THE CHRISTIAN CHOICE: ELECTION 2024

A Reasoned Evaluation Past Personalities to Principals, Policies & Platforms

Preface: Setting the Stage

From a Catholic perspective, voting is not merely a civic duty but a moral obligation that carries severe consequences for the common good and the dignity of the human person. The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that the faithful must participate in promoting the common good (CCC 1913-1915), and the U.S. Bishops in “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” have stated that Catholics must vote with an informed conscience, seeking to uphold the sanctity of life, protect the family, and promote justice and peace. While individual personalities may sway emotions, the moral weight of the vote rests not on charisma or character alone but on aligning policies and platforms with objective moral principles. Catholics are called to look beyond personal likes and dislikes, recognizing that their choices will affect life, liberty, and the fundamental moral fabric of society. This means evaluating candidates based on their positions on key issues like abortion, religious freedom, marriage, and care for the vulnerable, considering their platforms in the light of Church teaching.

On an imperfect, binary political landscape, Catholics are called to make moral choices that align as closely as possible with the teachings of the Church. The Republican and Democrat platforms offer profoundly different visions of America’s future, especially in life, family, religious freedom, economic justice, and national security. While no party or candidate perfectly embodies Catholic social teaching, the policies advanced by the Trump/Vance platform provide a more consistent defense of objective moral goods in areas that are non-negotiable for Catholics, such as the sanctity of life, protection of the family, and safeguarding religious liberty. On the other hand, the Harris/Walz platform takes extreme positions on key issues, promoting policies that directly conflict with Catholic doctrine and undermine fundamental human dignity.

---

1. The Sanctity of Human Life

Republican Position: Trump/Vance

• Policy & Action: Donald Trump’s administration achieved the most significant pro-life victory in decades by appointing justices who led to the overturning of Roe v. Wade. He reinstated and expanded the Mexico City Policy, preventing U.S. tax dollars from funding abortions overseas. Trump also became the first sitting president to attend the annual March for Life, signaling a strong commitment to the pro-life cause.

• Outcome: The overturning of Roe allowed states to pass more restrictive abortion laws, saving countless unborn lives. Trump's federal policies significantly reduced funding to abortion providers globally.

• Catholic Perspective: Pro-life leaders and Catholic bishops have widely praised Trump’s administration for its historic pro-life accomplishments, emphasizing that the protection of life is paramount in Catholic moral teaching.

Democratic Position: Harris/Walz

• Policy & Action: Kamala Harris and Tim Walz have repeatedly advocated for unrestricted access to abortion, seeking to codify Roe v. Wade into federal law. Roe, due to its broad interpretation of "health" exceptions, effectively allowed abortion on demand through all nine months of pregnancy, including late-term abortions. Harris and Walz support legislation that would roll back nearly all restrictions on abortion, including parental consent laws.

• Outcome: The Biden administration has aggressively expanded abortion access, including through telemedicine, and worked to dismantle pro-life protections. The Democratic platform, led by Harris and Walz, is among the most extreme in U.S. history, advocating for federal funding of abortions and rejecting even the most modest restrictions, such as bans on late-term abortion.

• Catholic Perspective: The Church has consistently condemned abortion as an intrinsic evil. The extremism of the Harris/Walz platform on abortion presents a clear moral conflict for Catholics, making it difficult to reconcile support for their policies with Catholic teaching on the dignity of human life.

2. Religious Freedom

Republican Position: Trump/Vance

• Policy & Action: Trump’s administration fought to protect religious liberty at home and abroad. The creation of the Office for International Religious Freedom and numerous victories in the courts ensured that individuals and religious organizations could act according to their beliefs, particularly in areas like healthcare and education.

• Outcome: Protections for religious liberty were greatly strengthened under Trump, allowing Catholic and Christian organizations to operate according to their beliefs without fear of government reprisal.

• Catholic Perspective: Religious freedom is essential to the Church’s mission, particularly education, healthcare, and social services. Catholic bishops widely supported Trump’s defense of religious freedom and lay leaders.

Democratic Position: Harris/Walz

• Policy & Action: The Harris/Walz ticket supports policies that threaten to erode religious freedom, particularly in the areas of healthcare and LGBTQ+ rights. The Equality Act, endorsed by Harris and Walz, would significantly restrict religious exemptions, forcing religious organizations to comply with federal mandates on issues like marriage and gender identity that conflict with their beliefs.

• Outcome: Religious organizations face increased legal battles and threats to their autonomy under the Biden/Harris administration. These policies create moral and legal pressure on Catholic institutions to compromise their core teachings on marriage, gender, and the sanctity of life.

• Catholic Perspective: Catholic leaders have raised serious concerns about the threats posed by the Democratic platform to religious freedom, particularly regarding the right to act by one’s faith in public life.

3. Marriage and Family

Republican Position: Trump/Vance

• Policy & Action: Trump supported religious liberty protections that allowed faith-based organizations to adhere to their beliefs about marriage and family. J.D. Vance has strongly advocated for the traditional family, recognizing its vital role in fostering societal stability.

• Outcome: Faith-based organizations received protections that enabled them to serve according to their understanding of marriage without legal repercussions. Policies supportive of the traditional family were reinforced.

• Catholic Perspective: The Church’s teaching on marriage as a union between one man and one woman is aligned with the protection of religious liberty that Trump/Vance advocate. Catholic institutions were protected from being forced to compromise on their moral teachings.

Democratic Position: Harris/Walz

• Policy & Action: The Harris/Walz platform aggressively promotes gender ideology, including policies that allow minors to make decisions about “gender selection” without parental consent. Harris has supported the Equality Act, which would force religious organizations to recognize same-sex marriages and gender identity decisions that conflict with Catholic teaching. They also support the expansion of gender-affirming surgeries and hormone treatments, including for minors.

• Outcome: These policies could lead to children undergoing irreversible medical procedures without parental guidance, as well as the imposition of legal penalties on religious institutions that refuse to accommodate gender ideology.

• Catholic Perspective: The Church teaches that gender is God-given and that decisions regarding gender identity should be made concerning Church doctrine and parental guidance. The Harris/Walz platform on gender and family issues represents a direct challenge to these teachings, which Catholic leaders have widely condemned.

4. Economic Justice and Social Welfare

Republican Position: Trump/Vance

• Policy & Action: Trump’s economic policies, including tax cuts and deregulation, led to record economic growth before the pandemic. His focus on job creation and economic self-reliance helped reduce unemployment, particularly among minority groups. Trump’s work requirements for welfare programs aimed to reduce dependency and encourage workforce participation.

• Outcome: During Trump's presidency, unemployment reached historic lows, particularly for Black, Hispanic, and Asian Americans. Wages for low- and middle-income workers rose, and poverty rates fell to record lows. Welfare dependency decreased as more people reentered the workforce.

• Catholic Perspective: Catholic teaching supports the dignity of work and the principle of subsidiarity, which encourages solutions at the most local level. Trump’s economic policies aligned with these principles, promoting economic growth while reducing dependency on government programs.

Democratic Position: Harris/Walz

• Policy & Action: The Biden/Harris administration has expanded government assistance programs, including healthcare, housing, and welfare. Stimulus packages provided temporary relief, but critics argue that these policies contributed to inflation and created disincentives for work, resulting in labor shortages and continued dependency on government aid.

• Outcome: While some Americans received financial relief, inflation soared, eroding purchasing power and contributing to economic instability. Job creation slowed, and businesses struggled to find workers, leading to supply chain disruptions and economic uncertainty.

• Catholic Perspective: While the Church supports social safety nets, it also emphasizes the importance of promoting self-reliance and the dignity of work. The Democratic platform’s focus on expansive government assistance risks creating dependency rather than fostering economic independence.

5. National Security and Border Security

Republican Position: Trump/Vance

• Policy & Action: Trump prioritized border security as a key national security issue, constructing hundreds of miles of border wall, increasing funding for border patrol, and implementing strict immigration policies aimed at reducing illegal immigration and human trafficking. His administration also worked to reduce asylum fraud and partnered with Mexico to curb illegal border crossings.

• Outcome: Illegal immigration decreased during Trump's presidency, and there were significant reductions in human trafficking and drug smuggling across the southern border. National security was bolstered through stricter immigration enforcement and cooperation with foreign governments.

• Catholic Perspective: The Church teaches that nations have the right to protect their borders while welcoming strangers. Trump’s policies focused on security and combating exploitation, particularly human trafficking, a key issue of concern for Catholic humanitarian organizations.

Democratic Position: Harris/Walz

• Policy & Action: Kamala Harris oversaw the border crisis as “border czar,” but her efforts have been criticized as ineffective. Under the Biden administration, border enforcement has been significantly relaxed, leading to record numbers of illegal crossings, increased human trafficking, and exploitation of migrants by cartels. The lack of solid border security has also exacerbated national security risks, including drug smuggling and potential terrorist threats.

• Outcome: Illegal immigration has surged under the Biden administration, with record numbers of encounters at the southern border. Human trafficking and drug smuggling have significantly increased, leading to a humanitarian and national security crisis.

• Catholic Perspective: While the Church advocates for the humane treatment of migrants, the chaos at the border under the Biden/Harris administration raises severe concerns about the exploitation of vulnerable populations and the failure to protect national security.

Conclusion

For Catholics seeking to navigate the 2024 election with a focus on moral clarity and alignment with Church teaching, the choice between Trump/Vance and Harris/Walz presents a stark contrast. While imperfect, the Trump/Vance platform aligns more closely with the Church's teachings on the sanctity of life, religious liberty, and the importance of family. In contrast, the Harris/Walz platform embraces extreme positions on abortion, gender ideology, and religious freedom that conflict with fundamental Catholic moral principles. National security and economic justice also reveal significant differences, with Trump/Vance promoting policies that prioritize the common good and national security, while Harris/Walz’s policies create significant moral, economic, and security concerns for Catholics.