A reader writes:
I don't see what the difficulty is in trying to decide which to prioritize when making a voting decision, abortion or torture. Here's the bottom line if you're against both. If we vote an anti-torture candidate into office, the torture will stop. If we vote an anti-abortion candidate into office, abortion will most likely continue unabated. Moreover, the only way to stop torture is to put someone who is against it in charge of the military and intelligence services. You can work to stop abortion (and succeed) regardless of who is running the country.
It is perfectly reasonable to believe that stopping millions of abortions is more important than preventing the torture of a few hundred prisoners. But that's really not the choice now, is it?