Can Catholics Vote Democrat?

  • Thread starter Thread starter adawgj
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Is it moral to vote for a democrat when both republican and democrat candidates have equally bad positions on abortion?
You have to also weigh the parties themselves on their abortion views. A pro-abortion Democrat who votes Nancy Pelosi into the Speaker’s position is far different than a pro-abortion Republican who votes John Boehner into the Speaker’s position.

One limits the evil of abortion, and one promotes it, even though both have the same position on abortion.
 
Totally irrelevant statistic. It is skewed by the fact Democrats like Carlie Rangel and Nancy Pelosi will get 90% of the vote in their heavily Democrat districts-often running unopposed. If you oppose gerrymandering I assume that also means you oppose majority minority districts?
And what keeps a party from splitting up a 2 Pelosi districts with one heavily Republican district and creating 3 Democratic districts. Nothing. From the example of Ohio and Illinois this can be done.
 
Is it moral to vote for a democrat when both republican and democrat candidates have equally bad positions on abortion?
What state are you talking about New York?

Even Chris Christie defunded America’s biggest abortion provider in New Jersey, clinics are closing and have closed in many states.

Be more specific. To just make your broad generalization seems to be in favor of the Democrats who do all to make abortion available and fund Planned Parenthood, the biggest abortion provider in the USA.
 
Slavery was once the law of the land too. Democrats can continue to push abortion, so-called reproductive rights. It is a battle similar to the Civil War. One side doesn’t see some as persons.
 
It’s not a half full/half empty thing. It is a fact and a one that likely will hold for the foreseeable future. 🤷 Repubs just are doing better than the Dems. The popular vote means nothing if it doesn’t transfer to wins.

I see things completely different. Republican candidates are having to be more pro-life to get elected at the local level. We need the same type of pressure on the Dems. If, they continue to lose on the local level because of life issues, maybe they will change. (I won’t hold my breath though.)
Well, popular vote is a pretty strong indicator, isn’t it?

I agree with you that Republicans are having to be more pro-life to win on the local level. This is very encouraging coming off a party that nominated a presidential candidate with a skittish record on pro-life issues. Not only do I hope it puts pressure on Dems, but also Republicans on the national level who were going a long way to convince themselves that they can’t be pro-life and win.
 
What state are you talking about New York?
I am not talking about any particular state because there are several states where both republican and democrat candidates are in favor of abortion. For example, if one is voting for governor and there are two pro-abortion candidates, does one just not vote?
Even Chris Christie defunded America’s biggest abortion provider in New Jersey, clinics are closing and have closed in many states.
I am not familiar with New Jersey politics, so I cannot comment one way or another.
Be more specific. To just make your broad generalization seems to be in favor of the Democrats who do all to make abortion available and fund Planned Parenthood, the biggest abortion provider in the USA.
I am just asking a question, nobody can really accuse me of supporting democrats.
 
Just as Paul said, we need to put on the Armor of God.

Ephesians 6:12
** For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.**
 
Well, popular vote is a pretty strong indicator, isn’t it?

I agree with you that Republicans are having to be more pro-life to win on the local level. This is very encouraging coming off a party that nominated a presidential candidate with a skittish record on pro-life issues. Not only do I hope it puts pressure on Dems, but also Republicans on the national level who were going a long way to convince themselves that they can’t be pro-life and win.
Popular vote doesn’t mean much at all. Only about a 1/2 of people vote anyway and it’s not always the same half. Different things motivate different people to vote.

History also points to a pretty consistent theme. No political party stays in power long.

That is why I think that if we want any change, Catholics need to stick to issues and not parties. No need to put our eggs all in one basket.
 
I am not talking about any particular state because there are several states where both republican and democrat candidates are in favor of abortion. For example, if one is voting for governor and there are two pro-abortion candidates, does one just not vote?

I am not familiar with New Jersey politics, so I cannot comment one way or another.

I am just asking a question, nobody can really accuse me of supporting democrats.
To their credit, Politicians already stick their neck out to support pro-life issues and some criticize them rather ruthlessly for even doing this. It’s easy to see merely in this thread.

Looking at the Governor races in 2014; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_gubernatorial_elections,_2014 , it’s difficult to see cases where the GOP candidate is not marginally more pro-life than the Democrat unless somehow states like North Dakota or Louisiana have pro-life Democrats running.

Pennsylvania, Pro-Life Governor running for office: lifenews.com/2014/08/06/pennsylvania-pro-life-gov-tom-corbett-gaining-on-pro-abortion-tom-wolf/

I would think some Eastern New England types of States could have 2 candidates with similar values.

Since a candidate can hardly be totally pro-life per Catholic teaching, I would not break it down to “2 candidates that support abortion.”

Rick Santorum is an avid pro-life but if one breaks it down, I’ve seen his voting record faulted for voting for a health expense that could have some tenuous connection to abortion. I believe this is covered at the website called “pro-life profiles” prolifeprofiles.com/rick-santorum-pro-life Yes, he still gets a good grade per his pro-life record.
 
Popular vote doesn’t mean much at all. Only about a 1/2 of people vote anyway and it’s not always the same half. Different things motivate different people to vote.

History also points to a pretty consistent theme. No political party stays in power long.

That is why I think that if we want any change, Catholics need to stick to issues and not parties. No need to put our eggs all in one basket.
I agree. The problem with the current system is that we have one basket that’s a bit frayed, and the other one is actually a wood-chipper wearing a clever disguise. What we need is a third basket. In the meantime, however, can we stop pretending that a wood-chipper is actually a basket?
 
Popular vote doesn’t mean much at all. Only about a 1/2 of people vote anyway and it’s not always the same half. Different things motivate different people to vote.

History also points to a pretty consistent theme. No political party stays in power long.

That is why I think that if we want any change, Catholics need to stick to issues and not parties. No need to put our eggs all in one basket.
Of course, this is why we need the Republican party that acts on pro-life issues when they are in power. Power is fleeting. We haven’t had that until very recently and frankly have really never had that on the national level.
 
I agree. The problem with the current system is that we have one basket that’s a bit frayed, and the other one is actually a wood-chipper wearing a clever disguise. What we need is a third basket. In the meantime, however, can we stop pretending that a wood-chipper is actually a basket?
👍👍👍
 
Too many Catholics have collapsed their responsibilities to evangelism to a focus on getting a Supreme Court who will overturn Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood.

The problem is that that’s a single-strategy approach that so far, has not worked and is not likely to work in the next 50 years. The electoral strategy to has failed, because from the beginning, it was poorly planned and poorly conceived. Yet those who say that Catholics can’t vote for a Democrat also say that all Catholics have to believe in their strategy, which as I said before, is a poorly conceived strategy, and in my heart of hearts believe that it will not work.

In a quote attributed (possibly incorrectly) to Albert Einstein, we hear the motto: “The definition of insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting different results.”

Here’s the bottom line.
First, if you look at states who consistently vote Democratic, if you sum up California, New York, and a few others, you very quickly see that overturning Roe v. Wade will not affect the legal status of a majority of abortions in the U.S. Historically, once New York legalized abortion, interstate travel for abortion skyrocketed before Roe v. Wade. If a bunch of “red” states outlaw abortion, there will still be plenty of opportunity for legal abortion by traveling out of state.

Second, Cytotec (miprosotol) is widely used throughout Latin America in nations where it is abortion is illegal to perform self-administered abortions. A black market for Cytotec, which is also prescribed for gastrointestinal problems, is already flourishing in Texas in the wake of state-level restrictions there. Just look at this story on El Salvador, and you can predict what will happen in the U.S. if Roe is overturned without regard for other policies: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3557184/

Third, if you look at the peer-reviewed publications from the 1920s and 1930s, you will see reports on abortion that tell you the same thing that CDC statistics tell you today: that most abortions take place among women who are young and/or economically vulnerable.

The constant harping of some Catholics on the need to get behind their failed and helplessly flawed strategy of “elect politicians who will nominate pro-life judges” seems deaf to all these concerns.

Want to end abortion? Do it one person at a time. Spread the Kingdom of God. Yes, that’s slow, but it’s the only way it will ever work. Mentor a kid in a neighborhood where 90% of kids grow up in mother-only households. Visit a prison where small-time drug offenders are released with no nope of getting a job, and end up as “unmarriageable men” (W.J. Wilson). Say a rosary at 2:00 AM outside the the bars that are closing down in cities across the nation and people are making really bad choices.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but it’s true. The organized pro-life movement in this country has been a failure, and cannot help but be a failure if it persists in its single-strategy idolization of the Supreme Court. The movement didn’t get started until states began abortion legalization in the late 1960s, so it’s always been focused on the legal aspect. But as Pope Francis told us in his America Magazine article,
We must not focus on occupying the spaces where power is exercised, but rather on starting long-run historical processes. We must initiate processes rather than occupy spaces. God manifests himself in time and is present in the processes of history. This gives priority to actions that give birth to new historical dynamics. And it requires patience, waiting.
Or, to quote another great thinker in a very different time, Henry David Thoreau:
Even voting for the right is doing nothing for it. It is only expressing to men feebly your desire that it should prevail. A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority. There is but little virtue in the action of masses of men.
To quickly respond to a reply here: my point is that one’s choices about voting have very little impact on the continued catastrophe of abortion. If you want to make a difference in reducing abortion, don’t count on the ballot box to be your only form of evangelism. Get out. Evangelize. Be Christ to the world. Stop idolizing politics. Only by changing the culture will we actually bring a culture of life. Voting does nothing without cultural change.
 
Too many Catholics have collapsed their responsibilities to evangelism to a focus on getting a Supreme Court who will overturn Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood.

The problem is that that’s a single-strategy approach that so far, has not worked and is not likely to work in the next 50 years. The electoral strategy to has failed, because from the beginning, it was poorly planned and poorly conceived. Yet those who say that Catholics can’t vote for a Democrat also say that all Catholics have to believe in their strategy, which as I said before, is a poorly conceived strategy, and in my heart of hearts believe that it will not work.

In a quote attributed (possibly incorrectly) to Albert Einstein, we hear the motto: “The definition of insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting the different results.”

Here’s the bottom line.
First, if you look at states who consistently vote Democratic, if you sum up California, New York, and a few others, you very quickly see that overturning Roe v. Wade will not affect the legal status of a majority of abortions in the U.S. Historically, once New York legalized abortion, interstate travel for abortion skyrocketed before Roe v. Wade. If a bunch of “red” states outlaw abortion, there will still be plenty of opportunity for legal abortion by traveling out of state.

Second, Cytotec (miprosotol) is widely used throughout Latin America in nations where it is abortion is illegal to perform self-administered abortions. A black market for Cytotec, which is also prescribed for gastrointestinal problems, is already flourishing in Texas in the wake of state-level restrictions there. Just look at this story on El Salvador, and you can predict what will happen in the U.S. if Roe is overturned without regard for other policies: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3557184/

Third, if you look at the peer-reviewed publications from the 1920s and 1930s, you will see reports on abortion that tell you the same thing that CDC statistics tell you today: that most abortions take place among women who are young and/or economically vulnerable.

The constant harping of some Catholics on the need to get behind their failed and helplessly flawed strategy of “elect politicians who will nominate pro-life judges” seems deaf to all these concerns.

Want to end abortion? Do it one person at a time. Spread the Kingdom of God. Yes, that’s slow, but it’s the only way it will ever work. Mentor a kid in a neighborhood where 90% of kids grow up in mother-only households. Visit a prison where small-time drug offenders are released with no nope of getting a job, and end up as “unmarriageable men” (W.J. Wilson). Say a rosary at 2:00 AM outside the the bars that are closing down in cities across the nation and people are making really bad choices.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but it’s true. The organized pro-life movement in this country has been a failure, and cannot help but be a failure if it persists in its single-strategy idolization of the Supreme Court. The movement didn’t get started until states began abortion legalization in the late 1960s, so it’s always been focused on the legal aspect. But as Pope Francis told us in his America Magazine article,
*
We must not focus on occupying the spaces where power is exercised, but rather on starting long-run historical processes. We must initiate processes rather than occupy spaces. God manifests himself in time and is present in the processes of history. This gives priority to actions that give birth to new historical dynamics. And it requires patience, waiting.
*
Or, to quote another great thinker in a very different time, Henry David Thoreau:
*
Even voting for the right is doing nothing for it. It is only expressing to men feebly your desire that it should prevail. A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority. There is but little virtue in the action of masses of men.
*
And your point is?
 
Too many Catholics have collapsed their responsibilities to evangelism to a focus on getting a Supreme Court who will overturn Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood.

The problem is that that’s a single-strategy approach that so far, has not worked and is not likely to work in the next 50 years. The electoral strategy to has failed, because from the beginning, it was poorly planned and poorly conceived. Yet those who say that Catholics can’t vote for a Democrat also say that all Catholics have to believe in their strategy, which as I said before, is a poorly conceived strategy, and in my heart of hearts believe that it will not work.

In a quote attributed (possibly incorrectly) to Albert Einstein, we hear the motto: “The definition of insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting the different results.”

Here’s the bottom line.
First, if you look at states who consistently vote Democratic, if you sum up California, New York, and a few others, you very quickly see that overturning Roe v. Wade will not affect the legal status of a majority of abortions in the U.S. Historically, once New York legalized abortion, interstate travel for abortion skyrocketed before Roe v. Wade. If a bunch of “red” states outlaw abortion, there will still be plenty of opportunity for legal abortion by traveling out of state.

Second, Cytotec (miprosotol) is widely used throughout Latin America in nations where it is abortion is illegal to perform self-administered abortions. A black market for Cytotec, which is also prescribed for gastrointestinal problems, is already flourishing in Texas in the wake of state-level restrictions there. Just look at this story on El Salvador, and you can predict what will happen in the U.S. if Roe is overturned without regard for other policies: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3557184/

Third, if you look at the peer-reviewed publications from the 1920s and 1930s, you will see reports on abortion that tell you the same thing that CDC statistics tell you today: that most abortions take place among women who are young and/or economically vulnerable.

The constant harping of some Catholics on the need to get behind their failed and helplessly flawed strategy of “elect politicians who will nominate pro-life judges” seems deaf to all these concerns.

Want to end abortion? Do it one person at a time. Spread the Kingdom of God. Yes, that’s slow, but it’s the only way it will ever work. Mentor a kid in a neighborhood where 90% of kids grow up in mother-only households. Visit a prison where small-time drug offenders are released with no nope of getting a job, and end up as “unmarriageable men” (W.J. Wilson). Say a rosary at 2:00 AM outside the the bars that are closing down in cities across the nation and people are making really bad choices.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but it’s true. The organized pro-life movement in this country has been a failure, and cannot help but be a failure if it persists in its single-strategy idolization of the Supreme Court. The movement didn’t get started until states began abortion legalization in the late 1960s, so it’s always been focused on the legal aspect. But as Pope Francis told us in his America Magazine article,
We must not focus on occupying the spaces where power is exercised, but rather on starting long-run historical processes. We must initiate processes rather than occupy spaces. God manifests himself in time and is present in the processes of history. This gives priority to actions that give birth to new historical dynamics. And it requires patience, waiting.
Or, to quote another great thinker in a very different time, Henry David Thoreau:
Even voting for the right is doing nothing for it. It is only expressing to men feebly your desire that it should prevail. A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority. There is but little virtue in the action of masses of men.
The pro-life movement is not as you describe it. It is not by any stretch of the imagination a one strategy movement.

Evangelism as you suggest is the best way and believe me that is getting done. There is also other strategies. It’s not lets turn roe vs wade at the supreme court and that’s it. Just take a look at all the restrictions, bans that have been enacted.

Also look at the crisis centers and how they have increased.
Also take a look at the apologetic and evangelization movement and how life is a central part

I don’t think it is fair to sit on the side lines and say what the “movement” should do without knowing what it does already.
 
The pro-life movement is not as you describe it. It is not by any stretch of the imagination a one strategy movement.

Evangelism as you suggest is the best way and believe me that is getting done. There is also other strategies. It’s not lets turn roe vs wade at the supreme court and that’s it. Just take a look at all the restrictions, bans that have been enacted.

Also look at the crisis centers and how they have increased.
Also take a look at the apologetic and evangelization movement and how life is a central part

I don’t think it is fair to sit on the side lines and say what the “movement” should do without knowing what it does.
Agreed. And surely we can all agree that we will never end abortion as long as Catholics keep voting for those who have vowed to do everything in their power to keep it legal.
 
Too many Catholics have collapsed their responsibilities to evangelism to a focus on getting a Supreme Court who will overturn Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood.

The problem is that that’s a single-strategy approach that so far, has not worked and is not likely to work in the next 50 years. The electoral strategy to has failed, because from the beginning, it was poorly planned and poorly conceived. Yet those who say that Catholics can’t vote for a Democrat also say that all Catholics have to believe in their strategy, which as I said before, is a poorly conceived strategy, and in my heart of hearts believe that it will not work.

SNIP

To quickly respond to a reply here: my point is that one’s choices about voting have very little impact on the continued catastrophe of abortion. If you want to make a difference in reducing abortion, don’t count on the ballot box to be your only form of evangelism. Get out. Evangelize. Be Christ to the world. Stop idolizing politics. Only by changing the culture will we actually bring a culture of life. Voting does nothing without cultural change.
This is a pretty insulting post. It presumes these are the only actions the pro-life forces in this country are taking. That’s patently untrue.

And these are NOT mutually exclusive avenues. Voting takes one Tuesday every other year. It is being done in conjuction with the other items you mentioned and more.

One last thing, this post exudes the excuse many Democrat catholics use to vote for pro-abortion politicians, namely excuses #10, 12, 13, and some of 7.

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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top