Another Strong Debate Performance by Senator Kerry

KERRY: Well, again, the president just said, categorically, my opponent is against this, my opponent is against that. You know, it's just not that simple. No, I'm not.

I'm against the partial-birth abortion, but you've got to have an exception for the life of the mother and the health of the mother under the strictest test of bodily injury to the mother.

KERRY: Secondly, with respect to parental notification, I'm not going to require a 16-or 17-year-old kid who's been raped by her father and who's pregnant to have to notify her father. So you got to have a judicial intervention. And because they didn't have a judicial intervention where she could go somewhere and get help, I voted against it. It's never quite as simple as the president wants you to believe.

Good old fashioned common sense just like Catholics like it.

As for Bush, did anyone think this made any sense?

BUSH: Embryonic stem-cell research requires the destruction of life to create a stem cell. I'm the first president ever to allow funding -- federal funding -- for embryonic stem-cell research. I did to because I too hope that we'll discover cures from the stem cells and from the research derived.

ESCR is "destruction of life" yet I am proud to say "I am first to fund it." Then later Bush says:

BUSH: Let me make sure you understand my decision. Those stem- cells lines already existed. The embryo had already been destroyed prior to my decision.

I had to make the decision to destroy more life, so we continue to destroy life -- I made the decision to balance science and ethics.

Translation: it is okay to destroy life to an extent, or , the wrong deed was already done, so I figured I'd continue with it anyway.

Talk about waffling. He wants to be simultaneously acceptable to both the "pro-life" folk and pro-ESCR folks.

Back to Kerry

I think we can save lives.

Now, I think we can do ethically guided embryonic stem-cell research.

We have 100,000 to 200,000 embryos that are frozen in nitrogen today from fertility clinics. These weren't taken from abortion or something like that. They're from a fertility clinic. And they're either going to be destroyed or left frozen.

And I believe if we have the option, which scientists tell us we do, of curing Parkinson's, curing diabetes, curing, you know, some kind of a, you know, paraplegic or quadriplegic or, you know, a spinal cord injury, anything, that's the nature of the human spirit.

KERRY: I think it is respecting life to reach for that cure. I think it is respecting life to do it in an ethical way.

And the president has chosen a policy that makes it impossible for our scientists to do that. I want the future, and I think we have to grab it.

There's a Q&A on Catholics and Stem Cell Research questions here

Overall, Kerry again showed people that he is a more than capable advocate for the middle class and an excellent candidate for Commander in Chief. Pres. Bush was defensive and missed an opportunity to say what his vision is for both the world and the country. But we all know that with Bush it is more ofthe same, bad economy and war.

Kerry showed that he is a fresh face with fresh ideas that resonate with common sense values that we all hold. I think Kerry did a great job with the abortion question. He was able to reveal his heart and yet show why he voted the way that he did. Again, it shows the difference between liberals and conservatives. Kerry is concerned about people, Bush is not. If Bush and Tom Delay and the like really wanted to ban PBAs all they had to do was fashion a law that included an exception for the mother's health and it would have passed the Supreme Court muster. But as any clear thinking person knows, Republicans in Washington could care less about life, all they were interested in was scoring political points.

John Kerry is where most Catholics are: personally opposed to abortion, but do not think it should be illegal. I think Catholics are beginning to see that Kerry, not Bush, resonates with Catholic values.