Can Catholics Vote Democrat?

  • Thread starter Thread starter adawgj
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
stinkcat_14 said:
Source? Or is this just your opinion?

According to whom?

Are you saying that one can vote for a pro-abortion republican over a pro-life democrat?
Click to expand...
Are you at all, reading these posts??? Have you read any of the documents which should guide us as Catholics to live by and vote with our faith?

All your post here illustrates is your ability to ignore what is being posted in order to stay loyal to a party. No-one here said anything about voting for Republicans period; much less a pro-abortion Rep. The thread is about not voting in support of abortion, which is what a vote does that is cast for a pro-abortion anything.

This post does nothing for the discussion.
 
The argument that voting for a pro-choice politician is equivalent to supporting abortion has two levels of indirectness separating the act of voting from the act of the abortion:
  1. You have the person deciding to procure an abortion. This could be a doctor or the pregnant woman herself. It is clear that the largest part of the blame for the sin falls on these people.
  2. One level removed from group (1), you have the politician who may believe that those who engage in procuring an abortion are wrong, but that he is not obligated to do anything to stop them. These may also be culpable for abortions.
  3. One level removed from (2), you have the voter, who may disagree with the politicians in group (2), but feel they are not obligated to prevent them from serving in office for other reasons. This is the group we have been discussing, and their degree of culpability.
  4. Although it has not been discussed, a natural extension of this chain of indirectness is people who disagree with those in group (3), but choose to remain friends with them and to assist them in their daily lives, despite the fact that they may vote for a pro-choice candidate.
My question is this: If the culpability for abortions proceeds undiluted up from group (1) to group (2) to group (3), as some have suggested, why should it stop there? Would not the culpability also extend to those in group (4) who through their tolerance of friends who vote for pro-choice candidates encourage that action?

If so, then why is no one here calling for a ban on friendships with those who vote pro-choice? And if not, that is, if those in group (4) are not culpable, then how does the argument for the non-culpability of group (4) fail when applied to group (3)?
 
zz912 said:
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.
Click to expand...
I think a case can made for that but it is most certainly not Church teaching.
 
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...
What bearing does any of this have on whether a catholic can support a pro-abortion candidate. To be honest I don’t know what point you are trying to make. Are you saying we shouldn’t vote or are you saying we can vote for pro-abortion candidates because it doesn’t matter?
 
LeafByNiggle said:
The argument that voting for a pro-choice politician is equivalent to supporting abortion has two levels of indirectness separating the act of voting from the act of the abortion:
  1. You have the person deciding to procure an abortion. This could be a doctor or the pregnant woman herself. It is clear that the largest part of the blame for the sin falls on these people.
  2. One level removed from group (1), you have the politician who may believe that those who engage in procuring an abortion are wrong, but that he is not obligated to do anything to stop them. These may also be culpable for abortions.
  3. One level removed from (2), you have the voter, who may disagree with the politicians in group (2), but feel they are not obligated to prevent them from serving in office for other reasons. This is the group we have been discussing, and their degree of culpability.
  4. Although it has not been discussed, a natural extension of this chain of indirectness is people who disagree with those in group (3), but choose to remain friends with them and to assist them in their daily lives, despite the fact that they may vote for a pro-choice candidate.
My question is this: If the culpability for abortions proceeds undiluted up from group (1) to group (2) to group (3), as some have suggested, why should it stop there? Would not the culpability also extend to those in group (4) who through their tolerance of friends who vote for pro-choice candidates encourage that action?

If so, then why is no one here calling for a ban on friendships with those who vote pro-choice? And if not, that is, if those in group (4) are not culpable, then how does the argument for the non-culpability of group (4) fail when applied to group (3)?
Click to expand...
We stop where the Church stops. There is a huge difference between being friends with a sinner and empowering them help others sin.
 
Lapey said:
Are you at all, reading these posts??? Have you read any of the documents which should guide us as Catholics to live by and vote with our faith?
Click to expand...
Have you read any of the documents? Because it is not clear that you have done your homework. The documents talk about the position of candidates, not party.
All your post here illustrates is your ability to ignore what is being posted in order to stay loyal to a party.
Click to expand...
Just what party am I being loyal to? I certainly not an apologist for the democrat party. I haven’t voted for a democrat since I voted for Gary Hart in a primary.
No-one here said anything about voting for Republicans period; much less a pro-abortion Rep. The thread is about not voting in support of abortion, which is what a vote does that is cast for a pro-abortion anything.
Click to expand...
This post does nothing for the discussion.
Click to expand...
Actually, my post adds a lot to the discussion, it is the epitome of wha this thread is all about. The question is, can you vote for a democrat. And certainly, if a pro-life democrat is running against a pro-abortion republican it will be certainly permissible to vote for a democrat in that situation.
 
I think y’all have entered the realm of prudential judgment and why tempers are flaring.

Where I could say I would not join the Democrat party, and give reasons why, there are those who are Catholic, pro-life, long time Democrats who stay in hopes of changing them and being the small voice of reason.

At the end of the day, if I felt I were called to run for public office, I would have to decide on some things as Independents rarely have a chance of winning.

Pro-life Democrats are rare but they are there.

I could talk all day long with Rep Rebecca Hamilton and scratch my head, along with her, as to why she stayed with the party. Hers is prudential judgment and in that realm we may not come to the same conclusion. I don’t feel called to join a party to stand against them or try to reform them. Evidently, she did feel that call. I have to respect that. I would hope others could too.
 
And I feel she has a better voice, influence, with those Catholic Democrats who are NOT abiding by the teachings. She has, in my book, a way to challenge them where they would ignore my concerns.
 
Hopey said:
And I feel she has a better voice, influence, with those Catholic Democrats who are NOT abiding by the teachings. She has, in my book, a way to challenge them where they would ignore my concerns.
Click to expand...
Which is very, very sad. Catholics who would put more import into the words of a person because they are a Democrat than they do the words of the Church.
 
I agree but it is evident, starting with the Kennedys, they were not opposed and encouraged to go against the Church.
And here we are now with people not listening to the Church on intrinsic evils.
The Church has lost her voice with some. But, God works in mysterious ways.
 
estesbob said:
We stop where the Church stops. There is a huge difference between being friends with a sinner and empowering them help others sin.
Click to expand...
If it so huge, please explain why, because I don’t see it. If the sin were a private sin, I could see why being friends with a sinner might not empower the sinning. But we are talking about a public sin - one that affects others. Having a normal relation with someone like that is empowering them to sin in their public fashion. Would you be friends with a murderer?
 
LeafByNiggle said:
If it so huge, please explain why, because I don’t see it. If the sin were a private sin, I could see why being friends with a sinner might not empower the sinning. But we are talking about a public sin - one that affects others. Having a normal relation with someone like that is empowering them to sin in their public fashion. Would you be friends with a murderer?
Click to expand...
Take it up with Church. The Church says I cant vote for a pro-abortion candidate. It says nothing about being friends with them or being friends with those who support abortion. Since all my Siblings and my Mother are yellow Dog Democrats were I to follow you advice instead of the Church’s I would have to disown my family.

And yes, I would be friends with a murderer. There is no sinner that I would rule out as a friend as I am a sinner myself.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
Have you read any of the documents? Because it is not clear that you have done your homework. The documents talk about the position of candidates, not party.

Just what party am I being loyal to? I certainly not an apologist for the democrat party. I haven’t voted for a democrat since I voted for Gary Hart in a primary.

Actually, my post adds a lot to the discussion, it is the epitome of wha this thread is all about. The question is, can you vote for a democrat. And certainly, if a pro-life democrat is running against a pro-abortion republican it will be certainly permissible to vote for a democrat in that situation.
Click to expand...
Yes I have, and I have sat through many moral theology courses as part of formation. I have, and others in this thread have quoted many documents to illustrate how a Catholic cannot vote for a pro-abortion candidate no matter what the party. I am not going through that process again for you to reject it or ignore it again; you go back and read. Furthermore, my comment was directly aimed at your misrepresentation of another’s post.

Now if we are talking absolutes, which obviously you are trying to, a pro-life Democrat can be supported. However with that said, if this vote will enable a party to remain or capture control of government, as long as it’s platform holds to supporting intrinsic evils, it cannot be supported.

The Church has not and will not come out with a statement saying that one cannot support party A or B, but if party A supports what the Church calls reprehensible in all cases, your properly formed conscience should inform you that they are off limits; if it does not, your conscience is not properly and fully formed.
 
Lapey said:
Yes I have, and I have sat through many moral theology courses as part of formation. I have, and others in this thread have quoted many documents to illustrate how a Catholic cannot vote for a pro-abortion candidate no matter what the party. I am not going through that process again for you to reject it or ignore it again; you go back and read. Furthermore, my comment was directly aimed at your misrepresentation of another’s post.

Now if we are talking absolutes, which obviously you are trying to, a pro-life Democrat can be supported. However with that said, if this vote will enable a party to remain or capture control of government, as long as it’s platform holds to supporting intrinsic evils, it cannot be supported.

The Church has not and will not come out with a statement saying that one cannot support party A or B, but if party A supports what the Church calls reprehensible in all cases, your properly formed conscience should inform you that they are off limits; if it does not, your conscience is not properly and fully formed.
Click to expand...
Again we go with the Magisterium. We can vote for a Democrat but need to keep in mind the direction the Party has taken when we do vote."

*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. *

. *Above all, following some evidently poor statements on the part of the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, and of the Democratic candidate to vice president, Senator Joe Biden, who, while presenting themselves as good Catholics, have represented Church teaching on abortion in a false and tendentious manner. *

Cardinal Burke
 
Lapey said:
Yes I have, and I have sat through many moral theology courses as part of formation. I have, and others in this thread have quoted many documents to illustrate how a Catholic cannot vote for a pro-abortion candidate no matter what the party.
Click to expand...
I never have claimed that a Catholic can vote for a pro-abortion candidate.
I am not going through that process again for you to reject it or ignore it again; you go back and read. Furthermore, my comment was directly aimed at your misrepresentation of another’s post.
Click to expand...
I think you ought to stop misrepresenting my post.
Now if we are talking absolutes, which obviously you are trying to, a pro-life Democrat can be supported.
Click to expand...
There is no way you can argue otherwise.
However with that said, if this vote will enable a party to remain or capture control of government, as long as it’s platform holds to supporting intrinsic evils, it cannot be supported.
Click to expand...
You are going to have to cite the Church teaching that addresses this particular issue. Are you saying that it is morally acceptable to vote for a pro-abortion republican over a pro-life democrat to keep the democrats from taking control of the house or senate? If that is what you are saying you are going to have to cite some teaching to defend that view.
The Church has not and will not come out with a statement saying that one cannot support party A or B, but if party A supports what the Church calls reprehensible in all cases, your properly formed conscience should inform you that they are off limits; if it does not, your conscience is not properly and fully formed.
Click to expand...
The church does not address the issue of parties, it addresses the issue of candidates.
 
Catholic Vote certainly backs up their views with quotes:

catholicvote.org/

I would think one could start with that.

No, Church Guidance may not specifically speak ill of one party but we have our right to think as creations of God.

When you have a party that took out “God” out of their platform and supports abortion on demand, sponsors legislation against religious freedom as the ACA is, one can think for themselves.

I mean, the Church may not state we are not to belong to the Satanic Church and commit human sacrifice but I can think for myself and figure that it’s not following Catholic Church teaching.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top