Catholics for Ron Paul Coalition

[JMJSHJ]

I’m sorry, I thought it was the Constitutional duty of Congress to make law and the Executive to enforce it. Maybe I’m just crazy. So the solution to judicial activism is by continuing to focus attention on the judiciary? And you wonder why nothing has changed in 40 years.

And what is Ron Paul’s solution to overturning Roe vs Wade?

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

And what is Ron Paul’s solution to overturning Roe vs Wade?

The Sanctity of Human Life Act, giving the unborn “personhood” status and therefore equal protection under the 14th Amendment.

 

[AntalKalnoky]

Revarum Novarum specifically condemend socialism,.

The USCCB be has no authority whatsoever over Catholics and does not speak for the Church. That is not my opinion-that is the teachings of the Catholic Church. In addition, one must be engaging in what Archbishop Chaput calls " moral and verbal gymnastics that should qualify as an Olympic event. " to read Faithful Citizenship and come to the conclusion that a candidate’s policies on war, the death penalty, taxation, health care, funding of social programs, etc. either individually or in combination mitigate their support of abortion.

.

I’m only taking a little of my Valuable time to correct a couple of your misunderstandings:

• (1) The Regional Bishops Conferences have The Authority to implement Church Policies: write the Area Guidelines or policies subject to Vatican Approval, for the Clergy and Parishes of the area, and Loyal Catholics. Otherwise why would the New Revised Mass wording Rules be Issued, Taught by the USCCB to Parish Clergy, Leaders, why not by individual bishops or the Vatican? It’s been Church Policy since the Second Century, esp the 4th. Why are Liturgical norms written, enforced by Bishops because of the regional Bishop’s Conference Published Norms (Laws)? Checked Liturgical Norms: USCCB?
  

                                                                                                                    (2) Rerum Novarum  Specifically condemned   Extremes  of  economic power abuses.  Not 'socialism'  which is  a universal  system  used by  all, including the Church.  Search the  Definitions  and   explanations of "Socialism"  in the   Wikki; it Includes   capitalism,  communism in extreme forms.
  
                                                                                                                    (3) Your opinion is that the  USCCB  Voter  Guidlines mitigate their support of  abortion? pls  explain.
  
                                                                                                                  Vivat Jesu,  Tony

 

[searching04]

Vote for Ron Paul, take away votes from the Republican nominee, help Obama win re-election, then Obama can give us two more pro-abortion supreme court justices guarenteeing abortion on demand for another 40 years. Good job guys!

Ishii

Bingo. On top of which the guy is an isolationist and wants to legalize drugs and prostitution. I am the biggest Consitutionalist you will find, but this guy is so far off the mark, he’s nuts. On economic policies, he might be OK; other than that, no way. And zero chance of winning.

 

[1holycatholic]

RERUM NOVARUM
“Hence, it is clear that the main tenet of socialism, community of goods, must be utterly rejected, since it only injures those whom it would seem meant to benefit, is directly contrary to the natural rights of mankind, and would introduce confusion and disorder into the commonweal.”
QUADRAGESIMO ANNO
“117. But what if Socialism has really been so tempered and modified as to the class struggle and private ownership that there is in it no longer anything to be censured on these points? Has it thereby renounced its contradictory nature to the Christian religion? This is the question that holds many minds in suspense. And numerous are the Catholics who, although they clearly understand that Christian principles can never be abandoned or diminished seem to turn their eyes to the Holy See and earnestly beseech Us to decide whether this form of Socialism has so far recovered from false doctrines that it can be accepted without the sacrifice of any Christian principle and in a certain sense be baptized. That We, in keeping with Our fatherly solicitude, may answer their petitions, We make this pronouncement: Whether considered as a doctrine, or an historical fact, or a movement, Socialism, if it remains truly Socialism, even after it has yielded to truth and justice on the points which we have mentioned, cannot be reconciled with the teachings of the Catholic Church because its concept of society itself is utterly foreign to Christian truth.”

Rerum Novarum Specifically condemned Extremes of economic power abuses. Not ‘socialism’ which is a universal system used by all, including the Church. Search the Definitions and explanations of “Socialism” in the Wikki; it Includes capitalism, communism in extreme forms.

Why is what you’ve written at odds with the Church?

 

[estesbob]

I’m only taking a little of my Valuable time to correct a couple of your misunderstandings:

• (1) The Regional Bishops Conferences have The Authority to implement Church Policies: write the Area Guidelines subject to Vatican Approval, for the Clergy and Parishes of the area, and Loyal Catholics. Otherwise why would the New Revised Mass wording Rules by Issued, Taught by the USCCB to Parish Clergy, Leaders, why not by individual bishops or the Vatican? It’s been Church Policy since the Second Century, esp the 4th.

10. At the level of particular Churches grouped together by geographic areas (by countries, regions, etc.), the Bishops in charge do not exercise pastoral care jointly with collegial acts equal to those of the College of Bishops.

11. In fact, only the faithful entrusted to the pastoral care of a particular Bishop are required to accept his judgement given in the name of Christ in matters of faith and morals, and to adhere to it with a religious assent of soul.

catholicnewsagency.com/document.php?n=734

. If you can quote a document refuting this please do so. Thus far all you’ve done is post your opinion and ask us accept it as fact

Rerum Novarum Specifically condemned Extremes of economic power abuses. Not ‘socialism’ which is a universal system used by all, including the Church. Search the Definitions and explanations of “Socialism” in the Wikki; it Includes capitalism, communism in extreme forms.

“Hence, it is clear that the main tenet of socialism, community of goods, must be utterly rejected, since it only injures those whom it would seem meant to benefit, is directly contrary to the natural rights of mankind, and would introduce confusion and disorder into the commonweal.”

vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_15051891_rerum-novarum_en.html

Please note that this says nothing about extremes of socialism, . It condmens the basic tenants of socialism itself.

Your opinion is that the USCCB Voter Guidlines support abortion?

Obviously not. I was commenting on those who try to twist Faithful Citizenship into support their view that they can vote for pro-abortion candidate if they think he is right on other issues.

 

[kubark]

You are assuming your conclusion in your premise. That’s an invalid proposition, since both sides of it are identical. “UNJUST war=evil”. Of course it is.

Wrong. I was simply making a distinction between a just war and “war” in general as it relates to official church statements regarding the “wars” in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. As far as I know, the Church has not yet spoken as to whether or not these wars are just. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that these wars (Iraq and Libya in particular) are unconstitutional and illegitimate and therefore could never be considered “prudential” (see the Catechism) or in the interests of the “maintenance of the peace” (Gaudium et spes, Vatican II). I was also making a comparison between the evil of abortion and the equally-wrong evil of unjust war. “Pro-life” is a comprehensive concept. Any politician who calls himself “pro-life” but supports a foreign policy that promotes UNJUST war IS NOT PRO-LIFE and defiinitely not worth a Catholic’s vote.

 

[estesbob]

Wrong. I was simply making a distinction between a just war and “war” in general as it relates to official church statements regarding the “wars” in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. As far as I know, the Church has not yet spoken as to whether or not these wars are just. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that these wars (Iraq and Libya in particular) are unconstitutional and illegitimate and therefore could never be considered “prudential” (see the Catechism) or in the interests of the “maintenance of the peace” (Gaudium et spes, Vatican II). I was also making a comparison between the evil of abortion and the equally-wrong evil of unjust war. "Pro-life" is a comprehensive concept. Any politician who calls himself “pro-life” but supports a foreign policy that promotes UNJUST war IS NOT PRO-LIFE and defiinitely not worth a Catholic’s vote.

You are of course entitled to hold this opinion, but people need to be aware that what you’re expressing is just an opinion and does not reflect the teachings of the church. Unless the Church specifically declares a war unjust, which no one contends is the case with Afghanistan or Iraq, .the decision as to whether support a war is up to this prudential judgment of the individual Catholic. . Even if a Catholic were to determine that a war was, in their opinion, unjust that would not give them a proportionate reason to vote for a pro-abortion candidate who opposed the war.

 

[kubark]

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.
​

*Then Cardinal Ratzinger, July 2004

Again, you miss the point and are misrepresenting Ratzinger. When he says “war” he is talking about JUST WAR and “diversity of opinion” about waging JUST WAR. NOWHERE has the Church declared our current foreign adventures to be JUST WARS.

 

[AntalKalnoky]

Why is what you’ve written at odds with the Church?

Don’t Catholic Clergy live in Community, ‘socilist? Need to understand the DefinitionS of all collective systems, wchich general;ly include capitalism. pls wikki the Details of "socialism’, including our Church Biblical Basis. What about Rerum Novarum and on extreme Wealth, and Greed for Money? Why left out?

                                                                                                                    Is   all weather  bad/evil, condemned,   because of extremes:  Tornadoes, Droughts, etc.,  etc?    :hey_bud::ehh::whistle:   Only  some things are Inherently Evil:  Killing,  Fetti  or the  elderly.    (IMO:  Removing USA Jobs  1980's  and  2000's, Now   creating  4.5  jobs in other  Nations  for each new one in the USA.  Our  Economy is  dependant on USA Employment,  with  $2  Trillion  Cash in Hand  by our Wealthiest Here,  virtually untaxed  too  since  2002.)                                                                                                    Why not Tax the  Richest,, most Profitable in the   World, Instead  of  paying them over  $100 Million tax   dollars  (Our Money) Annually, last  2  years:  Exxon-Mobile, GE?

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Don’t Catholic Clergy live in Community, ‘socilist? Need to understand the DefinitionS of all collective systems, wchich general;ly include capitalism. pls wikki the Details of "socialism’, including our Church Biblical Basis. What about Rerum Novarum and on extreme Wealth, and Greed for Money? Why left out?

                                                                                                                    Is   all weather  bad/evil, condemned,   because of extremes:  Tornadoes, Droughts, etc.,  etc?    :hey_bud::ehh::whistle:   Only  some things are Inherently Evil:  Killing,  Fetti  or the  elderly.    (IMO:  Removing USA Jobs  1980's  and  2000's, Now   creating  4.5  jobs in other  Nations  for each new one in the USA.  Our  Economy is  dependant on USA Employment,  with  $2  Trillion  Cash in Hand  by our Wealthiest Here,  virtually untaxed  too  since  2002.)                                                                                                    Why not Tax the  Richest,, most Profitable in the   World, Instead  of  paying them over  $100 Million tax   dollars  (Our Money) Annually, last  2  years:  Exxon-Mobile, GE?

Catholic clergy willingly live in community. They are not forced too. Big diference.

Secondly, I do believe GE should pay taxes.

 

[estesbob]

Again, you miss the point and are misrepresenting Ratzinger. When he says “war” he is talking about JUST WAR and “diversity of opinion” about waging JUST WAR. NOWHERE has the Church declared our current foreign adventures to be JUST WARS.

Nor have they declared them as unjust. . Again the Church says that support of the wars is up t our prudential judgment and Cardinal Ratzinger statement makes it very clear that a candidates opinion on the war is not proportionate with abortion.

 

[estesbob]

Don’t Catholic Clergy live in Community, ‘socilist? Need to understand the DefinitionS of all collective systems, wchich general;ly include capitalism. pls wikki the Details of "socialism’, including our Church Biblical Basis.

• What about Rerum Novarum and on extreme Wealth, and Greed for Money? Why left out?

Is all weather bad/evil, condemned, because of extremes: Tornadoes, Droughts, etc., etc? :hey_bud::ehh: Only some things are Inherently Evil: Killing, Fetti or the elderly. (IMO: Removing USA Jobs 1980’s and 2000’s, Now creating 4.5 jobs in other Nations for each new one in the USA. Our Economy is dependant on USA Employment, with $2 Trillion Cash in Hand by our Wealthiest Here, virtually untaxed too since 2002.)

• Why not Tax the Richest, most Profitable in the World, Instead of paying them over $100 Million tax dollars (Our Money) Annually, last 2 years: Exxon-Mobile, GE?

Again if you have Church documents backing up your opinions please post them. . I and others have posted church documents showing unequivocally that theCchurch categorically condemns socialism and that the USCCB has no authority over the individual Catholic.

 

[estesbob]

Catholic clergy willingly live in community. They are not forced too. Big diference.

Secondly, I do believe GE should pay taxes.

. It needs be noted that the Church has no opinion on whether GE should pay taxes or not, nor is there any church teaching that states a candidate’s opinion on whether or not GE should pay taxes would mitigate his support of abortion.

 

[AntalKalnoky]

You are of course entitled to hold this opinion, but people need to be aware that what you’re expressing is just an opinion and does not reflect the teachings of the church. Unless the Church specifically declares a war unjust, which no one contends is the case with Afghanistan or Iraq, .the decision as to whether support a war is up to this prudential judgment of the individual Catholic. . Even if a Catholic were to determine that a war was, in their opinion, unjust that would not give them a proportionate reason to vote for a pro-abortion candidate who opposed the war.

                                                                                                                He is expressing Church and Catholic   and worldwide  opinions,  as well  as most combat  veterans   from those theaters,  and Viet Vets.

• The Church does not “Declare War” or Politics unjust. Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have each relativelly strongly spoken against our wars of Our Choice of the 21st Century, as well as the Unenforced, and grossly improper “Free Market” type Wall Street Insider creations and trading, which Directly resulted in Our and World Financial collapse we still endure.
  
  Catholics are not supposed to vote on one or 2 issues, ignore other Inherent grave evils like the Policy of Torture of the 2000’s even our Milregs declared as Prosecutable Wrong, until Chaney supported it as Policy for “Suspects”, 80% of who were found to know nothing. Incidentally, our Iraq Conquest has been found to be Totally Unjustifiable. Meaning Zero. I know the details why, as most do.
• Popes speak in Moral, easily understandable Moral generalities on important Issues, because of their Office as The Vicar of Christ.

 

[kubark]

You are of course entitled to hold this opinion, but people need to be aware that what you’re expressing is just an opinion and does not reflect the teachings of the church. Unless the Church specifically declares a war unjust, which no one contends is the case with Afghanistan or Iraq, .the decision as to whether support a war is up to this prudential judgment of the individual Catholic. . Even if a Catholic were to determine that a war was, in their opinion, unjust that would not give them a proportionate reason to vote for a pro-abortion candidate who opposed the war.

Obama is a pro-abortion candidate. Ron Paul is the most pro-life, pro-constitution candidate and has the best chance of beating Obama in the general election. Voting for Ron Paul is not a vote for Obama. That kind of logic is almost as machiavellian as the “lesser of two evils” argument.

 

[kubark]

Nor have they declared them as unjust. . Again the Church says that support of the wars is up t our prudential judgment and Cardinal Ratzinger statement makes it very clear that a candidates opinion on the war is not proportionate with abortion.

Wrong again. Support for JUST WAR is up to your prudential judgement, not “wars” in general. Just because a war is deemed just doesn’t mean one HAS to support it. But if a war is unjust, regardless of whether or not the Church has determined it to be so, one CAN NEVER support it.

 

[estesbob]

Obama is a pro-abortion candidate. Ron Paul is the most pro-life, pro-constitution candidate and has the best chance of beating Obama in the general election. Voting for Ron Paul is not a vote for Obama. That kind of logic is almost as machiavellian as the “lesser of two evils” argument.

Ron Paul is not the most pro-life candidate running for the Republican nomination. . Several of the other candidates are every bit as pro-life as he is. His foreign-policy positions and the domestic policies he suggests are far outside the mainstream and are rejected by the overwhelming majorities of Americans on both sides of the aisle. . However that is just my opinion and a Catholic can in good conscience support Ron Paul for president.

Once Ron Paul loses the nomination, his supporters will have the options of either supporting the pro-life Republican nominee, the most pro-abortion president in history or sitting out the election either by not voting for writing an a nonviable candidates name … The third option is , in my opinion, just as egregious as voting for Barack Obama, . But again, that is my opinion, not the teaching of the Church.

. I will tell you that after the election is over, I will care little for the opinion of those who did not vote or wasted their vote on a nonviable candidate. . I prefer the opinions of people who made the tough decisions and voted for the best option for solving the problems of the country, not those who sat on the sidelines and want to then throw stones at everybody

 

[estesbob]

Wrong again. Support for JUST WAR is up to your prudential judgement, not “wars” in general. Just because a war is deemed just doesn’t mean one HAS to support it. But if a war is unjust, regardless of whether or not the Church has determined it to be so, one CAN NEVER support it.

And you are more than welcome to consider a any war you want to be unjust. What you can’t do is declare that all Catholics have to share in your opinion that a war is unjust, nor can you use your judgment the war is unjust as an excuse to vote for pro-abortion candidate.

. Both the Iraq and Afghani wars were in full swing when Cardinal Ratzinger made his statement about Catholics be able to use their Prudential judgment to determine whether the support a war or not.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Obama is a pro-abortion candidate. Ron Paul is the most pro-life, pro-constitution candidate and has the best chance of beating Obama in the general election. Voting for Ron Paul is not a vote for Obama. That kind of logic is almost as machiavellian as the “lesser of two evils” argument.

To our GOP boosters on the Forum, any vote for a candidate not anointed by the Republican Party is a vote for Obama. What amuses me is that if everyone who posts on this thread were all to vote for Obama or not vote for Obama, it wouldn’t make a difference in the election outcome. What are we? A few dozen posters?