OPINION:
Dr. Ben S. Carson recently explained that, in hopes of a Republican takeover of the U.S. Senate from Democrats who do President Obama’s bidding, he was endorsing a pro-abortion Senate candidate in a pro-abortion state where a pro-life Senate candidate would not have a chance of winning (“Charting a course between principle and pragmatism,” Web, May 20, and “Why the greater good sometimes necessitates compromise” Web, May 27).
If the choice for president in 2016 were Hillary Rodham Clinton, who would continue Mr. Obama’s radical, anti-life policies, and Dr. Carson, who would implement pro-life policies, saving millions of the preborn, for whom would those who have been so critical of Dr. Carson vote? Would they hurt Dr. Carson and the pro-life movement and help kill millions of preborn children by not voting?
Is there another issue on which pro-lifers would not compromise, given the same choice? Religious freedom? Health care? The economy? Public education? Veterans Affairs? Jobs? Funding Planned Parenthood? If the choice in 2014 is continuing Democratic control of the U.S. Senate, led by that erratic servant of Mr. Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (who has denied a Senate vote for more than a year on the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would ban approximately 18,000 painful abortions annually) and Republicans gaining control of the Senate and saving many preborn, for whom will those so critical of Dr. Carson vote?
Those who work to help end the horror of abortion need to be supported, not criticized. Contemporary political life requires realistic actions to advance the defense of life.
JOHN NAUGHTON
Silver Spring
Please read our comment policy before commenting.