H
He_Man
Guest
Actually, go to their website and read their talking points. They almost all oppose Catholic teaching.
- Status
R
rlg94086
Guest
BTW…do you *really *believe this? Look at the news, and consider a couple of things:
- Right now, the prospect of a pro-choice Republican presidental candidate has pro-lifers up-in-arms and the media rightly is making a big deal about it, because they recognize that Republicans are a pro-life party.
- What would happen if a pro-life candidate was currently the lead candidate in the Republican Party…no news. It wouldn’t be interesting, because everyone knows the Republican Party is pro-life.
- Now reverse the situation. By some incredible fluke, the leading Democratic Party presidential candidate was pro-life (not just personally…but calling for the overturn of Roe v. Wade; parental notification; etc.), against embryonic stem cell research, against gay marriage, and against euthanasia (I left cloning out, because I don’t think this is actually as clear in the Demcratic Party). What would happen? It would be a big deal, of course! Why? Because everyone knows the Democratic Party is pro-death at its core (even though they don’t use that term
)!
E
Ender
Guest
I have wondered what I would do if the positions were reversed, if the party I thought was right on most other issues was pro-abortion and the party I thought was catastrophically wrong on them was anti-abortion. I can sympathize with those actually in that situation. All I can say is that I hope I would have the integrity to honestly face the decision and not rationalize it away by pretending there was no difference between the parties on the issue.
In the political arena, it’s the only thing that gets results. If we didn’t elect pro-abortion politicians, just how long do you think abortion would remain legal? There is a one to one correlation between the legalization of abortion and the existence of pro-abortion legislators.political retribution?Is that what gets results?
Ender
C
chicago
Guest
Yes. Political parties are merely means systems not end belief systems.
The Democratic Party, for example, moved in the direction it did PRECISELY because of the expanding role women took within it. Those women just happenned to be feminists. It could, similarly, move elsewhere if pro-lifers took on a more active role within.
No. It isn’t that Republicans are a “pro-life party.” (If it were, then the prospect of it nominating a pro-choice candidate would be unthinkable let alone realistic.) Rather, a significant faction of Republicans make pro-life concerns a major factor in their voting choices. Such as I have previously outlined.
It would not be as interesting of a news item simply because there wouldn’t be as serious of consternation among some. Conflict makes for good entertainment (which news is). It sells!
Again, it is not a matter of what the “party if at its core.” Rather, it is a matter of how significant factions of voters would be disconcerted. It is a reflection about factions of individuals and groups, then, not the overall system.
- Now reverse the situation. By some incredible fluke, the leading Democratic Party presidential candidate was pro-life (not just personally…but calling for the overturn of Roe v. Wade; parental notification; etc.), against embryonic stem cell research, against gay marriage, and against euthanasia (I left cloning out, because I don’t think this is actually as clear in the Demcratic Party). What would happen? It would be a big deal, of course! Why? Because everyone knows the Democratic Party is pro-death at its core (even though they don’t use that term
R
rlg94086
Guest
Oh, I get it. Neither party has any core values at all…they are just clubs.
I don’t think so.
P
pontoon
Guest
If it doesn’t matter what values polictical parties have or if they don’t have any, as may have been suggested, do we consider the Supreme Court nomination not important? There is the difference between the Republican party and the Democrats. Who is standing up for the rights of the unborn and the teachings of Christ? Clearly the democrats are not. Where is the Catholic church leaderships voice and why aren’t the Bishops speaking out against Catholic Democrats who support abortion and gay marriage? Where are you?
E
estesbob
Guest
You dont vote for him-for the exact same reason you dont vote for a abortion and pro-embryonic stem cell research Democrat
E
estesbob
Guest
Its been listed ad nauseum and when it does it gets the usual thats not enough. But ill play the game-first you list what the democrats have done about it.
P
pontoon
Guest
What have the Republicans done about abortion just look at the Supreme Court. President Bust nominated Justice Roberts and Alito and Clinton nominated Ginsberg. Now who is doing something about abortion.
Also lets try another issue same sex marriage supported by our Catholic Democratic politicians in Boston and San Francisco. Marriage is a sacrament institued by Christ between a man and a women.
Lets go on embryonic stem cell research who is for and who is against?
Teaching of Darwinism in our schools and opposed to creationism being taught.
Removing Christmas from the national Holiday.
School pray
Family values
There are many differences
Also lets try another issue same sex marriage supported by our Catholic Democratic politicians in Boston and San Francisco. Marriage is a sacrament institued by Christ between a man and a women.
Lets go on embryonic stem cell research who is for and who is against?
Teaching of Darwinism in our schools and opposed to creationism being taught.
Removing Christmas from the national Holiday.
School pray
Family values
There are many differences
M
melensdad
Guest
Oh please don’t confuse Democrats with facts.
Republicans are far from perfect, and some of them need to be slapped down for their views on some things, but as a party the GOP is far friendlier to life issues than the Democrats.
Our problem, as Catholics, is we refuse to listen to our hearts and souls on election day and feel it is fine to disagree with church teaching. Cardinal O’Malley in Boston just went on a rant against Democrats, but I wonder if it will do ANY good at all or if the Church has just been marginalized by relativism?
A
Amolibri
Guest
When did we say that? You are willing to do your own stretch there, fella. We are speaking of BUSH. …and he is the titular head of the party…no? there is no “most” here.
E
estesbob
Guest
Bush is in favor of contraception(including plan B) and abortion only in cases of rape and incest. His opponents in the last two elections and the Party they represent favored tax payer funded abortions up unitl the moment the head fully exits the womb and contraception. Seems like a preety clear cut disitinction to me.
M
mary_bobo
Guest
Who is the “we”? Please check post #105. And last time I looked, Mary Bobo is not a fella. How about a little charity in your posts. The forum requires it.
C
chicago
Guest
Actually, I don’t think that the urination matches are the ideal way to go about such discussions. That’s also the faulty method employed by those who try to argue about who’s “more pro-life” from the Democratic side, afterall, when Seamless Garment type articulations get tramped out and thrown into the pot.
Rather, all I am saying is that things aren’t as clear cut and unambiguous as some would suggest regarding the inherant nature of political parties. There may be prevailing trends, but that is the extent of what they really are… trends which can change with the wind.
A
Amolibri
Guest
I do apologize, Mary. I was referring to the last poster, and missed the reference.
I do want to say that prolife for me is very broad, to include killing/starving of born people and injustices done to them. If I don’t address them, then I am not truly prolife.
I do want to say that prolife for me is very broad, to include killing/starving of born people and injustices done to them. If I don’t address them, then I am not truly prolife.
A
Amolibri
Guest
Further explaining my last post: (this is from Sr. Joan Chittister’s column today
the (US)bishops in their latest document, “Faithful Citizenship” – the church’s attempt to teach the importance of civic participation in the political process – eschewed single issue politics entirely. "As Catholics we are not single-issue voters. A candidate’s position on a single issue is not sufficient to guarantee a voter’s support," the document says quite directly.
Instead, the document sets out to remind people that voting is, indeed, a moral act but that political morality – social morality – is made up of more things than sexual issues, all of them morally important, all of them to be seen as the voter’s moral obligation to weigh issues and their effects on society at large. “Life is under direct attack from abortion, euthanasia, human cloning, and destruction of human embryos for research. These intrinsic evils must always be opposed,” the document reads. But then says, just as clearly, “This teaching also compels us as Catholics to oppose genocide, torture, unjust war, and the use of the death penalty, as well as to pursue peace and help overcome poverty, racism, and other conditions that demean human life.”
the (US)bishops in their latest document, “Faithful Citizenship” – the church’s attempt to teach the importance of civic participation in the political process – eschewed single issue politics entirely. "As Catholics we are not single-issue voters. A candidate’s position on a single issue is not sufficient to guarantee a voter’s support," the document says quite directly.
Instead, the document sets out to remind people that voting is, indeed, a moral act but that political morality – social morality – is made up of more things than sexual issues, all of them morally important, all of them to be seen as the voter’s moral obligation to weigh issues and their effects on society at large. “Life is under direct attack from abortion, euthanasia, human cloning, and destruction of human embryos for research. These intrinsic evils must always be opposed,” the document reads. But then says, just as clearly, “This teaching also compels us as Catholics to oppose genocide, torture, unjust war, and the use of the death penalty, as well as to pursue peace and help overcome poverty, racism, and other conditions that demean human life.”
E
estesbob
Guest
Are you going to list what democrats have done about abortion?
One only needs read party platforms and look at history to know there is a clear cut distinction between the parties. EVERY SINGLE bill whether it was for parental consent or banning partial birth abortion came from the Republican Party-every single bill to limit abortion was vigorously opposed by the Democrat party. The are investd in death. it is noteworthy that the very FIRST thing Bill Clinton did when he became President was reinstate fundng for oeverseas abortions.
E
estesbob
Guest
Correct-but a canidates postion supporting abortion is sufficient to deny a canidate the Catholics vote. I have often declned to vote for pro-lifecanidates because I ddnt like their stand on other issues. However nNo issue orcombination of issues trump abortion. The Bishops, the Vatican and the Cardinal Ratzinger have made this clear.Further explaining my last post: (this is from Sr. Joan Chittister’s column today
the (US)bishops in their latest document, “Faithful Citizenship” – the church’s attempt to teach the importance of civic participation in the political process – eschewed single issue politics entirely. "As Catholics we are not single-issue voters.** A candidate’s position on a single issue is not sufficient to guarantee a voter’s support," the document says quite directly.**
."
- 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.
**
**
**
E
estesbob
Guest
Fortunatley neither paty or canidate of either party or members of either party support any of the above, other than the death penalty, so it is not an issue when considering what canidate to vote for.
You are not correct that the Church calls for us to oppose the death penalty. I suggest you read the Cathecism. And I mentioned in a prior post none of the above singly or taken as a whole justfy voting for a canidate who supports abortion
C
chicago
Guest
You do realize, don’t you, that very often those bills would not have been passed through the Congress without the support of pro-life Democrats. Typically, the Republicans alone did not have sufficient support for such things (due to the pro-choicers in their party) to get them out of the House, especially.
Are you going to list what democrats have done about abortion?
One only needs read party platforms and look at history to know there is a clear cut distinction between the parties. EVERY SINGLE bill whether it was for parental consent or banning partial birth abortion came from the Republican Party-every single bill to limit abortion was vigorously opposed by the Democrat party. The are investd in death. it is noteworthy that the very FIRST thing Bill Clinton did when he became President was reinstate fundng for oeverseas abortions.
And, at the state level (not to mention local) quite a few legislatures rely upon pro-life Democrats both to enable positive legislative action which supports solid morality (including those things related to abortion) as well as finding key support among the same Democrats to oppose problematic bills which might advance alternative causes.
So, no, I’m not going to compare penile sizes with you on this one. But I will say that it absolutely takes the collaborative support of everyone from all sides to build bridges and gain ground while keeping the walls from tumbling down.
- Status