/or do not pertain to the subject of the essay.

  • chezami

    The use of the unborn as human shields for every disgusting thing Trump says and does and for every Right Wing Culture of Death priority is the single most disgusting tactic of the anti-abortion-but-not-prolife Christian Right. It has killed the its credibility. We need a new prolife movement that is for the *whole* of the Church’s teaching and not a tool of American Conservatism for making war on the Church.

    • JorgeThe Jorrid

      You are on the record as saying you’d vote for Killary if you lived in a swing state, and encouraging others to do the same. You hold no moral higher ground here. Go back to the hell hole you crawled out of, where you can slander pro-lifers to your heart’s content.

    • Antodav

      Unless you’re making the case that Christian conservatives should be anti-war and anti-death penalty as well as anti-abortion, you don’t have much moral ground to stand on.

      • MarylandBill

        If you read his blog you would find that Mark is very consistent with respect with supporting the Church’s teaching regarding the Death Penalty and war (i.e., in modern times, neither is rarely if ever justifiable).

        • JorgeThe Jorrid

          I think he’s referring to the seamless garment heresy, which Shea advocates.

          • MarylandBill

            Sorry, I don’t recall where the Church has ever proclaimed that concept to be a heresy? Mark is as aware as anyone of how progressives have used the concept of the Seamless garment to provide cover for their support for abortion. That is not what anyone is talking about here.

            By all means, Catholics can and should lead the charge of opposition to abortion, but if we oppose abortion by supporting other intrinsic evil, are we actually preaching a pro-life message or simply an anti-abortion one?

          • JorgeThe Jorrid

            Anyone with half a brain (and I know that’s asking a lot of libruls) would see that trying to prevent the stacking of the SC with anti-life, anti-Christian, anti-family judges is a pro-life message. But let’s purposefully muddy the waters to give cover for our support for the biggest criminal to ever seek the office. And thanks for explaining the evilness of Bernardin’s seamless garment.

          • MarylandBill

            So, the question is, are you here for actual debate, or so you can belittle those who disagree with you?

            Both candidates have extremely troublesome backgrounds. Trump’s anti-abortion credentials are thinner than a closed ice-rink’s at the equator and on other life issues he doesn’t qualify at all. If he had a long record of speaking up for the unborn, for the poor, against assisted suicide, etc.. then maybe it would be worth taking a chance on him. As it is, I am seriously worried about having that man’s finger on the nuclear trigger. If nothing else, electing Trump play’s into the Left’s narrative that pro-lifers are misogynists and will help us loose another generation of young folks.

          • JorgeThe Jorrid

            Oh good lord, the left will always have a “narrative”, whether it’s you’re a racist for wanting to protect our borders, or a homophobe for wanting to protect the family, or an islamophobe for being against jihadists…. and now you’re a misogynist for voting for Trump. Grow a pair, man.

          • chezami

            The combination of dripping contempt for the Holy Father and worshipful devotion to a pro-abort, draft-dodging, adulterous, pornocratic sex predator who mocks the disabled, POWs, and Gold Star families is just such a winning formula for the Greatest Catholics of All Time. Brilliant.

          • JorgeThe Jorrid

            LOL! Shouldnt you be busy linking to Salon, HuffPo, WashCompost and other librul propaganda outlets to showcase your brilliance among the other useful idiots?

          • JorgeThe Jorrid

            Mark Shea, a man so outraged by the sexual assault of women, that he has no problem with importing a culture where it’s not a crime, but a man’s right.

          • C. Martel

            I am a Catholic that is anti abortion, pro death penalty. If that makes me “merely” anti abortion and not truly pro life, so be it.

      • Nestorian

        As a matter of fact, that is exactly correct. Christian conservatives should absolutely be antiwar. Else they are not in fact truly pro-life.

        • MrAlanBreck

          Funny part is, Trump is one of the most anti-war on the Repub side.

          • JorgeThe Jorrid

            That hasn’t stopped the Clintonistas from pulling out the old Daisy Commercial. Yes that’s right, they’re using the same tactic to smear Trump as a warhawk with his hand on the nuke button, as they did to Barry Goldwater.

          • Nestorian

            Yes, and I am tempted to vote for him for that very reason.

        • MotherGinger

          I believe you mean anti-unjust-war. Being anti-war is as illogical and unChristian as being anti-defense-of-the-child-being-raped-next-to-you.

          Now, I believe most wars historically have been unjust. But the distinction is critical.

    • Sound of One Hand Laughing

      Mark, you have hated the pro-life movement for years. This is not new or news. In fact, the pro-life movement is broad and deep and vast. There is something in it for everyone, even you. Jump in, bub, the water’s fine.

      • chezami

        False. I oppose the anti-abortion-but-not-prolife movement, which uses the unborn as human shields for battling the Church on behalf of right wing culture of death priorities, precisely *because* I am prolife and want to see Catholics be *fully* prolife and not destroy the prolife movement (as they have now done) in the service of a pro-abort, adulterous, draft-dodging sex predator whose insults to POWs, the disabled, and Gold Star families they defend to their last breath. The destruction the anti-abortion-but-not-prolife Trump supporters have wreaked on the prolife movement and the witness of the Church in the past few months is vastly greater than anything the Left has achieved in the past 30 years. It will take a generation to repair it. Be *more* prolife, not less.

        • JorgeThe Jorrid

          So let’s show our support for the pro-life movement by backing someone who is perhaps the most corrupt person to ever seek higher office in this country. A woman “whose list of horrifically bad deeds, some of them felonious, would be way too long to produce here ( and makes Trump look like a Boy Scout). A woman who pledges to support abortion in every way possible, who trades favors with our enemies to fatten her own coffers, and plans to force Catholic hospitals to do abortions (which will be followed by requirements for Catholic schools to teach that homosexuality and transgenderism are normal) are enough to prove that she is a real and present danger to religious liberty.” -Dr. Janet Smith. A woman also who publicly stated that religions will need to change their teachings in order to support her pro-death views

          Yeah, that’s the ticket.

          • chezami

            I’m voting for Mike Maturen of the American Solidarity Party.

    • Thomas Sharpe

      Abortion is about birth control, specifically -backup birth control.

  • said she

    The saddest thing is hearing those who’ve made the decision that Trump would be better than Hillary then go on to defend the obvious evil that Trump says & does. Trump has already done great damage to our culture by fostering such excuse-making. Trump has made misogyny, insults, threats, lies, and churlish behavior great again.

    • kb

      No comparison. None of the scrutiny of Clinton, there has been much innuendo, few facts. Trump puts his misogyny and corruption out front and boasts about it

    • Faustina11

      None of which come close to the evil of killing children in their mothers wombs and getting filthy rich off of their tiny dismembered bodies.

  • Abby

    Thanks, Dr. Crosby!

  • Jenny Uebbing

    We in swing states do not have the luxury of considering a 3rd party vote as we have to operate in the binary reality of the election as D vs R. As reprehensible as Mr. Trump’s behavior and morality may be, his opponent is intractably opposed to reality itself. Mr. Trump *may* indeed blunder into a good SCOTUS nomination. Mrs. Clinton assuredly will not, and is perhaps the most horrifyingly corrupt candidate for president in our nation’s history.

    • Sally Wilkins

      Can you prove that? Because after three decades of trying, no one has been able to.

      • Deborah Wilbanks

        Yes, the Benghazi event was a political event to try to woo the electorate away from Obama in 2012. There was no media resistance to the story because the media thrives on scandal, so it was milked for the fable it could foster. Hilary has long advocated for women and children, and for universal healthcare. Witch hunts ensue when facts drown in a sea of partisan innuendo.

        • JorgeThe Jorrid

          Benghazi was a massive failure on the part of the Obama/Clinton tag team, who then tried to cover it up by blaming a video producer. She even lied directly to the face of the victim’s families at the funeral. And Hillary advocates for children? No innuendo here:
          — “I would like to see Planned Parenthood even get more funding.”
          — “Deep seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed.”
          — “The unborn person doesn’t have Constitutional rights.”
          — “The only people that I would ever appoint to the Supreme Court are people who believe that Roe V. Wade is settled law.”

        • MotherGinger

          I despise the assumption that promoting women and children means promoting welfare, abortion, and socialized medicine.

          The fact is, Clinton knew the 9/11 Benghazi attack was a massive terrorist military assault, but she lied to America and told us it was a “protest gotten out of hand” over a video by a nutty self-proclaimed “pastor” in Florida.

          • Deborah Wilbanks

            I agree with your first statement, but “the fact is” seldom leads to more than personal conviction. She reported what she was originally informed…she then retracted the statement when she realized that she was poorly informed. People see conspiracy where it suits their own beliefs.

    • MarylandBill

      The thing is, several of the Justices who supported Abortion in Casey were Republican nominees. I think we are living in a fantasy to assume that under the current culture, we are ever going to get a majority of the court that will get it right. We should be working to change the culture rather than supporting and objectively bad candidate…. either objectively bad candidate.

      • Sound of One Hand Laughing

        Casey was a long time ago and at that time. the federalist society, that has done so much to change the legal culture adn the GOP, was only ten years old.

        There is no question that the pro-life positon is not uniform among the GOP, but it remains the only viable alternative to advance our cause. Moreover, it is the GOP has has passed a few hundred laws around the country that has lowered the abortion rate and so roiled the pro-aborts.

        The fact remains that we must work on all aspects of the issue, both legally, politically and culturally..supply and demand. The prolife movement its already doing this.

        • MarylandBill

          And if it was a normal GOPer, I would agree with you. I voted for Romney in 2012 precisely because despite some obvious flaws, I believed he might really be sincere regarding abortion.

          • Sound of One Hand Laughing

            But the fact is, Trump has spoken even more strongly than Romney. He has gotten closer to pro-lifers than Romeny or McCain. I believe he will give us what we want.. Want to know the reason? Beause he really doesn’t care about the issue.

      • the rein man

        It seems to me (correct me if I am wrong) that Trump is the first presidential candidate that has publicly stated outright that he will appoint justices that will overturn Roe. The usual Republican line is “I do not have a litmus test.” Trump hasn’t used it, and it does not seem like he is trying to walk the fine edge in order to garner votes. Contrary to Mark Shea’s delusional left wing rants, pro lifers can and should vote for Trump. I am pro life 100%, and am voting for him.

      • MotherGinger

        Exactly. PP vs Casey came after TWELVE YEARS of Republican presidents. RvW was largely decided by nominees of Republicans.

        Trump is so divisive, such a blowhard, that I don’t believe he will ever get a conservative nominee confirmed.

    • JonathanJennings

      Hear hear. Better to have a chance at decent justices and decent laws. It beats the assuredly negative alternative.

  • CorrectionsDepartment

    Amen and amen.

  • kb

    I agree that Trump has already had a very negative impact on our culture. His commitments obviously mean nothing, so how can we believe he would honor anything he has said about about appointments of Supreme Court justices? He has no respect for women, the sanctity of marriage or those he exploits for his own wealth. “It Takes A Village”, written by Clinton illustrates how she values family as an institution. Let’s hope the GOP finds it is morality again, no GOP for me this year.

    • JorgeThe Jorrid

      Hitlary values the family??? LOL. Yeah, if that family is the gubmint (her “village”).

    • MarylandBill

      Mmm, well, Clinton values a statist approach to raising a child. I would hesitate anyone who supports abortion and the redefinition of marriage as strongly as she does to be pro-family.

    • kb

      You might want to actually read the book. It is about helping parents know how to help children with basic skills. A pro choice position is a pro-family position. So many of the so-called pro-lifers know nothing of the struggles of children who are being raised in terrible circumstances. The state does a bad job taking care of these children, the churches do very little, and kids are raising themselves! What is pro-life about that? Hillary Clinton has worked to improve conditions for children all of her career.

      • MrAlanBreck

        “struggles of children who are being raised in terrible circumstances.”

        Are you stating they would be better off dead?

  • ElsasserSC

    This argument misses one point. Given the current electoral system any vote that is not for Trump is for Hillary. Believe me it will be easier to impeach Trump that it will be to impeach Hillary. You would hope that the Democrat reps and senators would not be the ones who oppose impeaching Trump allowing his much more acceptable VP to step in. The symetric scenario with Hillary being impeached is far less possible give the level of control Clinton Inc has on the Democratic apparatus.

    • JorgeThe Jorrid

      The Clintonistas are nothing more than the mob. Everything they touch is poisoned and often killed.

    • kb

      Doubt that our paralyzed Congress could impeach anyone.

    • Dan F.

      Math is hard…

  • Rosemary58

    Was this written before Comey reopened the investigation? After?
    Only Hillary Clinton could make Donald Trump look like a knight in shining armor.

    • Deborah Wilbanks

      There has been nothing, there will be nothing. With nothing but more of the same, he should have waited until he had something more than innuendo, but without innuendo and hysterical posturing, the Republicans drown in their own intolerance.

      • Rosemary58

        I doubt it. If anything, the FBI wouldn’t waste time on innuendo. They need hard evidence. And evidently, the agents who were working on the Weiner jail-bait case were alarmed by what they came across, enough to stop reading his emails when they realized that they were seeing state-sensitive material that they were not cleared to read.

  • JorgeThe Jorrid

    “Look at the trainwreck that Trump has caused in the Republican Party…”

    Are you really this clueless?

  • Trump is really pro choice. He changes like the wind. Like every day. He only says otherwise to get vote.

    • Sound of One Hand Laughing

      Like Reagan.

  • Margaret Taylor Ulizio

    It is interesting and disconcerting to observe the collapse of the Catholic pro-life movement as it bargains away its own soul on promises it knows are false. What a lot of Catholic Trump voters don’t realize is that things like the appointment of Supreme Court justices and religious freedom are the means by which Trump has power over you, not the other way around. The scenario is predicable should Trump win….all those Catholics who bargained with the devil will say, “Now that we got what we want (a president who will nominate the Supreme Court justices that we want), we can begin to challenge Trump on all those other issues central to Catholic values we were willing to overlook. But the thing is, Trump doesn’t like to be challenged, and when he is, he retaliates. Thanks to those Catholics who have sold their souls to the devil, Trump will have been handed the perfect means to make his retaliation as deep and humiliating as possible. What a joke to think that Trump will blunder into a good Supreme Court pick. This is more likely to happen with Clinton than Trump. What is more likely is that Trump, once challenged by the entirety of Catholic teaching, will deliberately appoint justices at odds with Catholic teaching. It will be the perfect way for him to show those Catholics who really is in charge. It is central in Catholic teaching to see the Church as a woman, and we all know Trump takes great pleasure in humiliating women, especially those who would challenge him (and the Church must challenge him). So, for all those Catholics who think voting for Trump is defensible, be ready to stand and answer for it. I am a cradle Catholic, a Ph.D. theologian and a canon lawyer. The Church means a lot to me, and I am voting in good conscience for Hillary Clinton. I don’t have to go through any grand contortions or call what is false the truth in order to do so. It is not a bargain but a prudential choice for the most competent candidate. Clinton is not going to deplete the Catholic pro-life movement of the tiny little bit of credibility and integrity that it has left. With Clinton, the movement will live to see another day. Those of you bargaining with Trump know that your bargain is likely to end badly. If he wins, the time will come when Trump will have to put Mother Church in her place, and thanks to all of you who bargained on Trump, he will have everything he needs to do so. The Church’s pro-life movement and religious freedom movement will be left with nothing.

    • JorgeThe Jorrid

      “…I am voting in good conscience for Hillary Clinton. I don’t have to go through any grand contortions or call what is false the truth in order to do so….”

      Good lord, I don’t know where you teach or received your degree (I’m guessing it wasn’t on the Newman list), but I would never spend thousands of dollars to send my children there to be indoctrinated by such ignorance. The hildabeast in just a sampling of her own words:
      — “I would like to see Planned Parenthood even get more funding.”
      — “Deep seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed.”
      — “The unborn person doesn’t have Constitutional rights.”
      — “The only people that I would ever appoint to the Supreme Court are people who believe that Roe V. Wade is settled law.”

    • MarylandBill

      Honestly, your argument had me until you said you were voting in “good conscience” for Clinton. I can totally see people voting with trepidation for Clinton as the candidate who is likely to do less harm, but honestly, I think voting for either candidate in this election is a troublesome prospect for a Catholic.

      • Margaret Taylor Ulizio

        I don’t think anyone should vote for anyone if they can’t do it in good conscience. I am fearful of the election, but I believe Clinton is the best choice of the major candidates, however you want to explain it (e.g., less harm). If I believe that she is the best choice even if I do so with trepidation, I am still voting in good conscience.

        These aren’t leftist talking points, they are my own thoughts on the matter. Aside from the fact that Trump is not pro-life, this election isn’t a referendum on abortion. I suppose everyone here knows that we aren’t going into a voting booth and pressing a lever “yes abortion” or “no abortion.” And any thinking person knows that the choice between the two major candidates, e.g., Bush v. Kerry or Obama v. McCain, or Clinton v. Trump is not even remotely analogous to being a referendum on abortion. There is no direct line from the president to the absolute prohibition of abortion that people in the Catholic pro-life movement want. It just doesn’t work this way, but somehow politicians have figured out it is a handy carrot to dangle in front of certain constituencies. It doesn’t matter that what these constituencies want never actually happens. And so now the “pro-life” candidate stands for almost everything the Church opposes.

        In gambling with the devil, there are clearly those in the pro-life movement who think that they can hand over every card but one, that is, sacrifice every principle except one, and then once the election is over, demand all their other cards back. But I can guarantee that Trump doesn’t play this way. It will be the big reveal, when that one card, for which all the other cards were gambled away, is discovered to be blank. It is the anti-Gospel, because when it comes down to it every time you gambled with all your other values, you lost a little bit of the one you valued most.

        I can vote for Hillary Clinton in good conscience because I am voting to select the leader of a powerful, large and diverse counrty, and I have the moral obligation to vote for the person on the ticket most competent to do *that* job. To do anything else would be to act in bad conscience.

        • kb

          Well stated! We know Clinton’s positions. Trump’s positions are like moving parts of a reality show game.

        • MotherGinger

          No one – NO ONE – who claims to be Catholic can vote in good conscience for a woman who vocally promotes the legality of killing children the day before they’re born.

          P.S. I despise Trump and have been a #NeverTrumper since the beginning.

          • Margaret Taylor Ulizio

            It really isn’t your job to tell people what is in their conscience. If you think it is then you do not understand the meaning of conscience. I assume there are Catholics who are voting for a person whose entire candidacy is fueled on hate and division (and this isn’t Clinton) and are doing so in good conscience. A person’s conscience can be in error, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be followed provided the person has not been lax in trying to understand as much as possible before moving to action. I think it is moral to vote for a competent person because she is competent not because of her position on abortion. I think it is gravely immoral and foolhardy to vote for someone who just isn’t fit for the job. It is erroneous to think that the entire pro-life movement depends on who is president, it never has. The Church would make so many more and such greater inroads in their stance for life if they weren’t so willing to sell out their spiritual mission for an earthly prize. If Trump wins, you can say bye-bye to any meaningful pro-life movement. Maybe nevertrumpers and Hillary haters are taking the moral high ground, or maybe they are just like those in the Bible who are neither hot nor cold. There is no way that Trump’s appeals to hatred, violence and division are going to promote a culture of life. Maybe he will try to “end” abortion through brute force but that will NEVER work in the long run, and to see so many Catholics hitch their wagons to the band of hate is just heartbreaking.

          • Shelly Gale

            I have read this comment chain with interest. You hitched your wagon to a criminal, using very well-written pieces that are completely devoid of concrete logic.

            Sadly, it is apparent that our Catholic schools, including THE Catholic University of America, have been infiltrated by the left.

    • Sound of One Hand Laughing

      Laughable that you think the Catholic pro-life movement has collapsed. Wishful thinking from the left.

      • MarylandBill

        Are you sure? If someone as obviously a misogynist as Trump is elected and then actually fulfills his promises to pro-life conservatives (which I believe is doubtful), he actually will play into the left’s narrative that being pro-life means you are a misogynist. How many young people might be turned away because of that? I know I sat on the fence for a long time because of that narrative (to my eternal shame).

        • Sound of One Hand Laughing

          The left has its talking points and there is nothing we can do about it. Those who are prolife will remain prolife. …they will not leave because of Trump.

          • Mary Schreiner

            The problem is we need more than people just remaining pro-life. We’re supposed to be growing the pro-life movement and reaching out and changing hearts. No one is going to look at Trump as a beautiful example of a pro-life person and say hey I want to be like that. They’re going to say, huh pro-lifers really are what they’ve been accused of being the whole time. This pro-lifer is dismayed that so many so-called pro-lifers are willing to lay in the gutter with Trump, and that’s not because of leftist talking points, it’s because I’ve watched people I greatly respect sell all of their principles that they’ve claimed so fervently to espouse.

          • JorgeThe Jorrid

            I’d really like to hear why you think Killary is the more obvious pro-life candidate. One who others would be persuaded to become pro-life, if they witnessed Catholics supporting her.

          • CorrectionsDepartment

            Actually, many of us are voting for neither. But I too would begrudgingly vote for Clinton if I lived in a swing state, which I do not, happily.

            Mrs. Clinton is an attack on the pro-life body. No one here disputes that, nor does anyone here like that.

            Mr. Trump is an attack on the pro-life soul, and that is far more dangerous. Supporting Trump comes at a cost to one’s credibility. It reinforces the negative stereotypes about the pro-life movement, most notably, the stereotype that it does not care about women. He is the embodiment of then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s proportionate reasons to vote for a pro-abortion candidate, and he has strained the “no issue matters other than abortion” line of thinking into absurdity, especially since it has compelled pro-lifers to excuse his inability to show any common decency to anyone.

            That is our whole point here. There is a lot of blindness to the dangers of Mr. Trump, because of dislike of Mrs. Clinton, which is something I and many others share. We can and will deal with attacks to the body. But it will be tough to recover from damage to the soul.

          • Mary Schreiner

            The body/soul comparison is very nicely put.

          • JorgeThe Jorrid

            So let’s review here:
            We have someone who is perhaps the most corrupt person to ever seek higher office in this country. A woman “whose list of horrifically bad deeds, some of them felonious, would be way too long to produce here (and makes Trump look like a Boy Scout). A woman who pledges to support abortion in every way possible, who trades favors with our enemies to fatten her own coffers, and plans to force Catholic hospitals to do abortions (which will be followed by requirements for Catholic schools to teach that homosexuality and transgenderism are normal) are enough to prove that she is a real and present danger to religious liberty.” -Dr. Janet Smith. A woman also who publicly stated that religions will need to change their teachings in order to support her pro-death views. We could go on and on here, yet you’re voting for Killary because Trump represents a bigger danger to the soul? My lord…

          • MrAlanBreck

            Yes, that’s the argument. As for the people who say he will disgrace the office, the clearly have no knowledge of Kennedy, FDR, LBJ, and Washington

          • CorrectionsDepartment

            I’m afraid you’re arguing against stuff I didn’t say.

            * I’m not voting for Mrs. Clinton. I would feel obligated to under different circumstances, but I am voting third-party, probably for McMullin, who isn’t great but is far better than the top two, but really, who knows. Yes, that’s how bad Mr. Trump is, that he outweighs the damage Mrs. Clinton would cause. I refuse to blind myself to the damage Mr. Trump represents just because I don’t like Mrs. Clinton.

            * Trump is a gigantic danger to the soul of the pro-life movement, for reasons previously specified. Their support of Mr. Trump, instead of stating the obvious (that neither candidate deserves their support), is a monumental mistake. I did not address individual souls, but I could see circumstances under which, yes, he could be a bigger danger to the soul. For example, if someone supports Trump because of his incorrect stand on the non-negotiable of racism, they could be sinning.

          • JorgeThe Jorrid

            No, you said you’d vote for Killary if you lived in a swing state. A meaningless vote for a third party candidate does not absolve you of this. You hold no moral high ground here. And Trump is a racist now? Why, because he wants to secure our borders from illegal invaders who break our laws, overwhelm our health and educational systems, committ crimes including rape and murder and cause citizens to live in fear of their lives? Or he wants to prevent what is happening now in Europe, being overrun by Muslims who want to destroy our culture and institute Sharia law? Shame on him.

          • Mary Schreiner

            I’m not supporting Hillary, she is despicable. But the Left was never pretending to be pro-life. While the Right said for decades that character, values, and principle matter. Which clearly isn’t the case. I’m beginning to realize the Right has justly earned some of the accusations the Left has tossed at them. I want no part of a pro-life movement that tells me ANYTHING is excusable for the sake of scotus judges.

            I do live in a swing state by the way. But sorry to Clinton and Trump, neither of them are going to close the deal with me.

          • JorgeThe Jorrid

            You’re silence is implicit support of Killary.

          • MrAlanBreck

            ” They’re going to say, huh pro-lifers really are what they’ve been accused of being the whole time. ”

            A non perfect person wants to help us in the political arena. Let us give a sanctimonious lecture how he is not pure enough to help our cause and bask in our moral superiority.

          • JorgeThe Jorrid

            They’re letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

          • Mary Schreiner

            It’s not being morally superior, it’s just being moral. It’s *sooo* sanctimonious of me to want a leader with a modicum of decency. Funny how being a decent person was all that mattered back during the Clinton administration. But now, anything goes! A man can have 20 wives and say whatever the heck he wants about anyone he wants and everything is excusable because politics. He can do whatever he wants and be as dirty as he wants and it doesn’t matter because “the other side does it too.” Nope. That is not how my father raised me. “Moral principles do not depend on a majority vote. Wrong is wrong, even if everybody is wrong. Right is right, even if nobody is right.”

          • MrAlanBreck

            That sounds nice.

            While trump has many moral faults, they pale in comparison to conservatives like McCain, or even Reagen, who during his governorship of Cali legalized abortion and no-fault divorce. The problem is the “nice” conservatives are limp-wristed wimps who care more about posturing than fighting. Just look at this joke of an article. It’s clear why we have lost the culture wars for the last 50 years. He already said he plans on overturning Roe and plans on expanding religious freedoms. He may not be a saint, but he fights for us. If I had a choice between a “nice” person who has my interest in mind but is content in losing as long as it’s “dignified”, and a guy like Trump, I’ll take Trump, every time.

          • Mary Schreiner

            “He already said he plans on overturning Roe and plans on expanding religious freedoms.”

            Sure he does.

          • MrAlanBreck

            Well, if he is lying, he will be the same as all the Repub leadership for the last 30 years. You have nothing to lose.

          • Mary Schreiner

            I have nothing to lose, except for everything I, this author, many other authors have outlined over the past election cycle. My eternal soul, the validity of the pro-life movement, the defense of sexual assault victims (whom the GOP proudly walked away from and should be ashamed of themselves), the ability to grow a pro-life movement among women and minorities. Not to mention growing the GOP with women and minorities instead of courting white supremacists. Oh yes and the war crimes he might commit, the nuclear weapons he’ll have access to, the “deals” he may make to undercut our foreign interests, and so much more. And yes I am aware Hillary is just as bad, that is why I will not be a party to either of them getting elected. I don’t choose to gamble with my soul or my conscience.

          • MrAlanBreck

            Every one of your Trump, “mights” is a Hillary “will”. I hardly see how voting for Trump puts one’s soul in danger. Sounds like more sanctimonious posturing.

            ” the “deals” he may make to undercut our foreign interests”

            you mean keeping us out of pointless wars?

            “the validity of the pro-life movement”

            Makes no sense. You’re regurgitating leftist talking points.

          • Mary Schreiner

            No, I’m not regurgitating leftist talking points. I am a conservative pro-life woman who has been betrayed by my Party which has chosen to glory in every Leftist talking point ever launched. Instead of proving them wrong, the GOP has proven them right. But…you don’t think that undermines the pro-life movement at all? You don’t think that nominating and supporting an open misogynist and possible rapist is undermining the pro-life movement? You don’t think that nominating and supporting a man who advocates the murder of women and children and thinks women should be punished for abortion (until he reneged a day later when he was told it wasn’t cool to say)…that’s not undermining the pro-life movement? Or the fact that he sings the praises of Planned Parenthood? That he can’t stop himself from insulting women? You think that the fact that many conservative women are jumping ship from the GOP is good for the pro-life movement? You think that women and minorities are excited to join a pro-life movement whose face and mouth is Donald Trump? This is not leftist talking points. This is the GOP missing the plank in their own eye to take out the plank in their opposition.

            As far as keeping us out of pointless wars…do you seriously believe that? Seriously?? Trump is a manchild who can’t let anything go. He spends hours on Twitter railing against anyone who says anything mean against him. I would love to see what he’ll do when he’s got military power. I know he didn’t rule out the use of nuclear weapons, so hurray. I know he thinks it’s cool to target women and children, so hurray. How super awesome pro-life of him. Oh yeah he also thinks Putin is a “strong leader” and he didn’t really do anything wrong with Ukraine.

            With regard to my soul, well, it’s my soul, and my conscience, and thank goodness you don’t have to worry about it. My judgement tells me not to vote for either major candidate. I’m perfectly aware that Hillary is a “will” candidate. Not a good enough reason for me to gamble on Trump, and that’s what NeverTrumpers have said from the beginning. Do people not know what the word never means anymore? The fact is Trump never had my vote, not once. So not voting for him is not a loss to the GOP. He said he could win without me, so let him do it. Sorry for the long response! I must be on my way now though, I have dinner to make.

          • MrAlanBreck

            “No, I’m not regurgitating leftist talking points.”

            Yes you are.

            ” I am a conservative pro-life woman who has been betrayed by my Party which has chosen to glory in every Leftist talking point ever launched. Instead of proving them wrong, the GOP has proven them right.”

            The GOP has betrayed you for thirty years, by being completely useless.

            “But…you don’t think that undermines the pro-life movement at all? You don’t think that nominating and supporting an open misogynist and possible rapist is undermining the pro-life movement?”

            He’s not a misogynist. More than 50 percent of his execs are female.

            “You don’t think that nominating and supporting a man who advocates the murder of women and children”

            His statement referred to the fact that spouses usually know when their husband is going to commit terrorism. The Florida shooter is a prime example. He murdered fifty, she knew.

            The wives of the 9/11 killers knew also.

            “and thinks women should be punished for abortion (until he reneged a day later when he was told it wasn’t cool to say)…that’s not undermining the pro-life movement? ”

            Perfectly acceptable position. You murder your child, you have to pay a price.

            “Or the fact that he sings the praises of Planned Parenthood?”

            Wants to ban PP from abortions, leve it for everything else. Not ideal, but not terrible.

            “That he can’t stop himself from insulting women?”

            He attacks men and women equally. You have to in politics, or you lose. The right has always roled over at the slightest provocation, hence why they’re losers.

            ” You think that the fact that many conservative women are jumping ship from the GOP is good for the pro-life movement? You think that women and minorities are excited to join a pro-life movement whose face and mouth is Donald Trump? This is not leftist talking points. This is the GOP missing the plank in their own eye to take out the plank in their opposition.”

            For all Trump’s faults, someone who supports legal sanction is almost always worse. Especially with his opponent.

            “As far as keeping us out of pointless wars…do you seriously believe that? Seriously?? Trump is a manchild who can’t let anything go. He spends hours on Twitter railing against anyone who says anything mean against him. I would love to see what he’ll do when he’s got military power. I know he didn’t rule out the use of nuclear weapons, so hurray. I know he thinks it ‘s cool to target women and children, so hurray. How super awesome pro-life of him. Oh yeah he also thinks Putin is a “strong leader” and he didn’t really do anything wrong with Ukraine.”

            He wants to stay out of Syria. he sees no reason to start WWIII with Russia. I fail to see that as a negative.

            “With regard to my soul, well, it’s my soul, and my conscience, and thank goodness you don’t have to worry about it.”

            Voting for Trump will not endanger your soul. Give it some thought. As I said. We have a lot to gain and nothing to lose. Maybe the Right will know how it feels to succeed for once.

            Enjoy your dinner 🙂

          • donttouchme

            You’re not pro-life. You’re pro-choice–you believe a mother should be able to choose to murder her child with no consequences to herself. That’s literally the definition of pro-choice. So even without Trump the pro-life movement has no integrity. And actually Trump offered the movement some integrity by saying that mother murderess should be punished in some way for killing her baby, but it was resoundingly rejected by the “pro-life” movement and folks like yourself So congratulations…

          • Mary Schreiner

            You actually have no idea what I believe, but your strawman argument is quaint. What I believe is that the blame for abortion rests on the doctors willing to perform them, and the foundations that prey on struggling mothers, the culture that encourages a mother to kill her own child, the over regulation of adoption so as to make it very difficult, and more. This is a very simple idea: it’s the same idea as punishing the pimps who degrade and manipulate prostitutes. We could punish prostitutes all the live long day, but unless we get rid of the pimps, there will always be more prostitutes.

            I believe in building a society where the thought of abortion is abhorrent (because it is), so abhorrent that a law against abortion would be obvious. And I believe that Donald Trump has made that goal much, much harder, because when people think about the pro-life movement now, they think about him.

          • donttouchme

            You said this in the comment I responded to.
            “You don’t think that nominating and supporting a man who … thinks women should be punished for abortion (until he reneged a day later when he was told it wasn’t cool to say)…that’s not undermining the pro-life movement?”
            And you said this in the reply to me:
            “What I believe is that the blame for abortion rests on the doctors willing to perform them, and the foundations that prey on struggling mothers, the culture that encourages a mother to kill her own child…”
            So it’s obvious you don’t think a murderess should be punished for committing murder, and I do know what you believe. You’re pro-choice, like I said. That’s not a straw man; it’s just an uncomfortable reality check for you. But your idea really is very simple: “women are always and everywhere victims” probably of “the Patriarchy” right? You’re a pro-choice feminist. Congratulations.

          • Chris

            I’m voting for Hillary, but I have to say that too few pro-lifers think like you. These people will elect a monster to get what they want.

        • MrAlanBreck

          Who cares what the left says? Bill Clinton is a notorious sex offender, and he is still revered.

          Voting Trump is voting for our survival, as Hillary will do everything in her power to crush the Church.

    • donttouchme

      The pro-life movement is more aptly described as pro-choice, since the official position is that no woman should be punished for killing her child. Remember when Trump said he thought a woman who commits murder should be punished in some way, and “pro-lifers” excoriated him for not saying that women should be able to choose abortion without consequences? There is no real “pro-life” movement. It’s pro-choice.

  • Nestorian

    The real lesson for Christians to draw from this electoral season is that our true home is not in this world, and that as such, we are foolish to place much faith in the political institutions of this world. They are clearly irredeemably corrupt, and Christians are probably best off standing aside from the fray in a posture of prayerful and spiritual detachment.

    The alternative is to involve oneself in political affairs as a Christian, but to become morally compromised and corrupted in the process. This is an unacceptable alternative, so it is probably best just to stand aside.

    • JorgeThe Jorrid

      You might change your mind if you and your family were forced to live in a communist third world hell hole for a couple of years. And that’s where we’re headed if we continue to “stand aside from the fray” and let the socialist progressives have their way.

      • Nestorian

        What makes you so sure that a Trump presidency wouldn’t move the US in the direction of becoming a 3rd world hell hole perhaps even faster than a Clinton presidency? How can you possibly know one way or the other?

        • JorgeThe Jorrid

          We don’t know that, although it’s extremely unlikely. Besides you could make that argument against anyone running for prez. But we do know Shrillary will continue the same failed policies as her predecessor, that are destroying America. Which is exactly what he said he would do.

    • Mark Neal

      Why does involvement in political affairs necessarily make one morally corrupted? I’m pretty sure a Christian can vote, and even argue about who to vote for, without becoming morally compromised.

      I agree with you that our political institutions are “irredeemably corrupt,” and it’s foolish to put faith in them, but I think you’ve taken it in the wrong direction. Technically, our own families are irredeemably corrupt (in this life I mean), but nobody in their right mind would stand aside and practice spiritual detachment with respect to their own family members, if and when they get in trouble. If a brother or sister is sick or has lost the faith, you pray for them and you do whatever is in your power to help them.

      From a Catholic perspective, our country is our extended extended family: not as close to us as our immediate family, but we still have a duty to do something to help her when she is in trouble. We must both pray and act – prayer alone is not good enough.

      That is another way of saying that Good Works are necessary in addition to Faith.

      What are your thoughts, Nestorian?

      • Nestorian

        Politics in general is a murderous and deceitful enterprise, and most Catholics in my experience ignore this reality most of the time.

        The signal example of that deceitful murderousness of our generation was the war against Iraq – a criminal enterprise launched on the basis of lies under the Bush administration. (It is, to my mind, scandalous that the “Pro-life” movement was AWOL when it came to vociferously protesting that war.)

        But crimes of equal magnitude are going on right now under Obama: The effectively genocidal war in Syria, for example – for which the US and its Western allies bear the moral responsibility – or the equally murderous war currently being waged by Saudi Arabia against the population of Yemen with strong US support.

        And then there is the systematic support lent by the entire mainstream political establishment to supporting and empowering the criminal syndicates comprising the banking and finance sectors in our country….

        I could go on and on, but I think my point is clear. The institutions of this world are irredeemably given over to great evil, and steering clear of involvement in them is the morally safest course for a Christian to take.

        • Mark Neal

          Ok, maybe I’m misunderstanding what you mean by “steering clear of involvement in them.”

          You allow for “morally principled prophetic denunciation” of political institutions – or at least of certain actions of certain political institutions, it seems. For example, in your post you denounce as criminal the recent wars prosecuted by the Presidents and Congress, but you do not, I am assuming, denounce as criminal the existence itself of the Presidency or Congress. We are merely talking about certain actions of political institutions.

          But how can one denounce the political actions of others without becoming involved in politics? Isn’t that precisely what being involved means? If one forms an opinion of what the establishment should or should not do, and argues for it and against the opinions of others, then in my mind he is engaged in politics. Or do you simply mean that Catholics should not vote or run for office, or something like that?

  • Antodav

    This applies to all Christians who actually believe in the teachings of their religion, not just Catholics.

  • Jon

    We all understand the criticisms(and have for months), but the brilliant & perpetual bashing of Trump will NOT make REALITY go away. REALITY IS STUBBORN: not voting for either will NOT simply make Trump OR Hillary magically disappear. They. Are. Here. One. Will. Be. President. Face. Reality. And vote accordingly.
    **But the infinitely more interesting question is, “What does it mean to live faith IN THESE circumstances?” and not repeatedly trying to make the circumstances a utopia.

  • Sound of One Hand Laughing

    Those who speak this way are fine with a Hillary Clinton administration that will enshrine a 7-2 court that will keep Roe sacrosanct for the rest of our lives. She will also continue the persecution of Christians both here and abroad. This is a very irresponsible column.

  • Chip

    Pure nonsense.

  • Mark Neal

    Mr. Crosby says:

    The problem is not exactly that he would push bad policies; it is more systemic than that, it is that he would pollute our national ethos.

    Wait…did I read that right?

    The problem is not exactly that he would push bad policies;

    And then the article ends with:

    I say to the Catholic supporters of Trump: you are paying a huge price for the benefits you are bargaining for. Have you taken the measure of the manifold malignancy that Trump would bring into our public life?

    I swear: liberals are something I will never understand.

  • Michael Burke

    It’s bigger than abortion (if anything can be bigger than torturing and killing innocent children for convenience). Hillary and her staff have ridiculed Catholics and Evangelicals, she has said “we must change people’s religious beliefs”, and her running mate has said if the Catholic Church doesn’t change its stance on same sex marriage, laws will be passed to force them to change or leave the country. So, voting for Hillary could result in the Catholic Church becoming illegal in the USA. No thanks.

  • donttouchme

    Every man I respect prefers Trump to the nasty woman. The most vociferous anti-Trumpers are squealers like Mark Shea or late night talk show host Seth Meyers, who has a lot in common with Shea in terms of character. So just as a matter of choosing the company you keep, it’s better to support Trump.

    This isn’t even on the radar at this point, but what would it do to us as a nation to have a woman as commander in chief? I know we’re “all” on board with subjecting girls to the draft now, and allowing men to pretend they’re women in the armed forces, and allow men to pretend to marry each other, but what kind of threshold are we crossing to potentially have a woman in charge of our entire military? Yeah, Tim Kaine and other men who somehow always look and sound like lesbians are 100% in support of that and think its a great thing. But that goes back to choosing the company you keep.

  • JonathanJennings

    “Have you taken the measure of the manifold malignancy that Trump would bring into our public life?”

    It is a reverse straw man to act like American public life is this great unsullied institution and Trump cheapens it.

    Also, the moral high ground on killing terrorists’ families? Don’t tell me that you believe such ‘collateral damage’ was never authorized under Secretary Clinton’s watch. This from the woman who asked why we couldn’t just ‘drone’ Julian Assange…Sheesh.

    You don’t want to vote for Trump? Cool. I understand why you don’t like him. He’s no role model. However, please reciprocate the respect you seek in your closing remarks – to your fellow Catholics who will be pull the lever for him next week.

  • Mom of 8

    I can’t believe how easily he writes off Hillary and her moral deficiencies. The embarrassing precedent of such an evil woman to be our first female president! Read the party platforms and decide which people you want in government. Our bishops and priests are saying that voting for Jillary would be a mortal sin.

  • Margaret O’Hagan

    America you are beautiful . . . and blessed . . . . The ultimate test of your greatness is the way you treat every human being, but especially the weakest and most defenseless. If you want equal justice for all and true freedom and lasting peace, then America, defend life.

    Pope John Paul II

  • Jim Havens

    One of the two will win – Clinton or Trump. We must reasonably consider the likely outcomes and vote for the greater good. I understand the desire for a better option, but the reality is Clinton v. Trump. The evil of abortion is by far the greatest evil and our consciences must be formed accordingly. This is not a political game, it is natural law and common sense. It is also our Catholic Faith. As much as one may find the choices distasteful, the greater good in this instance is to vote Trump/Pence.

  • JorgeThe Jorrid

    “Let’s be clear here: Islam is not our adversary. Muslims are a tolerant and peaceful people, and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.” -HRC

    Let that sink in Mr. Crosby, while you’re feeling all sanctimonious about not voting for Trump.

  • VisPacem

    So, D.J. Trump incarnates “incompetence, ignorance, indecency, thugishness, trashiness, and psychological pathology;” and he would “pollute our national ethos.”

    Arguably, you need to seriously take an elementary logic book and meditate long on fallacies.

    To innocently promote what is only apparent sound reasoning and true inferences is one thing, but to presume oneself to be and present oneself as an authority on matters moral and yet offer nothing but a litany of ‘ad hominems’ among many other fallacies is quite another. Such implies serious flaws of character.

    Needless to say, you advert not at all to Trump’s acknowledgement of past sins and flaws; you advert not at all to his very public life dealing with tens of thousands of highly demanding people and none of these have made any presumptuous allegations such as you.

    Much less do you advert to the fact that Trump has, alone among the candidates, admitted and insisted he has come to realize that the law must protect innocent life, nor finally, do you seem aware at all that Trump’s consistently articulated and coherently established proposals accord very well with the principle of subsidiarity, natural law, and thus the primary principles enshrined in our Constitution (along with the implications of the Declaration.

    No, none of these things is important to you, although you do have high regard for your own pompous, sanctimonious, and utterly self-adulating, fastidious stance.

  • jpudner

    how did you feel about Hillary’s unabashed defense of partial birth abortion in the final debate – or Trump giving probably the strongest pro-life defense of any candidate in a general election debate in decades? In your attempt to ask pro-life voters to allow a candidate who defends even partial birth abortion on the basis of Trump calling Putin a strong leader, do you feel any moral obligation to point out that Hillary was the one who made Putin much stronger by giving Russians 20% of our uranium for yet another huge payment to the Clinton family? You claim the moral high ground in your closing paragraph by stating Trump will disgrace the office in the midst of the FBI finally working around the Justice Department attempt to squash their investigation? Very troubling, but all it takes for evil to succeed is for those who have the moral compass to do nothing. I believe Trump will sneak out a very close win, but it is certainly still in doubt and justifications like this will be the most troubling after 25 years of a Supreme Court set in place by Hillary Clinton. Finally, to try to pretend that it is the Trump supporters who are not respecting those supporting Clinton is absurd – have you watched any of the links of the political operatives who were regulars at the White House bragging about paying people to go into Trump rallies and start fights with Trump supporters – including targeting the elderly in attendance? The witch hunt to discredit anyone brave enough to admit they support Trump is what you are encouraging by asking others to stand by and let Hillary take over.

  • Easter Rising Farm

    Why do writers need to be so reductionistic in their presentation of fellow Christians’ positions and perspectives? This melodramatic reductionism is common during elections, especially this one.

    One need not think highly of Trump’s character, or laud him as a messianic prolife hero fighting the forces of darkness, in order to vote for him.

    The pope elected Pepin Holy Roman Emperor because he would protect the rights of the Christian community better than the Merovingians. It was not because Pepin didn’t have concubines, wasn’t full of the will-to-power, etc. Good thing for Clovis, or Constantine, etc. that there weren’t hot mics around.

    Trump is a barbarian in a barbarian country, as is Clinton. When the Church is in a barbarian land she doesn’t, historically, seem to abstain from supporting the best options

    • Aristotle111

      I know this is three months old, but really, this was well done, good sir!