Voting Pro-Life Is Not an Opinion

Posted on by

Vote Pro-Life badgeThe Stewardship Foundation was founded on Judeo-Christian principles of morals and ethics as laid out by the call of Christian conscience in 2009. Conscience is not the same as opinions or feelings. So on the matter of voting for a pro-abortion candidate, we must follow our conscience, regardless of how we “feel” about a particular candidate.

The taking of a God-given life is against natural law. It’s a matter of conscience, not opinion. It’s known by reason, not because it’s written down. Cain sinned when he murdered Abel long before Moses received the Ten Commandments. And Cain knew it was wrong to murder.

If a political candidate supports abortion, or any other moral evil, voting for that person makes us an accomplice in the moral evil at issue. So at this writing, where do the remaining committed candidates stand on abortion?

  • Hillary Clinton (D) Consistently fights against pro-life and believes women have the right to abortion for any reason.
  • Ted Cruz (R) Solid pro-life voting record since joining the Senate in 2013.
  • John Kasich (R) Strong pro-life voting record during 18 years in Congress, and has signed 16 pro-life laws as governor of Ohio.
  • Marco Rubio (R) Solid pro-life voting record during 5 years in the Senate.
  • Bernie Sanders (D) Solid pro-abortion voting record (over 100 times) in his career.
  • Donald Trump (R) Admits to being pro-choice in the past, but in 2012 declared himself pro-life after what he terms “a personal experience” with friends. He pledges to fight against the abortion-funding loopholes in ObamaCare.

So there it is. For those of strong moral conviction, we have but one choice this presidential election year: we must vote our conscience and cast our vote on the side of life.

Socially Responsible Investing—Enough?

Posted on by

Pope John Paul II stressed that “even the decision to invest in one place rather than another…is always a moral and cultural choice” (Centesimus Annus). Socially Responsible Investing (SRI) is used and encouraged by the United States Conference on Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in order to “exercise faithful, competent and socially responsible stewardship in how we manage our financial resources.”

Like the Stewardship Foundation, they base their values, directions, and criteria for financial choices on the Gospel. You can learn more about the Church’s SRI guidelines here.

But buyer beware. Outside the USCCB, the SRI movement is dominated by what some might consider left-leaning political concerns, not necessarily the issues supported by the Stewardship Foundation or the USCCB. For example, concerns might include torture and kidnapping in South America, forced child labor in Asia, and damage to the environment throughout the world. But what about the commercialization of sex through pornography, music, and motion pictures? Yet it receives little if any mention from most SRI advocates.

We can’t emphasize enough how important it is to choose the right financial advisor with the right software, tools, and experience to help you choose an investment portfolio that that is fully vetted based on moral truth as given to us in the Gospel. To learn more about socially (or morally) responsible investing, call Joe Finneran now at (614) 800-7985. And please share this with your family and friends whom you believe may be interested.

Can Moral Reasoning Win the Day Against Legalized Abortion?

Posted on by

March for Life 2016By now you’ve no doubt read or watched the news report about a busload of more than 100 teenagers from Minnesota stranded on the Pennsylvania turnpike after attending the 2016 March for Life. On Saturday morning, they built an altar out of snow and organized a mass for 200 to 300 people from nearby buses. The mood of the teenagers was great. But the reality on the numbers of abortions still taking place in the U.S. can turn a good mood cloudy.

In a recent article from The Catholic Thing, Hadley Arkes, political scientist and professor of Jurisprudence at Amherst College, reflects on the 2016 March for Life and asks us to reconsider our assumptions about how to overturn Roe v. Wade by stirring again the capacity for moral reasoning found in the text of the Constitution. Read the article here.