Do Catholics still support Trump

[MamasBoy33]

I’m resending this for Paul

 

[rrty]

Disregarding the obvious flaws of democracy, Trump is way better than the other options (Neo-Marxists and corporate pets).

 

[PaulinVA]

I’m resending this for Paul

I am 100% prolife. We found out our first son had a terrible birth defect during the sonogram from hell. He was three when he died, and we treated him with dignity during his life to his natural death.

I have had to live the pro life debate in my own life.

So, yes, anti-abortion. Conservative.

But, I disagree that a Catholic could not vote for a Democrat. I believe the Church says its possible if you aren’t voting for them because of abortion.

I think the President has much less influence on abortion policy, and abortions, than a governor or state senator /delagate/representative. They are the ones restricting abortions through legislation. The President? Not as much

I didn’t vote for Hillary, but I think the world would have been safer and America stronger with her as President. And I say that even though I don’t like her politics or how she conducted herself as secstate.

 

[Axsenex]

I’m reminded by a great episode from Babylon 5 titled “Comes the Inquistor” for some reason.

 

[MamasBoy33]

But, I disagree that a Catholic could not vote for a Democrat

I think you know this already but Catholics could vote for a Democrat depending on whose running. This year was pro choice candidate so itvmade it different

 

[PaulinVA]

PaulinVA:

But, I disagree that a Catholic could not vote for a Democrat

I think you know this already but Catholics could vote for a Democrat depending on whose running. This year was pro choice candidate so itvmade it different

I’m using democrat and pro abortion synonymously. You can vote for a pro abortion candidate as long as their stand on abortion isn’t why you are voting for them.

 

[MamasBoy33]

Yeah Your confusing me.
Sonyou are saying that i could vote for a prochoice President as lomg as there other qualities are good?

 

[ProVobis]

Click on the reply arrow to the bottom right of a person’s comment, and it will show that you’re replying to them directly - instead of whomever just guessing that you’re replying to them

Problem is you only get three such replies per day or per visit or however it’s been programmed. Or maybe you guys ignore those warnings here?

I apologize if I’ve confused anyone here by not replying to a name.

(Looks like this one made it through okay.)

 

[Axsenex]

Critical thinking is always lacking & that’s why I consider clueless voters to be useful if I’m working in the political campaign.

Always question everything… of course keep the social teaching & hold them accountable.

We are not doing that so guess what? The quality of candidates declined over the time. Oh well since 15+ Republican candidates failed to even match Trump why?

Quantity over Quality.

Meanwhile… Year 2

 

[Fauken]

Let’s use a bit of hyperbole.

One candidate is pro-choice. Another one wishes to completely outlaw abortion for all stages of pregnancy, but is pro euthanasia of the mentally infirm and elderly. In fact, this candidate is going to mandate that all people who are either over the age of 75, people with incurable mental disorders, infertile, habitually unemployed, and those deemed “unable to contribute positively to society”, be “liquidated”, i.e., killed, arguing the positive economic benefit that will be gained since we don’t have to pay for healthcare. All crimes will be punishable by death, Catholics must be registered as “foreign agents due to their allegiance to Rome”, and this candidate will solve all conflict in the Middle East by turning it all into glass after carpet bombing the whole area with nukes. Oh, and the candidate is a known white supremacist who desires the compete genocide of all non-whites. This will occur once the “undesirables” are gone, though the candidate has not promised this explicitly.

Since voting third party to you is tantamount to being an accessory to murder, for whom would you vote for?

EDIT: I realize some people will object to this scenario and say this second candidate is not truly pro-life. For the sake of this scenario, pro-life refers to being opposed to abortion. Also, in this situation, you cannot choose not to vote, as participation in this election has been made manditory by the passage of a new amendment to the Constitution saying all presidential elections have manditory participation.

SECOND EDIT: For the sake of clarity, the pro-choice candidate is against all of the policies I listed that the pro-life candidate supports. Otherwise, that would defeat the point of the scenario.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

Sonyou are saying that i could vote for a prochoice President as lomg as there other qualities are good?

I"ll answer for him: of course. That’s precisely what the USCCB said in their publication, and what I’ve been saying for a few weeks now. Perhaps it’s sunk in?

 

[ProVobis]

We are not doing that so guess what? The quality of candidates declined over the time. Oh well since 15+ Republican candidates failed to even match Trump why?

The 15+ candidates had almost equal positions, essentially splitting the vote. The other stood out like a sore thumb.

IMO the primaries would be better served if (1) all the states vote at the same time or (2) have runoff elections with the top 2 vote getters. This current system stinks.

 

[upant]

At Vatican City? or where? Can you cite a source for this?

Pope Francis’s 2018 message for the World Day of Migrants and Refugees

It is necessary, therefore, to ensure that agents in charge of border control are properly trained. The situation of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees requires that they be guaranteed personal safety and access to basic services. For the sake of the fundamental dignity of every human person, we must strive to find alternative solutions to detention for those who enter a country without authorisation.

mythical origin stories,

you don’t believe abraham existed? you don’t believe the prophet’s genealogy?

we’re talking genetics and DNA

it is inconclusive. every person on earth is a descendant of adam & eve.

In a study of Israeli Jews and Palestinian Muslim Arabs, more than 70% of the Jewish men and 82% of the Arab men whose DNA was studied, had inherited their Y chromosomes from the same paternal ancestors, who lived in the region within the last few thousand years.

I don’t need to “like Trump” to vote for him.

yup

You can vote for a pro abortion candidate as long as their stand on abortion isn’t why you are voting for them.

is that how your local bishop reads it? who is he? i’d be interested in reading his opinion.

Meanwhile… Year 2

will we have a scotus judge retire? i hope so.

people will object to this scenario

the pro-choice would also be in support of the things you associate with the outlaw abortion person. the pro-choice would just target a different group. so you still have to go anti-abortion.

That’s precisely what the USCCB said in their publication, and what I’ve been saying for a few weeks now. Perhaps it’s sunk in?

as i asked Paul, is that how your local bishop reads it? who is he? i’d be interested in reading his opinion.

 

[Fauken]

I see I didn’t make that clear. I didn’t mention that the pro-choice candidate would be opposed to what the other candidate was supporting, I thought it would be implied. If the pro-choice candidate supported those thing, that would make it easy.

By the way, which pro-choice candidate wanted to kill off unproductive citizens?

 

[Axsenex]

You know I earned BA in Political Science & I am likely to pursue MPA one day.

 

[upant]

which pro-choice candidate wanted to kill off unproductive citizens

which anti-abortion candidate wanted to kill off unproductive citizens?

 

[Fauken]

@upant

None that I’m aware of. But the situation is extreme to the point of ridiculousness on purpose. I admit that this will probably never happen. I’m just trying to illustrate a scenario where a Catholic could in good conscience vote for a pro-choice candidate, not because that candidate is pro-choice or they don’t care about abortion, but because the only other option is so very terrible.

 

[upant]

accepted

 

[SuperLuigi]

So who decides if someone’s conscience is well-formed?

Ultimately, God. Otherwise, I just go by what is in front of me. And really, it’s not rocket science to see what is going on here.

Hiding behind the “you can’t read my mind therefore my point/decision is just as valid” is not an argument and is not acceptable for a Catholic or anyone else who wants to make an honest argument.

I’m not going to say you aren’t following your conscience, but a strong conscience should be able to consider and answer opposing ideas and make adjustments as needed.

I see Catholic supporters of Trump on here willing to do that.

What about Muslims, atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, etc. who are all good citizens of the US?

Same thing. they need to properly form their consciences as well. A person cannot possibly form a good conscience and defend bad ideas just because it comes from someone they like or agree with politically.

 

[SuperLuigi]

The 15+ candidates had almost equal positions, essentially splitting the vote

Respectfully, that is absolutely incorrect. John Kasich wasn’t big on religious freedom, and Ben Shapiro correctly observed that Trump was making veiled promises to unions (which BTW will probably vote heavily Democrat in 2018).