Can Catholics Vote Democrat?

[zz912]

Did he have full knowledge that he was voting for abortion?

This is immaterial to our discussion. We are not discussing if he committed a mortal sin by voting for abortion. The fact is he voted for pro-abortion legislation (ACA). Whether he committed mortal sin is not in our discussion.

This post DOES show and perfectly illustrate what has been noted before. You are attempting to muddy the waters and reduce clarity to the issue.

Second, would the ACA have been more pro-life if a fully pro-abortion republican was voting for the bill?

This sentence makes no sense. How does it even relate to our discussion?

 

[stinkcat_14]

HHS Mandate came from his caving along with his “group of pro-life dems”. That is how he voted for abortion, tax payer funded abortions, and contraceptives. Even the Little Sisters of the Poor are being coerced to supply these immoral items because of his compromise of values; court cases pending of course.

The truth is there, we simply have to be ready to see it and accept it for what it is.

The question is, did he have full knowledge that he was voting for abortion?

 

[zz912]

You claim that I was intellectually honest and then you want me not to be

That’s not what I said. I said you hold yourself out to be intellectually honest. I was hoping you would live up to that description.

So a republican who supports unrestricted taxpayer funded abortion on demand is exactly equal to a pro-life republican?

Strawman argument.

 

[Lapey]

You claim that I was intellectually honest and then you want me not to be

So a republican who supports unrestricted taxpayer funded abortion on demand is exactly equal to a pro-life republican?

I’m hoping this is a typo…??? May not be “sloppy thinking” but it appears to be sloppy typing. reminds me of my terrible attempt a couple of days ago about Mrs. Pelosi!

 

[Lapey]

The question is, did he have full knowledge that he was voting for abortion?

Are you really making this argument? And you say you’re not a democrat? He knew what the administration wanted, if he didn’t understand what would happen then he doesn’t deserve to be in Congress.

 

[zz912]

You have a serious reading comprehension problem.

Love you too! (and for the record, I comprehended what you wrote just fine.)

I have never and do not intend to vote for a pro abortion candidate (previously stated).

Yeah, I comprehended that. My post had nothing to do with that though.

I think however you are hurting your own party by only allowing one issue to be talked about.

Only one issue needs to be talked about when we are discussing whether you can vote for a Democrat. It DOES NOT MATTER what their views on food stamps or the minimum wage are, when they support murdering millions of babies per year. All the discussions about other issues are attempts to muddy the water and give cover for Democratic catholics to vote for the virulently pro-abortion party. This is contrary to the Faith.

Can we not get candidates that are pro-life to also care about other issues???

Sure, there are discussions all the time. But as noted above, it matters not a whit what other position they hold when they support the virulently pro-abortion party.

Your position is so strong on abortion

Thank you.

yet seems to not exist on any other issue.

Your flawed and incorrect opinion.

Anyways just logged in so I can un-follow this thread and others I have posted on so I do not have to be bombarded with emails about posts from people who are unable to think outside their tiny little world.

Ironic.

 

[zz912]

Are you really making this argument? And you say you’re not a democrat? He knew what the administration wanted, if he didn’t understand what would happen then he doesn’t deserve to be in Congress.

I guess he just missed the weeks-long discussion and strong-arming that was applied to make him and the rest of the “pro-life” Democrats cave. They settled for a worthless piece of paper Executive Order that did nothing.

If Stupak didn’t know it was pro-abortion legislation, why did he hold out so long, and why did he demand an Executive Order? Those two facts prove he knew.

 

[ishii]

This:

This is the kind of muddying, disengenous discussion that gives cover to Democrat catholics to vote for pro-abortion politicians.

“Since all positions of politicians are suspect, we can never know really any position of a politician, nor form any real opinion of them, so I’m okay with voting for the politician that promotes intrisic evils.”

As noted before in this thread, this seems to be your M.O. for discussions. Endlessly bringing up tangential points to cloud the issues and avoid clarity.

Ishii

 

[estesbob]

There is no moral teaching of the Church that demands that I vote for candidates or parties that only pay lip service to issues *), so that people like you and others here are fooled into voting for them.

---

*) for abortion, see above posts on the Republican Party on the federal level. The actions of the Republican Party on the state level are a different matter.

As has been shown repeatedly a Catholic can not vote for a pro abortion candidate. That does not mean they have to vote for their pro life opponent.

I have been involved in the pro-life movement for over 30 years. I have counseled, I have picketed, I have marched. Given my experience with the pro-life movement I’m always somewhat puzzled when I see a post like yours. You would have would have us believe that those of us are most involved in the movement are nothing more than dupes. your post is a perfect example of the mental gymnastics that Archbishop Chaput points out as. a necessity for Catholic Democrats trying to rationalize their support for evil

 

[estesbob]

You have a serious reading comprehension problem. I have never and do not intend to vote for a pro abortion candidate (previously stated). I think however you are hurting your own party by only allowing one issue to be talked about. Can we not get candidates that are pro-life to also care about other issues??? Your position is so strong on abortion yet seems to not exist on any other issue. Anyways just logged in so I can un-follow this thread and others I have posted on so I do not have to be bombarded with emails about posts from people who are unable to think outside their tiny little world.

I think that is a good idea. You evidently believe people who differ from your opinion are attacking you . Not a good attitude to have when posting in a discussion form

 

[Lapey]

Did he have full knowledge that he was voting for abortion? Second, would the ACA have been more pro-life if a fully pro-abortion republican was voting for the bill?

I missed this stawman argurement. ZERO (0) republicans voted for the ACA; pro-abortion or pro-life.

 

[estesbob]

The past is the past. If you want to live in the past why don’t you bring up the 13th amendment and which party fought against it. How about the Civil Rights Act of the 60’s, who fought that?

“The Senate passed the amendment on April 8, 1864, by a vote of 38 to 6. However, just over two months later on June 15, the House failed to do so, with 93 in favor and 65 against, thirteen votes short of the two-thirds vote needed for passage; the vote split largely along party lines, with Republicans supporting and Democrats opposing.”

The original House version;

Democratic Party: 152–96 (61–39%)
Republican Party: 138–34 (80–20%)

Cloture in the Senate;

Democratic Party: 44–23 (66–34%)
Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

The Senate version;

Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%)
Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

The Senate version, voted on by the House;

Democratic Party: 153–91 (63–37%)
Republican Party: 136–35 (80–20%)

Hummm, sure does seem to me that the Democratic Party was much less in favor of freeing slaves or the Civil Rights Act of 1964. How do you like those stats of the past?

Just in case you didn’t realize this, racism is also an intrinsic evil which the Democrats earned the reputation of supporting. Today however, the perceived reputation is the opposite, but is it accurate? I say no.

The only way one can contend the Democrat Party is strong on civil rights is to ignore the destruction of the African-American family and ignore 400,000 black children killed a year with their full support .

 

[Ridgerunner]

This website (written in 2008) makes very good points about Republican reality vs. promises:

Conservatives fear that an opportunity to appoint conservative judges will be lost if they don’t vote for the “more viable” major party candidate. However, Republican Supreme Court appointees gave the country Roe v. Wade and then a court of eight GOP-appointed judges (five by Reagan and Bush) strengthened it in 1992. The same court has rendered many other liberal rulings. Future appointments promise to be no better.

.

This is absolutely a pro-abortion Democrat falsehood.

Nobody even imagined that the Supreme Court would take up abortion as a “right” prior to Roe.

But compare the record of the Repub vs Dem appointees in the Carhart vs. Gonzales case. That was about whether partial birth abortions could be banned legislatively or whether partial birth abortion is a “right”.

Remember now, that partial birth abortion is the direct and cruel murder of a viable child; one that could be born alive if not killed intentionally.

All of the Repub appointees to the Court supported the ban, even Kennedy who is, simultaneously a rogue Repub and a rogue Catholic. All of the Dem appointees supported partial birth abortion. Every one of them.

Of course it matters who is in the White House when appointments come up. Vote Democrat and you’re announcing to yourself and God that you are okay with partial birth abortion. It’s that clear.

 

[stinkcat_14]

I’m hoping this is a typo…??? May not be “sloppy thinking” but it appears to be sloppy typing. reminds me of my terrible attempt a couple of days ago about Mrs. Pelosi!

Yes, it is a typo. It just reminds us all that we are not infallible.

 

[estesbob]

This is absolutely a pro-abortion Democrat falsehood.

Nobody even imagined that the Supreme Court would take up abortion as a “right” prior to Roe.

But compare the record of the Repub vs Dem appointees in the Carhart vs. Gonzales case. That was about whether partial birth abortions could be banned legislatively or whether partial birth abortion is a “right”.

Remember now, that partial birth abortion is the direct and cruel murder of a viable child; one that could be born alive if not killed intentionally.

All of the Repub appointees to the Court supported the ban, even Kennedy who is, simultaneously a rogue Repub and a rogue Catholic. All of the Dem appointees supported partial birth abortion. Every one of them.

Of course it matters who is in the White House when appointments come up. Vote Democrat and you’re announcing to yourself and God that you are okay with partial birth abortion. It’s that clear.

Here is what we are talking about:

partial birth abortion

*Intact dilation & extraction, intact dilatation & evacuation, intact D&E, D&X Medical ethics A late-term abortion in which the fetus is partially vaginally *delivered ***alive *before the skull is collapsed, killing the fetus before complete delivery

The Democrats(with few exceptions) fought this ban. Bill Clinton vetoed it the first time it passed.

 

[CrossofChrist]

CrossofChrist:

My question is: why would you? I honestly want to know something good Democrats have done for our country these last 6ish years. Anyone, please help me out here.

CrossofChrist:

I just genuinely want to know what good Democrats have done in any aspect of public life.

The only person who replied said that their foreign policy is good, they are much less supportive of torture, and their domestic policy is better.

But how does this, and all reasons other Catholics can legitimately disagree with, trump all the abortion–and contraceptive–funding (including overseas), enthusiastic support for gay “marriage”, the HHS Mandate, privatization of religion, and general support for a culture defined by individualism and not by religion? How are Republicans not the go-to option?

 

[Al_Moritz]

This is absolutely a pro-abortion Democrat falsehood.

Really? If you haven’t noticed, that quote comes from the website of the Constitution Party of Virginia, and their statement on sanctity of life reads:

constitutionparty.com/the-sanctity-of-life-2/

They are firmly anti-abortion and only expose the discrepancy between Republican promises and Republican reality, i.e. the Great Republican Lie.

 

[estesbob]

Really? If you haven’t noticed, that quote comes from the website of the Constitution Party of Virginia, and their statement on sanctity of life reads:

constitutionparty.com/the-sanctity-of-life-2/

So should a Catholic be bound by the teachings of the Church or the Constitution party website?

 

[theCrow]

The point is exactly what you say it shouldn’t be. One party supports intrinsic evils, while the other does not. The bottom line question remains, can a Catholic in good standing, with a properly and fully formed conscience support intrinsic evil; i.e. the Democratic Party’s platform? The answer is simply, not without cooperation in that evil. I’ll also repeat this statement, if you want to place the state of your soul in jeopardy by gambling on what level of cooperation it is, be my guess. “As for me and my family, we will serve the Lord”

Also, being completely and uncompromising on the issues of abortion are not right-winged ideologies. This is centrists because it is in fact what Mother Church states we must do. Intrinsic evil means it is NEVER acceptable. We must always fight for the most vulnerable among us; there are none more innocent and vulnerable than the unborn.

I guess I am one of the “vociferous” posters and I do agree with the GOP’s stance on the life issues, but I strenuously disagree on many other issues; immigration and capital punishment being two big ones in my book but not on the same level as abortion. There are none on that level. By the way, isn’t purgatory, sin, and judgment part of the reality of our faith?

One party supports intrinsic evils, while the other does not.

These blanket statements are quite false, and quite dangerous actually. You are creating an US VS THEM mentality, which is exactly what groups like ISIS are trying to do right now, to demonize the whole group of Americans, Dems and Republicans.

 

[estesbob]

One party supports intrinsic evils, while the other does not.

These blanket statements are quite false, and quite dangerous actually. You are creating an US VS THEM mentality, which is exactly what groups like ISIS are trying to do right now, to demonize the whole group of Americans, Dems and Republicans.

What intrinsic evil does the. Republican Party support?