John F. Kerry's Vietnam buddies are divided. Some of them contend that Kerry would make a great President. Most of them insist that he wouldn't. Their opinions are largely based upon Kerry's actions during and shortly after the Vietnam war. His Senate voting record certainly leaves much to be desired from the standpoint of national defense, a fact that could sway a military man's opinion. That notwithstanding, is it really fair to judge Kerry's potential as President based upon his decades-old millitary service?
The real question is this: If you knew, beyond any doubt, that John Kerry was a real war hero, would you then vote for him? The fact is that his Vietnam service may or may not be an indicator of his leadership capabilities. I have failed as a leader many times in the past, but judging my present leadership capabilities based upon my past performance might not be fair, because I just might have learned something from my mistakes. Kerry's service record is largely irrelevant to the question of whether or not he is fit to serve as our President.
The proper criterion by which any candidate--presidential or not--should be evaluated has been, and will remain, his understanding of the sanctity of human life. Virtually every other issue, from our right to bear arms, to individual liberty, to the proper role of the federal government, hinges upon whether or not a candidate understands the sanctity of human life; that is, "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
If a candidate rejects the self-evident truth that the taking of innocent Life--be it via abortion, euthanasia, embryo reasearch, or what have you--is anathema to the very core of our nation's existence, then that candidate does not understand the sanctity of human life. He cannot, then, be expected to understand the broader concepts of the Constitution, which are predicated upon an understanding of the sanctity of human life. Therefore, he cannot represent the best interests of any citizen who values Life, and he cannot be trusted to defend the United States Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. He is not fit to govern; he needs instead himself to be governed.
The real question, then, is not how John Kerry acted in the war, but rather how he acts in the womb.
Posted by jon at August 13, 2004 01:21 AM