Catholics and their political views

  • Thread starter Thread starter aship716
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Then how to explain that there are intellectuals in the Catholic community who voted for Hilary Clinton and not for Trump?
 
Mac said:
Abortion directly attacks life. You cant put that second to somthing that indirectly effects life ,
Click to expand...
But you can’t put abortion first either by voting for Trump because you may be putting a madman in charge who isn’t going to do much to eliminate or even reduce abortion, despite his rhetoric and despite his judicial appointments. It would be different if abortion were a straight ballot issue, but it is not. I would love to vote for a pro-life candidate, but Trump is not the one.
 
Last edited:
Mac said:
No, acually I read it some of it, scanned it looking for abortion , I just didnt see were it said what you say it says. Not wanting to argue just trying to be clear on what exactly was said.
Click to expand...
Don’t just read some of it. Read all of it.
 
Athanasiy said:
Then how to explain that there are intellectuals in the Catholic community who voted for Hilary Clinton and not for Trump?
Click to expand...
An interesting observation. My first reaction is to ask, “So what?” However, I really would like to know the explanation, and hope you get an answer here.
 
In Romania under Nicolae Ceaușescu abortion was prohibited in mostly all cases, so much do that women had to produce proof of menstruation to prove they weren’t pregnant.

Pretend a candidate just like him were running against a Democrat, would he still be the “lesser of two evils”?

Voting, “prolife” means one thing say if there is a referendum on whether to limit or end abortion or legalize abortion. These types of referendums have occurred in other countries. Obviously as a Catholic it would be problematic to directly vote to legalize abortion.

Voting “prolife” in the US for president largely means, “will the president get a chance to put in judges who will overturn Roe V Wade, then it will go to the states, who then decide what to do with abortion laws.”

Abortion was legalized almost 50 years ago. Since then until president Clinton, all new supreme court judges were nominated by republicans.

https://scottericalt.com/vote-republican-to-stop-abortion/

And here is an excerpt of Evangelium Vitae, The Gospel of Life, an encyclical by Pope John Paul.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 

40.png
Voting for a pro-abortion candidate a mortal sin? Ask an Apologist
I have a question for an apologist. According to Fr. Stephen Toroacco, in his “A Brief Catechism for Catholic Voters” (Copyright 2003 by Leaflet Missal Company): "To vote for such a candidate simply with the knowledge that the candidate is pro-abortion is to become an accomplice in the moral evil of abortion. If the voter knowingly and freely assents to his or her status as such an accomplice, then the voter sins mortally." My question is, is it a mortal sin to vote for such a candidate? My …
Click to expand...
40.png
Is it a mortal sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate? Ask an Apologist
I have heard that it is a sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate. Is that true? Would the sin be mortal?
Click to expand...
40.png
If you vote for a pro-abortion candidate can you go to communion? Ask an Apologist
A priest in a homily said that if you vote for a pro-abortion candidate you should not go to communion.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
So, does it mean that there are spiritual foundations that are higher in the balance of comparison than the pro-belief beliefs?
 
Athanasiy said:
So, does it mean that there are spiritual foundations that are higher in the balance of comparison than the pro-belief beliefs?
Click to expand...
Fyi, this is written by (then) Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (in a memorandum called “Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles” sent to Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, then archbishop of Washington, D.C.):

Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.

https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/li...eceive-holy-communion-general-principles-2153
 
Yea, it looks like any Romanian president after the Ceausescu is preferable to the despotic and totalitarian pro-life communist leader.
Otherwise, what is the point of promoting life and at the same time destroying it by creating zombie robots who fight God, religion, dignity, freedom, economic creativity and right for dignified life, right for protest, for noble human impulses for changes … 🤔
 
Last edited:
As I fully expected, you are unable to back up your claim of certain knowledge of how conservative people think.
 
I’d like to know about Trump’s adorer’ views this morning when Trump retweeted a video of a Trump supporter in The Villages in Florida shouting: “White Power!” several times toward people protesting Trump. Does this no disturb you that you President retweeted something so horrible? Trump retweetingne of his supporters yelling “White Power!” Seriously?
 
Trump took the tweet down, so his supporters will just say it was an innocent mistake… which means to say, they will once again admit he is thoughtless and careless in what he says and tweets… despite having more responsibility, and thus more moral culpability, than any of us here.
 
Exactly! They’ll day knowing that not only did he retweet it, but he also added a comment that expressed his support for this supporter exclaiming: “White Power!” We cannot say that Trump is racist on this board because we would be severely admonished and told we’re not Christlike, that we are not to judge or condemn others as we’ll be bringing the same upon us, and calling someone a racist is libel, slander, and hate speech and would get a person flagged or suspended from the board, even if anyone were to put the retweet on the forum. But, Trump is an honorable man.
 
Last edited:
Trump has tweeted many things that would get me in trouble on this board - and rightfully so. Such as when he called one of his former female staffers a “dog”. Yet we’ve had Trump supporters on CAF lauding him as a man who “fights back”, defending, as Catholics, his personal insults and attacks.
 
Trump’s victory four years ago was a reaction to everything that’s wrong in DC.
He is

a flawed man but has proven himself in a lot of ways.
Biden is a symptom of what’s wrong in DC. It’s mind boggling that the party of “ diversity” ends up with an even older white man and is a career politician that has been largely ineffective for the forty some years he’s lived off the taxpayers ‘ He is corrupt and frankly not up to the job of POTUS
He may very well win,in which case the left will take over and those that so oppose Trump will be blind sighted by how quickly this country goes down the drain. We who voted for Trump did so do avoid this frightening prospect.In the end we have only been kicking the can down the road it serms
 
ANY form criticism, no matter how mild and factual (even if one quotes Trump’s own words), of Trump on this forum is considered blasphemy and could get one flagged or suspended. Creepily cultist at times.
 
Disturb me? Most of what he says , does and tweets disturbs me.
 
Last edited:
I guess we shouldn’t bring up the European intelligence reports of Putin putting a bounty on American troops in Afghanistan by offering cash awards to Afghan Taliban-linked and affiliated militants who kills American soldiers.This happened as far back as three months ago, February or March at the latest. Putin and Trump both deny it, of course. If Trump was not briefed, as he claims, then why not? He should have been briefed on something of this magnitude. Shouldn’t he have been alarmed and angry that this happened right under him and his intelligence officials did not brief him? Why does he not show any anger toward Putin putting a bounty on American troops with the same fervor as he does about the removal of Confederate statues, for example? Trump is very deferential toward Putin, even subservient to him. Something’s not right. Extremely disturbing.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top