Democrats go all in for abortion rights

[dmelosi]

I saw where one poster presented what one bishop had to say. We cannot look through the list of bishops for one that agrees with a view and call it done. There is one voice over all Catholics.

I am in the diocese of what Bishop Paprocki teaches. The letter was in the bulletins at mass.

Please see…
ct.dio.org/bishops-column/61-politics-and-moral-complexity-gods-law-comes-first/video.html

Also please take a look at what Archbishop Chaput says: Catholic teaching trumps party loyalty on abortion.

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1204504.htm

The bishops are united on another evil, the hhs mandate. No one questions which party is fearlessly steamrolling everyone on that issue.

 

[scipio337]

So, this is proof he’s telling the truth, by how he misrepresented facts then? He runs one way, but does another, so we can trust him now…

Or the extraordinary assumption that we can take his “conversion” to a pro life view, given his acts and recent history, at its word?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I am in the diocese of what Bishop Paprocki teaches. The letter was in the bulletins at mass.

Please see…
ct.dio.org/bishops-column/61-politics-and-moral-complexity-gods-law-comes-first/video.html

Also please take a look at what Archbishop Chaput says: Catholic teaching trumps party loyalty on abortion.

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1204504.htm

The bishops are united on another evil, the hhs mandate. No one questions which party is fearlessly steamrolling everyone on that issue.

Bishop does NOT endorse Presidential Candidate - Faithful Citizenship instruction proper

The Faithful Citizenship presentations are based directly on the statement of the Catholic Bishops of the United States in their most recent version of the Faithful Citizenship document from October 2011. The Bishops’ statement is quoted extensively throughout the course of the presentation, including the portions of the Bishops’ statement that clearly indicate that intrinsic evils, such as abortion, must always be opposed and that a Catholic can never in good conscience vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil if it is the voter’s intent to support that position.

Bishop Lennon noted, “There is no evidence that the Faithful Citizenship presentations are biased, but reflect the straightforward teachings of the United States Bishops and the Catholic Church on how an individual’s faith relates to his voting choices. This issue has been grossly distorted by a few individuals who wrongly claim to represent the entire Right to Life movement and whose purpose is not to shed light on authentic Catholic teaching but to remake and narrow the scope of Catholic teaching to fit their own personal agenda.” Bishop Lennon also noted that it is very telling that the detractors have given no specific example of any statement made at the forums that is contrary to Church beliefs and teaching.

We have one voice over all Catholics. We cannot pick and choose between bishops, who are clearly divided on the subject.

 

[dmelosi]

Bishop does NOT endorse Presidential Candidate - Faithful Citizenship instruction proper

We have one voice over all Catholics. We cannot pick and choose between bishops, who are clearly divided on the subject.

Divided? I am not aware of any bishops divided on this…please point me to a bishop’s site to review.

 

[dmelosi]

Bishop does NOT endorse Presidential Candidate - Faithful Citizenship instruction proper

We have one voice over all Catholics. We cannot pick and choose between bishops, who are clearly divided on the subject.

Please take a look at the last sentence in the link you provided…
“Again, it emphasized that Catholics had the responsibility NOT to vote for someone who supported the intrinsic evils. This was emphasized over and over, even though all social injustices were discussed.”

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Divided? I am not aware of any bishops divided on this…please point me to a bishop’s site to review.

What you quoted has a link.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Please take a look at the last sentence in the link you provided…
“Again, it emphasized that Catholics had the responsibility NOT to vote for someone who supported the intrinsic evils. This was emphasized over and over, even though all social injustices were discussed.”

Then address the parts I emphasized in my quote.

…if it is the voter’s intent to support that position.

This issue has been grossly distorted by a few individuals who wrongly claim to represent the entire Right to Life movement and whose purpose is not to shed light on authentic Catholic teaching but to remake and narrow the scope of Catholic teaching to fit their own personal agenda.”

 

[_Abyssinia]

There are some who don’t care one way or the other about abortion and support the Dems for other reasons, whatever they are.

I would like to know what reason you think overrides the importance of 1 million being killed in the womb annually?

 

[_Abyssinia]

Bishop does NOT endorse Presidential Candidate - Faithful Citizenship instruction proper

We have one voice over all Catholics. We cannot pick and choose between bishops, who are clearly divided on the subject.

Bishops are not allowed to endorse because it would infringe tax excempt status of the Church. They do not have to endorse, various Bishops inform Catholics on the issues for voting

If you think voting for a pro abortion candidate and just because you do not support the abortion position that gets you a get out of jail free card, you are mistaken. If there is a pro life alternative canddiate and you vote for the pro abortion candidate you are guilty of mortal sin says Fr Stephen Torraco in paragraph 14

 

[dmelosi]

Then address the parts I emphasized in my quote.

Let me try to understand this…Are you trying to tell me that voters don’t know that by voting for those that promote abortion that they are not also promoting abortion, but are not really promoting it because they personally don’t agree?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Please take a look at the last sentence in the link you provided…
“Again, it emphasized that Catholics had the responsibility NOT to vote for someone who supported the intrinsic evils. This was emphasized over and over, even though all social injustices were discussed.”

Go back and reread the link provided.

The Bishop stated:

This issue has been grossly distorted by a few individuals** who wrongly claim to represent the entire Right to Life movement** and whose purpose is not to shed light on authentic Catholic teaching but to remake and narrow the scope of Catholic teaching to fit their own personal agenda.”

The part you are referring me to was written by the Right to Life leader:

“When (name withheld) made her presentation, it wasn’t something she made up. It was a USCCB (U.S.Conference of Catholic Bishops) power point that was being used all over the country. Again, it emphasized that Catholics had the responsibility NOT to vote for someone who supported the intrinsic evils. This was emphasized over and over, even though all social injustices were discussed.”

What the Bishop wrote, was in response to the email received.

 

[estesbob]

Bishop does NOT endorse Presidential Candidate - Faithful Citizenship instruction proper

We have one voice over all Catholics. We cannot pick and choose between bishops, who are clearly divided on the subject.

Can you name a single bishop who said there are proportionate reasons that would allow a catholic to vote for barack Obama or any other candidate who supports unrestricted taxpayer-funded abortion on demand?

The bishops are not divided on this at all.The only people who thinks this is a complex issue are those who are looking for an excuse to reject the church and vote for pro-abortion candidate.

 

[estesbob]

Let me try to understand this…Are you trying to tell me that voters don’t know that by voting for those that promote abortion that they are not also promoting abortion, but are not really promoting it because they personally don’t agree?

Welcome to the bizarro world of CatholiC Democrats, a world where those who promote abortion actaully limit it and those who oppose abortion do so only for selfish personal reasons and actually bring about an increase in abortion

 

[dmelosi]

Welcome to the bizarro world of CatholiC Democrats, a world where those who promote abortion actaully limit it and those who oppose abortion do so only for selfish personal reasons and actually bring about an increase in abortion

I really believe that the selfishness is actually selling ones soul to the devil.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Let me try to understand this…Are you trying to tell me that voters don’t know that by voting for those that promote abortion that they are not also promoting abortion, but are not really promoting it because they personally don’t agree?

Cardinal Ratzinger:

“A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favor of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.”

Bishop Lennon:

…a Catholic can never in good conscience vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil if it is the voter’s intent to support that position.

This issue has been grossly distorted by a few individuals who wrongly claim to represent the entire Right to Life movement and whose purpose is not to shed light on authentic Catholic teaching but to remake and narrow the scope of Catholic teaching to fit their own personal agenda.”

 

[estesbob]

Cardinal Ratzinger:

Bishop Lennon:

*“No, you can never vote for someone who favors absolutely what’s called the ‘right to choice’ of a woman to destroy human life in her womb, or the right to a procured abortion,” he said.

“You may in some circumstances where you don’t have any candidate who is proposing to eliminate all abortion, choose the candidate who will most limit this grave evil in our country, but you could never justify voting for a candidate who not only does not want to limit abortion but believes that it should be available to everyone,”

Cardinal Burke*

 

[dmelosi]

Cardinal Ratzinger:

Bishop Lennon:

From the article from Cardinal Ratzinger…
“When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons”

What proportionate reason do you give for over 1 million intentional deaths that the democratic proudly promotes every year?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Can you name a single bishop who said there are proportionate reasons that would allow a catholic to vote for barack Obama or any other candidate who supports unrestricted taxpayer-funded abortion on demand?

The bishops are not divided on this at all.The only people who thinks this is a complex issue are those who are looking for an excuse to reject the church and vote for pro-abortion candidate.

Can you provide the Pope’s definition of proportionate reasons? He’s the author of the material which is the subject of debate between the bishops. There is minimal division between the bishops. Where the major differences are is in the selective interpretations,of laypersons. for partisan reasons, which seems to be addressed by Bishop Lennon.

No one is looking for an excuse to specifically support abortion itself. The reasons of doubt and mistrust on either candidate have been listed, but also seem to be quickly dismissed for partisan reasons.

 

[estesbob]

From the article from Cardinal Ratzinger…
“When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons”

What proportionate reason do you give for over 1 million intentional deaths that the democratic proudly promotes every year?

The only proportionate reason, as explained by numerous bishops and vatican documents, is when the candidate’s opponent is more pro-abortion than they are.

 

[estesbob]

Can you provide the Pope’s definition of proportionate reasons? He’s the author of the material which is the subject of debate between the bishops. There is minimal division between the bishops. Where the major differences are is in the selective interpretations,of laypersons. for partisan reasons, which seems to be addressed by Bishop Lennon.

No one is looking for an excuse to specifically support abortion itself. The reasons of doubt and mistrust on either candidate have been listed, but also seem to be quickly dismissed for partisan reasons.

I and others have in this thread and numerous times in other threads posted specific quotes from vatican documents, the pope and other members of the magisterium indicating that the only proportionate reason is when a candidate’s opponent is more pro-abortion than they are. If you can find a single member of the magisterium stating there are proportionate reasons that would allow a catholic to vote for Obama or anyone else who supports unrestricted taxpayer-funded abortion on demand please do so.