Can a Catholic be Democrat?

[LeafByNiggle]

There is no such Catholic teaching on voting per se. Look in the Catechism. You won’t find it. Look among the Encyclicals. You won’t find it. What you will find is teaching about abortion as an issue. But not about voting for a political candidate for a different reason other than abortion.

 

[Nepperhan]

Anti-Catholic bigotry is alive and well in the U.S. Senate

Well, you are extrapolating based on policy statements. That sounds like a reach.

 

[Poet]

The military. Do you not understand how it works? You join. And then they train you and they call you if you have to go to war otherwise you are sent to diffrent bases. They call them. They call. They cant just go.

I understand the military VERY well. My father was in a war zone, his base being bombed, the day I was born. I grew up on military bases. My brothers in law have been in the military. I’ve been to boot camp and in the military personally. Three of my sons are in the military.

I completely get how the military works. So one of your family members volunteered to join the military and you tried to tell people a family member was ‘drafted.’ Sorry, no, if you VOLUNTEER to join the military, you KNOW that you are volunteering to go where you’re needed and sent. The whole PURPOSE of the military is to FIGHT WARS IF NEEDED. We all know that. If you absolutely don’t want to be in a war zone, DO NOT VOLUNTEER.

But there has not been a draft since the 70s. Nobody, since the early 70s, has been FORCED to join the military.

My life has been shaped by the military. I know it very well. Don’t ever make assumptions, on forums, about who you’re talking to or what they know.

 

[Poet]

He is answering the question? Have you? Are you just commenting idiocracy in order to get a rise out of people? Are you even Catholic or just someone that came across a “Catholic forum” and found a great opportunity to troll

It’s a shame I don’t know how to show the whole thread of this conversation but it is:

What is True admonished someone that it’s not their place to tell anyone what to do or think.

I pointed out that the OP ASKED for opinions and therefore an opinion was given.

HOW on God’s green earth, in any rational path, does ‘the OP asked for opinions’ translate to me being a troll??? How on God’s green earth does ‘OP ASKED for (name removed by moderator)ut’ translate to ‘idiocracy’???

HOW in any rational sense does ‘OP asked for (name removed by moderator)ut’ suggest that I am not Catholic???

What is True suggested someone not give an opinion on what a Catholic should vote for. I pointed out that the original poster ASKED FOR opinions on what a Catholic should vote for. How does this equate to me being ‘not Catholic???’

I’m truly flummoxed by this apparent logic. OP asked for opinions and so by pointing that out I must be…what??? Atheist? Born again? Anglican? Buddhist? Wiccan???

I’m truly lost. But go ahead. Tell me what denomination or faith I must really be by pointing out the logical truth that OP ASKED FOR OPINIONS.

 

[upant]

Well, you are extrapolating based on policy statements. That sounds like a reach.

they are condemning teachings approved by the church,

this isn’t a policy statement, in each hearing the catholic was basically being called unfit because of the religious beliefs of the church.

it isn’t a reach, it is reality! which democrat spoke up against this line of questioning?

as the article says, " plenty of Senate Democrats agree with them. They’ve adopted a strategy of interrogating President Trump’s judicial nominees about Catholic beliefs and associations.

 

[jtwp5]

If there are too choices and both support abortion, you should vote for lesser of two evils. Because third party has no chance of winning.

 

[Dolphin]

About a year ago we had this very question and as I do remember a “Can a Catholic be Republican” thread was posted as well in order to trigger some people.

Let’s keep the dialogue to a beneficial and civil level, not one of who can yell the loudest

 

[Dolphin]

No this is not true. Bishop Barron specifically renounced this in one of his many word on Fire homilies a few years ago. People were saying 2016 was “a choice between two evils” and to “chose the lesser evil”.

Bishop Barron said under no circumstance may you ever chose an evil. It does not matter if one is quantitatively more evil in your opinion because you would still be chose an evil which is morally wrong.

As such, if you have determined both candidates are evil, you cannot ever vote for them because you would be consenting to an evil.

There is no such thing as a “lesser evil”. It’s like saying you are choosing to venially sin instead of mortally sinning… no you don’t chose either because both are sin.

The bigger question here is how to determine if a politician is objectively evil and therefore cannot be voted for. In my calculus I determined Trump and Hillary to be of this evil category and thus couldn’t vote for them

 

[TK421]

@Dolphin
I didn’t vote for either of them as well (the mainstream views of the parties are intolerable), but could you link that homily by Bishop Barron because that is not what I have previously read about voting.

 

[Dolphin]

If I find it I will, my pastor was the one who told myself and my parish about it during a homily of his then I went home and listened to Barron. I wanna say it was a homily from 2015 or 2016

 

[upant]

The pope’s been adamant that other issues are just as important as abortion, including “the lives of the poor, those already born, the destitute, the abandoned and the underprivileged, the vulnerable infirm and elderly exposed to covert euthanasia, the victims of human trafficking, new forms of slavery, and every form of rejection…”

yet he and the US bishops, just recently, prioritized abortion as the premier issue.

Archbishop Robert J. Carlson of St. Louis told CNS it was “beautiful” when the pope explained why life was the number one, most important issue, “because if you’re not alive you can’t do anything else
(bold mine)

So. Methinks you are safe voting Democrat.

it is clear, abortion is the number 1 issue, but, it isn’t the Dems only anti-catholic policy. they have quite a few that disagree with Rome.

it isn’t a coincidence that the Democrats tried to take God out of their platform and then claim to be the party of the “nones”.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

yet he and the US bishops, just recently, prioritized abortion as the premier issue.

But we don’t get to vote for issues by themselves. We vote for people. Saying that abortion is the “premier issue” does not mean one may never vote for a pro-choice candidate.

 

[TheLittleLady]

We are free to vote for any party.

You may wish to read the entire document that our Bishops have written for you and me:

https://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/faithful-citizenship/upload/forming-consciences-for-faithful-citizenship.pdf

From the US Bishops:

35. There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position
even on policies promoting an intrinsically evil act may reasonably decide to vote for that
candidate for other morally grave reasons. Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil.

36. When all candidates hold a position that promotes an intrinsically evil act, the
conscientious voter faces a dilemma. The voter may decide to take the extraordinary step of not voting for any candidate or, after careful deliberation, may decide to vote for the candidate
deemed less likely to advance such a morally flawed position and more likely to pursue other
authentic human goods.

 

[Nepperhan]

as the article says, " plenty of Senate Democrats agree with them. They’ve adopted a strategy of interrogating President Trump’s judicial nominees about Catholic beliefs and associations .

I think the questioning is about someone’s stances rather than if the person is Catholic or not. That’s not questioning ‘Catholic beliefs’. However, blocking a chaplain because he is a Catholic priest can only be blocking Catholic beliefs.

 

[upant]

I think the questioning is about someone’s stances rather than if the person is Catholic or not. That’s not questioning ‘Catholic beliefs’. However, blocking a chaplain because he is a Catholic priest can only be blocking Catholic beliefs.

you seem to be splitting hairs, they are attacking Catholics in a politically correct way. they were attacked because the church was alive in them. they were attacking church teachings on various subjects. why else would one fault the KOC?

Dianne Feinstein told Amy Coney Barrett, now confirmed to the Seventh Circuit, “The dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s a concern.”

 

[Kindnessmatters]

On such issues, I am also pulled toward Republican. Trump"s policy is dramatically increasing labor jobs, bringing manufacturing jobs back and levelling the playing field for American made goods.

As for poverty he is reducing joblessness dramatically, increasing wealth throughout the country. Far less people are dependent on food stamps and unemployment benefits.

Democrat policies such as unsustainably high minimum wages have killed jobs wherever implemented

 

[TheLittleLady]

Far less people are dependent on food stamps and unemployment benefits.

Fewer people receive SNAP benefits since 2013, long before Mr Trump was a candidate.

Mr Trump is suggesting cuts to SNAP in the billions of dollars.

AP FACT CHECK: Trump on drop in food stamp rolls

WASHINGTON (AP) — A look at President Donald Trump's statement Tuesday night on food stamps and how it compares with the facts:

apnews.com

About employment:

AP FACT CHECK: Trump exaggerates his role in black job gains

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is exaggerating his role in bringing economic gains to black Americans.

apnews.com

Take a few moments to fact check no matter what you read or hear or have tweeted to you.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

As for poverty he is reducing joblessness dramatically, increasing wealth throughout the country. Far less people are dependent on food stamps and unemployment benefits.

The economy has been heading in that direction since long before Trump. He gets credit like the rooster gets credit for the sun rising. As for wealth, it has gone up, but not equally. Wealth inequality is the highest it has been since the 1920’s. And much of that wealth has been funded by deficit spending - stealing from the grandchildren of those who benefit today. And if unemployment benefits are decreasing, that may not be because of less need, but rather because of tightening requirements.

 

[Kindnessmatters]

The AP is no longer an unbiased news source. Federal unemployment and food stamp figures are accurate and indisputable.

 

[Kindnessmatters]

This is just not a supportable argument. There is direct correlation between specific policy and trade changes by Trump and the unprecedented economic success of his presidency. The Obama growth was the slowest economic recovery ever recorded

Further, look at American cities. Those with the most poor, most homeless, most unemployment and crime, have all been Democrat run for decades. The policies do not work.