Catholics who vote for those who kill the innocent are-

[phil19034]

Governments are a direct reflection of the people who vote the politicians into office.

I don’t necessarily agree with this. Reason, we are often presented with choosing the lesser of two evils when it comes to elections. 2016 was a perfect example. The two worst candidates in history going against one another.

It takes money and connections to get a political campaign off the ground. Very few politicians succeed via a grassroots movement. YES - some do, but most don’t.

So more times than not, we have 1 corrupt, power hungry lawyer (or former political staffer) vs another corrupt, power hungry lawyer (or former political staffer).

NOW - we are starting to see retired doctors, business people & more veterans run, but still the vast majority are lawyers and former political staffers. The career politicians tend to be very susceptible to corruption.

 

[Divine3]

Isn’t the OP thread about voting in people who promote the death of babies and tragically woman die from abortion too?
Prayer and fasting is needed
100. In this great endeavour to create a new culture of life we are inspired and sustained by the confidence that comes from knowing that the Gospel of life, like the Kingdom of God itself, is growing and producing abundant fruit (cf. Mk 4:26-29). There is certainly an enormous disparity between the powerful resources available to the forces promoting the “culture of death” and the means at the disposal of those working for a “culture of life and love”. But we know that we can rely on the help of God, for whom nothing is impossible (cf. Mt 19:26)

 

[Divine3]

Continued
Filled with this certainty, and moved by profound concern for the destiny of every man and woman, I repeat what I said to those families who carry out their challenging mission amid so many difficulties: 135 a great prayer for life is urgently needed, a prayer which will rise up throughout the world. Through special initiatives and in daily prayer, may an impassioned plea rise to God, the Creator and lover of life, from every Christian community, from every group and association, from every family and from the heart of every believer. Jesus himself has shown us by his own example that prayer and fasting are the first and most effective weapons against the forces of evil (cf. Mt 4:1-11). As he taught his disciples, some demons cannot be driven out except in this way (cf. Mk 9:29). Let us therefore discover anew the humility and the courage to pray and fast so that power from on high will break down the walls of lies and deceit: the walls which conceal from the sight of so many of our brothers and sisters the evil of practices and laws which are hostile to life. May this same power turn their hearts to resolutions and goals inspired by the civilization of life and love.
http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-p...s/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae.html

 

[Londoner]

IMO voting for a candidate I don’t agree with is wasting my vote.

I doubt that many people are able to vote for a candidate with whom they agree on every single issue. For most people it comes down to voting for the candidate who most closely shares their views on the most important issues and/or for a candidate who has the best personal qualities out of all the candidates. Another important consideration can be that voting for a candidate one can at least tolerate can help prevent the election of a truly intolerable candidate.

Recently, for example, I have voted for the Liberal Democrats. This is the party that most closely reflects my views on the most important issues currently facing the UK and is also the party with the highest calibre of leadership. In the past I have voted for the Labour Party because, although I have mostly held a low opinion of the party’s leadership, the incumbent Labour MP in my constituency was a good constituency MP and a hard-working parliamentarian. Now that he has retired, and the incumbent Labour MP is not a good constituency MP, I no longer vote for that party. I couldn’t even consider voting for the Conservative Party because their candidate is a racist and misogynist. I wouldn’t vote for the Green Party because their policies are very close to the Liberal Democrats and they don’t stand a realistic chance of being elected. We also have candidates here from parties like UKIP, the Brexit Party, and various small communist and neo-Nazi parties. One good reason for voting for a basically tolerable candidate is that if everyone abstained from voting for mainstream parties because of relatively minor disagreements on some policies, there would be a real possibility of one of these communist or neo-Nazi parties gaining power.

 

[steve-b]

In the United States, each representative votes individually, not as a party. The platform is a guideline of unity that is voted on and represented as a whole. I am not satisfied with the Democratic Party platform and would like to see their rigidity loosened in regard to abortion, especially with the Republican Party becoming less in line with my morality as well. This will not happen in an election, but takes place over a generation or two.

I do not vote for my vote to "go somewhere." I vote my conscience for the best person, even sometimes when that person is a long shot.

If you don’t want your vote to go somewhere, or said another way, you know your vote will go nowhere, then I have to ask, why vote?

 

[Norseman82]

Jesus was an immigrant

Edit: saw Cruciferi’s post, which was what I was going to post:

People repeat this as fact but it’s technically incorrect.

The Holy Family were “subjects” of the Roman Empire who moved to the Roman Province of Aegyptus. It would be like moving from Ohio to California.

 

[Norseman82]

You will have to give some examples of what he has done to protect innocent babies.

Attempts to defund Planned Parenthood for one. And let’s see how the judges he appoints handle challenges to Roe v. Wade when the time comes.

 

[Norseman82]

I like how Archbishop Sample states it:

I think Archbishop Sample and Fr. Goring are stating basically the same thing, just that Archbishop Sample is playing “good cop” and is more scholarly in his approach, whereas Fr.Goring is more “bad cop” and is “in your face” in his approach.

Another thing: Fr. Goring is Canadian. If anyone reads what is going on up there, it is worse than the United States, especially with free speech issues. Here is a video he released a few days ago where he interviewed a Canadian pro-life activist:

Maybe Fr. Goring is issuing a warning to be vigilant so the United States does not turn into Canada.

 

[Kullervo]

The message is similar, but I think how we state things is also very important.

 

[Divine3]

This is excellent. When she expresses that pro choice people no longer see pro life people as people, but someone to aggressively go against.

 

[farronwolf]

Defunding planned parenthood will probably reduce some of the abortions. However the flip side of that is that it will cause some pregnancies to terminate early due to the reduced healthcare provided to women. Kind of a double edged sword.

Roe is precedent. Even if the court turns it back to the states, it will not ban abortion as a choice for women as it relates to their personal healthcare decisions.

Like it or not, abortion is with us to stay as a legal choice for women. The only way to end it is for the country to have a fundamental change in its thinking. I don’t see that happening, since we have become a “me” society. No turning that back in my opinion.

 

[mythbuster1]

“Will spend eternity in Hell,” suggests that the sin is unpardonable, which would constitute grave public scandal for a priest to say. He has to leave open room for future repentance, without understating the danger those souls are in.

 

[mythbuster1]

There is a distinct possibility that this will require another Civil War to resolve. It is far from certain that things will come to that, but by no means can it be ruled out, and we surely deserve it.

 

[PetraG]

I don’t think that will happen. This isn’t a territorial dispute.

 

[RCIAGraduate]

How do you respond with people who have an issue practically voting for the other side especially if (like me), they have an issue with their stance on seemingly on every other issue (that might be hyperbolic but not the most major fan of them on several issues (even I could (maybe I can, at least compromise))?

 

[JimG]

I voted Democratic for several decades, until the party turned into the party of abortion, gay marriage, and sexual license. I simply could not do it any more.

 

[1cthlctrth]

There have been more than 50,000,000 abortions in the United States since 1973.
And, the Democratic Party even voted against banning 20-week abortions (Pain-Capable) and against protecting infants born after botched abortions.

 

[RCIAGraduate]

What about concerns like the following like the impacts of their fiscal policy to the poor and needy as well as (pardon if it sounds like slander), they don’t seem too great/inclusive of minority communities?

 

[JimG]

I worry about fiscal policy. But what worries me most is that the nation is piling up debt to be repaid by future generations which are becoming smaller and smaller. Eventually the government will have to default on the debt, one way or another, and that will hurt a lot of people.

 

[farronwolf]

For our country to be in the “greatest economic period” in its history and at the same time spending over 1 trillion more than it takes in is just astounding.

When I ask some of my die hard republican friends about it, they tell me that they can accept that because other things are so great. Makes my head spin.

That is akin to getting a raise at work and instead of paying down your debt, going out and finding a house twice as expensive as the one you are in, and buying two new cars to boot.

Years ago, RINO was a derogatory term, however it seems that the current republican party has become RINO’s, except for their stance on abortion. All is well as long as a person says they are pro life, everything else is negotiable.

In the next 10 to 15 years, the baby boomers will be retired, taking a large portion of the workforce out, but yet with record low unemployment, they don’t want immigrants coming into the country to start up the ladder to replace those that are retiring. If unemployment is at less than 4%, who’s jobs are they taking again? More head spinning on my part.

I think all of this is a result of party politics. Folks are afraid to sit down and have a conversation, with facts about how to fix problems, current and upcoming in our country. I feel for my 16 year old son, and the issues his generation will have to face due to the current mindset of Americans.