Conservatives only answer...moral dilema on voting?

Question

If all the candidates running in 2008 were pro-choice, and you vowed never to vote pro-choice, what would you do? Sacrifice your morals in the hope your one vote would maybe make a difference? Or abstain from voting, then have everyone tell you it's "none of your business who wins."

Answer 1

The choice to write in a candidate is always there. There is also the option of abstaining in that race. There have been several times where all the candidates in a certain race, or an unopposed candidate, are not going to get my vote. I will still go to the polls, and vote on other issues!

Answer 2

I would not like to vote for a pro-choice candidate, but one must not decide who is the best candidate because of one issue. Your vote must be a combination of your views and beliefs. One may think that a vote for a pro-choice candidate might be a vote for pro-choice, but this may not be the case. If there is no other choice, then you wouldn't be sacrificing your morals. Regardless whether you vote or not, one of the candidates would be elected, so you should vote based on other issues. There are more moral issues than just the abortion debate.

Answer 3

If you're vote is based on a single issue, then you have already lost the battle. Both sides run campaigns based on hot-button issues in the hopes that no one will pay attention to the rest of their platform. It's the easiest way to make sure they get votes. It's the biggest political scam going, and it works so well. Even if a candidate claims to be pro-life it doesn't mean they'll actually do anything once they are in office.

To not vote for someone who would make a good president based on one singular issue is throwing your vote away, regardless.

Answer 4

if it is something I felt SUPER strongly about, I would not vote. and the people telling me that it's not my business who wins, would basically be right. If I chose not to vote, I don't plan on b*tching about it later... I would hope that's not the case in the 2008 race, however, you would probably expect to see a pro-choicer take the lead and be the end candidate simply because this world is becoming more and more liberal. If it came down to pro choice republican versus pro choice obviously democrat, uh, i'd still be sticking to my guns and roots and voting Republican

Answer 5

Let's set aside the basic question about abortion for a moment and assume that we are talking about Issue X.
If I had a fundamental and opposite idea about Issue X than the candidates running, then I could not vote for them and would, therefore, abstain.

But the question begs that we relieve ourselves of reality for a bit because I would never consider voting for people who were not a like mind as me. Therefore, our opinions on Issue X are bound to be so similar that I would have no moral qualms about voting for that person.

Answer 6

I'm conservative but believe that outlawing abortion is a horribly barbaric idea, and you know what, it's no one's business where I cast my votes in 2008 or any year, but it's all of our business who wins the election. If that's your choice, abstaining from excercising your RIGHT to vote in a free, democratic election, that makes you silly, not moral.

Answer 7

Well I don't think we will have that problem since the morality vote will again be a big issue.

But you have to look at all of the issues not just one.
where do they stand on drugs, on budget, on taxes.

Pro choice is already a law ( but it is already in the works to get that over turned, though the ND law on abortion, we will see it at the surpeme court before too long.

I think it will be a state law issue within 4 years.

Answer 8

I would still vote for the best candidate regardless. I am a republican but I am an American first and have always believed in voting come election time.

Answer 9

It would never happen, but if it did I would vote for an independent who was pro-life or not vote at all. And, yes, I agree that if I choose not to vote, I have no business moaning about it later.

Answer 10

i'd ought to throw Strum Thurman on the list and lower than the bus! after all he's the only which instigated replacing the South from Democrat to Republican. He became a racist, a hypocrite with a Black love baby, a homophobe, and all bags that being a bigot includes. So too for Jessie Helms, whose abrasive hate cultivation darkened humanity and inspired many who followed. Dishonorable element out is going to Nancy and Ron Reagan. before them conservatives were regarded upon as being meaningless and "out of the loop". They gave them status and invited hate-mongers like Jerry Falwell into the Whitehouse for coverage making practise. For, all of us understand Nancy became the only manipulating Ron like a domestic dog canines to ingratiate him to the conservative agenda and guard his whitewashed position in historic previous. i am going to't bypass with out declaring George Bush / Dick Cheney, 2 of the most delusional, heartless and mind lifeless those who ever held public workplace. actual Cheney better so than Bush and if Cheney were no longer the only on accurate of issues than why may Bush enable his presidency to be destroyed?