Living the Gospel of Life -- Study Guide
Paragraph Thirty-one
Reflection
This paragraph speaks about the "political penalty" some may pay for living out their pro-life convictions in public office. Yet it also points out that "many voters are hungry for substance." Statistical polls in recent elections have in fact demonstrated that taking a pro-life position on abortion is advantageous for the candidate.
For example, a Wirthlin poll taken immediately after the elections of 2000 asked voters whether the abortion issue affected their vote. Some 42% said yes. Those who voted for the candidate who opposed abortion were 23% and those who voted for the candidate who favored abortion were 19%.
Two years later, after the mid-term elections of 2002, a Zogby International/Buffalo News Nationwide poll showed that 40% of voters voted for pro-life candidates or at least tended to favor them, while only 23% voted for or favored the pro-choice candidates. Another Zogby post-election poll that year showed that 25% of all voters chose pro-life candidates while only 13% chose pro-abortion candidates. When viewed just among those who voted on the abortion issue, 61% chose the pro-life candidate, and only 31% chose the pro-abortion candidate.
Discussion Questions
What are some examples of ways in which politicians witness to the dignity of life -- or compromise that witness -- in the course of carrying out their duties?
Priests for Life
PO Box 141172
Staten Island, NY 10314
Tel. 888-PFL-3448, (718) 980-4400
Fax 718-980-6515
Email mail@priestsforlife.org
Subscribe to Fr. Frank's bi-weekly prolife column (free): subscribe@priestsforlife.org
Click
here to See What Abortion Looks Like!
Home
Search || Crisis
Pregnancy Help || About Us ll Support
our Work
Latest News || Guestbook
|| About Other Groups ll Online
Store
This site is updated daily!