Can Catholics Vote Democrat?

[zz912]

So you really think the GOP is the party of truth, with their wishes to cut public programs that help the needy, ties with big businesses, lack of concern for the God’s earth and preservation, lack of concern over the huge gun violence issue, etc.?

Excuse #8, just without the claim of a Church document. Republicans are eeeeeeeevil, and my made-up caricatures of their positions constitutes justifiable reason for me to vote contrary to Catholic teaching.

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.
16. 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), so it’s okay for me to vote for the virulently pro-abortion party.

 

[zz912]

Seems like 90% of this forum would love for the RCC to come out and endorse GOP candidates. I would be surprised if some people in here wouldn’t be happy if the Church straight up excommunicated Democrats.

I would be happy if the Church started excommunicating many Democrat “catholic” politicians openly. Their souls are in dire jeopardy and the leadership of the Church needs to recognize that and act accordingly.

I would also be happy if pastors started preaching about proper voting for Catholics, and that Catholics cannot vote for pro-abortion politicians.

Hopefully that would start to bring many Democrat catholics back into the Church. Or at least let them know they have separated themselves from the Church.

As for endorsing the GOP, I would rather the Church not directly endorse them. I have too many issues with the GOP, and we’ve already seen the problems when the American catholics aligned themselves to one party (Democratic).

 

[zz912]

The Church teaches that we should have a well developed conscience. Since in good conscience I cannot support the use of secular authority to force a women to remain in a state of pregnancy against her will - and thereby robbing her of her fundamental right to personal autonomy, I have no alternative but to oppose any politician or law that seeks to do just that. This is a position I came to through careful consideration and weighing of different arguments. It is not an opinion the Church teaches, it is a personal opinion.

On the other hand, I would also oppose any politician or law that seeks to encourage or facilitate abortion as a solution to social problems. I would also support actions by the state that would to reduce the likelihood that a woman would seek an abortion. I believe Church would support both of those positions.

Another contributor to this forum wanted to dismiss my argument as an example of “pluralism” (i.e., “I personally don’t agree with the evil but I don’t feel I can prohibit you from that action”.) Actually, the issue is not whether I “can” or “can not” prohibit something, but rather whether I "should’ or “should not” prohibit it. Anyone with enough muscle or weapons can prohibit whatever they please. They may even believe they are justified in doing so, but that doesn’t mean anything. I am certain that the militants in Iraq believe they are justified in what they are doing.

The whole problem with the abortion debate is that it is often set up in a way that forces a person to make a choice between two bad options: either violate a woman’s rights or allow a child’s rights to be violated. I see that as a false choice. There are many things a person can do that does not require him to violate anyone rights or sit idly by while another person’s rights are violated. Unfortunately, both Republicans and Democrats lack the political will to engage in the kind of discussion that could actually go beyond the false choice narrative in a constructive manner.

There is no right to kill an innocent human being. Go back and re-examine your post while you consider this truth. You will see the glaring errors you have typed.

 

[stinkcat_14]

One side in this discussion is fully in line with Catholic teaching. The other is not. And that side gives twisted and contorted excuses for why they can ignore Church teaching.

Actually, one can debate whether or not all sides are in line with Church teaching. For example, I don’t represent the dominant view here, yet the side I advanced has not contradicted Church teaching.

 

[zz912]

Actually, one can debate whether or not all sides are in line with Church teaching. For example, I don’t represent the dominant view here, yet the side I advanced has not contradicted Church teaching.

You don’t come across as particularly on any side, but one who straddles the fence and brings confusion and obfuscation to the discussion.

 

[ishii]

Seems like 90% of this forum would love for the RCC to come out and endorse GOP candidates. I would be surprised if some people in here wouldn’t be happy if the Church straight up excommunicated Democrats.

Its amazing to me how some posters here interpret criticism of the Democrat party as a requirement to vote GOP. My, how defensive they get when their party is justifiably criticized.

Et Cetera - we just need people to be truthful about the Democrat party’s support for the culture of death. Acknowledge that and let the chips fall where they may. I suspect that some Democrat catholics, even after acknowledging that, would still vote for their beloved party.

Ishii

 

[Ridgerunner]

Its amazing to me how some posters here interpret criticism of the Democrat party as a requirement to vote GOP. My, how defensive they get when their party is justifiably criticized.

Et Cetera - we just need people to be truthful about the Democrat party’s support for the culture of death. Acknowledge that and let the chips fall where they may. I suspect that some Democrat catholics, even after acknowledging that, would still vote for their beloved party.

Ishii

One doesn’t have to BE a Repub in order to oppose immoral Democrat policies and candidates. I’m not, and never have been. But I do know one thing. If one wants to oppose evil (and one certainly should) one should do it in a way that’s effective. Getting into a snit and voting third party is not effective.

The Democrat party is never going to abandon its devotion to abortion until it starts losing a lot of elections on account of it.

 

[sallybutler]

Its amazing to me how some posters here interpret criticism of the Democrat party as a requirement to vote GOP. My, how defensive they get when their party is justifiably criticized.

Et Cetera - we just need people to be truthful about the Democrat party’s support for the culture of death. Acknowledge that and let the chips fall where they may. I suspect that some Democrat catholics, even after acknowledging that, would still vote for their beloved party.

Ishii

The problem I have with this is that the Republican Party nominated a man who, while stating that he was personally 100% pro-life in all cases, belonged to and supported a church that was (and still is) supporting the culture of death. Yet anytime I or others mention this, we are told that belonging to a church that supports evil is ok as long as you don’t agree with them, but being a democrat with the same opionion on abortion is not ok.

It seems to me that people are just as willing to justify voting their beloved Republican party as they accuse Democrats of doing.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Why would the bishops publish a list of excuses from people who ignore Church teaching?

I wondered that myself. It seems a non sequitor.

 

[ishii]

The problem I have with this is that the Republican Party nominated a man who, while stating that he was personally 100% pro-life in all cases, belonged to and supported a church that was (and still is) supporting the culture of death. Yet anytime I or others mention this, we are told that belonging to a church that supports evil is ok as long as you don’t agree with them, but being a democrat with the same opionion on abortion is not ok.

It seems to me that people are just as willing to justify voting their beloved Republican party as they accuse Democrats of doing.

You’re talking about Romney right? How many Mormons elected to public office have voted pro-abortion? Compare that with howany democrats elected to public office who support abortion and get back to me. Btw Romney was pro life. Maybe not perfectly pro life but in a race between Obama and Romney the choice for pro lifers was a no brainer.

Ishii

 

[Al_Moritz]

Sooner or later one must wake up and realize that the anger I have for a certain group of people that allows me to vote for the protection of murder is not normal.

Sooner or later one must wake up and realize that the denialism regarding the discrepancies between political promises and reality of a certain party, which makes one gullible enough to vote for them just based on their mere lip service on pro-life issues (at least on the federal level) is not normal.

The “morally grave reasons of not voting for a pro-choice candidate” are in no way “theoretical”. To support pro-abortion candidates is to participate/cooperate in that intrinsic evil. That is not debatable; as to what level of participation we are guilty of, that is debatable to a certain extent. But to simply disregard it as not “formal cooperation with evil” for the fact that two little words are there, “because of”, and that makes everything okay is just not accurate. Informal or remote material cooperation is still cooperation. What am I missing?

You are missing the precise text of Ratzinger’s statement about formal and material cooperation. Please read again.

 

[Al_Moritz]

It seems to me that people are just as willing to justify voting their beloved Republican party as they accuse Democrats of doing.

Precisely.

 

[qui_est_ce]

So you really think the GOP is the party of truth, with their wishes to cut public programs

This is a common misconception. The Republican party does not wish to cut public programs, they wish to limit the INCREASES.

that help the needy,

Many of these programs do not help the needy, but rather perpetuate dependence on public subsidies and further poverty.

ties with big businesses,

Is big business intrinsically evil? Are Democratic ties to big business somehow superior to Republican ties to big business?

lack of concern for the God’s earth and preservation,

I don’t know where you get this. Just because Republican want less bureaucracy does not mean they don’t care about the environment.

lack of concern over the huge gun violence issue, etc.?

Again, where do you get this? Conservatives do care about all violence and its root causes.

Most conservatives will agree that often government it the problem, not the solution. This is why conservatives outperform liberals in their time and money to help the poor.

 

[zz912]

The problem I have with this is that the Republican Party nominated a man who, while stating that he was personally 100% pro-life in all cases, belonged to and supported a church that was (and still is) supporting the culture of death. Yet anytime I or others mention this, we are told that belonging to a church that supports evil is ok as long as you don’t agree with them, but being a democrat with the same opionion on abortion is not ok.

It seems to me that people are just as willing to justify voting their beloved Republican party as they accuse Democrats of doing.

This is disengenous and is spreading an untruth. Here is the position of the LDS:

lds.org/topics/abortion?lang=eng

*Human life is a sacred gift from God. Elective abortion for personal or social convenience is contrary to the will and the commandments of God. Church members who submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for such abortions may lose their membership in the Church.

Additional Information

In today’s society, abortion has become a common practice, defended by deceptive arguments. Latter-day prophets have denounced abortion, referring to the Lord’s declaration, “Thou shalt not . . . kill, nor do anything like unto it” (D&C 59:6). Their counsel on the matter is clear: Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must not submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for an abortion. Church members who encourage an abortion in any way may be subject to Church discipline.

Church leaders have said that some exceptional circumstances may justify an abortion, such as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. But even these circumstances do not automatically justify an abortion. Those who face such circumstances should consider abortion only after consulting with their local Church leaders and receiving a confirmation through earnest prayer. *

So we see that your statement of his church “supporting the culture of death” is wholy inappropriate and misleading. They oppose 98-99% of all abortions, and even the ones they allow, they don’t do so carte blanche. While they are wrong about the cases where abortion is permitted, it is VERY different from “supporting the culture of death”. Your statement equates their view with the view of the Democratic Party, which supports any and all abortions, and wants taxpayers to pay for them.

Please do not further insult and libel the LDS church by equating their views with the views of the Democratic Party.

Secondly, your position, even if true, is meaningless. Even if Romney was a member of a church which supported abortion, it is not the same as being a member of a political party. You could certainly weigh if he was truly pro-life by belonging to such a church, but here’s the key: He would NOT be voting into power or influence his church. A “pro-life” Democrat Congressman WILL vote into power the pro-abortion Democratic Party leaders. So even if your claim were true (which it’s not) that the LDS are supporting the culture of death, it would NOT be the same.

I hope you can understand this finally, as you have thrown out this excuse before to justify voting for pro-abortion politicians. (It’s number 2 on the list).

 

[qui_est_ce]

Sooner or later one must wake up and realize that the denialism regarding the discrepancies between political promises and reality of a certain party,

So well said! Still waiting for Obama to make good on so many promises.

which makes one gullible enough to vote for them just based on their mere lip service on pro-life issues (at least on the federal level) is not normal.

Yet the Republicans are called obstructionists when they oppose ACA’s coverage of abortion.

Yet the Republicans are called “haters” when they opposed the repeal of the Mexico City Policy.

 

[Crossbones]

You’re talking about Romney right? How many Mormons elected to public office have voted pro-abortion?

Ishii

Governor Mitt Romney was pro-abortion. In a 2002 debate when he was running, he said “I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose and am devoted and dedicated to honoring my word in that regard.”

Senator Harry Reid is pro-abortion.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Governor Mitt Romney was pro-abortion. In a 2002 debate when he was running, he said “I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose and am devoted and dedicated to honoring my word in that regard.”

I think he evolved on that position since 2002.

 

[Crossbones]

I think he evolved on that position since 2002.

Some believed that, but I was just pointing out in regards to Ishii’s comment that there have been pro-abortion Mormons elected.

 

[StevenFrancis]

I was wondering if it’s ok for Catholics to vote Democrat? I know that the Democrats are more in favor of abortion, but that doesn’t they don’t do other things that help our country. If anyone on here is Catholic and a Democrat what advice do you have?

I’m an Independent, but unfortunately third parties rarely get votes.

I wish that all Catholics were true to the faith, and honestly loved the Church. We should vote Catholic. In some times after the 1920’s and before the 1970’s, the Democratic party might have been a reasonable choice for a fully practicing Catholic in good standing to make in voting. The Church will not, for whatever reason, come right out and say that we should no longer vote for Democrats. This is a shame, in my opinion, because, never mind the candidates themselves, the actual platform of the party itself specifically identifies the establishment of moral evils as the law of the land. It is a complete ideology, which apart from some genuine love for the poor, (satan always mixes in a little something to help the medicine go down), is based on evil. I have BEEN a Democrat. The lions share of those who are my family, friends, and fellow parishoners still are. I love them all as a Christian, but I have become convinced that their ideology, (NOT THE INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE), is evil, and that no friend of Christ should vote for a candidate of the Democratic party unless and until their very platform is re-written and the foundation upon which the candidates must run is changed to be a party of life, from conception to natural death, including the support of traditional marriage and the importance of the family.

Catholics are the largest voting block in the U.S. The party have become masters at exploiting the loving nature of Catholics towards the poor, and have successfully sold them evil and death as fine print at the bottom of the contract. Catholics are the only voting block who could change the platform of the Democratic Party in one single election cycle. If no Catholic voted for a Democrat in just one General election, and vocally said it was because of their party platform, you might see their ideology change over night.

You only asked about the Democrats. I’m not much more enamored by the Republicans. But the problem there IS the individuals. It is possible for there to BE a good Republican, (Rick Santorum, for example), because the party platform is written in a way that allows Christian ideology to live within the ranks of it’s party.

So, you said you are an independent. So am I. I will allow myself to vote for certain Republicans in the primaries, and if they were to get the nomination, (they never do), then I would vote for them. In the mean time, I seek out the candidate who is not a member of the Democratic party, who, even if secular or of a different faith than mine, most exemplifies the principles of life, love, and family, and who at least doesn’t stand actively against life issues, and doesn’t promote disordered marriage, and I will vote for them, whether they are Republican or Independent. This will remain my policy until the Democratic party changes their platform. If the Republicans change theirs also to promote evil, and preclude a candidate from realistically getting the nomination because of sincere Christian ideals, then I will vote only for independents.

I have been chastised for voting for independent candidates because I am told that I am not helping “either party”. Well, maybe we need more than two major parties. Maybe we need no parties at all. In any event, I am answerable to God for my love of neighbor. If my conscience will not allow me to subject my fellow man to the Democrat or the Republican, but I truly feel that candidate X from some other party, or non-partisan is truly the best Government choice for my neighbors, then I must be true to my conscience. We must stop seeking good ends through evil means. Ends do not justify means. We also can’t think of it as Hollywood Squares and vote for candidate X for “the block”. We are a unique people, who have the extraordinary gift of having a voice in who we shall be governed by. I don’t think it’s a squandered vote to vote for the person who we truly believe is best for our nation out of those who are running. But we, as a people, must begin to demand better. We must stop being sheep led to slaughter. We need to exercise this gift to it’s fullest, towards the goal of being governed justly, and without being forced by a party or a government to participate in evil through our very daily lives. It is still possible, but only if enough people care to stop voting Democrat until the charter changes, and even Republican, if the individual candidates don’t embrace life, family values, and morality.

Economy, foreign policy, deficits, ecology…these will all be handled confidently by a person who’s first concern is life, morality and family, because those are motives which should guide all actions. If you start with good foundations, you get good strong buildings.

okay…my 2 cents, coupled with $2.85 will get you a cup of coffee at Denny’s.

Live, laugh, and love,
God bless,
Steve

 

[Ridgerunner]

Some believed that, but I was just pointing out in regards to Ishii’s comment that there have been pro-abortion Mormons elected.

Just as there have been pro-abortion Catholics elected, and lots of them. So what does this mean other than perhaps party affiliation trumps religion with some?