Tomorrow is a vital day in America. There are no shortage of moral issues on which America will cast its vote. There are those who immediately cry, "you can't legislate morality." But this statement is so incredibly wrong. Every law passed by our Congress is part of our moral canon. Webster's New Dictionary & Thesaurus defines "moral" as "concerned with right and wrong conduct; of good conduct." Laws delineate between what is right and what is wrong public behavior. But let's take a look at the moral issues that are before us this election day.

First, truth is the ultimate issue to be considered tomorrow. On several occasions, Senator John Kerry has made statements about his service in Vietnam. Sen. Kerry served one full term at sea and then one partial tour of duty on Swift Boats. Four months into his Swift Boat tour, John Kerry asked for a transfer after receiving 3 Purple Hearts. Upon returning to the U.S., Kerry then joined the ant-war movement and reported to the Senate that he had witnessed atrocities while in Vietnam. However, Kerry had no evidence of specific incidents of atrocities. Throughout his career as a Senator, Kerry also claimed to have been honorably discharged from the Navy. But recent evidence shows that the likelihood of Sen. Kerry actually having received an Honorable discharge are slim. Kerry has also claimed on several occasions that he was illegally ordered into Cambodia by "President Nixon" in December 1968. Richard Nixon was not sworn in as President until January 1969. Also, his claims of incursions into Cambodia have been proven false. More recently, Sen. Kerry has bent the truth throughout his campaign by speaking in such terms as to be both for and against the war in Iraq, and practically every other issue.

The next moral issue that should be on our minds is partial birth abortion. Partial birth abortion is the practice of taking a full-term pregnancy, pulling the baby partially from the mother's womb and then killing the baby by one of several different means (including vacuum extraction of the baby's brains). This is absolutely hideous. There can be NO ethical, moral or other reason to support partial birth abortion. It is the murder of a partially born baby. Some liberals have opposed previous bans on this practice by insisting on protection of the health of the mother. Let's get this straight -- there are no circumstances where the mother's health is threatened. The mother has already carried the pregnancy to term. Any problems with the pregnancy immediately prior to birth can be handled safely through delivering the baby via C-section. In fact, "aborting" the child during natural birth is a greater health risk to the mother than letting the baby survive the birth. Allowing this practice to continue is to promote the murder of child for no other reason than for the convenience of the mother. Sen. John Kerry has voted six times to oppose bans on partial birth abortion (his excuse is "the mother's health").

Embryonic stem cell research is also a great moral abuse. Although researchers concede that, currently, embryonic stem cell research shows little promise -- nowhere near the promise shown by adult stem cell research -- it continues to be a talking point for the Liberal Left. The State of California is also voting on an initiative to provide public funding for embryonic stem cell research and to support the cloning of fertilized human embryos -- nascent human life -- for the purpose of stem cell research. Now, I have previously posted information on where Sen. Kerry and President Bush stand on this issue. To my mind, this is merely another form of abortion. The only difference is that the destruction of human life is taking place at an earlier stage of the development of the child. Abortion -- and embryonic stem cell research -- is murder for convenience.

This election day, there are 11 states considering constitutional amendments to define marriage as being between one man and one woman. What I think people fail to understand is that this is not a referrendum on same sex unions. It is a matter of protecting the institution of marriage from being redefined by an overactive judiciary. I have always thought of judges being impartial and unbiased -- ruling only on the merrits of the case in the eyes of the law. But this is no longer the case. Judges now insert their own personal and political opinions in their rulings despite what the law may say. We have to rein in these rogue judges. Vote to protect the institution of marriage. What God intended to be holy, we must keep from being perverted by the rogue judiciary.

I have tried to talk briefly on the major moral issues that I see in this election. But if you have issues you want to see me address, please e-mail me. I'll be happy to give my two cents. But, by all means, get out and vote tomorrow.