- Feb 5, 2002
- 166,232
- 55,967
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
DIFFICULT MORAL QUESTIONS: “I’m disgusted by the leading political candidates for president. Do I have a moral obligation to vote in November?”
A. We all have an obligation — indeed, a grave obligation — to work for the common good of our country. The office of president contributes significantly to our country’s common good. So we ordinarily have an obligation to vote in presidential elections. I say ordinarily because the obligation is not absolute.
In the system as it presently exists, the choice of president essentially is made between only two candidates. If after careful investigation we judge that neither party’s nominee represents any evidential advantage to the common good over the other, then we have no obligation to vote. If, however, one of the candidates and the party he represents clearly pose a greater threat to the country’s well-being, even if the other candidate and his party are undeserving in many ways, we should vote for the less unworthy candidate in order to prevent the worse from being elected.
Some have argued that we should be entitled to cast a “negative vote,” in which case the vote would be subtracted from the total of the candidate toward which it was cast. Presently, we have no such option. In its absence, voting for the less unworthy candidate acts as a kind of negative vote.
What about voting for a more worthy third-party candidate? Such voting is usually symbolic, a kind of “purity” vote, more for ourselves and our own reputations than for the common good. I say usually because if significant numbers vote for the same third-party candidate, it could indicate his viability for vice president (or presidential appointee) or for a future presidential run, or even — what is to be hoped one day — the burgeoning viability of a three-or-more party system to replace our badly corrupted two-party system. But we’d have to know in advance that such numbers were opting for an alternative candidate before we could have confidence that our vote could offer realistic benefit to the common good.
Continued below.
Do You Have an Obligation to Vote in November?
A. We all have an obligation — indeed, a grave obligation — to work for the common good of our country. The office of president contributes significantly to our country’s common good. So we ordinarily have an obligation to vote in presidential elections. I say ordinarily because the obligation is not absolute.
In the system as it presently exists, the choice of president essentially is made between only two candidates. If after careful investigation we judge that neither party’s nominee represents any evidential advantage to the common good over the other, then we have no obligation to vote. If, however, one of the candidates and the party he represents clearly pose a greater threat to the country’s well-being, even if the other candidate and his party are undeserving in many ways, we should vote for the less unworthy candidate in order to prevent the worse from being elected.
Some have argued that we should be entitled to cast a “negative vote,” in which case the vote would be subtracted from the total of the candidate toward which it was cast. Presently, we have no such option. In its absence, voting for the less unworthy candidate acts as a kind of negative vote.
What about voting for a more worthy third-party candidate? Such voting is usually symbolic, a kind of “purity” vote, more for ourselves and our own reputations than for the common good. I say usually because if significant numbers vote for the same third-party candidate, it could indicate his viability for vice president (or presidential appointee) or for a future presidential run, or even — what is to be hoped one day — the burgeoning viability of a three-or-more party system to replace our badly corrupted two-party system. But we’d have to know in advance that such numbers were opting for an alternative candidate before we could have confidence that our vote could offer realistic benefit to the common good.
Continued below.
Do You Have an Obligation to Vote in November?
