How Should I Vote?

While I try to avoid turning this blog into a political debate, I do believe that it might be helpful to share some things I have learned about moral theology (as well as a link) that might assist you in discerning your vote for the upcoming presidential election. 

I have been observing the character of our recent political candidates carefully.  I have looked at independent parties that already exist, and one that is trying to grow.  I became aware of an element of the Democratic Party that I did not even know existed, known as Democrats for Life of America. I have debated with myself the ins and outs of voting for a presidential candidate that supports abortion and one that (supposedly) does not.

To be sure, this political environment is extremely toxic and I have found it at once to be interesting, frustrating and disheartening.  I watched the debates as the field was being culled and I found them slightly informative.

Anyway, I suspect there are a lot of people struggling with the upcoming presidential election because they feel like they have to choose between a current president whose behavior can be seen as irreverent and immoral and a rival who is securely pro-choice.

It’s a terrible place to be.

As I continue to contemplate the moral choice in regards to the ethical action I will take by voting in this race, there is one thing that has stood out for me.

If you are looking at Catholic moral teaching, intention is always a strong part of decision-making.  Discernment comes through a process that looks at the direct result of one’s action and one’s intention, among other things, like a well-formed conscience, etc.

Using the current race as an example:

If you are pro-life (not just against abortion) and you vote for a presidential candidate that is pro-choice, is that morally wrong?

Ask yourself, “Am I voting for the pro-choice candidate because I support abortion, or because I believe I am voting for the common good of the country?  By removing a rival candidate that claims to be pro-life but retains children at borders, separates families and doesn’t respect human dignity in many other areas, am I acting morally with my vote?

What is your true intention?

In this situation, if your intention is morally sound—you are not supporting abortion for instance—and you decide to vote for the pro-choice candidate, would this be sinful?  Your intention, your well-formed conscience and a lack of direct causality to the unborn would most likely factor in, allowing it to be morally acceptable.

The reality is, your vote is not directly, or intentionally, causing harm to an unborn child, and there is always the potential for the pro-choice candidate to change his views. 

Now, if you direct your vote for the candidate who you believe to be decidedly immoral based on his actions but are putting your hope in his claim of being pro-life (perhaps out of obligation), how do you justify his actions that do not respect life in general?

Okay, let’s get to it.

On the one hand, you would not be required to vote for a president simply because he claims to be pro-life, especially if you see that his other actions are not working toward the common good of all people.

Understand that I’m really not trying to push you to vote in a particular way—that would not be ethical!  I am just offering some help in terms of sorting things out. 

Here is a little insight I learned in my moral/theology class that may speak to our present dilemma:

“The foundation of human dignity is not my rights.  My dignity is the foundation of my rights.  We have rights because of our dignity, not because they are given to me.  This dignity I have is given me by my very existence.”

I would propose, then, that we need to examine where in our culture is our dignity being upheld, and consider supporting that.

Secondly, “Some actions we commit have both good and bad effects. This principle helps us determine if our act is morally licit or not.  It does not justify an evil action.  This principle helps us make evaluative judgment as to whether this is a good action or an evil action.

When you have an evil and good effect.  Evil can be foreseen.  Is it intended?”

There is such a thing known as the Principle of Double Effect.  I have a great link that can explain this further.  Here’s a snapshot of it:

“The Principle of Double Effect is used to determine when an action which has two effects, one good and one evil, may still be chosen without sin. This principle is attributed to St. Thomas Aquinas, who used it to show that killing in self-defense is justified (Summa Theologiae I-II q64 art. 7).

With respect to voting, it would allow under certain conditions the toleration of the unintended evil of another for a proportionate reason. All four conditions must be satisfied:

1. The action must be morally good, or indifferent, as to object, motive and circumstances.
2. The bad effect(s) may only be tolerated, not directly willed.
3. The good effect must be caused at least as directly as the bad.
4. The good effect(s) must be proportionate to compensate for the bad effect(s).“
5.  

In my opinion, voting is an action which could been seen as having both a good and bad effect, but of itself, it is morally good.  So it is up to us to pray on the remaining points to make our decision.

Let us all take the time to discern our vote, be honest about our intention, and praise God for the opportunity to live in a country where we have the freedom to participate in electing the members of our government.

Janet Cassidy
janetcassidy.blogspot.com
janetcassidy.blubrry.net (podcasts)