Do we have to vote?

[john78]

normally i wouldnt really care who gets elected, but Obama has lit a fire in me of someone i never want to see in office again.

It isnt a question for me of do i have to vote, it is a question of can i really sit here and do nothing and complain about how bad obama is, and still not vote.

personally i can not do that, and i cant personally give my vote to a third party just so some number cruncher can say oooo sir look at these statistics.

My vote is not for Mitt Romney, my vote is AGAINST BARRACK OBAMA, and Romney is merely the only real threat to get Obama out, once Obama is out Romney will have his chance to prove himself, and if he doesnt , guess what, I will be voting AGAINST Romney in the next Election !

That is unless the one running against him is a reflection of Obama or communisim/marxisim, anti america, pro choice, anti israel.

Then i would stick with Romney as the lesser of two evils.

And then only hope and pray that God will bless our country with better leaders.

Every election for a new president or returning president is historical , votes even though WE THINK THEY DO NOT COUNT, guess what

Politicians sure do a lot to make sure they get as many as they can, for something we think doesnt really matter.

It would be nice to sit back and relax and go ya know what, who ever gets elected is really going to do a great job for the country and our freedom.

but we havent reached that point yet, and might never.

can any of us really afford to not vote against obama ?

he rammed a bill down our throats and now we are fighting for Religious freedom once again, what does he have planned down the road that we dont know about ?

If Obama truely is the worst president, than anyone else can do better.

 

[onmyknees]

2240 Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one’s country:

Pay to all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due. 

[Christians] reside in their own nations, but as resident aliens. They participate in all things as citizens and endure all things as foreigners. . . . They obey the established laws and their way of life surpasses the laws. . . . So noble is the position to which God has assigned them that they are not allowed to desert it.

The Apostle exhorts us to offer prayers and thanksgiving for kings and all who exercise authority, “that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way.”

scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2240.htm

And one can add that with so many important things in the USA election (abortion…religious liberty…) …it is very important.

See the Catholic Answers Voter guide…

Thanks for bringing up the Catholic Voters guide Bookcat! I just read it again since I couldn’t remember all the five non-negotiables.

 

[LilyM]

Lets take another example…A teacher assigns her class a vocabulary exercise on Monday and tells them that they will have an oral test on Friday. The students study - each to their ability and desire - and on Friday they are tested.
Would you say that they only “exercised” on Friday? Or did they exercise all week in preparation?

One does not exercise their “right to vote” by showing up at the polls. Your story below demonstrates that. You showed up - but did not vote. Yours was a one time oversight - I wonder how many of your neighbors do this regularly.
The exercise occurs in the study and decision making process that one does preparatory to voting. And if, in that process (exercise) one determines that, for them, no vote is the best vote…then they have indeed {u]exercised

their right to vote.

So - Since you “sat on the couch” (did no exercise) during the time you should have been “exercising” (studying), you were unable to exercise when the time came to perform.

I am not advocating people not voting, but I tell you this… I would rather that people not vote who do not know what they are voting for…

Peace
James

But the ‘exercise’ of studying or learning (which what the students will be doing during their week) is different to the ‘exercise’ of taking a test (which they will only be doing at one specific time - on Friday). Even though studying usually specially precedes tests.

One hopes they would be learning their vocab anyway, regardless of whether or not they were tested on it. And one wouldn’t say they hadn’t learned or studied, provided they went through their vocab homework, if say the school teacher mysteriously disappeared on Thursday night and so the Friday test was never held.

If I said ‘I put on my running shoes this morning’ I did indeed do a particular ‘exercise’, the ‘exercise’ of putting on my running shoes. No one would say, however, that by merely putting on my running shoes I did the ‘exercise’ of actually going for a run in them! Even though one normally does the former before doing the latter.

So it is with the ‘exercise’ of researching political candidates and determining that one cannot or will not vote for any of them, as opposed to the ‘exercise’ of actually voting - going to the polling station and marking that ballot.

No I don’t say I exercised my right to vote. However, I intended to do so and through no fault of my own I was unable. Given my past experience of being able to do the internet research I’ve described, or at least seeing/hearing enough campaign material to know what the candidates stood for, it wasn’t unreasonable to wait until the night before.

So no harm, no foul, no moral wrong or sin. Just a lesson learned for next time.

 

[The_Rock]

ewtn.com/vote/voting_faq.htm

ewtn.com/vote/2008/KC_election08.pdf

 

[JRKH]

I put my post badly–I should have written those who cannot in good conscience vote for any of the candidates offered.

Fair enough. That is why it is great to have these kinds of conversations in charity…Everyone has the opportunity to learn from each other.

A lot of Catholics would not be able to vote Libertarian, for example.

Agreed

A problem with your suggestion would be that if someone voted for, say Ralph Nader as a protest vote, then the major parties would think they need to appeal to another Naderite rather than someone who was just fed up.

Now it’s my turn to apologize…I did not intend to convey that a third party vote should be thought of as a “protest vote”. Rather one should vote for whatever party or candidate most closely aligns with their beliefs whether that party or candidate has a chance of winning or not. By doing so, it strengthens that position and if sufficient numbers vote that way, then the major parties will take notice and make adjustment because they are not foolish and do not wish to go the way of the “Whigs”…

In it’s most basic form, my suggestion to consider third party candidates is designed to
a) Show people that they have more than just two options on the ballot and these other parties are worth a look.
b) A third party vote is not a “wasted vote” which is what the major parties want you to believe.

That said - each person must still make up their own mind how to vote.

Peace
James

 

[Tigg]

During the last election, The last election, I went through a lot of thinking. I finally determined that if one believes in conscience that they cannot vote for either one of the major party candidates, the pragmatism that rears its ugly head and suggests voting for the lesser of two evils should be avoided.

(This is not to say that it would be sinful to vote for either, even for pragmatic reasons bit that some people’s conscience might differ)

I realized that one’s vote is not only a contribution to a corporate action but even more it is an individual act between oneself and God. We have to do what God calls us to do more than what any person tells us to do.

:clapping: :clapping:

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Yes, I agree Julianne!! I cannot believe that Catholics on here are not going to vote for the pro-life candidate.

My belief is that the ones who are sitting it out this time, are the ones who voted for Obama last time. They can’t vote for him this time, so they are keeping their votes out of the system.

Some of them might be Libertarians who are angry that their boy Ron Paul isn’t going to be the nominee.

 

[Tigg]

Yes, I agree Julianne!! I cannot believe that Catholics on here are not going to vote for the pro-life candidate.

So - you are suggesting that in reality, we only have two choices. So what am I to do, an ardent pro-lifer who gives primary consideration to life issues, when in my conscience I believe that **neither **candidate is pro-life? So we are back to the lesser of two evils argument, and my conscience will not allow me to vote for any evil if I have conviction that a 3rd party candidate is pro-life, regardless of whether he has a chance to win.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

vote for a viable third party such as the Libertarians or the green party or some such.

“Viable third party” Sure, that’s why Ron Paul became a Republican so he could win elections - because the Libertarians are so viable. ROTFLOL.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

A sure way for all of us to lose our sufferage is to stop voting. Do you want the kind of world that would bring?

 

[Newbie2]

One does not exercise their “right to vote” by showing up at the polls. The exercise occurs in the study and decision making process that one does preparatory to voting. And if, in that process (exercise) one determines that, for them, no vote is the best vote…then they have indeed {u]exercised

their right to vote.

Peace
James

Yep.

We have a duty to vote, as has been discussed earlier in this thread. We may have two (or more) equally stinky candidates running for whatever office, but one (or more in board elections) candidates is going to win. As a Catholic, your participation in Social Justice matters is required, and that participation is primarily by voting for the candidate best able in your opinion to effect the principles of Catholic social justice through the discharge of duties in their office.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

So - you are suggesting that in reality, we only have two choices. So what am I to do, an ardent pro-lifer who gives primary consideration to life issues, when in my conscience I believe that **neither **candidate is pro-life? So we are back to the lesser of two evils argument, and my conscience will not allow me to vote for any evil if I have conviction that a 3rd party candidate is pro-life, regardless of whether he has a chance to win.

Yes, because that “lesser of two evils” mentality comes from a certain 3rd party that wants to steal voters away from the 2 major parties. A 3rd party vote is thrown away, regardless of your ideals. Nice thought, but doesn’t work in real life. Real life is full of decisions that could be viewed as “the lesser of two evils.” It’s all in how you frame it.

 

[Tigg]

This is difficult subject matter to dialog in the social justice forum as forum rules state we are not to discuss politics here which is why I haven’t specifically named names. I don’t know how we can automatically assume that a third party candidate is running to simply “steal votes away from the other two.” In the last election, I voted for someone I believed to be a principled, truly pro-life candidate who was seeking public office in order to preserve the Constitution from the egregious attacks we’ve seen over the years (even before the current administration got into office.) Ideals really have nothing to do with it; I simply voted for the person I believed would uphold the sanctity of life and promote the common good of this country. It is out of my control if others did not vote for him so he could achieve victory.

 

[JRKH]

Yes, because that “lesser of two evils” mentality comes from a certain 3rd party that wants to steal voters away from the 2 major parties. A 3rd party vote is thrown away, regardless of your ideals. Nice thought, but doesn’t work in real life. Real life is full of decisions that could be viewed as “the lesser of two evils.” It’s all in how you frame it.

Would you care to explain your reasoning behind the bolded statement above?
I am truly interested.

Peace
James

 

[Tigg]

Another observation as to why it is so difficult to discern the reasons for voting or not, is because within the two-party system, we no longer have a party which upholds conservative values. Both major parties are now given to the same inclinations toward globalism, big government and the loss of individual freedoms. And both parties have been quilty of unequaled corruption and deceit. I guess John Adams was right when he said this Constitutional Republic was made only for a moral and religious people. If we are truly people of faith, it becomes more difficult to stay within the narrow confines of the pre-chosen two, who do not, in any way, seem to share our values.

 

[wynnejj]

If the two major political parties, one of whom is assured to win, only offers us packages that contain morally fatal alternatives on a grand scale, does Catholic duty require us to vote for our perception of the lesser of two evils?

This is a question that is in line with the question of whether to obey your parents in all things. So if your parents give you the choice of two commands, both of which are seriously intrinsically evil, do you honor your parents by obeying one of the two commands, or do you honor your parents by disobeying your parents to train them that their authority does not extend to evil works.

If the majority of Catholics voted their conscience exclusively for the best candidate, or not voting at all, are you not training the two major parties that to get our block of voters you must not give us a morally fatal alternative?

If a consumer buys junk with planned obsolescence because its “cheap”, doesn’t he end up buying more junk at greater overall price, training manufacturers to only produce junk for sale for increased profit?

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Would you care to explain your reasoning behind the bolded statement above?
I am truly interested.

Peace
James

This is elementary, my dear Watson.

2 major political parties, correct?

You vote for one of those parties, your vote supports that party’s candidate.

You vote 3rd party, your vote is removed from the pool of either of the major party’s candidate, and given to a candidate WHO WILL NOT WIN the election.

It is the same thing as not voting at all. You can argue with me, the result does not change. Your vote has not counted in the general election.

It’s funny how there is this streak of idealism that runs through some Catholics, yet they will not use the same idealism to fight abortion.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

If the two major political parties, one of whom is assured to win, only offers us packages that contain morally fatal alternatives on a grand scale, does Catholic duty require us to vote for our perception of the lesser of two evils?

This is a question that is in line with the question of whether to obey your parents in all things. So if your parents give you the choice of two commands, both of which are seriously intrinsically evil, do you honor your parents by obeying one of the two commands, or do you honor your parents by disobeying your parents to train them that their authority does not extend to evil works.

If the majority of Catholics voted their conscience exclusively for the best candidate, or not voting at all, are you not training the two major parties that to get our block of voters you must not give us a morally fatal alternative?

If a consumer buys junk with planned obsolescence because its “cheap”, doesn’t he end up buying more junk at greater overall price, training manufacturers to only produce junk for sale for increased profit?

The two parties are not morally equivalent. One advocates and in fact, legislates for access to abortion, fetal stem cell research, human cloning, homosexual marriage and euthanasia, all of which are intrinsically evil. The other party is not morally “fatal” as you term it.

What is in my control? If I vote, I have played some part in the system that I live within. If I do not vote, I have no right to complain in any way. In fact, I am stupid not to participate in such a magnificent system of government, with its 3 branches and its democratic representation. It is my DUTY to participate, whether I get exactly what I want, or not.

On this Memorial Day, remember that many have DIED to keep that right available for you.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

You vote 3rd party, your vote is removed from the pool of either of the major party’s candidate, and given to a candidate WHO WILL NOT WIN the election.

It is the same thing as not voting at all. You can argue with me, the result does not change. Your vote has not counted in the general election.

The error in your logic is that you are thinking only of the one upcoming election, as if there was never going to be another. The fact is that voting for a third party, even if the polls say that party is almost certainly not going to win this time, still raises awareness of the support for that party. Public awareness of that support provides many advantages for that party going forward, incuding getting that party on the ballot, generating media coverage, and convincing more people the next time around not to think like you because they will see more hope in such a vote. So try seeing this question from a larger time frame.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

The error in your logic is that you are thinking only of the one upcoming election, as if there was never going to be another. The fact is that voting for a third party, even if the polls say that party is almost certainly not going to win this time, still raises awareness of the support for that party. Public awareness of that support provides many advantages for that party going forward, incuding getting that party on the ballot, generating media coverage, and convincing more people the next time around not to think like you because they will see more hope in such a vote. So try seeing this question from a larger time frame.

And in the meantime, while you throw away your vote, how many truly evil politicians have been elected and how many judges appointed by those politicians who are TRULY pro-abortion, hate America, are socialists or even Communists? Do we really have the time to dork around holding our vote back? Not any more. Maybe in 1970, when the country wasn’t on the brink of oblivion by our debt and our enemies. Grow up!