A lot of Catholics like Bernie Sanders. Recently, we saw an outpouring of support of the candidate in the comments under an excellent article written by Deacon Keith Fournier. Many Catholics appreciate Sander's stance on some social issues - after all, he is a democratic socialist. However, a massive reservation remains, Bernie Sanders is an anti-life candidate. Given this reality, is he disqualified from support?

LOS ANGELES, CA (California Network) - My short answer to the question above is yes. As a self-professed (but hesitant) Sanders supporter (full disclosure), I want to explain. Deacon Fournier is absolutely correct. As Catholics we have an obligation to withhold support from political candidates that actively seek to facilitate the destruction of life in its first home, the womb.

We cannot say enough to condemn abortion, but suffice it to say it is an abomination in all its forms. It is among the gravest of all sins and as Catholics we have a solemn duty to do all we can to prevent it.

However, I suggest there is a "pro-life" slant on Sanders that deserves discussion. It's not expected that anyone will vote for the socialist candidate, but the discussion itself is certainly merited. Let's consider the practical pro-life case for Senator Sanders.

I believe that the pro-life movement has all but failed. Solemn pronouncements from the clergy seem to fall on deaf ears. Gruesome advertisements, shocking news stories, even a viral video exposeé do little to curtail abortion. Self professing Christians make up the majority of those who seek abortions!

If any of the tired tactics of the past four decades worked, we'd see less abortion. Today, the only reason abortion rates are down is because abortifacient and contraception rates are up. In either case, life is blocked or terminated. At no moment can we point to the statistics and say a drop has occurred because of prayer rallies, pamphlets, or a religious proclamation.

Pro-lifers are accused of being "pro-birth" as opposed to genuinely pro-life. Critics point to pressure to cut welfare programs, a lack of support for children born to single parents or poor households, and the retention of the death penalty. Some say that these concerns are aside from the pro-life considerations, but they are the bread-and-butter staple of the anti-life left. It stands to reason, we must also address these concerns if we wish to make genuine progress in the fight for life.

In my opinion, supporting a self-professed pro-life candidate does little to end abortion. Americans have elected self professing pro-life candidates and we've given entire legislatures over to pro-life representatives. Every single time, they pass marginally effective legislation. Any legislation that has an impact usually gets overturned. Although most Americans despise abortion, their voices are not heard.

We ask you, humbly: don't scroll away. Hi readers, it seems you use Catholic Online a lot; that's great! It's a little awkward to ask, but we need your help. If you have already donated, we sincerely thank you. We're not salespeople, but we depend on donations averaging $14.76 and fewer than 1% of readers give. If you donate just $5.00, the price of your coffee, Catholic Online School could keep thriving. Thank you.



Help Now >





But why?

Planned Parenthood is a major political donor and a massive recipient of both public and private funds.

It is claimed that public funds given to Planned Parenthood are never used for abortion, but this is a meaningless statement. Money is fungible, which means a tax dollar given to Planned Parenthood for checkups still means more dollars are available for abortion.

Planned Parenthood spends millions on lobbying and this year they have endorsed Hillary Clinton. A whopping $1.3 million was spent on lobbying in 2015. They spent nearly $2 million in 2011. The amount fluctuates.

It's safe to say their campaign cash is part of the problem. Pro-life candidates have to fight against Planned Parenthood's war chest and this makes it harder to elect Pro-Life candidates. It becomes yet more difficult to get pro-life legislation though the legislatures because Planned Parenthood can money-blitz any bill that enjoys popular support.

Here's where Bernie Sanders comes in. Sanders is running on a platform to stop lobbyists, such as those who work for Planned Parenthood, and routinely pad the pockets of politicians. As Super PAC money goes away, the voices of the American people can be heard again.

What will happen when politicians once again have to listen to the people instead of wealthy donors?

Think of the power that billionaires, the Davos men, who believe in Agenda 21, have over our political processes. Right now, our governments do what they want, not what, We The People want.

Destroying their influence could undermine their efforts to lobby the government to push sexual immorality (abortion, contraception, promiscuity) as far as our elementary schools.

Other proposals by Sanders includes universal healthcare and living wages. These are not small considerations. While some women use abortion as birth control, most actually make carefully considered decisions to abort their children. The calculus tends to be financial rather than moral. Poor women tend to have abortions because they astoundingly believe they cannot "afford" a baby! Abortion becomes a tool of convenience - functionally a financial incentive.

However, if people receive living wages for their work and healthcare is no longer viewed as a luxury, more women may also elect to keep their children.

It seems a bizarre thing, to elect an anti-life candidate for a four-year stint in the Oval Office to turn around abortion trends, but what other candidate is offering to get big money (which includes Planned Parenthood) out of politics? What happens when the people are heard once again? What happens when financial incentives to get abortions evaporate?

While Republican candidates are universally pro-life, none of them have pledged to squelch the corrupt system Planned Parenthood uses to stay in the abortion business. Only Sanders proposes to do that. And none of the Republicans has a plan to improve financial compensation for work or to make healthcare truly free and available to the poor, who most commonly seek abortions.

It may seem like strange bedfellows, but Sanders may also be a good bet for restoring democracy and dissuading women from abortion. And it will be much more effective than a sermon or a rally.

Furthermore, imagine what happens when we follow up a reformative Sanders presidency with good, conservative candidates who have the courage to bring their morals and values into the Oval Office?

Yes, we can make America great again, but it might come by unconventional means. I'm not proposing anyone actually vote for Bernie Sanders outright, but this idea is worth thinking about and discussing.

We invite your comments below, both for and against. Please let us know how you feel about this critical issue!

---

The California Network is the Next Wave in delivery of information and entertainment on pop culture, social trends, lifestyle, entertainment, news, politics and economics. We are hyper-focused on one audience, YOU, the connected generation. JOIN US AS WE REDEFINE AND REVOLUTIONIZE THE EVER-CHANGING MEDIA LANDSCAPE.