Catholic group’s voters guide urges church principles

[irenaeus1]

I’m not sure how you infer that.

There are other ways to reduce abortion. Consider this: over the past 26 years we’ve had 18 years of republican presidents and abortion is still legal. We’ve had 12 years of a republican controlled House of Representatives and abortion is still legal. How long has the senate been republican controlled? But still we have legalized abortion.

It seems to me that the republicans are not as pro-life as those that vote for them want to believe.

It doesn’t matter whether there was a Democrat or a Republican in the White House or which party controlled the Houses of Congress… what matters is were pro-life people in the White House or in sufficient numbers in both Houses. Why? For exactly the reason that Bush was allowed to exercise when appointing Supreme Court Justices. You can have the most staunch pro-life people in the executive and the legislative branches, but that won’t get the job done provided liberal activist pro-death judges are legislating from the bench. What the pro-life people in the executive and the legislative branches, particularly the Senate, has done has positioned the cause for when such a scenario arose as when Supreme Court Justices stepped down and needed to be replaced. While we do not know for sure what the two that Bush nominated will do, we can be assured that the choices made stand a much better chance of being instrumental in overturning Roe than if Kerry had been able to nominate the replacements. This has nothing to do with Bush being Republican or Kerry being Democrat. It had to do with their professed positions on the matter - clear and simple. Are all Republicans pro-life? Absolutely not. Are there Democrats who are pro-life? Sure. I will support candidates from either party provided they respect the life of the unborn.

Some people argue that I should not be a single-issue voter. I usually reply by asking them if they supported a candidate that had one of the best welfare reform plans, the best health care programs to propose, the best prescription drug options, the best education reform, but was an active member of the KKK would that be enough for them to not consider them for their vote? That’s usually enough to get them to at least think about the reasonableness of allowing a single issue to screen further consideration.

In Christ,
Irenaeus

 

[cheese_sdc]

Some people argue that I should not be a single-issue voter. I usually reply by asking them if they supported a candidate that had one of the best welfare reform plans, the best health care programs to propose, the best prescription drug options, the best education reform, but was an active member of the KKK would that be enough for them to not consider them for their vote? That’s usually enough to get them to at least think about the reasonableness of allowing a single issue to screen further consideration.

In Christ,
Irenaeus

How about a person that declares that he/she is pro-life, then lies to the country to get support of invading another nation, spends the country into massive amounts of debt, and whose fiscal policies are irresponsible?

 

[Holly3278]

If you want a good Catholic Voters guide, go to www.caaction.com

 

[KathleenElsie]

How about a person that declares that he/she is pro-life, then lies to the country to get support of invading another nation, spends the country into massive amounts of debt, and whose fiscal policies are irresponsible?

Ah the conspiracy theory of the left. Bush can do no right.:banghead: I guess the honesty that Clinton showed in his presidency was better.

 

[cheese_sdc]

Ah the conspiracy theory of the left. Bush can do no right.:banghead: I guess the honesty that Clinton showed in his presidency was better.

Actually I am a registered independant who voted for George Bush Senior and George W. Bush twice.

I also try to look at the objective facts when making decisions and President George W. Bush has been found wanting.

 

[Jeanette_L]

Actually I am a registered independant who voted for George Bush Senior and George W. Bush twice.

I also try to look at the objective facts when making decisions and President George W. Bush has been found wanting.

And yet when it counted, he did what he promised his voters, and nominated appointees to the Supreme Court who weren’t hands down liberals. That’s what a lot of people wanted when they voted for him. The abortion issue will not be resolved in a presidential term, but through a process which is lengthy. As the previous poster said, Kerry wouldn’t have furthered the Pro-life cause, he would have set it back a decade or more. For those of us who believe this issue is THE moral issue of our generation, the Republican party is all we have to work with, and work with it we will.

And although the Republicans have not been able to overturn Roe vs Wade as of yet, at least within that party the issue is alive and well and discussion is not forbidden. You’re not booed off the stage at the convention if you hold Pro-life views on your campaign platform. You won’t find that in Kerry’s camp. He can keep his voters guide.

 

[bones_IV]

And yet when it counted, he did what he promised his voters, and nominated appointees to the Supreme Court who weren’t hands down liberals. That’s what a lot of people wanted when they voted for him. The abortion issue will not be resolved in a presidential term, but through a process which is lengthy. As the previous poster said, Kerry wouldn’t have furthered the Pro-life cause, he would have set it back a decade or more. For those of us who believe this issue is THE moral issue of our generation, the Republican party is all we have to work with, and work with it we will.

And although the Republicans have not been able to overturn Roe vs Wade as of yet, at least within that party the issue is alive and well and discussion is not forbidden. You’re not booed off the stage at the convention if you hold Pro-life views on your campaign platform. You won’t find that in Kerry’s camp. He can keep his voters guide.

Supporting the republican party will not put an end to abortion.

 

[Jeanette_L]

Supporting the republican party will not put an end to abortion.

It will keep the issue alive and relevant.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Supporting the republican party will not put an end to abortion.

People’s hearts must change. There will be no change in law till then.

Yet it is only the Republican party that keeps the issue alive and in the public eye. Those that want to keep killing babies and going toward euthanasia want the issue out of the publics eyes.

You loose more rights to complacency then to force. The blame is large enough to go around. From those pushing the agenda to the “silent” majority that have ignored the issue.

 

[bones_IV]

It will keep the issue alive and relevant.

That’s making abortion into an issue. It’s not a political issue. It’s cold blooded murder. You and I weren’t “pregnancies” or “blobs.” You and I weren’t a “mass of cells” or “unplanned.”

 

[bones_IV]

People’s hearts must change. There will be no change in law till then.

Yet it is only the Republican party that keeps the issue alive and in the public eye. Those that want to keep killing babies and going toward euthanasia want the issue out of the publics eyes.

You loose more rights to complacency then to force. The blame is large enough to go around. From those pushing the agenda to the “silent” majority that have ignored the issue.

You should be well aware of the fact that the Republican party should have accopmlished more than they did. Do you realize that President Bush supported Planned Parenthood the day he came in office. When will the democrats and republicans wake up and stop betraying the babies? Not supporting the republican party is not complacency. You’ve got your wires crossed. We put an end to abortion by doers of the word of God period. President Bush is often heard repeating his “the unborn should be welcomed into life and protected by law” mantra. I think it’s time the President put some action behind his words.

 

[LRThunder]

You should be well aware of the fact that the Republican party should have accopmlished more than they did. Do you realize that President Bush supported Planned Parenthood the day he came in office. When will the democrats and republicans wake up and stop betraying the babies? Not supporting the republican party is not complacency. You’ve got your wires crossed. We put an end to abortion by doers of the word of God period. President Bush is often heard repeating his “the unborn should be welcomed into life and protected by law” mantra. I think it’s time the President put some action behind his words.

But this country isn’t a dictatorship, contrary to what some might say. President Bush can’t force the end to an abortion on the rest of the country, as desirable that might be. It’s going to take time.

 

[manualman]

I was recently informed that the word ‘Satan’ is derived from a word meaning ‘to divide.’ What better way for evil to advance in the world than for christians to cancel out each others votes by equalizing the severity of all issues? Once that is accomplished, it is quite easy for a relatively small group of people who espouse a morally corrupt agenda, but vote as a unified block can have their way with us.

We will continue to be impotent as voters until we can agree upon a prioritization for our votes. To me, murder to the tune of one million per year rather trumps minimum wage and even questionable war rationales. I have my beefs with Bush and had to hold my nose to vote for him the second time, but the alternative wouldn’t have been tolerable even with a clothespin.

I don’t believe catholics can or should ever be a republican block. We should vote what is right in accordance with a properly functioning moral conscience. If we did that, BOTH parties would have pro-life planks and we could move on to the NEXT most serious issue…

But no, let’s squander our influence instead. We can all feel better about that, I’m sure.

 

[bones_IV]

But this country isn’t a dictatorship, contrary to what some might say. President Bush can’t force the end to an abortion on the rest of the country, as desirable that might be. It’s going to take time.

Not suggesting a dictatorship. Let ask you this. Does the complete answer to this enormous problem lie in politics? We can support and vote for referendums such as the one in South Dakota that bans all surgical and medical abortions without exception. We can urge our representatives to support and pass the Right to Life Act, which provides the legal protection of personhood for each human being from the moment his life begins.

 

[LRThunder]

Not suggesting a dictatorship. Let ask you this. Does the complete answer to this enormous problem lie in politics? We can support and vote for referendums such as the one in South Dakota that bans all surgical and medical abortions without exception. We can urge our representatives to support and pass the Right to Life Act, which provides the legal protection of personhood for each human being from the moment his life begins. Think before you speak.

I agree. But ending abortion is going to take more than passing laws. As long as the Supreme Court holds to the views that abortion is constitutional, then passing laws will be pointless.

 

[bones_IV]

I agree. But ending abortion is going to take more than passing laws. As long as the Supreme Court holds to the views that abortion is constitutional, then passing laws will be pointless.

Consider that on 9/11 3,000 people were murdered in the World Trade Center bombing. Bombings also occured near the Pennsylvannia countryside and the Pentagon. Fact: 3,500 babies are aborted everyday surgically here in the United States. That’s one dead child every 24 seconds. Where is the anger? Where is the outrage? Where is the shock? Since I was born after January 22, 1973 I am a survivor LRThunder. At any rate during my mother’s pregnancy I could have been aborted.

 

[rlg94086]

Not suggesting a dictatorship. Let ask you this. Does the complete answer to this enormous problem lie in politics? We can support and vote for referendums such as the one in South Dakota that bans all surgical and medical abortions without exception. We can urge our representatives to support and pass the Right to Life Act, which provides the legal protection of personhood for each human being from the moment his life begins.

Bones,

No one has suggested that politics is the only answer, so you are attacking a straw man. That said, politics is part of the answer. The Republican Party is doing more to support the pro-life side than the Democratic Party. Whom are you suggesting support for? A third party candidate who won’t get into office and therefore won’t accomplish anything?

The appointment of good SCOTUS judges will hopefully improve the court decisions. We need more pro-life congressmen in order to make abortion illegal. To do that, we need to change more minds in the voting populace.

 

[bones_IV]

Bones,

No one has suggested that politics is the only answer, so you are attacking a straw man. That said, politics is part of the answer. The Republican Party is doing more to support the pro-life side than the Democratic Party. Whom are you suggesting support for? A third party candidate who won’t get into office and therefore won’t accomplish anything?

The appointment of good SCOTUS judges will hopefully improve the court decisions. We need more pro-life congressmen in order to make abortion illegal. To do that, we need to change more minds in the voting populace.

Well…okay…but, I suggest you think before you type.

Seems to me that you uncritically support Bush. What you said is hypocrisy. As Father John Hardon said so often, we must be faithful to God, and not to gaining human respect. We are called to say the truth, and to mean it!

 

[rlg94086]

Seems to me that you uncritically support Bush. What you said is hypocrisy. As Father John Hardon said so often, we must be faithful to God, and not to gaining human respect. We are called to say the truth, and to mean it!

How do you read that in my post? I am critical of Bush - he hasn’t done enough. But, from a practical standpoint, what does that mean? I would rather have a politician who accomplishes some of my goals, than a politician who accomplishes none of my goals - or even worse, works against my goals! Are you questioning my faithfulness to God, because I vote in a way that I think will further the pro-life movement?

Why do you assume that everyone who “supports Bush” supports everything he does uncritically? We all have to weigh our options.

God bless,

Robert

 

[bones_IV]

How do you read that in my post? I am critical of Bush - he hasn’t done enough. But, from a practical standpoint, what does that mean? I would rather have a politician who accomplishes some of my goals, than a politician who accomplishes none of my goals - or even worse, works against my goals! Are you questioning my faithfulness to God, because I vote in a way that I think will further the pro-life movement?

Why do you assume that everyone who “supports Bush” supports everything he does uncritically? We all have to weigh our options.

God bless,

Robert

I pity people who support Bush because they cannot see that the devil is enjoying these “baby steps” toward nowhere. May the Lord grant us the courage and strength to do His will and not man’s.