Deeply Saddened

Perhaps it's no excuse, but "real life" got in my way this past month (that is, husbands coming and going, babies growing and changing, moving, traveling, cancer in the family, etc etc etc) and I freely admit that I didn't really vet Scott Brown for my own personal information. I knew he was campaigning against a woman Democrat, a woman Democrat who has readily and easily behaved as instructed by the political powers-that-be in her party, and that Scott Brown was campaigning strongly against the health industry takeover being orchestrated by the Democrat-controlled Congress.

I did not know, point blank, that he was not pro-life.

I did not know until after the election was over, and I now feel like I was cheated by the man. At the very least, the mainstream coverage of him was not so complete as to mention his stance on abortion. The wiser among you would rightly respond, "He's a Massachussets Republican. What do you expect?" One does not make headway in the bluest of blue states by touting conservative social opinions. I should have known. Still, I feel cheated. Here was a "good man" who was setting an example of clean living and honest campaigning--he defeated the bad guys and stood in the way of millions of babies being killed on the American taxpayers' dime.

He just doesn't stand enough in the way. He's standing alongside the train tracks, throwing rocks at the train wreck that is our social amorality run amok. He ought to be standing on the tracks, letting the machine know that more innocent children will be slaughtered in this country over his dead body. That's where we all ought to be. Last week, several hundred thousand of you were out there on the tracks, marching down the National Mall. Kudos, but you can't write laws, and you can't change the ones that are written. Bigger men must collaborate to change the status quo in the country. Why do all of our big men have small hearts?

But back to Brown. Was a vistory won? Or are we teaching American politicians that "good enough" is, well, good enough? It isn't. Thinking abortion shouldn't be paid for with tax dollars is NOT good enough. (They already are paid for, by all kinds of back-alley government social projects, but let's not go there right now.) My own baby means everything to me--I made Joseph promise when we went to the hospital that if it came down to me or baby, well, the answer was "baby." When I look at my baby, when I see his face twist in fear at a bad dream or hear his anguished cry at finding himself alone, I cannot feel in my heart that any politician in office who supports abortion is a politician who shouldn't be there. No pro-abortion "victory" is ever a victory. Babies are dying. Abortion is frightening to them--they are terrified, aware of what is happening, and they are terrified. Such a horrible thought...my little baby's cry at a bad dream (a cry which usually dissolves into hysterical laughter, thank goodness--I have a versatile little dreamer) breaks my heart. How can knowing that hundreds of thousands of babies' cries go not only unheeded, but are actively caused by the decisions of their mothers and the behavior of their doctors, not break my heart as well?

It does break my heart. But it doesn't help me answer in my own soul what to do in cases like that in Massachussets last month. Was stopping healthcare takeover worth it? I understand fully the prinicple of double effect, and the discussions like Judie's at ALL are not opaque to me. But I'm still uneasy. I probably would have voted for him, because I truly feel that the prevention of large-scale evil is a good thing. And I certainly did not will the evil of his pro-abortion opinion. But would it have been right?

Sigh. What a sick world. I want to enjoy my life, my child, and my country in peace. No such luck.