Reason proportionate to abortion?
Recently, commenting on "defensible motives to support Senator Obama" in the 2008 presidential election, Archbishop Charles J. Chaput stated, "I do not know any proportionate reason that could outweigh more than 40 million unborn children killed by abortion and the many millions of women deeply wounded by the loss and regret abortion creates."
Does there exist, on the contrary, such a proportionate reason, and what is that reason? If there be no such reason, or if one cannot rationally articulate such a reason, is it conceivably morally justifiable to support Obama in the 2008 election?
I'd like to hear from Obama supporters: given the US Bishops' outspokenness on this issue, it surely must be of principal consideration when voting.
Please restrict the purview of this topic to the questions posed. What, if anything, is a proportionate reason? If there be no proportionate reason, might one still justifiably vote for Obama?
EDIT: I had taken for granted that we all know and agree with the Church's teaching, but I see that I shouldn't have. It appears that the go-to argument in favor of voting for Obama is the notion that McCain will do nothing to diminish the number of abortions, or that overturning Roe will do nothing to diminish the number of abortions. As absurd as that notion is, one must bear in mind that this is not a numbers game. The Church has made it quite clear that voting for a candidate who supports abortion constitutes remote material cooperation in evil. It is only "permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons." Therefore, one must have proportionate reasons, and if one has them, one must (I assume) be able to articulate them. A proportionate reason is not: "But will abortions really decrease under McCain?" Nor is it, "Obama has better economic policies," nor is it "Lots of people die in wars." I'm still waiting for someone to state a proportionate reason to the legalized slaughter of innocent children, and state using sound moral principles why it is proportionate.
Does there exist, on the contrary, such a proportionate reason, and what is that reason? If there be no such reason, or if one cannot rationally articulate such a reason, is it conceivably morally justifiable to support Obama in the 2008 election?
I'd like to hear from Obama supporters: given the US Bishops' outspokenness on this issue, it surely must be of principal consideration when voting.
Please restrict the purview of this topic to the questions posed. What, if anything, is a proportionate reason? If there be no proportionate reason, might one still justifiably vote for Obama?
EDIT: I had taken for granted that we all know and agree with the Church's teaching, but I see that I shouldn't have. It appears that the go-to argument in favor of voting for Obama is the notion that McCain will do nothing to diminish the number of abortions, or that overturning Roe will do nothing to diminish the number of abortions. As absurd as that notion is, one must bear in mind that this is not a numbers game. The Church has made it quite clear that voting for a candidate who supports abortion constitutes remote material cooperation in evil. It is only "permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons." Therefore, one must have proportionate reasons, and if one has them, one must (I assume) be able to articulate them. A proportionate reason is not: "But will abortions really decrease under McCain?" Nor is it, "Obama has better economic policies," nor is it "Lots of people die in wars." I'm still waiting for someone to state a proportionate reason to the legalized slaughter of innocent children, and state using sound moral principles why it is proportionate.