As we draw near to yet another tumultuous American election, it can be difficult to decide whom to vote for. As a Catholic, I have found the choices this year less than appealing, but nonetheless, there is always a conclusive decision to be made. Donald Trump is the best candidate for Catholics to support in this election. Before every person reading this article dies from a heart attack, I ask that you consider what The Holy Mother Church has laid out in deciding how to vote for a candidate. 

First, not all issues are equal. I doubt very much that anybody disagrees with this. We may disagree on what issues they are, but nobody with two brain cells can seriously say that all the issues in an election are of equal weight. The Church, with her magisterial authority coming from Our Lord’s lips to Saint Peter, has dictated what is to be the most important issues when considering a candidate. On abortion, Kamala has a record that would make King Herod seeth with envy. She supported every abortion liberalization bill during her time in the Senate; as the Vice President and Democratic nominee, she has continued to call for abortion on demand, with little to no regulation. Most notably, during her time as California Attorney General, Vice President Harris prosecuted a pro-life activist (David Daleiden) for videotaping a conversation with Planned Parenthood employees where he caught them explaining how they sold the body parts of the aborted babies. Of course, Kamala Harris didn’t miss an opportunity to prosecute him, and the abortion industry was more than happy to fill her coffers with plenty of money in return. Harris has also expressed opposition to religious exceptions and would attempt to force Catholic doctors and nurses to perform abortions. While Donald Trump is certainly far from perfect, he supports certain restrictions on abortion and will not prosecute Catholics for opposing this evil. 

Second, Kamala Harris has expressed outright dislike for Catholics. While questioning three judges, Paul Matney, Brian Buescher, and Peter Phipps, Harris continued to subject them to a religious test. She questioned them on their membership in the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic men’s fraternal service organization. Her attack on the three judges was, no surprise, related to the organization’s opposition to abortion. Then-Senator Harris asked Judge Matney, “Were you aware that the Knights of Columbus opposed a woman’s right to choose when you joined the organization?” She later directed questions at the other judges relating to Supreme Knight Carl Anderson’s public opposition to abortion. 

There are important points which must be addressed. First, no judicial nominee, or any nominee for office in the United States, needs to be subjected to a test of religious beliefs. Article VI of the U.S. Constitution states, “No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” If these judges opposed abortion, that shouldn’t disqualify them from sitting as judges. The interpretation of abortion statutes in the U.S. has always been guided by personal opinions and beliefs. Justice Powell voted for the majority in Roe because a law clerk of his lost a girlfriend during an attempted “coat-hanger” abortion in the late 1960s. In other words, the case of Roe itself has always been entangled in personal beliefs and experiences. The judges may also oppose abortion because of a legal theory, such as Originalism. Senator Harris should have asked, “Will you rule how I want you to rule?” Then, at least, she would have been honest.

Second, the Catholic Church has long opposed abortion. If then-Senator Harris was mystified by the Knights’ opposition to abortion, she simply betrayed her ignorance and foolishness. Third, the Knights of Columbus is not solely an anti-abortion advocacy group. It does many charitable works and was founded in order to give money to immigrant women and families if the father died. Senator Harris may think she is simply attacking abortion, but she is attacking an organization that has done much good over the decades and has specifically served those in poorer communities.

There are those on the other side who will clamor about Kamala serving the poor better or her regard for the marginalized. If Vice President Harris wanted to serve the poor and working-class, she would not support unmitigated immigration into this country, which strips the poor of job opportunities and forces them to spend their tax dollars supporting immigrant’s healthcare, housing, and education. If Vice President Harris supported the poor, she would not have cast the tie-breaking vote to pass the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which allowed the IRS more leverage to track tips of employees, including those with working-class professions. If Vice President Harris is for the poor, she would not support continuing to pump money into the failing public education system in the U.S., which has failed America’s poor and working-class children. Although he is far from perfect, Donald Trump is the best choice for Catholics to vote for in this election. By George, I would vote for Ghengis Khan before I even thought about casting a ballot for Kamala Harris!