Abortion and Voting

[jp2weloveu]

Because Planned Parenthood targets the inner-city. abortion is now and always has been firmly rooted in the proposition that the world be better off without black brown and yellow children.

Exactly the case. Those uninformed can get the story from the horse’s mouth - Margret Sanger, the founder of planned parenthood, wrote several books on the necessity to “save” society through eugenics. She wasn’t one to stop at the color line though if you were not wealthy, sickly or disadvantaged - no matter what color - that was a good enough reason to rid society of you and your offspring.

 

[SwingCorey]

Oh that is not what I meant at all. I was just trying to write that it is only article that I have read on statistics. I can see how that came out wrong. By the way it was an article written by an African American who is pro-life. She was writing about the Roe V Wade decision and questioning why this group is having alot of them.

The best way to view the statistics of who is having abortions is to actually go to a clinic and pray in front of it for an hour. (2 or 3 rosaries usually take an hour total.) You will see that it is about 25% blacks, almost as many Hispanics, and the rest white college-aged women.

At least, that’s what I’ve seen each of the times I’ve gone. Very distressing, considering their relative percentage of the overall population (blacks and hispanics are both around 15% of the overall population). Kinda makes you think that abortion policies are racist as well as anti-child.

For more info about praying in front of abortion clinics, see 40 Days For Life and select the city closest to you. You will see where they are organizing vigils during Lent in your area.

 

[Numinous]

Obama is Moloch.

 

[PJM]

Is it a mortal sin to vote for anyone, regardless of the political party, who is in favor of abortion? I have researched and cannot get a definate answer. Everyone seems to be dancing around that question.

Did you check the USCCB web?
United sated Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Dear friend in Christ,

Please forgive my inquiry, but are you serious:shrug:

I’d ask what diocese your in, but will not because it would be an imbarassment to Bishop and Pastor. How very sad that you don’t know!

**THANKS FOR TRYING and thanks for supporting Life **

Yes it is…
Our Catecheism…
“2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is **gravely contrary to the moral law: **You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish”

The word “Grave” or “Gravely” is synomous with “Mortal” as in Mortal Sin.

“2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,” “by the very commission of the offense,” and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.”

This includes, knowingly voting for Pro-Choice candidates, if there are other options (meaning a Pro-Life Candidate) that is running at the same time.

Personal opinions
Party Politics
Something you think is “more important,” i.e. War, Economy, Environment ect. DO NOT exceed the value of a SINGLE innocent life.

I myself would never vote for anyone who is pro-abortion no matter what party, however, I have a few catholic friends that I am concerned about who are staunch one political party. I thought if I could get a definate answer from you that might help.

Thank you,
JJ:slapfight:

 

[elts1956]

I disagree with that last statement - they may have TRIED to tell you who you could not (in good conscience) vote for, but they neither made it clear nor did they do so successfully.

If you read the “Faithful Citizenship” book cover-to-cover, not from the standpoint of someone who already understands the issue, you will find that it is filled with double-speak and hedging. Yes, there are good, pertinent points (that could be summed up in 2-3 paragraphs, rather than a 10-20 page booklet), but they were buried for the sake of obfuscation and a desire not to offend.

Basically, they tried to tell you to vote with a formed conscience, without ever attempting to state what consists of a fully formed conscience. If everybody votes their conscience, that’s great - that’s what everybody on both sides says they did - but it’s not so great if there’s lots of people whose moral compasses do not point to “true North”, and therein lies the problem.

To sum up the intrinsic evils (that many Catholics do not realize are always wrong!) :

• artificial birth control is immoral
• abortion is immoral
• in-vitro fertilization is immoral
• embryonic stem cell research is immoral

This is where “Faithful Citizenship” failed - and this is why over 50% of “Catholics” voted for Obama. No clear leadership on the issue of “the Catholic vote”.

That the USCCB (in Faithful Citizenship) muddled up the muddled thinking of some catholic voters this election, has been my argument from the get go, as I have posted many, many times on various political 2008 threads.

Good for you. I think either our teachers in the educational system need to teach more in depth critical thinking skills, or most of our Bishops need to also take a refresher course in such.

However, I don’t think the catholic ? bo supporters can let themselves off scott free from the responsibility of voting for the wrong reason/s. Bishops such as Chaput, Finn, Herman, Martino and others gave straighforward definitions and explanations of what was actually meant in “Faithful Citizenship”, but many Dem. catholics had already made up their minds where their vote was going to go and refused to either read these documents, or, if they read them, did so with a thick film over their eyes.

P.S. you forgot homosexual marriages as being one of the Intrinsic evils that is anathema to the Church…

 

[Eggnotz]

Thinking that there is some amorphous “greater good” that somehow countervails encouraging the act of entering wombs and dismembering babies as they try to fight off suction curettes while having their tiny arms and legs snapped like twigs and sucked into jars is, well, there are no human language words to describe it. I guess “evil” will have to suffice.

 

[joe_clark]

My brother and his wife, both catholic, vote for a party that has an openly pro-abortion stance - all other parties in my country have abortion as a conscience issue - they don’t force people to vote for pro-abortion policies.

The way I look at it, whoever you vote for, whatever they do, you are responsible for. If Obama legalises infanticide and publically supports it, then all who voted for Obama are responsible for the blood of infants.

Questions:

What if there are two candidates with one who will allow abortion and the other candidate in favor of capital punishment. Is one better than the other? If both in the end murder a human being, does one take precedent over the other? This is actually a possibility where I live.

 

[PJM]

So…we should all be single issue voters then?
well, yeah. I see your point.
That’s definitely the most rational argument for a citizen of a country who wants to better that country because apparently the only thing affecting that country is abortion. There’s apparently no other morality, social justice, and poverty issues or anything.

My dear friend in Christ???

Your “logic” is scarry frigtning :bigyikes: and darn right spooky:tsktsk:

If we don’t have lifewhat the heck else matters!:hypno:

Name just ONE THING OF GREATER IMPORTANCE than life, just ONE! And the fact that it is the innocent life of defenceless baby, is even more bizarre.

Friend, what the heck are you thinking?

May God bless and enlighten you! I’ll pray for you!

 

[estesbob]

Questions:

What if there are two candidates with one who will allow abortion and the other candidate in favor of capital punishment. Is one better than the other? If both in the end murder a human being, does one take precedent over the other? This is actually a possibility where I live.

Abortion is an intrinsic evil and can never be supported in any way. The death penalty has been allowed by the church for its entire 2000 year existence. The Pope himself said that there is no comparison between the two.:

There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia

 

[jp2weloveu]

Questions:

What if there are two candidates with one who will allow abortion and the other candidate in favor of capital punishment. Is one better than the other? If both in the end murder a human being, does one take precedent over the other? This is actually a possibility where I live.

The death penalty has accounted for the deaths 1,143 persons in America since the supreme court allowed it in 1976. Most if not all of the people were arguably guilty of only the most heinous crimes which showed real depravity and almost always murder.

Abortion has claimed 50,000,000 persons in America since the supreme court allowed it in 1973. ALL of the victims were completely innocent and there was/is no prosecution of the perpetrators.

Let me see - even though I accept Church teaching; and as such do not support the death penalty (in almost any case) - “does one take precedent over the other?” Sure does in my book.

 

[Nordar]

The death penalty has accounted for the deaths 1,143 persons in America since the supreme court allowed it in 1976. Most if not all of the people were arguably guilty of only the most heinous crimes which showed real depravity and almost always murder.

Abortion has claimed 50,000,000 persons in America since the supreme court allowed it in 1973. ALL of the victims were completely innocent and there was/is no prosecution of the perpetrators.

Let me see - even though I accept Church teaching; and as such do not support the death penalty (in almost any case) - “does one take precedent over the other?” Sure does in my book.

I truly do not see the comparison between abortion and the death penalty. Abortion is the killing of innocent babies, who have no voice, who have just as much right as anyone to born.

 

[joe_clark]

Abortion is an intrinsic evil and can never be supported in any way. The death penalty has been allowed by the church for its entire 2000 year existence. The Pope himself said that there is no comparison between the two.:

There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia

The pope may have endorsed the death penalty, but putting a human being to death by lethal injection, firing squad (gary gilmore) all result in the same. not comfortable with this.

 

[estesbob]

The pope may have endorsed the death penalty, but putting a human being to death by lethal injection, firing squad (gary gilmore) all result in the same. not comfortable with this.

I vehemently oppose captial paunishment. i have stood in silent prayer outisde the death chamber in huntsville texas many times as the condemned were put to the death.

That is not the point, however. The point is there is no moral equivalence between the death penalty and abortion. The Pope did not endorse the death penalty-he merely pointed out that it is somehting catholics in good conscience can disagreee about. the same can not be said for abortion

 

[joe_clark]

I truly do not see the comparison between abortion and the death penalty. Abortion is the killing of innocent babies, who have no voice, who have just as much right as anyone to born.

I also do not see the comparison. Death is permanent. If there is an oops moment, there is no turning back. You cannot bring an innocent person back to life after you murder them.

Yes, innocent babies have no voice, neither do the condemmed. I used to be for the death penalty until DNA freed and found 15 people innocent that were on death row, convinced and convicted by people just like you and me. The juries on all 15 were convinced that they had the right guy.

In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, Nicholas James Yarris was on death row and was convicted before the use of DNA. He spent 23 years of his life incarcerated in Pennsylvania while he fought to not be executed for a murder he did not commit. He had to fight the District attorney for the DNA test when they became available. It did not matter that he was innocent, only that the DA could save face. He was eventually proven innocent by three separate DNA tests in July2003 and after many more month of delay, was eventually set free on January 16th 2004.

I do not know what is wrong, but if the pope endorsed the death penalty or allows the same, I believe he is wrong. I think the Pope should talk to Mr. Yarris about this. Something to think about.

 

[Nordar]

I also do not see the comparison. Death is permanent. If there is an oops moment, there is no turning back. You cannot bring an innocent person back to life after you murder them.

Yes, innocent babies have no voice, neither do the condemmed. I used to be for the death penalty until DNA freed and found 15 people innocent that were on death row, convinced and convicted by people just like you and me. The juries on all 15 were convinced that they had the right guy.

In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, Nicholas James Yarris was on death row and was convicted before the use of DNA. He spent 23 years of his life incarcerated in Pennsylvania while he fought to not be executed for a murder he did not commit. He had to fight the District attorney for the DNA test when they became available. It did not matter that he was innocent, only that the DA could save face. He was eventually proven innocent by three separate DNA tests in July2003 and after many more month of delay, was eventually set free on January 16th 2004.

I do not know what is wrong, but if the pope endorsed the death penalty or allows the same, I believe he is wrong. I think the Pope should talk to Mr. Yarris about this. Something to think about.

The Pope did not endorse the death penalty, how do you get from what the Pope said, that he endorse it?

I do not agree with the death penalty, however it has no comparison to Abortion.

Putting someone on death row, (even when innocent) is a very sad thing and unfortunatly there are mstakes.
It does not equate in any way to abortion, the fact that you seem it think that is does should give you something to think about!

 

[joe_clark]

The Pope did not endorse the death penalty, how do you get from what the Pope said, that he endorse it?

I do not agree with the death penalty, however it has no comparison to Abortion.

Putting someone on death row, (even when innocent) is a very sad thing and unfortunatly there are mstakes.
It does not equate in any way to abortion, the fact that you seem it think that is does should give you something to think about!

Per Estesbob post:

estesbob
Senior Member
Prayer Warrior
Forum Supporter Join Date: May 8, 2005
Posts: 16,182

Re: Abortion and Voting

---

Abortion is an intrinsic evil and can never be supported in any way. The death penalty has been allowed by the church for its entire 2000 year existence. The Pope himself said that there is no comparison between the two.:

You are a better person than I if you can equate murder. I can’t. Muder is murder and only begets more. If you believe what you say, then the people that murder medical personell at clinics are your heroes? This is not good at all. You appear to condone the murder of one over another and I am saying no living creature has this right. I’m not talking about self defense of family or person or country for that matter.

I’m talking about a human being strapped down and tied hey looking into your eye, like Jesus on the cross, and you just inflict the means to terminate a human being, no different than terminating a small child. Still don’t get it, but do understand where your going? The final act of murder is the same.

 

[estesbob]

Per Estesbob post:

estesbob
Senior Member
Prayer Warrior
Forum Supporter Join Date: May 8, 2005
Posts: 16,182

Re: Abortion and Voting

---

Abortion is an intrinsic evil and can never be supported in any way. The death penalty has been allowed by the church for its entire 2000 year existence. The Pope himself said that there is no comparison between the two.:

You are a better person than I if you can equate murder. I can’t. Muder is murder and only begets more. If you believe what you say, then the people that murder medical personell at clinics are your heroes? This is not good at all. You appear to condone the murder of one over another and I am saying no living creature has this right. I’m not talking about self defense of family or person or country for that matter.

I’m talking about a human being strapped down and tied hey looking into your eye, like Jesus on the cross, and you just inflict the means to terminate a human being, no different than terminating a small child. Still don’t get it, but do understand where your going? The final act of murder is the same.

You are operating under two false assumptions One is that I am supporting the death penalty The other is that the Pope has endorsed the death penalty. Neither is true.

We are talking about a hypothetical situation where one candidate supports the death penalty but opposes abortion and his opponent supports abortion but opposes the death penalty The church says we cannot vote for the latter but can vote for(but are not required to) vote for the former. You evidently would not vote for either which is of course you’re right to do so.

We need todifferentiate between an intrinsic evil and evil. Abortion is always evil. The church teaches that the death penalty is not evil in and of itslef-only the unjust application of it can be… We are never allowed to support an intrinsic evil.

 

[elts1956]

Questions:

What if there are two candidates with one who will allow abortion and the other candidate in favor of capital punishment. Is one better than the other? If both in the end murder a human being, does one take precedent over the other? This is actually a possibility where I live.

Abortion is deemed an INTRINSIC Evil while Capital punishment is one that various opinions/deductions as to the evil of such can be decided through use of one’s prudential judgement.

Now, before you ask, “What is the difference, both involve the killing of a human being?”, one, abortion, is the killing of the most innocent, vulnerable human being there is, while Captial punishment is, hopefully, a just punishment for a heinous crime.

 

[syromalabarcath]

**

**

Syromalabarcath is correct that the Catholic Church will never tell you who to vote for.But they most certainly will tell you who you cannot vote for. And they made it clear in the last election that a Catholiccould not vote for Obama

false.
they never explicitly said that.

 

[syromalabarcath]

My dear friend in Christ???

Your “logic” is scarry frigtning :bigyikes: and darn right spooky:tsktsk:

If we don’t have lifewhat the heck else matters!:hypno:

Name just ONE THING OF GREATER IMPORTANCE than life, just ONE! And the fact that it is the innocent life of defenceless baby, is even more bizarre.

Friend, what the heck are you thinking?

May God bless and enlighten you! I’ll pray for you!

lol, I’m good, thanks for the prayers but no thanks.