I
Ignatius
Guest
Well said. We all need to be praying about this scandal which is misleading many Catholics, forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=317986
- Status
I
Ignatius
Guest
In other words, you will not comply with Church teaching unless it is stated in exactly the formof “No Catholic can vote for a pro-abortion politician when a pro-life alternative is available”. What would be your argument then? forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=317986
I
Ignatius
Guest
I
Ignatius
Guest
In other words, you will not comply with Church teaching unless it is stated in exactly the formof “No Catholic can vote for a pro-abortion politician when a pro-life alternative is available”. The Holy Father, Pope John Paul II before him, and the constant and crystal clear teaching of The Catholic Church has been that abortion is an intrinsic evil and is never justified under any circumstances. It is completely unambiguous. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=317986
T
twb1621
Guest
First let me say that one of the reasons we have come to this place in time with so many Catholics practicing by their own opinion is because in the not too distant past the Church tried to be more “politically correct” which you are going to find changing as time goes on. The Church is RESPONSIBLE to guide the faithful, period. This ridiculous idea that a Catholic is a Christian except when it is not convenient is only acceptable to that Catholic and if anyone thinks the Word (God) is flexible, study closely. If a Catholic knowingly supports abortion directly or indirectly he or she is in fact committing grievous sin. I SAID KNOWINGLY NOW. The Church made it clear that if this president was elected his primary intention was to relax all the restrictions against abortion and this was the man who compared pregnancy to nothing more than an unwanted mistake and a burden. The Bible has always in both the OT and the NT reflected on a child as a gift from God and I re post the following;
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I dedicated you, a prophet to the nations I appointed you.
(Jeremiah Ch 1: 4-5)
Thus says the LORD,
Your redeemer, who formed you from the womb: I am the LORD, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens; when I spread out the earth, who was with me? (Isaiah Ch 44: 24)
5 For your own lifeblood, too, I will demand an accounting: from every animal I will demand it, and from man in regard to his fellow man I will demand an accounting for human life. 6 If anyone sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; For in the image of God has man been made. (Genesis CH 9: 5-6)
Now how whould you like the Church to present this to you? Its ok to vote against life as long as the other issues are covered ?
If a person finds abortion more morally acceptable than abstinence, there is no morality and one of the most critical teachings (reflected in the commandments) is to love and thou shalt not kill. Our president did exactly what the Church said he would and within less than 48 hours we became a country that not only supports abortion legally but will financially support abortion both within our country and outside our country as well. Those who voted for him have a hand in that whether we like it or not and remember as Jesus said, do not be like the pharisees, claim to be one thing but live another. Do you think God’s word if fixable? Our tax dollars now will pay for abortions around the world. DO you think if Christians stood together against abortion there would be any politician who would support it, no way.
T
twb1621
Guest
I think it is interesting to note the Readings for yesterday Saturday March 7th, 2009;
Reading 1
Dt 26:16-19
Moses spoke to the people, saying:
“This day the LORD, your God,
commands you to observe these statutes and decrees.
Be careful, then,
to observe them with all your heart and with all your soul.
Today you are making this agreement with the LORD:
he is to be your God and you are to walk in his ways
and observe his statutes, commandments and decrees,
and to hearken to his voice.
And today the LORD is making this agreement with you:
you are to be a people peculiarly his own, as he promised you;
and provided you keep all his commandments,
he will then raise you high in praise and renown and glory
above all other nations he has made,
and you will be a people sacred to the LORD, your God,
as he promised.”
Reading 1
Dt 26:16-19
Moses spoke to the people, saying:
“This day the LORD, your God,
commands you to observe these statutes and decrees.
Be careful, then,
to observe them with all your heart and with all your soul.
Today you are making this agreement with the LORD:
he is to be your God and you are to walk in his ways
and observe his statutes, commandments and decrees,
and to hearken to his voice.
And today the LORD is making this agreement with you:
you are to be a people peculiarly his own, as he promised you;
and provided you keep all his commandments,
he will then raise you high in praise and renown and glory
above all other nations he has made,
and you will be a people sacred to the LORD, your God,
as he promised.”
P
pennsylvan
Guest
We were all given the right to choose in Eden. Opposing legislation that could imprison women for making the wrong choice does not equal supporting abortion.
T
twb1621
Guest
And here is something else we inadvertantly supported;
Associated Press
updated 7:00 p.m. ET, Sun., March. 8, 2009
WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama’s announcement Monday that he is overturning his predecessor’s policies toward embryonic stem cells also will include a broad declaration that science — not political ideology — would guide his administration.
Obama planned to reverse President George W. Bush’s limits on federally funded stem cell research and direct the National Institutes of Health to put in place safeguards so science is protected from political interference. The moves would fulfill a campaign promise.
Associated Press
updated 7:00 p.m. ET, Sun., March. 8, 2009
WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama’s announcement Monday that he is overturning his predecessor’s policies toward embryonic stem cells also will include a broad declaration that science — not political ideology — would guide his administration.
Obama planned to reverse President George W. Bush’s limits on federally funded stem cell research and direct the National Institutes of Health to put in place safeguards so science is protected from political interference. The moves would fulfill a campaign promise.
T
twb1621
Guest
the illegality would be in performing abortions, not having them.
O
Ockham
Guest
Yes it does. Think about the issue and not the politics.
If I make the wrong choice and murder my boss, you wouldn’t be pro-choice in supporting my incarceration. By upholding society’s laws against murder you are effectively anti-choice. How can you be pro-choice on abortion and anti-choice on murder when they are the same thing?
F
fix
Guest
The statement he made is consistent with traditional moral theology and should be understood in that way.
Here is the statement, again:
This archbishop explains:
Do you have any evidence the Church teaches “proportionate reasons” mean any subjective private opinion is morally licit to act on?
We have a living magisterium, that is one magisterium. Where has the magisterium taught what you claim?
F
fix
Guest
What choice does the baby get?
O
Ockham
Guest
*We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
This sentence has been called “one of the best-known sentences in the English language”[2] and “the most potent and consequential words in American history”.[3] The passage has often been used to promote the rights of marginalized groups, and came to represent for many people a moral standard for which the United States should strive. This view was greatly influenced by Abraham Lincoln, who considered the Declaration to be the foundation of his political philosophy,[4] and promoted the idea that the Declaration is a statement of principles through which the United States Constitution should be interpreted.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Declaration_of_Independence*
Given Obama likes to compare himself to Lincoln, and Lincoln’s belief that the Declaration of Independence which includes the line "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is the foundation of the Constitution, and Obama’s oath to uphold the Constitution, I’d say Obama is acting in breach of his office.
Also think about the line, “created equal”. Created, not birthed. When are we created?
This sentence has been called “one of the best-known sentences in the English language”[2] and “the most potent and consequential words in American history”.[3] The passage has often been used to promote the rights of marginalized groups, and came to represent for many people a moral standard for which the United States should strive. This view was greatly influenced by Abraham Lincoln, who considered the Declaration to be the foundation of his political philosophy,[4] and promoted the idea that the Declaration is a statement of principles through which the United States Constitution should be interpreted.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Declaration_of_Independence*
Given Obama likes to compare himself to Lincoln, and Lincoln’s belief that the Declaration of Independence which includes the line "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is the foundation of the Constitution, and Obama’s oath to uphold the Constitution, I’d say Obama is acting in breach of his office.
Also think about the line, “created equal”. Created, not birthed. When are we created?
H
Hislittlelady
Guest
This is a link from a new website by Father Pavone from EWTN. I thought this might be of interest to anyone who debates pro-choice and pro-life. Please be sure to view the entire website, most of all the links down toward the lower part of the page for viewing. They are extrememely graphic but very necessary for one to get the full picture. I will await your responses on your thoughts after seeing what Father Pavone has presented here. It’s very heart wrenching and although many of you may have seen things of this nature before, I’m sure there are many that have not. So I give you fair warning.
http://www.priestsforlife.org/images/index.aspx
http://www.priestsforlife.org/images/index.aspx
S
savienu
Guest
And both the priest and the deacon, in those circumstances, are right, and praise God that there are clergy left out there with the fortitude to stand up for the truth. If there was a political candidate who advocated the legalized killing of any other group of people, and Catholics were in support of that person, it would be the same situation. It’s called “formal cooperation with evil.” It’s not “improperly inserting the Church into personal politics.”
S
savienu
Guest
So, you supported Cain’s right to kill Abel and disagree with God that he should have been punished? What about Saddam Hussein? Didn’t he have the right to kill also those people, because God gave us freewill in Eden? What about Hitler? Why is he condemned? After all, he was only exercising his right to choose.
B
BillP
Guest
Lets try this one more time.
First. I have never, not once, in this conversation spoken in favor of abortion. So lets lay that strawman to rest right off shall we?
Second, Fix, you quoted Cardinal Ratzinger:
After careful consideration, I believe that McCain’s chances of effectively reducing the number of abortions is extremely small. The final decision isn’t made by the legislature, or the executive. Its made by SCOTUS. Similarly, Obama’s chances of passing the FOCA are pretty much non-existent. There are too many Republican senators, and too many conservative Democrats. It just isn’t going to happen.
There isn’t going to be meaningful change on abortion policy in this country until the hearts of the people change. Right now 15% of the electorate support a complete ban on abortion, 15% support no restriction whatsoever, and 70% are somewhere in between. Until those somewhere “in betweeners” are moved into the complete ban camp, nothing will change.
Nothing changed in 8 years of Clinton, nothing changed in 8 years of Bush, because nothing changed in the hearts and minds of the electorate.
Now, you may agree or disagree with the accuracy of my analysis. You may not find Obama’s positions on other policy areas are “proportionate” to his pro-choice stance. The don’t vote for him. But you have no business lying and saying that my support for Obama makes me ineligible for communion. That’s not what the Church teaches. In fact, if you do make that assertion, you may be committing the sin of calumney.
First. I have never, not once, in this conversation spoken in favor of abortion. So lets lay that strawman to rest right off shall we?
Second, Fix, you quoted Cardinal Ratzinger:
So let’s just deal with this quote.
Got it. If I vote for Obama because he’s in favor of the FOCA I can’t take communion. Makes sense to me.
So if I think that Obama’s positions on various issues (economics, tax policy, foreign policy, etc) collectively, proportionately outweigh his pro-choice positions, then I can vote for him over McCain. Got it.
After careful consideration, I believe that McCain’s chances of effectively reducing the number of abortions is extremely small. The final decision isn’t made by the legislature, or the executive. Its made by SCOTUS. Similarly, Obama’s chances of passing the FOCA are pretty much non-existent. There are too many Republican senators, and too many conservative Democrats. It just isn’t going to happen.
There isn’t going to be meaningful change on abortion policy in this country until the hearts of the people change. Right now 15% of the electorate support a complete ban on abortion, 15% support no restriction whatsoever, and 70% are somewhere in between. Until those somewhere “in betweeners” are moved into the complete ban camp, nothing will change.
Nothing changed in 8 years of Clinton, nothing changed in 8 years of Bush, because nothing changed in the hearts and minds of the electorate.
Now, you may agree or disagree with the accuracy of my analysis. You may not find Obama’s positions on other policy areas are “proportionate” to his pro-choice stance. The don’t vote for him. But you have no business lying and saying that my support for Obama makes me ineligible for communion. That’s not what the Church teaches. In fact, if you do make that assertion, you may be committing the sin of calumney.
O
Ockham
Guest
So if you were in full knowledge of Hilter’s plan for the Jews, but voted for him anyway due to his economic initiatives that would be OK?
You can’t duck this issue by pretending it was a lower priority or suitable alternative candidates weren’t available. If your political views fit most closely with a pro-abortion party then you have to either change their position or find another party.
Obama said the first thing he’d do if elected would be sign the FOCA. That should have been a clear indicator that his priority was not economics, Iraq, or anything else. He made it clear his intention is to murder children and you helped him do it. How does that feel?
You can’t duck this issue by pretending it was a lower priority or suitable alternative candidates weren’t available. If your political views fit most closely with a pro-abortion party then you have to either change their position or find another party.
Obama said the first thing he’d do if elected would be sign the FOCA. That should have been a clear indicator that his priority was not economics, Iraq, or anything else. He made it clear his intention is to murder children and you helped him do it. How does that feel?
B
BillP
Guest
Yes. if I thought that he had no chance of implementing those plans.
For example. Henry Ford was about the worst kind of anti-Semite, but millions of Jews still bought cars from him, not because he was anti-Jewish, but in spite of his anti-semitism, because he made good cars. That was a proportionate reason for them.
Nobody is ducking anything. You are entitled to your opinion about my political beliefs (as I am about yours). No one is entitled to lie about what the Church teaches in an attempt to coerce others into adopting a particular set of beliefs.
The FOCA that you’all are hyperventilating about has been kicking around Congress since 1973 and has never even made it out of committee. In fact the legislation isn’t even pending before Congress at the moment, it hasn’t even been introduced into the current Congress.
Yes, that’s right folks, the FOCA, doesn’t even technically exist. There is no FOCA to fight right now.
As far as Obama the first thing he did wasn’t to sign the FOCA was it? He hasn’t “murdered any children”.
I sleep just fine dude.
Give me a break. Go try intimidating somebody who doesn’t bother to read, look up sources or think for themselves.
F
fix
Guest
You are imputing things to me I never said. I have not said one word about you personally. Please stop making these charges.
I am stating what cardinal Ratzinger said and what the Church teaches. I have not made any claims about any individuals.
You have given no proof the Church teaches proportionate reasons, in this matter, means we each get to decide based on subjective criteria what is proportionate to abortion.
I have given proof of the opposite and here is more:
- Status