A new political party needed?

[Love4All]

a Catholic Party would let the IRS revoke the Church’s tax exempt status.

I’m not talking about an arm of the Church.

 

[bsroufek]

As I understand it, we must have a sufficiently large number of people in a party in order to
be recognized on a ticket.

It’s really hard to get a party started, even if you want to, because of the requirements set up
for establishing a party.

And, the local tickets often don’t have an option for parties other than Democrat/Republican,
I think. I could be wrong here, but I think I’m right above about the requirements for starting
a party.

 

[Love4All]

First of all, people need to get past this utter stereotypical nonsense that the republicans are all pro-social conservative and that the democrats care about poor people.

A friend of mine said that it is more like brand names. The stereotypes arise from actualities. Nothing is as cut and dried as a stereotype makes it out to be, but, they are not without basis.

What both of these parties and their “ideas” concern are getting votes and winning elections.

It’s pretty basic that you can’t run the show unless you can get elected.

That’s why you have the TEA PARTY and #occupy, even if both have made major strategic mistakes in 2012.

The concern for the poor of the democrats has left many of them across the globe worse off because all too many of them care about is trying and feeling good about it, not actual results.

Like I said, “Peace and Prosperity,” as a campaign promise, but lying through their teeth about their ability to actually deliver. Most people recognize this, if only on a subconscious level. Most people think, “well, they’re politicians, of course they’re going to lie,” and accept it. Tragic, but true.

In fact, the democrats have become some of the worst capitalistic cronies since the time of Upton Sinclair.

Universal healthcare is a complete disaster where is has been tried. The government decides who gets what treatment.

Ideals and implementations often differ. Just because an ideal has been poorly implemented in the past, even if it has never been properly implemented, doesn’t make it a bad idea.

The Declaration of Independence said it right: we have natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In that order. The right to life supersedes the right to liberty, so, abortion should be outlawed. And those other two rights supersede the right to the pursuit of happiness, so, you are not allowed, in your pursuit of happiness, to interfere with the life or liberty of anyone else.

Universal Health Care falls under the Right to Life. No one should die or remain ill because they can’t afford medical care. A society that permits such things has sold its soul.

As far as pro-life laws go, voters in South Dakota and Mississippi rejected a proposal on that. It may be most effective to allow the states to decide, which would be in accordance with the Constitution and may save the most lives.

One of the beauties of the American system is that if certain groups of citizens wish to live under a completely different set of laws from another group, they have that right. I’d like to see more diversity in States, and the system provides for it.

The American System is in a certain very real sense an experiment. I think there should be some states whose laws accurately reflect Catholic moral teaching, and others whose laws reflect “Do what thou wilt.” And the American People in general should remain very closely informed as to the quality of life in those diverse locations, as an experiment, to see which system best facilitates life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Also, there should be a program in place to assist those who would like to move to a different state because they like its laws better. The government should help such people to move, encourage them to move, facilitate their moving. It is part of the separation of the sheep and the goats.

With republicans and conservatives, we have a conservative Supreme Court and Roe v Wade, which is strictly unconstitutional, is still here and I have to say that I am disappointed in the recent marriage debate over Prop 8.

For obscene material laws, there’d be a black market and like the pro-life and marriage issue, consolidation of federal power on those issues is something everyone needs to consider because that could be a dangerous concept, and our Founding Fathers realized that.

My ideas would solve the problems inherent in what you are describing.

In short, what we need are politicians who won’t run on emotions or big government, whether its religious or secular.

If anyone on here thinks that big Catholic government will solve problems or that we need as secular of a government as possible, they are sadly mistaken.

I maintain that the Catholic Party is an idea whose time has come.

 

[Love4All]

As I understand it, we must have a sufficiently large number of people in a party in order to
be recognized on a ticket.

It’s really hard to get a party started, even if you want to, because of the requirements set up
for establishing a party.

And, the local tickets often don’t have an option for parties other than Democrat/Republican,
I think. I could be wrong here, but I think I’m right above about the requirements for starting
a party.

You need a certain number of petitioners to get on the ballot in each state.

If the Catholic Party is to be effective, we’d need to get on the ballots in all fifty states.