Third-Party Voter

The article on decisions in 2020 (“Looking Ahead to Decision 2020,” front page, Feb. 2 issue) was good as far as it went. You talk about the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, which I believe was balanced and accurate. There is a third alternative that I believe needs to be addressed: those of us who have joined a third party. Our votes are often discounted.

I left the Democratic Party in 2015. I asked myself if I was a Catholic who was a Democrat or a Democrat who was a Catholic. I answered that I am first and foremost Catholic and could no longer support the Democratic Party. If I am going to be answerable to Jesus Christ for my vote and for its ramifications, I could not continue to be a Democrat. I looked at the Republican Party and quickly looked away, as I wanted nothing to do with Donald Trump; and, to be honest, there was still some Democratic blood running in my veins. I found my answer in the American Solidarity Party, a party that is a whole-life party that has a strong platform that supports families, marriage, the environment and social justice.

It seems to have taken the best of both parties and added a good dose of the Catechism of the Catholic Church into its platform. I believe that 2020 could be the “Year of the Third Party,” making a difference in the outcome of our elections.

         Janey Lidgren

         Lebanon, Oregon

 

Ruffled Feathers

Having followed the Chick-fil-A controversy in detail, I was dismayed by the negative comments of columnist Michael Pakaluk (“There’s More to Chick-fil-A Flap Than Meets the Eye,” In Depth, Dec. 8 issue) about those of us who are protesting against the company for capitulating to the “LGBT” crowd, as he is clearly not in possession of all the facts.

I agree with Mr. Pakaluk that a company has the right to bestow its corporate donations as it sees fit. If Chick-fil-A had merely announced that it would henceforth only be supporting “local food banks and homeless shelters,” no one would have been upset. However, that’s not the whole story. First, having long resisted pressure from LGBT groups that objected — often violently — to its donations to the allegedly “homophobic” Salvation Army and Fellowship of Christian Athletes, it made a point of declaring that it was dropping those two organizations.

Moreover, it announced donations to two specific organizations: Covenant House and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

As a longtime supporter of Covenant House, I was horrified to read an online comment claiming that this organization is actively promoting the LGBT agenda.

So I checked their website, and, alas, it’s true; on its homepage there’s even a photo of the group carrying a banner in a “gay pride” parade. I’ve now dropped Covenant House from my list of charities; while I’m all for helping homeless teenagers, no matter what their sexual persuasion, the last thing a Christian organization should be doing is encouraging them to pursue the sinful and self-destructive “gay” lifestyle.

Supporting SPLC is even worse; not only does it smear many conservative, pro-life and Christian organizations as “hate groups,” lumping them with the KKK and white supremacists (leading to, among other things, a violent attack on the offices of the Family Research Council and the attempted assassination of a conservative congressman), but its own ex-employees report that “social justice and racial equality,” SPLC’s alleged goals, are sadly lacking at its own corporate headquarters.

Given these facts, it’s impossible to believe that Chick-fil-A “is just as Christian and in favor of Godly marriage as before,” or can “bank on these critics soon enough becoming appreciative customers again,” when it’s delivered such a resounding slap in the face to everyone who previously supported it for standing by Christian principles. Yes, the company is free to give to whomever it wants. But we, its erstwhile supporters, are also free to stop buying its products. That’s not “bullying,” “blackballing” or “unjust persecution,” Mr. Pakaluk. We’re merely voting with our pocketbooks — just as Chick-fil-A has.

         Anne G. Burns

         Cos Cob, Connecticut

 

Sign of Contradiction

Response to “Empowered Pro-Life” Democrat (front page, Jan. 19 issue): First, I feel that it is an oxymoron. It is difficult to be under the party of the big tent when the party’s platform is pro-choice. That gives the mother the right to terminate the baby.

Second, God gives life.  Killing a baby in the womb is murder, yet we go to great lengths to save the sea turtles’ eggs so that they can live.

Third, it would be like campaigning for no smoking for youth, yet allowing the tobacco companies to hand cigarettes out to them. It is a contradiction.

         Beverly Harrell

         Columbia, South Carolina

 

All-In for Christ

Relative to “User’s Guide to Sunday” (“Following Jesus Is All or Nothing,” Jan. 19 issue):

Recent reports and accounts of priests’ transgressions, suspected irregularities at the Vatican treasury and seemingly conflicting thoughts and visions of the Pope versus the pope emeritus all fly in the face of St. Paul’s caution (1 Corinthians 1:10) against divisions within the Body of Christ.

Claire Dwyer’s “User’s Guide to Sunday” warns that unless we are “all-in” followers of Christ, we are leaving ourselves vulnerable to attack from the evil one.

I have this horrifying image of the Church lately finding itself in situations as if it were a person being mugged and pummeled, who, when lying bruised and battered in the gutter, looks up to see the assailants as being longtime dear friends; or, even worse, brothers.

In our lifetime, the cry for adamant and vocal support (prayers and/or active participation in various ministries) for our Church and its clergy has never been more urgent.

         Ken Horstman

         Lakehurst, New Jersey