Citizens Have Co-Responsibility For Society
Citizens Have Co-Responsibility For Society
This duty especially obliges those in a democracy who must elect representatives to run the State on their behalf. The obligation to vote depends on the issue and the worthiness of the candidates. It is more seriously obliged when a good candidate is opposed by an unworthy one.
The moral theology tradition teaches that one may not vote for an enemy of religion or of freedom, except to exclude a worse enemy of religion and of freedom. In such a case, the exclusion of the worst candidate is the object which is intended, not the evils the less bad candidate might do. It is that good choice (excluding a worst candidate), not “the lesser of two evils” which is chosen. We may never choose evil directly, only tolerate it. This is an application of the Principle of Double Effect mentioned above.
In determining which candidate is a threat to religion and liberty, or, which of several candidates is the worse threat, there is a hierarchy of values. This hierarchy is moral common sense. For example, it is clearly more evil to kill a person than to slap them unjustly. In determining the hierarchy of political issues, therefore, non-negotiables issues outweigh negotiable issues.
Non-negotiables issues concern certain truths and are always morally applicable, such as taking the life of the innocent, depriving people of their liberty, especially religious liberty, and preserving the morality of society, since personal and social life depends on it.
Negotiable issues concern complex circumstances, for example, how to protect, preserve and pay for health care. Policy issues involve differing opinions about the best means to the good end both parties desire, even if they differ about the possibility of achieving it by the various means proposed.