A pre-election rant

  • Thread starter Thread starter valient_Lucy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
V

valient_Lucy

Guest
I try not to rant (too much) and I try not to rant on the forums (too much). But I can’t control myself anymore.
I live in Ohio, and I’m sick of the corruption within the state, and the various different scandals where people stole money from tax payers. However, since most of these people are Republicans, and “more pro-life” than the Democrats, I feel like I have no choice but to ignore them. Seriously, I can’t take the fact that the state is a complete financial mess and the politicians are stealing from us, but because they’re pro-life, or pretend to be, we can’t do anything about it.
I think that I should run for office, and make it my goal to set the record for stealing as much money from the government as possible. As long as I’m pro-life, no pro-lifer could touch me.

I never understood why some French people want to reinstate the monarchy. But after just a few years of voting, I agree. Democracy is highly overrated. It’s time to bring back the Divine Right of kings. Or at least, overturn the 19th ammendment, that way I won’t be allowed to vote.

Ok, rant over.
 
(sound of respirator)
Darth Vader for President!

When you’re tired of voting for the lesser of two evils!
(/sound of respirator)

If there’s a third party candidate who is also pro-life, you do not have to vote Republican.
  • Liberian
 
Oh, has the Catholic Church decreed that **good **Catholics have to vote Republican?
 
The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.
Winston Churchill

Dmocracy is the worst form of Government except all those others that have been tried.
Winston Churchill
 
I know exactly what you mean! I can’t bring myself to vote Republican under any circumstances. I understand all about the prolife argument, but these Repubs aren’t doing anything about abortion, mainly, I believe, because the issue is their cash cow. If they actually did anything useful against legalized abortion, they’d lose it. Meantime, by being single-issue voters, we get Iraq, fuel for the military-industrial complex, union-busting, anti-labor pro-corporate regulations, obsession with foreign affairs, racial code-talk against certain hated minorities, etc. etc. etc. I feel that we should work against abortion and euthanasia/fetal stem cell/birth control and all of that, but avoid bringing into political office people who use abortion as a platform and nothing else. Besides, I doubt very many of these politicians who claim pro-life positions are nearly as seamless as we might like. In other words, there are so many possible exceptions that there essentially would be no prohibition at all… that way, they could have their political cake and eat it too!
 
valient_Lucy said:
Seriously, I can’t take the fact that the state is a complete financial mess and the politicians are stealing from us, but because they’re pro-life, or pretend to be, we can’t do anything about it.
I
Click to expand...
I think the key there is “pretend to be”. You have to ascertain who is, indeed, truly pro-life. I personally have no problem calling the Dems the true pro-life party.
 
Ah yes, that pro-life democratic party. What bizzaro world is this? In the real world the Democratic party boos its own pro-lifers off the stage, refuses to even let them be heard at national conventions, filibusters to prevent the elevation of any judge with any whiff of morality against the atrocity of abortion.

For Democrats, abortion is the holiest sacrament of their belief system. Over a MILLION babies a year senselessly killed. Sure, that’s pro-life. right.

I don’t have blinders and don’t vote for phony pro-life or actual pro-choice republicans. Just half an hour ago I had to write in a candidate for governor to get a pro-life name out there. He has no chance of winning, but hopefully he will get enough to send the message to the R’s that they better take us seriously next time or they will again lose our votes.

I DO get tired of being a single issue voter. I imagine decent Germans in the 1930’s and decent Americans in the 1850’s did too. Too bad our genocide has been so much longer lived. I’d like to be able to consider other issues, but nobody has presented me with anything as pressing as 1 million government-approved murders per year.
 
Allweather said:
I know exactly what you mean! I can’t bring myself to vote Republican under any circumstances. I understand all about the prolife argument, but these Repubs aren’t doing anything about abortion, mainly, I believe, because the issue is their cash cow. If they actually did anything useful against legalized abortion, they’d lose it. Meantime, by being single-issue voters, we get Iraq, fuel for the military-industrial complex, union-busting, anti-labor pro-corporate regulations, obsession with foreign affairs, racial code-talk against certain hated minorities, etc. etc. etc. I feel that we should work against abortion and euthanasia/fetal stem cell/birth control and all of that, but avoid bringing into political office people who use abortion as a platform and nothing else. Besides, I doubt very many of these politicians who claim pro-life positions are nearly as seamless as we might like. In other words, there are so many possible exceptions that there essentially would be no prohibition at all… that way, they could have their political cake and eat it too!
Click to expand...
🙂 Gee, you’re cynical. The steps taken by the GOP with reguard to abortion have been enumerated over and over on this forum. Either you did not see them or you chose to ignore them.
 
mary_bobo said:
🙂 Gee, you’re cynical. The steps taken by the GOP with reguard to abortion have been enumerated over and over on this forum. Either you did not see them or you chose to ignore them.
Click to expand...
I haven’t been on this forum for long, but I’m very politically aware, and so I probably know all the usual arguments. The GOP has enough pro-choice members that the GOP as an organization can’t be seriously considered pro-life, IMO. Not very many among the GOP leadership would favor abortion restrictions that didn’t include exceptions for rape and incest, among others, such as life of the mother, which could be easily manipulated as an end-around the prohibitions. Personally, I wouldn’t consider rape and incest valid excuses for abortion. Then, there is the birth-control-flipside-of-the-coin factor in the culture of death. We aren’t going to get any legal sactions against birth control. Let’s face it: we live in a secular society, purposely designed that way from the outset. We can work for frameworks that restrict abortion, but an outright ban is just not possible. Too many voters favor abortion, and those people get representation as well. We should focus on converting those people over to our point of view, rather than pumping single-issue politics as if to force our viewpoint down their throats. Most secular, and even millions of Christians, see no problem with abortion, or birth-control for that matter, and that’s why it is still legal and will remain so. We SHOULD speak out, but voting single-issue only brings in stinkers who also favor wars in faraway places, and pumping our tax dollars into corporate scams that weaken the labor voice, among other things.
 
Well, I voted this morning so praise God it’s all over. I’m now leading a crusade to overturn democracy and set up an absolute monarchy. Of course, the challenge of picking a king who will have Divine Right will be a very difficult one. But it will be the last difficult political decision I have to make!

Support the Divine Right of Kings!
 
Sandi,

The Catholic Church has stated that if a pro-life candidate is running against an anti-life candidate, it is a sin to vote for the anti-life candidate. Given the two parties’ platforms regarding abortion, that generally translates into a statement that it is a sin to vote for a Democrat or a Libertarian. (A local Libertarian here some years ago, though, declared himself to be strongly pro-life. I voted for him.)
  • Liberian
 
Today was such a glorious day! Dems win the House and they will win the Senate. Rumsfield has Resigned (now we just need Cheney and Bush out). Such a happy day indeed! I’ve been smiling all day long. And when i shared the news of Rumsfields demise to my fellow soldiers, they almost jumped for joy.

Its about time the American people woke up!
 
Liberian said:
Sandi,

The Catholic Church has stated that if a pro-life candidate is running against an anti-life candidate, it is a sin to vote for the anti-life candidate. Given the two parties’ platforms regarding abortion, that generally translates into a statement that it is a sin to vote for a Democrat or a Libertarian. (A local Libertarian here some years ago, though, declared himself to be strongly pro-life. I voted for him.)
  • Liberian
Click to expand...
My understanding is that one would have to vote for a so-called “anti-life” candidate specifically BECAUSE he/she was “anti-life” in order for it to become sinful. If this is true, then there is plenty of room for one to vote for a candidate for various other reasons than his/her stance on life issues, such as abortion and fetal stem cell research. A sin to vote for a Democrat? Are you sure about that?

Moreover, it seems to me that so-called “anti-life” or “pro-choice” people come in a variety of flavors and degrees. Personally, I oppose all abortion all the time. It seems to me that this is in line with the uncompromising position of our Church. Others would permit abortion in cases of rape and incest. From my point of view, any candidate who opposed abortion EXCEPT in cases of rape and incest would qualify as “anti-life” or “pro-choice.”
 
nydas said:
Today was such a glorious day! Dems win the House and they will win the Senate. Rumsfield has Resigned (now we just need Cheney and Bush out). Such a happy day indeed! I’ve been smiling all day long. And when i shared the news of Rumsfields demise to my fellow soldiers, they almost jumped for joy.
Click to expand...
I have to say that I’m feeling rather good myself!!
 
Allweather,

I also have heard that one would have to vote for the pro-abortion candidate specifically because he is pro-abortion in order for it to be sinful, but I have not heard it from a reliable source and I do not trust it. It simply allows too much “wiggle room.” After all, by this logic you could support a candidate because you like the color of his hair, while ignoring his stance on abortion.

Given that it is a sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate (which I will maintain until I hear a reliable statement to the contrary), and given that the official platform of the Democrat Party is pretty much unlimited abortion, yes, I will stand by my statement that it is in most cases a sin to vote for a Democrat.
  • Liberian
 
Liberian said:
Allweather,

I also have heard that one would have to vote for the pro-abortion candidate specifically because he is pro-abortion in order for it to be sinful, but I have not heard it from a reliable source and I do not trust it.
Click to expand...
Well, How about the Pope? Is Priests for Life a “reliable” source?
A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.
Click to expand...
priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/04-07ratzingerommunion.htm
Liberian said:
Given that it is a sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate (which I will maintain until I hear a reliable statement to the contrary), and given that the official platform of the Democrat Party is pretty much unlimited abortion, yes, I will stand by my statement that it is in most cases a sin to vote for a Democrat.
  • Liberian
Click to expand...
You are simply wrong in assuming that voting for Democrats is “in most cases a sin”.
 
BillP,

Thank you for the quote. That does indeed state it rather authoritatively.

The operative phrase in the quote is “in the presence of proportionate reasons,” and the operative word in the phrase is “proportionate.” Frankly, given a choice between a nominally pro-life Republican and a definitely pro-choice Democrat, a “proportionate reason” would have to be EXTREMELY strong in order to be proportionate to the right to life, even it if is only nominal.
  • Liberian
 
Liberian said:
The operative phrase in the quote is “in the presence of proportionate reasons,” and the operative word in the phrase is “proportionate.” Frankly, given a choice between a nominally pro-life Republican and a definitely pro-choice Democrat, a “proportionate reason” would have to be EXTREMELY strong in order to be proportionate to the right to life, even it if is only nominal.
Click to expand...
I agree with you here. That’s why I vote Democrat.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top