Perhaps Hutchinson has bought into the propaganda that “Japanese who did it got the death penalty after WWII”, the way the otherwise rational Mark Shea did. Actually what those Japanese did was an utterly different and vastly more dangerous form of waterboarding. You can read about both kinds (as well as other forms of torture sometimes lumped in with the US version of waterboarding) in the Wikipedia entry for waterboarding.

There has been a lot of other propaganda against the Bush administration centered on waterboarding, and I don’t want to take up space detailing and refuting it, so I just recommend that readers look at the following website, which does a fine job of that, including a detailed description of the guidelines used in US waterboarding.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/28/despite-reports-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-waterboarded-times/

The Romney campaign soft-pedals these issues, even saying that a comment about the Chick-Fil-A is not part of it. (Or, to use Obama’s words, that the right of a private citizen to voice his religious beliefs “is above Romney’s pay grade”.) It seems to have put all its eggs into the economy basket, and to have conceded all issues about values to the Obama campaign. That is a sure loser, given the sympathies of the press. “It’s the economy, stupid” was a winner for the Democrats in 1992 because they were getting trounced on values; but it will be a loser for Romney if that’s all he talks about.

And you are just plain wrong when you say that abortions did not decrease when the elder Bush was president. Abortions peaked the year after he was elected and declined thereafter. Clinton is widely credited with a steady decline while he was in office, but I strongly believe that it was the 1992 Casey v. Planned Parenthood decision that really helped the decline continue, by making it clear that the laws I have just mentioned were Constitutional.

I say that even though the Supreme Court overturned a state bill banning partial birth abortion. Justice Kennedy, who had voted with the Casey majority, bitterly attacked the new majority (which included new Clinton appointee Breyer, who had replaced Byron White) saying that it betrayed the principles that had been set down in the Casey decision.

Justice White had written the stronger of the two dissents from Roe v. Wade, but Republicans meekly went along with Clinton’s appointment of Breyer to replace him. Watch history repeat itself if Obama is re-elected, just as I predicted in my first paragraph.

Look to the person sitting in the Oval Office since that is the person who is receiving your vote–and to his beliefs, views, platform, agenda. That simple. Even if it is “the lesser of two evils” don’t we want less evil? It it time for Catholics to rise to their call and vote against what Mother Church teaches as “intrinsically evil”.

Maybe, just maybe, choosing life will have blessings beyond anything what we can imagine.

http://catholicexchange.com/the-catholic-woman-voter/

Abortion: Arguably the most pressing issue and most CLEAR teaching of the
church. There is absolutely no doubt which party is most aligned with the
Church. The Republican Party has championed the cause of overturning Roe
vs. Wade or at the very least limiting abortion on demand. Supposedly 30%
of democrats are pro-life; however, the party of inclusion seems to take great
pains to mute their views in the candidates that are vying for office as well
as their platform. Speaking of platforms … notice that the Republican
Party’s stance on abortion as pointed out in their 2012 platform, “We,
however, affirm the dignity of women by protecting the sanctity of human
life.” Now take note of the Democrats’ stance as taken from
their platform, “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports
Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy,
including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose
any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.” Please note
that in the past Democrats used to trumpet “safe, legal and rare” …
now it’s “safe and legal”!

Religious Liberties: Democrats have shoved the HHS mandate down the
throats of Religious institutions forcing them to provide contraception,
sterilization and some abortifacient drugs for no co-pay in their employees’
health insurance. Catholic hospitals, schools and social service agencies are,
therefore, required to abide by the mandate, even though their religious
teachings forbid the use of these services. So insulting to the
basic Constitutional right of freedom of religion, almost every single US Bishop
along with other faiths have adamantly rejected and are now suing to overturn
the mandate.

Defense of Marriage: Republicans have fought to maintain the Defense of
Marriage Act (DOMA) … the Obama administration has taken the view that it’s
unconstitutional so it no longer defends the law. A quick reminder, the
Catholic Church specifies that marriage is between a man and a woman!

Death Penalty: Yes, many Republicans support the Death Penalty … please
note that unlike abortion the states can choose not to enact the death
penalty. In fact, 35 states allow the death penalty but only a handful
actually utilize it. Although the Church has come out and stated its
opposition to the death penalty it has not changed the language in the
Catechism which allows for the death penalty in extreme cases. 2267
“Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been
fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude
recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively
defending human lives against an unjust aggressor.”

Security: No doubt which party leads in the defense of our nation both at
home and abroad. Republicans have always called for a strong national defense
and the delicate balance of ensuring our security while limiting incursions
into our individual liberties. History has shown us what the policy of
appeasement/weakness provides … take a look at the current situation in the
Middle East. Countries that we have aided in their pursuit of democracy
have been met with vehement demonstrations against the US all because of a
third rate movie, per the Obama administration!

Torture: Hard to
define, but to borrow from the old democrat slogan … safe, legal and rare!

Social Justice: Here
lies the great divide between Catholics … this must be the issue that keeps at
least 47% of the Catholics in the Democratic camp. We as Christians are taught to be generous
with our time, treasure and talent. The
difference between the two camps is who is going to be generous with what. Social Justice folks want to see more from
the government to help the needy (the definition of needy has certainly grown
over time). This would include the
possibility of wealth distribution, socialized medicine, etc. etc. Currently Mitt Romney is getting hammered for
simply speaking the truth about the economic state of America: roughly 47% of Americans don’t pay taxes and
are dependent on the government. Here’s
more ammo to back his statement up: 47
million out of 300 million Americans are on Food Stamps (a new record), 9
million are on some type of disability (a new record), 106 million receive some
type of government support. The government
borrows $3.5 BILLION everyday which has precipitated a debt that now stands at
$16 Trillion (a new record). Yet with
all the increased spending from the government we still have more people living
in poverty than ever before. I ask,
which party has at least attempted to reduce the growth … is it social justice
to saddle our future generations with this enormous debt?

I could go on and on about the clear choice between the two
dominant parties, but I must at least address the author’s major issue which is
lack of choice to make your vote/voice count.
The reality is we have and presumably will always have a two party
system unlike Europe’s multiparty system which has its own flaws. Third parties do little to impact the
political process … even Ross Perot, despite receiving 20% of the vote tallied
0 electoral votes back in 1992. Most third
parties are extremist in nature and appeal to only the most strident of
supporters. Bottom Line: You play the hand you’re dealt and pick the
party which most aligns itself with your particular views. As a humble Catholic when my life on Earth is
over and I’m hopefully standing before the Big Guy upstairs, I don’t want to
have to explain why I utilized my precious vote for a party and or candidate
that supported many issues counter to my faith and the Church Jesus
established.