Can Catholics Vote Democrat?

  • Thread starter Thread starter adawgj
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=A_RhSLbtkqwC&oi=fnd&pg=PR1&dq=criminal+abortion&ots=Hv_b61M-Eb&sig=TJ–S3SHnFYZK5plNmJw29aYfes#v=onepage&q=criminal%20abortion&f=false
*Criminal Abortion: Its Nature, Its Evidence, and Its Law
  • By Horatio Robinson Storer, Franklin Fiske Heard, 1868.
    Page 28:
    “From these figures, there can be drawn but one conclusion – that criminal abortion prevails to an enormous extent in New York, and that it is steadily and rapidly increasing.”
books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=8N6WWLM1ZAsC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=taussig+abortion&ots=qrHDBkAfbO&sig=9whXMi31vJxvbqtGOY3OUeRdrdk#v=onepage&q=taussig%20abortion&f=false
The Prevention and treatment of abortion
By Frederick Joseph Taussig, 1910, page 4.
]This would make the ratio of abortions to confinements [women assigned to bed rest near the end of their pregnancy] 1 to 2.3." (Total “abortions” – criminal and spontaneous
Page 78:
*“It is surprising, then, that we find an estimate of 80,000 criminal abortions a year in New York, 6,000 to 10,000 a year in Chicago, and like numbers elsewhere?” *

ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.28.5.621 – The paper is free online.
Stix, R.E., Wiehl, D.G. Abortion and the Public Health. American Journal of Public Health, Volume 28, Pages 621-628, May 1938.
See Table I, page 622, showing estimates of % of pregnancies ending in illegal abortion for different sampling locations. Estimates range from 2.1% to 22.1%.
Compare this to CDC’s current estimate of the “abortion ratio,” that is, the number of abortions per 1,000 live births: 228. To estimate the total number of “viable pregnancies” ending in abortion, the math is 228 / (1000 + 228) = 0.186 or 18.6%. These estimates are within the range of estimates reported in Table I of the Stix and Wiehl paper.

I hope you see that I’m not just making these numbers up. These are peer-reviewed scientific publications, all prior to 1940 and well before any widespread movement to legalize abortion. I am using objective, scientific methods to try to inform what I’m saying.

If you want, tomorrow I’ll go through the incidence estimates by state of red/blue affiliation to show how overturning Roe v. Wade is unlikely to make a significant difference in the overall incidence of abortion.
 
ishii said:
Vote for the person, and you vote for the party -
Click to expand...
No. Republican rhetoric play no better to me than Democrat rhetoric. I will reject this particular bit of partisan rhetoric in favor of my faith. I would encourage all Catholics, Democrat and Republican to re-examine each year whether your faith guides your vote or your politics guide your faith. The Catholic Church makes a better moral teacher than either party.
 
Path_Finder said:
That’s exactly what I’m doing, looking at the Church, looking at the non-negotiables, same-sex marriage, abortion and so on. I think many of us have made it clear we vote on the issues not the party. That part is your own projection.
Click to expand...
“I have never understood the expression non-negotiable values. Values are values, and that is it. I can’t say that, of the fingers of a hand, there is one less useful than the rest. Whereby I do not understand in what sense there may be negotiable values.”

Pope Francis

I guess the Holy Father lacks the clarity of the Republican Party. I will stick with the Church and the wisdom of the Holy Father.
 
pnewton said:
No. Republican rhetoric play no better to me than Democrat rhetoric. I will reject this particular bit of partisan rhetoric in favor of my faith. I would encourage all Catholics, Democrat and Republican to re-examine each year whether your faith guides your vote or your politics guide your faith. The Catholic Church makes a better moral teacher than either party.
Click to expand...
The difference is clear,

I will not support the killing of the unborn, I will not support the Democratic Party, historically, the party of slavery and the racist Ku Klux Klan organization.

This is what the Church tells me.
 
pnewton said:
“I have never understood the expression non-negotiable values. Values are values, and that is it. I can’t say that, of the fingers of a hand, there is one less useful than the rest. Whereby I do not understand in what sense there may be negotiable values.”

Pope Francis

I guess the Holy Father lacks the clarity of the Republican Party. I will stick with the Church and the wisdom of the Holy Father.
Click to expand...
I guess if you don’t understand Church instruction, you don’t have the right to be sermonizing to others about what they should or should NOT be following.

What do they say about taking statements out of context.

** Sorry P. Newton, I will follow the Church and NOT be for Murder and not following P. Newton’s verbal gymnastics that seems to bash one party.**

I look at the make up of the state of Texas, and you know, it’s like what you once said to me, I kind of wonder about racism.
 
pnewton said:
“I have never understood the expression non-negotiable values. Values are values, and that is it. I can’t say that, of the fingers of a hand, there is one less useful than the rest. Whereby I do not understand in what sense there may be negotiable values.”

Pope Francis

I guess the Holy Father lacks the clarity of the Republican Party. I will stick with the Church and the wisdom of the Holy Father.
Click to expand...
I guess if you don’t understand Church instruction, you don’t have the right to be sermonizing to others about what they should or should NOT be following.

The Holy Father says this:

"Defend the unborn against abortion even if they persecute you, calumniate you, set traps for you, take you to court or kill you. No child should be deprived of the right to be born, the right to be fed, the right to go to school."

That’s pretty simple and to the point, I will take Pope Francis’s statements, not someone who seems to use quotes to opportunistically talk those down who are defending the right to be born, the right to be fed, the right to school.

What do they say about taking statements out of context.

Sorry P. Newton, I will follow the Church and NOT be for Murder and not following verbal gymnastics.

Racism is wrong, I simply have problems with the history of the DemocratIC party’s past as well. And I don’t think it’s in the past either.

I will follow what Pope Francis says regarding abortion, that it’s wrong. Not using some quote of his that somehow he doesn’t understand the non-negotiables.

** “Every child that isn’t born, but is unjustly condemned to be aborted, has the face of Jesus Christ, has the face of the Lord.”** - Pope Francis

I will take Pope Francis’ words and not vote for the Democrat Party that condemns children to die.

How interesting, that some quotes are used but not others. Oh dear.
 
fnr said:
books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=A_RhSLbtkqwC&oi=fnd&pg=PR1&dq=criminal+abortion&ots=Hv_b61M-Eb&sig=TJ–S3SHnFYZK5plNmJw29aYfes#v=onepage&q=criminal%20abortion&f=false
*Criminal Abortion: Its Nature, Its Evidence, and Its Law
  • By Horatio Robinson Storer, Franklin Fiske Heard, 1868.
    Page 28:
    “From these figures, there can be drawn but one conclusion – that criminal abortion prevails to an enormous extent in New York, and that it is steadily and rapidly increasing.”
books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=8N6WWLM1ZAsC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=taussig+abortion&ots=qrHDBkAfbO&sig=9whXMi31vJxvbqtGOY3OUeRdrdk#v=onepage&q=taussig%20abortion&f=false
The Prevention and treatment of abortion
By Frederick Joseph Taussig, 1910, page 4.
]This would make the ratio of abortions to confinements [women assigned to bed rest near the end of their pregnancy] 1 to 2.3." (Total “abortions” – criminal and spontaneous
Page 78:
*“It is surprising, then, that we find an estimate of 80,000 criminal abortions a year in New York, 6,000 to 10,000 a year in Chicago, and like numbers elsewhere?” *

ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.28.5.621 – The paper is free online.
Stix, R.E., Wiehl, D.G. Abortion and the Public Health. American Journal of Public Health, Volume 28, Pages 621-628, May 1938.
See Table I, page 622, showing estimates of % of pregnancies ending in illegal abortion for different sampling locations. Estimates range from 2.1% to 22.1%.
Compare this to CDC’s current estimate of the “abortion ratio,” that is, the number of abortions per 1,000 live births: 228. To estimate the total number of “viable pregnancies” ending in abortion, the math is 228 / (1000 + 228) = 0.186 or 18.6%. These estimates are within the range of estimates reported in Table I of the Stix and Wiehl paper.

I hope you see that I’m not just making these numbers up. These are peer-reviewed scientific publications, all prior to 1940 and well before any widespread movement to legalize abortion. I am using objective, scientific methods to try to inform what I’m saying.

If you want, tomorrow I’ll go through the incidence estimates by state of red/blue affiliation to show how overturning Roe v. Wade is unlikely to make a significant difference in the overall incidence of abortion.
Click to expand...
I do not care for you to take up a lot of time in your research, I respect that. However, I’m not sure if an 1868 study was peer reviewed and I’m not seeing figures such as 500,000-1,000,000.

This does not change the fact that the US Government should not be aiding Planned Parenthood, pioneered by Eugenicist Margaret Sanger.

I believe too, if Wisconsin or New Jersey has defunded Planned Parenthood, perhaps it might be valuable to see how stats from 2012 go instead of 1931.
 
P Newton: Just so there is no mistake, I hope you understand Pope Francis does see abortion as wrong.
 
6.6. The total abortion incidence is 1 abortion to 2.7 pregnancies and 1 abortion to 1.6 confinements. This is according to the histories of our abortion cases. The relation of hospital abortion to hospital confinements is as 1:5.3 and stillbirths to abortions as 1:5.2.
Click to expand...
FNR, this is a hospital, NOT the general population hence, talking about stats that are not helpful.
 
zz912 said:
EXCUSES FOR VOTING FOR PRO-ABORTION POLITICIANS
  1. National Republicans aren’t “really” pro-life, so it’s okay if I vote for the virulently pro-abortion party.
  2. Specific candidate isn’t “really” pro-life, or I don’t believe his supposed change of belief, so it’s okay if I vote for the virulently pro-abortion party.
  3. My deacon/priest/bishop/cardinal told me or wrote me a letter telling me it was okay to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  4. I’m not a one-issue voter, so I can ignore the Church’s teaching and vote for the virulently pro-abortion politician.
  5. Republicans (at any level) have not passed enough pro-life laws (as decided by me), so I can vote for the political party that is virulently pro-abortion.
  6. Republicans (at any level) have not had enough success on pro-life issues (as decided by me), so I can vote for the political party that is virulently pro-abortion.
  7. Roe vs. Wade is still the law of the land even though most Supreme Court justices were appointed by the Republicans, therefore Republicans aren’t serious about abortion, so I can vote for the political party that is virulently pro-abortion.
  8. I found a Church document that mentioned proportionate reasons in voting, so I personally judged support for a higher minimum wage (or other social justice cause) was on equal footing with abortion, and I can vote for the political party that is virulently pro-abortion.
  9. I personally believe that Democratic policies will reduce abortions, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  10. We can’t do anything about abortion until we change the hearts and minds of the people, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  11. You can’t legislate morality, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  12. People will still have abortions even if you make them illegal, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  13. We can’t end abortion until we address the root causes, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  14. I can’t impose my beliefs on other people, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  15. There isn’t any difference between the parties, so it is okay for me to vote for the virulently pro-abortion party.
Click to expand...
I would like to add another reason to this excellent list:
  1. The Pro-Life movement is in the tank for the Republican party (even though all pro-life legislation has had the overwhelming support of Republicans and overwhelming opposition from Democrats).
 
saintjohnxxiii said:
I would like to add another reason to this excellent list:
  1. The Pro-Life movement is in the tank for the Republican party (even though all pro-life legislation has had the overwhelming support of Republicans and overwhelming opposition from Democrats).
Click to expand...
We are definitely in the reason 13 phase of the thread with a lot of 16 thrown in also.
 
fnr said:
If you want, tomorrow I’ll go through the incidence estimates by state of red/blue affiliation to show how overturning Roe v. Wade is unlikely to make a significant difference in the overall incidence of abortion.
Click to expand...
Personally I’m curious about this. I read an opinion article that stated that if Roe vs. Wade was overturned today, abortion would still be legal in 40 states. He didn’t provide a source or any reasoning behind it so I was curious if it was accurate.

This thread reminds me of this interview:

Rise of culture wars has meant ignoring the common good
 
pnewton said:
“I have never understood the expression non-negotiable values. Values are values, and that is it. I can’t say that, of the fingers of a hand, there is one less useful than the rest. Whereby I do not understand in what sense there may be negotiable values.”

Pope Francis

I guess the Holy Father lacks the clarity of the Republican Party. I will stick with the Church and the wisdom of the Holy Father.
Click to expand...
In what way are the Holy Father’s words stating that there are negotiable values??? In this statement he is supporting even on a stronger level that we as Catholics are held to a higher standard. He is not refuting the “non-negotiable” lists, he is securing that values in general are non-negotiable.

How does this make your case and not those of the pro-life voters???

Along with the liberal press, you have fallen for the misinterpretations of his words.
 
Path_Finder said:
I guess if you don’t understand Church instruction, you don’t have the right to be sermonizing to others about what they should or should NOT be following.

The Holy Father says this:

"Defend the unborn against abortion even if they persecute you, calumniate you, set traps for you, take you to court or kill you. No child should be deprived of the right to be born, the right to be fed, the right to go to school."

That’s pretty simple and to the point, I will take Pope Francis’s statements, not someone who seems to use quotes to opportunistically talk those down who are defending the right to be born, the right to be fed, the right to school.

What do they say about taking statements out of context.

Sorry P. Newton, I will follow the Church and NOT be for Murder and not following verbal gymnastics.

Racism is wrong, I simply have problems with the history of the DemocratIC party’s past as well. And I don’t think it’s in the past either.

I will follow what Pope Francis says regarding abortion, that it’s wrong. Not using some quote of his that somehow he doesn’t understand the non-negotiables.

** “Every child that isn’t born, but is unjustly condemned to be aborted, has the face of Jesus Christ, has the face of the Lord.”** - Pope Francis

**I will take Pope Francis’ words and not vote for the Democrat Party that condemns children to die. **
How interesting, that some quotes are used but not others. Oh dear.
Click to expand...
Thiks site so dearly needs a LIKE button!!!👍🙂
 
Path_Finder said:
FNR, this is a hospital, NOT the general population hence, talking about stats that are not helpful.
Click to expand...
Also keep in mind, miscarriages are labeled as “spontaneous abortions”. So those stats, if you can call them stats, include natural cause infant mortality as abortions.
 
saintjohnxxiii said:
I would like to add another reason to this excellent list:
  1. The Pro-Life movement is in the tank for the Republican party (even though all pro-life legislation has had the overwhelming support of Republicans and overwhelming opposition from Democrats).
Click to expand...
We are definitely in the reason 13 phase of the thread with a lot of 16 thrown in also.
 
saintjohnxxiii said:
I would like to add another reason to this excellent list:
  1. The Pro-Life movement is in the tank for the Republican party (even though all pro-life legislation has had the overwhelming support of Republicans and overwhelming opposition from Democrats).
Click to expand...
👍
 
pnewton said:
What ever standards one uses for a label or a rating, it should not apply one way to Democrats and another way to Republicans. I have seen more double standards when it comes to politics at CAF than I can count.

So yes, a Catholic can be Republican, Democrat or neither. This is the position of the Catholic Church. What no one will ever produce here is any authoritative position from the Church on political parties. Yet the pretense that there is one will continue as long as this site exists.

Look to the Church, not your fellow Catholics for what is moral.
Click to expand...
No, a Catholic can NOT be a Democrat. At one point in time they could, but the political party has moved from being simply neutral towards the Christian faith and the Church, to being anti-Catholic and anti-Christian. The PARTY is pro-abortion! Actively, excitedly, enthusiastically PRO-ABORTION.

Continued participation and membership with such an anti-Catholic and pro-abortion party is contrary to the faith, and mutually exclusive with being Catholic.
 
zz912 said:
No, a Catholic can NOT be a Democrat.
Click to expand...
Source? Or is this just your opinion?
At one point in time they could, but the political party has moved from being simply neutral towards the Christian faith and the Church, to being anti-Catholic and anti-Christian. The PARTY is pro-abortion! Actively, excitedly, enthusiastically PRO-ABORTION.
Click to expand...
Continued participation and membership with such an anti-Catholic and pro-abortion party is contrary to the faith, and mutually exclusive with being Catholic.
Click to expand...
According to whom?

Are you saying that one can vote for a pro-abortion republican over a pro-life democrat?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top