My Vote Against Mark Kirk

Mark KirkI did not vote for Mark Kirk.  As many of you know, I was struggling with voting for him because of his pro-choice stance.  Up until now, I’ve been a practical Republican conservative.  Philosophically, I’ve voted for the lesser of two evils (discounting any third party candidates as not viable, and therefore not worth voting for).  Not wanting to be a one-issue voter, I would take into account all of the major candidates’ views, and vote for the better of them.

Fiscal Issues
In terms of fiscal issues, there is no distinguishable difference between the two Illinois Senate candidates, at least rhetorically.  The difference lies in actions.  Both say that they’ll be fiscal conservatives in the Senate.  Mark Kirk has been a fiscal conservative as a congressman, but we can only take Alexi Giannoulias’ word that he would be the same.

Social Issues
The candidates are indistinguishable on social issues.  Both are pro-choice, both are for special rights for homosexuals.  My main issue is this: abortion is wrong; abortion is the killing of a person.  It should not be spun as a woman’s choice issue, any more than murder is a woman’s choice issue.  There are moral issues that I DON’T think that the government should be involved in legislating against.  Homosexuality is a sin, but should the government legislate against it?  No.  Adultery is a sin, but should the government legislate against it?  No.  Abortion is not in that category; an individual should not be given the choice whether or not to kill someone.  This is an area where government legislation is necessary.

Personal Issues
This campaign has been largely about the candidates’ personal issues, which is unfortunate.  Alexi Giannoulias has personal problems because he was a senior officer with a bank that (a) failed and (b) made loans to a lot of shady characters.  Mark Kirk has his own problems because he padded his credentials relating to his military record.  All in all, it’s a poor race, with no good candidate from either major party.

What’s the Alternative?
The alternative, in my opinion, is Mike Labno, the Libertarian candidate.  You can check out his website at  He’s a good candidate, if not viable.

  • laura

    Unfortunately, I agree, there IS NO GOOD candidate with the chance to win, therefore I will vote for the republican since I would like to see republicans in control.

    • admin

      Daryle made a good point to me. He said, “I’m being swayed even further down this road toward a view of voting that exalts the sovereignty of God over the pragmatics of politics—voting for a God-honoring candidate, even if it means a write-in who has no chance of winning, and entrusting the outcome, and the future of our state/nation, to Him.”

      Really, shouldn’t we trust that God is in control, and he will control the outcome of the race, no matter who I vote for? In that case, we should vote for the more God-honoring candidate.

  • Cathy

    Bob, I went to Mike Labno’s website. Under his personal information, it says he “co-parents his daughter.” Do you know his marital status?

    • admin

      I don’t. There’s a lot that I don’t know about him. He hasn’t been personally vetted as thoroughly as his opponents. But, at least on the issues, he more closely reflects my beliefs.


  • Genuine Chris Johnson


    Good point on abortion. One thing though: the framers didn’t see routine law enforcement as anything the federal government would handle. There used to be an idiom “you don’t want to make a Federal case out of this.” It seems that everything is a federal case.

    I don’t see the US government as having the responsibility–or authority–for trying simple murders. They aren’t “High Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

    • Bob

      The problem that arises is that other branches of the federal government HAVE seen it fit to put this under their jurisdiction (whether right or wrong), and therefore it HAS to be dealt with at the federal level by federal officials. My position would be to elect a federal official that sees it as the rights of the states to make laws governing murder and abortion, and would vote in such a way as to give that authority back to the states.