Should Abortion Stance Be the Most Important Factor in Voting?

From OneNewsNow:

POLL: Abortion stance as a factor in voting

According to our most recent poll response, voters -- at least those who frequent our website -- appear to be giving priority to issues other than a candidate's position on abortion when determining who they will support for president.

OneNewsNow.com asked: Is a presidential candidate's stand on abortion your MOST IMPORTANT consideration when choosing who to support? You said:

Read the OneNewsNow.com article that inspired this question here.

Vote Life, Canada! advises all Canadians to make the defense of innocent human life their foremost voting criterion. Although this approach might be characterized as “single issue voting,” an approach to which many people object, it can hardly be described as unreasonable.

Let’s suppose you said, “I just can't vote or not vote for a candidate on one single issue.”

What if the candidate were a racist, e.g. a card carrying member of the KKK? What if the candidate were a Jew-hater and a holocaust denier? What if the candidate were sympathetic to terrorism in order to achieve political ends?

Would any of these “issues” by themselves be sufficient for you to dismiss the candidate?

I hope you get the point. Without a doubt, for every voter, there are lots of “single issues” which would disqualify candidates. It’s simply a matter of starting to identify them and see where the “issue” of abortion might rank in that list of evils.

As we make clear in our voter’s guide,

Imagine a politician saying, “I support terrorism.” And then a voter saying,” I disagree with you on terrorism, but what's your health care plan?” You'd think they were both mad! You wouldn't think twice about rejecting a candidate who supported terrorism. His stance, permitting the public to be killed, is dangerous to society and contrary to every principle of public service.

Consider abortion in the same light. Abortion is no less violent than terrorism and produces the same result-dead and bloodied human beings, most often in pieces.

Most election campaigns are not centred in basic principle but rather in policy, such as the method in which health care is delivered, or the degree of taxation levels, or the size of government. No politician questions the principle of healthcare or the principle of taxation or the principle of fighting crime. If such principles were to be abandoned it would not be surprising if the politician were considered as disqualified.

The protection of human life is a fundamental principle and the most foundational human right we possess in society. It is not a mere policy. To allow abortion, which is the killing of a human child in the womb, is to break the principle that every human life deserves protection. Those who would abandon this principle forfeit their right to political office, an office open only to those who would be a guardian of the public and of peace and good order.

To quote again from our voter’s guide:

Stop for a moment and think. If politicians aren't ready to respect the life of a small defenseless child, do you want to trust them with your life and future? If they will disregard the most basic of rights, what of your many other legitimate concerns as a citizen?

A leader’s stand on abortion certainly warrants “single-issue” voting for the Christian who believes in the justice and truth emanating from Christian revelation.