Can Catholics Vote Democrat?

[SMGS127]

So you voted for McCain in 2008. Good to know!

(Oh wait, you didn’t.)

I wasn’t Catholic way back then. I voted for Obama to advance gay rights and because Palin was the worst VP pick in the history of the country and it scared me to have her anywhere near a nuke box.

 

[andrewstx]

True. Sadly true.

And many would vote for Hitler or Stalin, if he had an R next to his name.

Really, I think it is time to abolish the extreme partisanship that has overtaken American politics.

 

[zz912]

And many would vote for Hitler or Stalin, if he had an R next to his name.

Really, I think it is time to abolish the extreme partisanship that has overtaken American politics.

So you honestly think that Republicans would support two extreme leftists and vote for them? I just don’t see it. A large segment of Republicans organically started voting for Tea Party candidates because too many Republicans had become RINO’s and move leftward.

 

[zz912]

I wasn’t Catholic way back then. I voted for Obama to advance gay rights and because Palin was the worst VP pick in the history of the country and it scared me to have her anywhere near a nuke box.

So you’d obviously change your vote if you were somehow able to travel back in time then. Right?

 

[freeRadical]

Did he say that knowing everything that we found out later? Like that there were no weapons of mass destruction and that Iraq was not an immediate threat to the United States like was claimed. Or did he base his statement off of the bad intelligence collected by President Bush’s administration?

Do you know for sure, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that there were no WMD’s in Iraq?

 

[Dawnia]

And many would vote for Hitler or Stalin, if he had an R next to his name.

Really, I think it is time to abolish the extreme partisanship that has overtaken American politics.

That is one thing about Repubs that I know is patently false. Romney had an R behind his name, but a section of Repubs wouldn’t vote for him because he was Mormon. There were Repubs who wouldn’t vote for Bush either. Repubs don’t fall in lock step with their party.

 

[zz912]

Did he say that knowing everything that we found out later? Like that there were no weapons of mass destruction and that Iraq was not an immediate threat to the United States like was claimed. Or did he base his statement off of the bad intelligence collected by President Bush’s administration?

Irrelevent question. The decision to support the war is made BEFORE the war begins.

 

[Dawnia]

I wasn’t Catholic way back then. I voted for Obama to advance gay rights and because Palin was the worst VP pick in the history of the country and it scared me to have her anywhere near a nuke box.

Ummm…have you missed the crazy dude who gets let out of his cage on occassion who is the current VP? It’s not an accident that no one has attempted to assassinate the President. Even the crazies are scared of getting him as President.

 

[Crossbones]

Irrelevent question. The decision to support the war is made BEFORE the war begins.

Actually, I think it is very relevant. I would love to see the quotes of the Pope supporting the war. You guys are great at finding these quotes, so I look forward to reading them.

 

[ishii]

I wasn’t Catholic way back then. I voted for Obama to advance gay rights and because Palin was the worst VP pick in the history of the country and it scared me to have her anywhere near a nuke box.

Has becoming catholic changed how approach voting? No angle here. Just curious

Ishii

 

[Path_Finder]

So you’d obviously change your vote if you were somehow able to travel back in time then. Right?

2008, how interesting, I didn’t realize Obama/Biden spoke on gay issues, gay marriage back then. That’s right. They didn’t.

 

[zz912]

2008, how interesting, I didn’t realize Obama/Biden spoke on gay issues, gay marriage back then. That’s right. They didn’t.

They did speak about several items, but it wasn’t an overinflated fake issue by the media at that point in time. Plus everyone knew Obama was lying then anyway.

 

[steve_b]

Since Republicans are more likely than Democrats to support capital punishment, does that mean you can’t vote republican. Or if both support it, will you vote neither.

In that case the issue is one of proportion

1. 
   *]How many criminals were executed for example in 2013 through capital punishment? 39 murderers executed for murdering 60+ people. deathpenaltyinfo.org/execution-list-2013
   *]Here’s the Democratic party #22 platform
   *]Republicans promote and vote pro life and oppose abortion and that is their platform. Be sure and open the internal links in #22.
   
   Do the math on this issue of life. 39 murderers executed, vs millions of abortions funded by executive order when a democrat is in office.
   
   It’s not even close. Votes have consequences.

 

[SMGS127]

So you honestly think that Republicans would support two extreme leftists and vote for them? I just don’t see it. A large segment of Republicans organically started voting for Tea Party candidates because too many Republicans had become RINO’s and move leftward.

He said Hitler and Stalin, not two extreme leftists. Totalitarianism is a right-wing ideology.

So you’d obviously change your vote if you were somehow able to travel back in time then. Right?

Maybe. Probably if he had picked someone other than Palin. I’m not sure I could put aside the risk of our country being attacked by Palin becoming President, as that would be a dire human life issue.

2008, how interesting, I didn’t realize Obama/Biden spoke on gay issues, gay marriage back then. That’s right. They didn’t.

Well they actually spoke a lot on LGBT issues, though as a conservative, you probably didn’t pay attention to what Democrats were talking about during the election. And everyone knew both men supported gay marriage – Pres. Obama did so in the Illinois state legislature before he was a US Senator .

 

[Lapey]

Not correct. The Pope Emeritus (emphasis mine):

*[N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in of evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favor of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered *remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.

Emphasis mine!!! You, or anyone else for that matter who are involved in the verbal judo or yet to present one iota of evidence pointing to the proportionate reasons that justify your pro-abortion vote. The challenge has been placed at your feet to produce any magisterial statement, Chesterton does not suffice, which supports your vote for those who protect the rights to kill children.

I’ve tried to remain outside of this discussion, but you keep blindly miss quoting the words of many and possibly leading others into your mistakes. You are in error.

 

[Lapey]

Thank you for correcting me. I’ll certainly accept the pope’s explanation, but whether it is proximate or remote the condition for valid cooperation remains “the presence of proportionate reasons.” This is what the debate is about. What do you consider to be a proportionate reason to support a pro-abortion candidate?

Ender

You’re not wrong. Without proportionate reasoning, there is sin.

A Catholic, with a fully and properly formed conscience, cannot vote for a pro-abortion candidate without committing sin. The only proportionate reason is when both candidates are proven to be equally pro-abortion. In the case of the last election, BO vs MR this was not the case. MR ran on a “mostly pro-life” platform and was the lessor of two evils. There were no proportionate reasons to vote for BO.

 

[Lapey]

Well, from the responses I’ve gotten to this post, apparently everyone thinks saving the life of one little girl with insulin is a sufficient reason to risk not passing a restrictive law on abortion as an unintended double effect. So why wouldn’t saving a whole bunch of kids from childhood diseases with a vaccination program be sufficient reason to risk the same thing as an unintended double-effect? Because that is just what someone who votes for a pro-choice candidate for some other reason might do.

That post is ridiculously flawed; first off it is not the principle of double effect, it is in fact linking two completely separate events together to somehow justify in your mind that it is okay to vote for a pro-abortion candidate.

This is precisely the verbal gymnastics AB Chaput talked about. I call verbal judo because it is completely using “martial arts” type tactics against common sense to make one feel better about doing something against Church teaching.

 

[Lapey]

So are you going to be the first one to say that the response given by the man in the story to his neighbor, John, was the morally correct thing to do?

I would be the first to say your scenario is ridiculous and not even remotely a true possibility.

Again, you are bringing two situations together to make yourself feel better; this is not reality.

 

[Lapey]

Actually, the post this comment refers to is VERY relevant.

It may be so that the post is relevant, but that doesn’t change the reality that if the Church were to do that She would have to forfeit all tax exempt status. As far as I am concerned, I believe that should have been rejected from the beginning of this misrepresented clause inserted into the law by LBJ in the early 50’s. The Church teaches we must reject unjust laws, this is one of them if it keeps Mother Church quiet on teaching clear and simple truth.

 

[Lapey]

I said the father came asking for the insulin, not the daughter. If your daughter were in desperate need of insulin and you knew there was some perfectly good insulin right next door, would you opt to call 911 and wait, hoping they get there in time, or ask your neighbor for a sure thing? And whether you call CPS services after this is beside the point. The main question is, would you give him the insulin for his daughter, knowing that doing so will speed him on his way to work, where he will likely vote for against the abortion bill?

Two separate situations with absolutely no connection. Unless you’re are trying to make a point which is not there; then one must use fantasy.