Prez4Life

from the Weekly Wrap

Sen. Thomas Lincoln chimed in, not so much to praise or defend but to commiserate, in the wake of Sen. Bob Casey’s (D-PA) endorsement of Barack Obama this week. By most measures, Sen. Casey is a pro-life Democrat. Obama, of course, is pro-choice. Casey’s endorsement was met with widespread criticism in the pro-life community. Many commentators questioned Casey’s pro-life sincerity.

“I wish, of course, that Sen. Casey had endorsed me for President,” Lincoln quipped a day after Casey’s announcement. “I think he and I may have more in common than he and Sen. Obama, but he obviously didn’t have that choice–or he didn’t feel that he had it. I understand that, having tried to work within the Democratic Party as a prolifer for many years. The Party is what it is on this issue, and it punishes rebels.”

“But should we be surprised that Casey didn’t endorse Clinton?” Lincoln added with a wink, hinting at Bill Clinton’s refusal to let Casey’s father, the late Pennsylvania Gov. Bob Casey, also a staunch pro-lifer, address the 1992 Democratic Convention.

“I’d like to add that it’s not just the Democratic Party that’s behaving badly here,” Lincoln noted. ”It’s not just the Party that’s monolithic on this. Too much of the pro-life community has only one definition for being pro-life–or maybe I mean one party label. I too am discouraged by Sen. Obama’s stand on life, but I’m encouraged by much of what he says–and Sen. Clinton too. Let’s be clear, I’m not endorsing anyone. But much of what they stand for will improve living conditions for many people in this country, and improved conditions will mean more women willing to bring their babies to term. I don’t know that turning a blind eye to a candidate’s support for war because he may be more anti-abortion than his opponent doesn’t mean you’re necessarily being pro-life. And it certainly doesn’t guarantee an end or even a reduction in abortion. Past performance of pro-war, pro-life politicians hasn’t been very good on the life side.”

Prez4Life is a labor of love–or something like it. Your support can keep it going. Anything is appreciated. Click below to pay safely via PayPal. Contributions are not tax-deductible.

from LeftIsRightNow blog

There’s been a little dustup among the wingnuts over whether or not Sen. Lincoln favors gay marriage. Apparently some Catholic critics want to excommunicate the former Senator for loose lips.

Turns out that Lincoln has a not-so-bad record on gay rights and gay marriage. This isn’t exactly a voting record, however. His one major vote on the issue–on the Defense of Marriage Act in the 1990s–was to restrict marriage to heterosexual couples. But in his defense, most Democrats, including Pres. Clinton, supported it. The more recent attention to gay marriage at the national and state levels has generally come after Lincoln left the Senate.

Gay organizations have told us that Lincoln was never really considered either a friend or foe. He was more or less supportive of gay rights, but wasn’t a leading figure.

But he’s made comments more recently that are generally favorable of gay marriage. In a way, he comes off with what some have called the Cuomo Defense on abortion. Two decades ago, Mario Cuomo famously argued that while he personally opposed abortion, he couldn’t let his personal religious beliefs influence him in the performance of his public duties as an elected official. Lincoln has more or less said that he’s personally opposed to gay marriage (or at best neutral) but doesn’t see that his personal morality should impact secular law.

Not an unreasonable position, Mr. Lincoln. Perhaps you should apply it in other areas as well…

from RightPoliticsRightReligion blog

Well, the newspapers showed another photo of Mr. and Mrs. Lincoln leaving church, presumably after Easter Mass. Apparently, to the MSM these days, it’s only news when nontraditional and dissident Catholics (or the Pope) attend Mass. The rest of us are chopped liver.

I don’t know whether Mr. Lincoln received Holy Communion or not. I’m sure he did. For some of these people, Communion is a political act. But so is acting to undercut the sanctity of marriage, Mr. Lincoln. And it’s more than just a political act, it’s an immoral one.

It’s taken a while for Lincoln’s record on gay marriage to come to light (let’s face it, Lincoln isn’t exactly on the top of everyone’s list to write about), but his record–particularly for someone who calls himself a practicing Catholic–is dismal.

Whenever possible, it appears, he has favored allowing gays to marry. He has spoken to gay organizations in favor of gay marriage. He’s talked to the news media about it. He’s spoken out against legislation to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

The Church is absolutely clear on this issue. It recognizes the threat gay marriage poses to traditional marriage and the family. This isn’t a case where Lincoln simply disagrees with a Church teaching. He wants to legitimize–legalize–immorality. That is, he’s not simply privately disagreeing–sinning in silence–but he has taken public action to cause scandal and create public sin.

And he has received Holy Communion in this state of sin. Shouldn’t someone be doing something about this?

In a recent campaign stop, Sen. Thomas Lincoln reacted recent media descriptions of him as a “former Democrat.”

“I am not a former Democrat,” he argued. “I haven’t left the Party and have no plans to do so. I won’t go so far as to say the Party left me, although that’s a fashionable theme among my group.” Lincoln is a prolife Democrat.

“I’m simply a Democrat who’s running for President as an independent. I would govern as a Democrat. In fact, I will likely run the country in a way that most Democrats–the rank and file, if not the power elite–would want.”

From Catholics Unified Newsletter 

It’s been very interesting to follow the independent campaign of former Sen. Thomas Lincoln for president. Or, not so much to follow the campaign as to follow the reaction to it. As many have found before him, the prolife liberal Mr. Lincoln seems to have no natural political home.

A politician with pretty high rankings from anti-abortion groups (for the most part, his only prolife demerits are for his support for campaign finance reform, which these groups oppose because they claim it limits their ability to oppose abortion), Lincoln nonetheless has been a target of many in the prolife world. He’s not sufficiently prolife, they say, because he won’t stake all on an absolute ban on abortion. Lincoln has said that he believes in banning abortion, but he knows that today’s America will not abide one. He believes in reducing demand through other means and restricting supply by working around the edges.

His prolife critics also say he’s insufficiently prolife because he has voted agaisnt some prolife judicial appointees. Lincoln has countered those arguments by pointing to other stands those nominees had taken–on privacy, worker and consumer rights, environmental regulation, and other areas–that he found wanting. In his words, “Give me a prolife judge who wants to make life worth living for all of us.” Hear, hear!

On the other hand, Lincoln’s liberal credentials have not gotten him very far with many of his seemingly natural constituencies. Despite his opposition to Pres. Bush’s tax cuts (he voted against them and plans to eliminate some if elected), opposition to the Iraq War (he voted against its authorization in 2002 and lost reelection), support for labor and support for civil and gay rights, he has been roundly criticized and dismissed as a liberal because of his opposition to abortion rights.

Despite the opposition he’s gotten from both sides, Lincoln has persevered and holds true to his positions. Whatever you think of his politics, you might agree that he was well named. According to reports, Lincoln was named for St. Thomas More, who happens to be the patron of politicians. But more than that patronage, Thomas More is known for his stubborn clinging to principle and faith in the face of opposition from the whole government of England and its King Henry VIII. At the cost of his job, his livelihood, and ultimately, his life, More would not assent to actions he believed were contrary to his faith and therefore to the best interests of his country.

Tom Lincoln’s faith in his politics is equally strong.

Janet Brink, St. Thomas University Law School

After a recent appearance, Sen. Thomas Lincoln was asked about his prolife liberal perspective. In previous talks, he has focused on his liberal credentials as opposed to his prolife stand. This time, he was asked to look at it in reverse.

“I am prolife. I think every abortion is a tragedy. I look forward to the day when all abortions are not just illegal but nonexistent. But I have to go along with President Bush here. I don’t think the country is ready for a ban, so if we want to reduce abortion, we need to look for ways both to make carrying children to term more appealing and less stressful and to reduce unwanted pregnancies. We need to address the demand side of the equation because cutting off supply won’t work at this point in time.”

“But I want to respond to a criticism I’ve heard before of prolifers. That is that if they oppose abortion, why aren’t they out adopting children–or some similar critique. I believe that the right to life is fundamental. There’s no contingency here. It’s more basic than the right to a fair trial. And when it comes to fair trials, we don’t expect people who support them to be responsible for the guilty who go free.”

“The right to liberty is basic. We didn’t demand that the abolitionists take responsibility for freed slaves or come up with a system for caring for them or incorporating them into society. Slavery was an abomination, and the social costs of ending it were a small price to pay by comparison. Why are we treating the right to life so differently?”

“So, I don’t think prolifers should be responsible for children who would be born if abortion were eliminated. But I have to say that I think they should want to be. They should want to care for these children. It’s unrealistic, however, to put this responsibility wholly on individuals, however. It’s something that society as a whole needs to take responsibility for.”

“There’s where too many of my fellow prolifers have come up short, I believe. They stress the immorality of abortion but ignore the immorality of ignoring their brothers and sisters.”

“It’s not just a religious thing–though it’s that too. The Golden Rule comes to mind, as does much of Isaiah and the Gospels. This is simply about how to treat other living human beings. And even more mercenary, it’s about our survival as a society.”

“Unfortunately, we get into arguments about personal liberty and taxes and personal responsibility. You know, you have no right to terminate that life, but you have no claim on me or my resources to help you raise the child. You can’t tax me to provide healthcare or nutrition–that’s all your responsibility. Well, I’d like to suggest that you and I are personally responsible for each other. That’s the bottom line of my campaign.”

From RightReligionRightPolitics blog

Is anyone else bothered by Sen. Lincoln appearing at so many Catholic colleges? Everytime you hear about him now, he’s at some Catholic college. It’s as if he’s trying to pass himself off as the Catholic candidate. I don’t know about you, but I find that annoying and insulting.

Maybe it’s because his liberal friends won’t let him speak on their campuses. Or maybe he doesn’t want to go where he’s not likely to be welcome. After all, his liberal friends don’t seem to want him much more than we do.

But I also don’t understand why these Catholic colleges are so eager to have him. Granted, he’s generally prolife (although it’s not like he’s getting ratings of 100 from the prolife groups–he’s in the 60s and 70s, I think), but look at some of his other positions. He’s weak on contraception. I believe his sanctity of marriage position is suspect. What’s his stand on physician-assisted suicide? I believe he’s weak on stem cell research. And, bottom line, if he wants us to believe he’s prolife, why didn’t he leave the Party of Death?

Aren’t Catholic colleges supposed to teach the faith and avoid scandal? Perhaps that’s the most frustrating part of this whole situation. Why didn’t they just disinvite him?

Speaking at LaSalle University in Philadelphia, Sen. Thomas Lincoln addressed criticism of his prolife progressive orientation. “Some people will tell you that you can’t be both prolife and liberal. It’s like the liberal response to those bumper stickers that say you can’t be both pro-choice and Christian. That one, I’ll leave to others to hash out. I’ll stay with the secular argument.”

“Let me tell you some of my basic plans for when I become President,” he said, a smile breaking across his face as he says it. His audience chuckled as if they were in on a joke, but he recovered, “No, this is serious. I think my bona fides on the prolife side are good. I don’t think there’s much doubt about that.”

“On the progressive side? I believe that government can be a tool to solve the problems of people, and I believe that in recent years, government has only been used to solve the problems of big business and government. It’s padded the pockets of a few while ignoring the many. I will aim to phase out many of the tax cuts that the President pushed through for the rich, despite the war he also forced on us. The combination of war spending and reduced revenues wreaked havoc on the deficit and debt. Worse, it cut into services for people who desperately need them.”

“When the tax cuts are eliminated, I see that revenue going primarily to improved access to health care, education, and infrastructure. We need to focus on how we can strengthen our society at its most vulnerable points.”

“I will also do what I can through the executive and legislative branches to correct the wrongs perpetrated by the Supreme Court. Whether they call it states’ rights or strict constructionism or whatever works at the moment, the Court has seemed to take people out of the picture and consolidate power among the government and business. Whether it’s product safety, tort reform, workers’ rights, or privacy, the court seems to have forgotten that a democracy is built on people, not power.”

“And I will begin an immediate drawdown of US troops in Iraq. I don’t promise that it will happen overnight, but it will happen. This tragic mistake has torn apart that country and destabilized the region, and we’re obligated to try to keep it from descending into total chaos. But we need to show the world that we intend to change. When he was running for President, George Bush said he intended to restore humility to American foreign policy. Of course, it’s been anything but. That’s one Republican promise I could fulfill.”

“I don’t know if all that makes me a liberal, or if my position on one issue totally defines me as something else. I have to admit that I’ve always seen the idea of extending rights to the most vulnerable as being a liberal thing. When is the last time you remember a conservative wanting to expand rights or caring for the vulnerable?”

“On the other hand, I get complaints from the prolife crowd too. Some of those liberal positions are enough to blackball me from the club.”

Sen. Thomas Lincoln has spoken at numerous Catholic colleges since he entered the Presidential race as an independent candidate. The speeches have been designed to win voters for his campaign, but they’ve had an additional benefit: volunteers.

The campaign reports that after almost every speech at a Catholic college in a primary state, several students signed on to work for Lincoln. The students have done everything from stuffing envelopes to making phone calls in state nominating contests. The campaign estimates that nearly 100 volunteers joined up after about a dozen talks.

Lincoln campaign chair Dick Benedict said, “These students have been an unexpected blessing. An independent campaign struggles to raise the kind of money necessary in today’s political world. Every volunteer lets us go that much farther and reach more people with our message.”

Karla Wright, a student at the University of Dayton, explained why she volunteered for Lincoln, “I admit I didn’t know much about his history, but I liked what I heard when he spoke on campus. This country has so many problems that cause so much personal hardship for people, and I think much of it is caused by a basic lack of compassion or empathy on the part of the people in power. They don’t seem to care about the everyday person. I may not be quite as 100% prolife as he is, but I do think that the level of abortion here reflects that lack of empathy–or it’s a symptom of it. I think Lincoln has a chance to bring attention to the way things are, and maybe to bring about some change.”

A minister at one of the colleges, who asked not to be identified, noted, “I think the thing about Lincoln is that he combines the prolife message that our students are exposed to on campus with the social teachings of our faith–for the most part, anyway. You don’t get that from the major parties. Each party sides with some of the teachings, but not all. Lincoln comes the closest I’ve ever seen. That’s pretty appealing to young people.”