Can Catholics Vote Democrat?

[estesbob]

For those who are trying to rationalize voting for Wendy Davis for Texas Governor remember she filibustered a bill that would have forbidden aborting babies at this stage of development:

http://www.babycenter.com/i/m/stages/popups/20/index.jpg

 

[Path_Finder]

No, a good Catholic votes for candidates who are against:

1. Abortion
2. Euthanasia
3. Embryonic Stem Cell Research
4. Human Cloning
5. Homosexual “Marriage”

Note: there are other evils too, but these are the top 5 NON-NEGOTIABLES that affect American Politics.

catholic.com/sites/default/files/voters_guide_for_serious_catholics.pdf

Anytime a Catholic votes for person who’s views are opposite to Catholic teaching according to the above guide, the Catholic is committing a grave sin. If you know its grave and vote anyway, then you commit a mortal sin.

For a practicing Catholic, these are not political opinions, they are evil. Voting for candidates who are in favor of these things is voting for the devil’s candidate.

Catholics must vote Catholic first. Party is not relevant. I know Catholics who are democrats and vote for pro life candidates in the primaries. Then, if the pro choice one wins, they vote pro life in the election, if if that means voting republican.

You should be Catholic first, a family person 2nd, an American third, and party last.

But too many people base their values off their party instead of their religion. The party should be influenced by the people, not the people by their party.

This is well stated. On issues I find important, I’m not thinking about party-lines.

I’m thinking about that issue that I or my faith finds important and on who deals with it most effectively.

Also, there are guidelines as to how to vote. Unless someone is really in the dark about how candidates and parties are towards the issue, those guidelines are helpful.

For the record, I believe in North Dakota and Louisiana and possibly other places, you may actually have some, for example, pro-life Democrats. It’s just that in general, nationally and in Washington DC, such positions seem rare.

Article on black female Democrat in Louisiana who sponsored a pro-life bill: christianpost.com/news/this-black-female-democratic-lawmaker-says-abortion-wont-solve-problems-of-black-community-interview-121877/

 

[markomalley]

This is well stated. On issues I find important, I’m not thinking about party-lines.

I’m thinking about that issue that I or my faith finds important and on who deals with it most effectively.

Also, there are guidelines as to how to vote. Unless someone is really in the dark about how candidates and parties are towards the issue, those guidelines are helpful.

For the record, I believe in North Dakota and Louisiana and possibly other places, you may actually have some, for example, pro-life Democrats. It’s just that in general, nationally and in Washington DC, such positions seem rare.

Article on black female Democrat in Louisiana who sponsored a pro-life bill: christianpost.com/news/this-black-female-democratic-lawmaker-says-abortion-wont-solve-problems-of-black-community-interview-121877/

I am glad that there are some authentically pro life Democrats in office.

One thing that I always consider is not only the candidate but also the leadership that the candidate will support. For example, a candidate could be 1000% pro life, but if he/she votes to make Nancy Pelosi or Debbie Wasserman-Schultz the Speaker of the House, that means that the legislative agenda of the pro abortion Speaker will be advanced, regardless of the pro life positions of your candidate.

 

[Mulligan2]

No, a good Catholic votes for candidates who are against:

1. Abortion
2. Euthanasia
3. Embryonic Stem Cell Research
4. Human Cloning
5. Homosexual “Marriage”

Note: there are other evils too, but these are the top 5 NON-NEGOTIABLES that affect American Politics.

catholic.com/sites/default/files/voters_guide_for_serious_catholics.pdf

Anytime a Catholic votes for person who’s views are opposite to Catholic teaching according to the above guide, the Catholic is committing a grave sin. If you know its grave and vote anyway, then you commit a mortal sin.

For a practicing Catholic, these are not political opinions, they are evil. Voting for candidates who are in favor of these things is voting for the devil’s candidate.

Catholics must vote Catholic first. Party is not relevant. I know Catholics who are democrats and vote for pro life candidates in the primaries. Then, if the pro choice one wins, they vote pro life in the election, if if that means voting republican.

You should be Catholic first, a family person 2nd, an American third, and party last.

But too many people base their values off their party instead of their religion. The party should be influenced by the people, not the people by their party.

Can you please provide a link to where Pope Francis said this?

 

[estesbob]

Can you please provide a link to where Pope Francis said this?

Homosexual Marriage

In 2010, Francis championed against a bill for same-sex marriage and gay adoption, according to the National Catholic Register.
“[T]he Argentine people will face a situation whose outcome can seriously harm the family," he wrote to the four monasteries in Argentina. "At stake is the identity and survival of the family: father, mother and children. At stake are the lives of many children who will be discriminated against in advance, and deprived of their human development given by a father and a mother and willed by God. At stake is the total rejection of God’s law engraved in our hearts.”
He went on to describe it as a “‘move’ of the Father of Lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God” and asked for lawmakers to “not act in error.”

Abortion:

. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. 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.

Benedict XVI

Gravity of other issues:

Obviously, we have other important issues facing us this fall: the economy, the war in Iraq, immigration justice. But we can’t build a healthy society while ignoring the routine and very profitable legalized homicide that goes on every day against America’s unborn children. The right to life is foundational. Every other right depends on it. Efforts to reduce abortions, or to create alternatives to abortion, or to foster an environment where more women will choose to keep their unborn child, can have great merit–but not if they serve to cover over or distract from the brutality and fundamental injustice of abortion itself. We should remember that one of the crucial things that set early Christians apart from the pagan culture around them was their rejection of abortion and infanticide. Yet for thirty-five years I’ve watched prominent “pro-choice” Catholics justify themselves with the kind of moral and verbal gymnastics that should qualify as an Olympic event. All they’ve really done is capitulate to Roe v. Wade.

*Read more: *http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/pontifications/2008/08/while-cardinal-george-the-pres.html#ixzz39dBxKy3a

Archbishop Charles Chaput

Voting for Abortion Canidate:

*No, you can never vote for someone who favors absolutely what’s called the ‘right to choice’ of a woman to destroy human life in her womb, or the right to a procured abortion," he said.

“You may in some circumstances where you don’t have any candidate who is proposing to eliminate all abortion, choose the candidate who will most limit this grave evil in our country, but you could never justify voting for a candidate who not only does not want to limit abortion but believes that it should be available to everyone,” he said.*
**
Cardinal Burke

 

[lynnvinc]

For those who are trying to rationalize voting for Wendy Davis for Texas Governor remember she filibustered a bill that would have forbidden aborting babies at this stage of development:

http://www.babycenter.com/i/m/stages/popups/20/index.jpg

Using that picture to suggesting Wendy Davis is somehow anti-baby is pretty offensive. “Pro-choice” is not the same thing as “pro-abortion”; it is a stance does not want to put women who have abortions in prison. Considering that they sometimes rape women in prison and do not provide amenities like soap down here in Texas, unless the prisoners pay for it, and give strict vegetarians food they cannot eat so they end up eating just crackers and water, I really don’t want to put them in prison either.

Now just put the world in that womb picture to understand what Abbott would be aborting, including promoting miscarriages, stillbirths, birth defects, killing of adults and the elderly, as well as harming and killing children and fetuses.

It’s a matter of the lesser of 2 evils. And if Wendy is a true Democrat, then she should be in favor of helping the poor and helping women, which may end up reducing abortions more than what Abbott could do by working to make it illegal. (Making abortions illegal does not mean they will cease.)

 

[Mulligan2]

Homosexual Marriage

In 2010, Francis championed against a bill for same-sex marriage and gay adoption, according to the National Catholic Register.
“[T]he Argentine people will face a situation whose outcome can seriously harm the family," he wrote to the four monasteries in Argentina. "At stake is the identity and survival of the family: father, mother and children. At stake are the lives of many children who will be discriminated against in advance, and deprived of their human development given by a father and a mother and willed by God. At stake is the total rejection of God’s law engraved in our hearts.”
He went on to describe it as a “‘move’ of the Father of Lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God” and asked for lawmakers to “not act in error.”

Abortion:

. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. 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.

Benedict XVI

Gravity of other issues:

Obviously, we have other important issues facing us this fall: the economy, the war in Iraq, immigration justice. But we can’t build a healthy society while ignoring the routine and very profitable legalized homicide that goes on every day against America’s unborn children. The right to life is foundational. Every other right depends on it. Efforts to reduce abortions, or to create alternatives to abortion, or to foster an environment where more women will choose to keep their unborn child, can have great merit–but not if they serve to cover over or distract from the brutality and fundamental injustice of abortion itself. We should remember that one of the crucial things that set early Christians apart from the pagan culture around them was their rejection of abortion and infanticide. Yet for thirty-five years I’ve watched prominent “pro-choice” Catholics justify themselves with the kind of moral and verbal gymnastics that should qualify as an Olympic event. All they’ve really done is capitulate to Roe v. Wade.

*Read more: *http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/pontifications/2008/08/while-cardinal-george-the-pres.html#ixzz39dBxKy3a

Archbishop Charles Chaput

Voting for Abortion Canidate:

No, you can never vote for someone who favors absolutely what’s called the ‘right to choice’ of a woman to destroy human life in her womb, or the right to a procured abortion," he said.

“You may in some circumstances where you don’t have any candidate who is proposing to eliminate all abortion, choose the candidate who will most limit this grave evil in our country, but you could never justify voting for a candidate who not only does not want to limit abortion but believes that it should be available to everyone,” he said.
**
Cardinal Burke

Thanks for posting, but that wasn’t what I was asking. I was not asking what an archbishop or a retired pope said on the topic.

Has Pope Francis (while he has been pope - not prior to becoming pope) issued voting guidelines for Catholics?

 

[estesbob]

Using that picture to suggesting Wendy Davis is somehow anti-baby is pretty offensive. “Pro-choice” is not the same thing as “pro-abortion”; it is a stance does not want to put women who have abortions in prison. Considering that they sometimes rape women in prison and do not provide amenities like soap down here in Texas, unless the prisoners pay for it, and give strict vegetarians food they cannot eat so they end up eating just crackers and water, I really don’t want to put them in prison either.

Now just put the world in that womb picture to understand what Abbott would be aborting, including promoting miscarriages, stillbirths, birth defects, killing of adults and the elderly, as well as harming and killing children and fetuses.

It’s a matter of the lesser of 2 evils. And if Wendy is a true Democrat, then she should be in favor of helping the poor and helping women, which may end up reducing abortions more than what Abbott could do by working to make it illegal. (Making abortions illegal does not mean they will cease.)

She is pro-abortion. She filibustered a bill that would have protected the children in the stage of development I posted. Caring about the poor or wanting to help women can not mitigate ones support of this abject evil

 

[estesbob]

Thanks for posting, but that wasn’t what I was asking. I was not asking what an archbishop or a retired pope said on the topic.

Has Pope Francis (while he has been pope - not prior to becoming pope) issued voting guidelines for Catholics?

No-why should he? Do you think they change from Pope to Pope?

Every quote I posted was from a member of the Magisterium. Everyone one of part of the unbroken line of apostles stretching back to Peter. Their teaching authority is not lessened if they retire or are not Pope.

 

[Mulligan2]

No-why should he? Do you think they change from Pope to Pope?

Every quote I posted was from a member of the Magisterium. Everyone one of part of the unbroken line of apostles stretching back to Peter. Their teaching authority is not lessened if they retire or are not Pope.

I didn’t think Pope Francis had issued anything like this. Thank you for verifying.

 

[JimG]

It would certainly not be a wise move for Pope Francis or any pope to issue voting guidelines for U.S. Catholics. What has happened to draw Catholics away from the Democratic party is that for the past twenty years or more, the party has taken official positions increasingly opposed to Catholic–and human–moral values.

 

[Suudy]

Using that picture to suggesting Wendy Davis is somehow anti-baby is pretty offensive. “Pro-choice” is not the same thing as “pro-abortion”; it is a stance does not want to put women who have abortions in prison.

I don’t know of anyone that wants abortion illegal to make the de facto stance that women are jailed for abortion. Indeed, it seems to me the woman is the least culpable. I’d like to see the doctors and his assistants punished, and those that provide financial or material assistance. Like the Church teaches about sin, there are 3 parts: grave matter, full knowledge, and full consent. Abortion certainly is grave matter. Not all women may have full knowledge, but all doctors have had the training and know exactly what they are doing. And for consent, doctors are not forced to perform abortions. But frequently women are coerced or pressured into abortions, either through abusive relationships. pressure from family and friends, or just through fear their judgement is clouded. Of all that are involved in an abortion, the pregnant woman is more often than not the least culpable. (Though certainly there are women who know exactly what they are doing and do it anyways.)

… I really don’t want to put them in prison either.

Me either. Women are often the victims of abortionists as well.

Now just put the world in that womb picture to understand what Abbott would be aborting, including promoting miscarriages, stillbirths, birth defects, killing of adults and the elderly, as well as harming and killing children and fetuses.

Miscarriage, stillbirths, and birth defects are not intentional acts. Do you really think Abbot desires an increase in miscarriages, and he the positions he hold are done with that specific intent in mind?

Now, consider the pro-“choice” person. Do they hold their pro-“choice” position to specifically support a woman’s “right” to “choose” to kill an innocent human being? If this isn’t clear, I fear I’m at a loss on how to help.

It’s a matter of the lesser of 2 evils. And if Wendy is a true Democrat, then she should be in favor of helping the poor and helping women, which may end up reducing abortions more than what Abbott could do by working to make it illegal. (Making abortions illegal does not mean they will cease.)

Making rape illegal does not mean it will cease. Should we legalize rape?

Make murder illegal does not mean it will cease. Should we legalize murder?

 

[estesbob]

It would certainly not be a wise move for Pope Francis or any pope to issue voting guidelines for U.S. Catholics. What has happened to draw Catholics away from the Democratic party is that for the past twenty years or more, the party has taken official positions increasingly opposed to Catholic–and human–moral values.

Or as Archbishop Burke put it:

At this point, the Democratic Party risks transforming itself definitively into a “party of death” due to its choices on bioethical issues, as Ramesh Ponnuru wrote in his book "The Party of Death: The Democrats, the Media, the Courts and the Disregard for Human Life."And I say this with a heavy heart, because we all know that the Democrats were the party that helped our Catholic immigrant parents and grandparents to better integrate into and prosper in American society. But it’s not the same anymore.Nonetheless, there are among Democrats some pro-lifers, but they are, unfortunately, rare.

 

[MJE]

Using that picture to suggesting Wendy Davis is somehow anti-baby is pretty offensive. “Pro-choice” is not the same thing as “pro-abortion”; it is a stance does not want to put women who have abortions in prison. Considering that they sometimes rape women in prison and do not provide amenities like soap down here in Texas, unless the prisoners pay for it, and give strict vegetarians food they cannot eat so they end up eating just crackers and water, I really don’t want to put them in prison either.

Now just put the world in that womb picture to understand what Abbott would be aborting, including promoting miscarriages, stillbirths, birth defects, killing of adults and the elderly, as well as harming and killing children and fetuses.

It’s a matter of the lesser of 2 evils. And if Wendy is a true Democrat, then she should be in favor of helping the poor and helping women, which may end up reducing abortions more than what Abbott could do by working to make it illegal. (Making abortions illegal does not mean they will cease.)

Tell us about the legislation & those who sponsor it that directs police/sheriff to arrest and and imprison post-abortive women.

Being offended by the picture of the baby in utero reminds me of the time Katie Pavlich, on a tv panel, criticized the Democrats, who claim to be pro-woman, for glorifying Ted Kennedy. He left a young woman to die in his car while he went to get legal help. The “pro women” Dem’s were offended & outraged Pavlich brought up this incident.

 

[lynnvinc]

Tell us about the legislation & those who sponsor it that directs police/sheriff to arrest and and imprison post-abortive women.

That would be the legislation they are aiming for. Illegal means one has to go to prison and/or pay a fine. Even the mildest offense here in Texas, a Class C Misdemeanor can carry a jail sentence as well as a fine.

Being offended by the picture of the baby in utero …

I’m offended by the way it is used – to lambast “pro-choice” candidate. And it wasn’t that picture, so much as this poster:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

It was that poster that really settled it for me – to vote against Abbott (and by default for Wendy). I hate abortions and I hate dirty politics. I’m pretty sure Wendy will be reducing more abortions than poison-all-Texans (esp the poor and minorities) Abbott. He appears to me to be a maniac set on deregulating environmental laws, allowing people to be poisoned, and for those laws he cannot deregulate fast enough, putting people in charge who will commit fraud and cover up the problems…as they did with alpha radiation in the Houston drinking water, and several other atrocities I know of.

I could never ever vote for such a pro-death candidate.

While there are some good Republicans to me the Republican party (which is not longer the party of Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt) is a super-pro-death party.

 

[MJE]

That would be the legislation they are aiming for. Illegal means one has to go to prison and/or pay a fine. Even the mildest offense here in Texas, a Class C Misdemeanor can carry a jail sentence as well as a fine.

I’m offended by the way it is used – to lambast “pro-choice” candidate. And it wasn’t that picture, so much as this poster:

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media...ogressive,q_80,w_636/b9hngznulpkiym3roaxv.png

It was that poster that really settled it for me – to vote against Abbott (and by default for Wendy). I hate abortions and I hate dirty politics. I’m pretty sure Wendy will be reducing more abortions than poison-all-Texans (esp the poor and minorities) Abbott. He appears to me to be a** maniac **set on deregulating environmental laws, allowing people to be poisoned, and for those laws he cannot deregulate fast enough, putting people in charge who will commit fraud and cover up the problems…as they did with alpha radiation in the Houston drinking water, and several other atrocities I know of.

I could never ever vote for such a pro-death candidate.

While there are some good Republicans to me the Republican party (which is not longer the party of Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt) is a super-pro-death party.

We certainly do not need any “maniacs” in office!
I am anti-maniac!

 

[lynnvinc]

We certainly do not need any “maniacs” in office!
I am anti-maniac!

 

[_Abyssinia]

That would be the legislation they are aiming for. Illegal means one has to go to prison and/or pay a fine. Even the mildest offense here in Texas, a Class C Misdemeanor can carry a jail sentence as well as a fine.

I’m offended by the way it is used – to lambast “pro-choice” candidate. And it wasn’t that picture, so much as this poster:

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media...ogressive,q_80,w_636/b9hngznulpkiym3roaxv.png

It was that poster that really settled it for me – to vote against Abbott (and by default for Wendy). I hate abortions and I hate dirty politics. I’m pretty sure Wendy will be reducing more abortions than poison-all-Texans (esp the poor and minorities) Abbott. He appears to me to be a maniac set on deregulating environmental laws, allowing people to be poisoned, and for those laws he cannot deregulate fast enough, putting people in charge who will commit fraud and cover up the problems…as they did with alpha radiation in the Houston drinking water, and several other atrocities I know of.

I could never ever vote for such a pro-death candidate.

While there are some good Republicans to me the Republican party (which is not longer the party of Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt) is a super-pro-death party.

How do you think Wendy Davies would reduce more abortion than Greg Abbott? What policies is she advocating that would result in fewer abortions?

You talk about poison, some babies being poisoned to death in abortion clinics.

What about the claims you make regarding Greg Abbott?

 

[Suudy]

That would be the legislation they are aiming for. Illegal means one has to go to prison and/or pay a fine. Even the mildest offense here in Texas, a Class C Misdemeanor can carry a jail sentence as well as a fine.

What legislation has been proposed that would jail a woman for procuring an abortion? How do you know that is “the legislation they are aiming for”?

While there are some good Republicans to me the Republican party (which is not longer the party of Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt) is a super-pro-death party.

Name a single Republican that advocates a policy with the intent to destroy innocent human life. Every single pro-“choice” candidate (Davis included) supports a policy that intentionally allows people to “choose” to kill innocent human beings.

 

[Path_Finder]

That would be the legislation they are aiming for. Illegal means one has to go to prison and/or pay a fine. Even the mildest offense here in Texas, a Class C Misdemeanor can carry a jail sentence as well as a fine.

I’m offended by the way it is used – to lambast “pro-choice” candidate. And it wasn’t that picture, so much as this poster:

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media...ogressive,q_80,w_636/b9hngznulpkiym3roaxv.png

It was that poster that really settled it for me – to vote against Abbott (and by default for Wendy). I hate abortions and I hate dirty politics. I’m pretty sure Wendy will be reducing more abortions than poison-all-Texans (esp the poor and minorities) Abbott. He appears to me to be a maniac set on deregulating environmental laws, allowing people to be poisoned, and for those laws he cannot deregulate fast enough, putting people in charge who will commit fraud and cover up the problems…as they did with alpha radiation in the Houston drinking water, and several other atrocities I know of.

I could never ever vote for such a pro-death candidate.

While there are some good Republicans to me the Republican party (which is not longer the party of Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt) is a super-pro-death party.

Wisconsin, Mississippi, Alabama, Arizona and even New Jersey all have seen abortion clinics shut down meaning less abortions. Republicans are largely responsible for this. If one doesn’t want to see the truth, so be it.