B
blessedtoo
Guest
For me, it is not.And if that OBVIOUS (?) “major party” is Democrat…???
For me, it is not.And if that OBVIOUS (?) “major party” is Democrat…???
I think we all can relate to this frustration. However, I’d say it’s a safe bet that our beloved Pope, who has called the US to the carpet for her involvement in Iraq, is certainly not going to ask Catholics to “lock and load”. I shudder whenever anyone even entertains such ideas.Here’s something that may sound extreme, but I’m going to say it. I do not recommend anyone do this… BUT…if Pope Benedict XVI said it’s time to lock and load for real, would you?..I know for a fact that I would give my life because this is cause for just war. Voting on such an issue is actually insane. There’s no such thing as a vote for who gets to live. That is deeply disordered. I’m being irrationally rational about this situation. What will you do if “Pro-Life” candidate gets into office and then sandbags us again? I’ll be writing letters to the ends of the earth. I will do my best to influence folks, by waking them up. I’ll be pushing for Pro-Life Democrats and Republicans and Independents and everyone else. This is the only way we’ll ever get laws that stay put to protect life
JLongoria wrote:
The moral theology of the Church is based around natural law ethics.
I can speak with some level of confidence (though it is amateur compared to some others) because I’ve been required to take undergraduate courses in biomedical ethics and philosophy of religion.
The point I’m trying to make in this discussion is the qualifying principle of double effect, which essentially states that, “it is morally permissible to perform an action that has two effects, one good and the other bad” so long as four criteria are met.
*]An act, considered apart from its consequences, must be permissible.
*]The bad effect cannot be avoided if the good effect is to be achieved
*]The bad effect is not a means of producing the good, but only a side-effect.
*]The good and the bad must be “proportional”; that is, the bad effect must at most be equal to the good effect, but preferably less
With this being said, we can evaluate the case:
First, voting in and of itself is morally permissible; I don’t think anyone disagrees here. Second, the bad effect (abortion in cases of incest, rape, etc.) must occur for the good effect (the prevention of millions of more abortions) to be achieved.
Third, our intent is to prevent the deaths of millions of babies, not the other way around. In hoping to prevent the death of millions of children, there is a bad side-effect, namely, that abortions can be performed in cases of incest, rape, etc.
The third criterion under the principle of double effect embodies the importance of intent in our reasoning. We do not intend for the bad effect to occur; but it must occur in order for the lives of millions of babies to be saved.
Fourth, the amount of abortions procured in cases of rape and incest is far less than that of those seeking abortions in general.
All four statements have been satisfied, so we can reason that it is morally permissible to vote for a candidate with the intent that millions of babies’ lives will be saved; unfortunately, there is still a bad effect.
Take the argument now and apply it to not voting, and you’ll see that it violates the fourth criterion.
This, of course, does not shut the door on the issue. We still reason that abortion in and of itself is completely and utterly morally impermissible.
Yet that is a different argument altogether: I think everyone here agrees that the act of abortion is inherently evil.
Wow. That was a God shot if ever I saw one!
This makes me realize that people are being extremely judgemental against Catholics who just don’t get it. At the same time…this ends my struggle for who to vote for. Even though I dispise the man that I beleive lies like the norm I’ll vote on principle because at this point it’s all that is really left. Voting a third party makes sense too to build up momentum for later. It is wrong to tie peoples hand together or point a gun to their head to coerce them to vote your way. But to just cast a blanketed rediculous vote seems wrong too now after reading this. I have much to learn…and I have tons of college. I guess you need a degree in philosophy and theology to be qualified to vote. Just think what the average Catholic does not have education wise and then try to figure out why that can’t make the connection. What to do next?Beat people that claim to be pro-life over the head with judemental statements like “I didn’t see you at the abortion clinic praying with us.” But that would sound uncharitable wouldn’t it? But then, they are being judgemental to all those other people who don’t get what they are saying either…and beating them over the head…That’s not charitable either. Hmmmn…what to do?
Well, at least I found what I needed. Prayers for the rest of you out there wondering what happened to my rant. But I will be looking for you out at the abortion clinic with your spiritual swords…rosaries. Next time you think about criticizing someone ask yourself when is the last time I prayed for the end to abortion. When is the last time I wrote a letter to a political candiate or government leader about this issue. Talk is cheap. Walk the walk, don’t just talk the talk.
We don’t disagree.
This makes me realize that people are being extremely judgemental against Catholics who just don’t get it. At the same time…this ends my struggle for who to vote for. Even though I dispise the man that I beleive lies like the norm I’ll vote on principle because at this point it’s all that is really left. Voting a third party makes sense too to build up momentum for later. It is wrong to tie peoples hand together or point a gun to their head to coerce them to vote your way. But to just cast a blanketed rediculous vote seems wrong too now after reading this. I have much to learn…and I have tons of college. I guess you need a degree in philosophy and theology to be qualified to vote. Just think what the average Catholic does not have education wise and then try to figure out why that can’t make the connection. What to do next?Beat people that claim to be pro-life over the head with judemental statements like “I didn’t see you at the abortion clinic praying with us.” But that would sound uncharitable wouldn’t it? But then, they are being judgemental to all those other people who don’t get what they are saying either…and beating them over the head…That’s not charitable either. Hmmmn…what to do?
Well, at least I found what I needed. Prayers for the rest of you out there wondering what happened to my rant. But I will be looking for you out at the abortion clinic with your spiritual swords…rosaries. Next time you think about criticizing someone ask yourself when is the last time I prayed for the end to abortion. When is the last time I wrote a letter to a political candiate or government leader about this issue. Talk is cheap. Walk the walk, don’t just talk the talk.