Do we vote for the lesser of two evils?

[larsont7]

Are you saying you would prefer to have a re-elected Obama name several justices to the supreme court, with the idea that they might be better than Roberts? That seems unlikely to me.

Also, I think it’s a mistake to try to rely on the Court to undo legislative mistakes. The people ought to do that themselves by electing different legislators.

My point was that it won’t matter if it’s Romney or Obama in office, we’ll get the same (or at least very similar) results. And we’ve put in different legislators for decades now from both parites, and the country continues to get progressively worse. This is coming from a former College Republican who has worked on several campaigns and have voted conservative my entire life. I’m just fed up with both parties at this point.

That being said, in some of our state and local elections, we have some very good candidates that I have no problem supporting. I just wonder if we’ll ever see a Presidential candidate worth voting for again.

 

[larsont7]

Catholic Voter Quandary
youtube.com/watch?v=dRjL7Am_Fhk&feature=plcp

I haven’t been keeping up with this thread, so I apologize if this video has already been posted. While I have at times been in conflict with some of what comes off of the Vortex videos, I happen to be in agreement with this one. I’m tired of having to vote for evil at all even if it is the lesser evil, but what other choice do we have in this election?

This video sums it up. It’s not a matter of whether Obama or Romney will bring the country further down the spiral it is headed, but which one will bring it down faster.

Here’s my take: a Catholic in good conscience MAY NOT (under any circumstance) vote for Obama; a Catholic in good conscience SHOULD NOT vote for Romney, though I wouldn’t belittle anyone that does just to keep Obama out of office.

The best thing we as Americans can do is pray, pray, pray for our nation daily. If all the Catholics united on voting for moral candidates, we’d never be put in this situation of a lesser of two evils.

 

[JimG]

My point was that it won’t matter if it’s Romney or Obama in office, we’ll get the same (or at least very similar) results. And we’ve put in different legislators for decades now from both parites, and the country continues to get progressively worse. This is coming from a former College Republican who has worked on several campaigns and have voted conservative my entire life. I’m just fed up with both parties at this point.

That being said, in some of our state and local elections, we have some very good candidates that I have no problem supporting. I just wonder if we’ll ever see a Presidential candidate worth voting for again.

Well, I do think it will matter as to the kind of justices who are nominated–not just to the SCOTUS, but to all levels of the Federal judiciary. I am certain that Obama will nominate those sympathetic to the pro-choice cause.

I think it will make a difference as to whether we continue to lose religious liberty. I’m certain that Obama will continue the weakening of the 1st Amendment that he has begun with the HHS mandate.

And I think it will make a difference as to the rapidity with which the national debt bubble is increased. I am not at all certain that either candidate can avoid the bursting of the debt bubble. The public has become too dependent on it. But I’m certain that Obama will explode it sooner rather than later.

So yes, it does make a difference. And above all, I simply cannot vote for the most pro-abortion president in history.

 

[zab]

Voting for Romney could buy us a little more time to get this country back on track. Obama is not like any other Democrat. People should go see the movie, 2016, if they have a chance.

 

[rlg94086]

Lest we chase a rabbit that does not exist, I was not speaking of refraining from voting, but rather voting for a third party. Let me also clarify that every vote does count, in my case, one eight millionth. As miniscule as this is, it is not zero.

We do not know the future. So why are we always so convinced that certain candidates are unelectable?

Absolutely, Paul. In fact, I am so impressed by you that I am going to write you in. You are not unelectable.

 

[rlg94086]

This video sums it up. It’s not a matter of whether Obama or Romney will bring the country further down the spiral it is headed, but which one will bring it down faster.

Here’s my take: a Catholic in good conscience MAY NOT (under any circumstance) vote for Obama; a Catholic in good conscience SHOULD NOT vote for Romney, though I wouldn’t belittle anyone that does just to keep Obama out of office.

The best thing we as Americans can do is pray, pray, pray for our nation daily. If all the Catholics united on voting for moral candidates, we’d never be put in this situation of a lesser of two evils.

And, the reason a Catholic “SHOULD NOT” vote for Romney is…?

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Larsont7,

I read your post and it has taken me a little time to compose my thoughts … I’ve been voting since 1968… I could not vote for Johnson or the ‘Johnson lite’ of Humphrey - so I voted for Nixon. I’ve been at this a little longer then you… Oh, well … I think it was the right choice at the time, but Nixon was a profound disappointment. And, VP Agnew was even more of a disappointment. You know, we are held accountable by men for the outcomes of particular actions - but, God holds us accountable to what is in our heart when we did whatever it was that we did.

The opening statement of your post, distressed me greatly. Without engaging in a word game - how can the moral choice be not to vote for the lesser of two evils? This is an impossible position to put yourself in - and I pray that you address whatever it was that got you there and then to get out! Honest. To subscribe to what you have proposed is to endorse Hell…

You are not responsible for the decision of Chief Justice Roberts… and I am not either. To my way of thinking (and I am not a lawyer) this was a ‘slam dunk’ - and Roberts talked himself out of doing the right thing. I am confident that Obama was not the first President to be surprised by the vote of someone he picked for the Court!

But, while we are both very disappointed in the Roberts vote - I know I did not build my moral life on this highly promoted lawyer …I’m willing to bet you didn’t either. Yes a pro-life Republican selected Roberts for the position and the Senate approved (Sen Obama and a minority voting against him).

If Obama retains the Presidency, he will be appointing abortion supporting judges who will have a similar view of ‘religious freedom’ as Obama has. Two possibly three Justices may be replaced during the next 4 years - Obama has already made two selections who are not on the Court. I do not know about you - but, I find that scary.

Your choice to vote for a Third Party Candidate is fine - as far as it goes. It would be hoped that you select the candidate that you are most in agreement with - and if he wins fine. I would much rather if you were voting for this Third Party Candidate out of conviction for what he stands for - rather then because you see Romney as a ‘light’ version of Obama If Obama wins - all I can say is ‘Thy Will be done’ - for I have done everything I can think of to present a rational view of why we can not allow this abortion promoting President to win a second term. His one term will be analyzed at length years from now - but, right now, he is a disaster.

We all have the responsibility to denounce evil. Exactly how we do this is up to each one of us. In a little more then 2 months we will be called upon to vote - not our pocket book, but our conscience. This is a difficult assignment - and we will be held accountable before God as to what was in our heart at the time we cast our vote.

God bless

This will be my first election (been voting since 1992) where I cannot in good conscience vote for the “lesser of two evils”. IMHO, Obama and Romney will lead us down the same path over the next 4 years. It’s not a matter of who’s can turn this country around anymore. It’s a matter of who’s going to take it down faster. And Romney, based on his past history (not his “current” political beliefs), is Obama-lite.

I probably wouldn’t be this antagonistic towards this election if it hadn’t been for Republican-appointed “conservative” Justice John Roberts voting in favor of the HHS Mandate. That pretty much made me lose all faith in our political system, and I will be voting for a third party this year, even if it means Obama getting reelected.

I see revolution coming soon, and I’m normally not this much of a naysayer. May God have mercy on our great nation!

 

[ishii]

The Catholic Church has also identified unjust wars as a grave matter. Abortion may be graver but simply calling yourself “pro-life” doesn’t make the evils of spending another $2 trillion on the military (while doing nothing to help the mothers deliver babies in the U.S.) go away. This is my problem with the Republican Party.

Strawmen arguments are cheap, provobis. Who has advocated spending trillions on the military while “doing nothing to help mothers deliver babies” ?? How much do you think should be spent on defense? 1 trillion? 1.5 trillion? .5 trilloin? Please advise. (but first, tell us what expertise you have in military/defense/national security issues).

Ishii

 

[ProVobis]

Who has advocated spending trillions on the military while “doing nothing to help mothers deliver babies” ?? How much do you think should be spent on defense? 1 trillion? 1.5 trillion? .5 trilloin? Please advise. (but first, tell us what expertise you have in military/defense/national security issues).

If the Republicans would listen to Ron Paul, they’d know how much and where to spend the money. He’s more experienced than most of them. But they don’t. They won’t even let him talk at the convention. Or anyone from the Tea Party for that matter. What does that tell you about the sincerity of their “pro-life” position? After tonight I’m not open to the Democrats or Republicans this year. Sorry.

 

[rlg94086]

If the Republicans would listen to Ron Paul, they’d know how much and where to spend the money. He’s more experienced than most of them. But they don’t. They won’t even let him talk at the convention. Or anyone from the Tea Party for that matter. What does that tell you about the sincerity of their “pro-life” position? After tonight I’m not open to the Democrats or Republicans this year. Sorry.

And, this will be different for you how?

ProVobis:

Yeh, I remember that one well. I voted for Nixon and regretted it. He didn’t withdraw troops right away as he promised, dropped the gold standard, fixed prices and wages, appointed enough justices to the Supreme Court to make Roe vs Wade the law of the land without passing Congress, caused the 70’s inflation, resigned, and managed to get the Democrats to take the blame. After Nixon, never voted Democrat or Republican for President again.

It’s pretty disingenuous to claim that you are now not open to either party after claiming you gave that up 40 years ago.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Hi, LeafByNiggle,

Allow me to tell you something about courtesy. You asked me to do something and I declined. You asked again, and again I declined. Unless I am mistaken, this is your third attempt - and, I again, will decline. If you continue with this line of insistance, I will simply stop responding to you.

You posts have been nothing if not courteous, and I thank you for that. There is too much ranting in this forum and I am glad you are not giving in to that temptation.

In referring to my earlier post about the yard sign I was not really coercing you into answering it. I was just drawing an assumption from your non-answer, namely that you would conclude, as any reasonable person would conclude, that it is not a sin to remove your own yard sign for 4 hours. It was more of a rhetorical question than a question that demanded an answer. Of course it is not a sin to do that.

But then I have to look at what it is we have just absolved from sin. Here we have a person who has just deliberately avoided an opportunity to denounce evil, and a grave evil at that. But you identified avoiding the denunciation of evil as a grave matter when it comes to failing to use your vote to denounce evil. I hope you see the difficulty. One kind of denunciation of evil is mandatory and another kind is optional. The evil is the same in both cases: abortion. What explains the difference?

Scripture has a number of examples people who went to great lenghts to get what they wanted - the 'Pearl of Great Price (Matt 13) is a good example. The livies of the Saints offer us the example of real people willing to sacrifice all to do what they believed.

Yes, these are praiseworthy acts when people give there all for the faith. But a lesser person who does not have the courage to give of himself to that extent is not necessary condemned. It is the difference between what is good to do and what is obligatory to do.

The issue I am trying to address is not a fanciful abstraction, but rather the real world of Presidential Politics - and our role in this matter when we go to vote. It really is as simple as that. If denouncing evil in the privacy of a voting booth is too much of an imposition, then everything else is of no real consequence.

I think the idea behind this line of reasoning is that voting is so easy and costs essentially nothing, that if something is not willing to pay such a small price to give voice to his faith then why bother asking if he is willing to pay even greater prices (such as sacrificing a good opportunity to sell your home). Did I do justice to your point? If that is the point, then let me respond by saying that there is a great price associated with voting too. It is not a financial price or even a person hardship. It is the price of having to suppress your desire to express your view on other topics. This is the dilemma of people who disagree with Obama, for instance, on abortion, but who think his environmental or foreign policy position is superior. By having to vote against Obama because of abortion, they suffer the loss of the opportunity to vote for (in their mind) the environment or war. That is a cost to the voter. Therefore I do not think it is irrelevant whether someone is required to bear some great cost to oppose evil in other ways.

 

[ProVobis]

It’s pretty disingenuous to claim that you are now not open to either party after claiming you gave that up 40 years ago.

I didn’t say I wasn’t open to Senate or House positions in the last 40 years. But, to be fair, I’m no longer in Henry Hyde and Pete Roskam’s district because of redistricting so that is part of my voting frustration this year. One was and one is true gentlemen.

 

[Pork_Roll]

Here’s my take: a Catholic in good conscience MAY NOT (under any circumstance) vote for Obama; a Catholic in good conscience SHOULD NOT vote for Romney, though I wouldn’t belittle anyone that does just to keep Obama out of office.

I think that video by Fr. Barron was excellent. He explains how both Ayn Rand (unregulated GOP style capitalism) and Karl Marx are opposed to catholic social doctrine.

 

[rlg94086]

I think that video by Fr. Barron was excellent. He explains how both Ayn Rand (unregulated GOP style capitalism) and Karl Marx are opposed to catholic social doctrine.

But, Fr Barron does not say a Catholic should not vote for Romney/Ryan. He merely discusses the twofold teaching of subsidiarity and solidarity. I’ve seen nothing in Ryan that opposes that twofold teaching. Perhaps, you have more insight into Ryan than Ryan or Our Lord has.

 

[Traditionalism]

Why should I vote for either? One is a false rightist(which means he’s a leftist in rightist clothing), and the other is a leftist. Distributism is what Catholics should support, not greedy Capitalists.

 

[SeekNFind]

I think that video by Fr. Barron was excellent. He explains how both Ayn Rand (unregulated GOP style capitalism) and Karl Marx are opposed to catholic social doctrine.

I totally get why Catholics are against Obama, but it amazes me how many Catholics are on the Romney/Ryan bandwagon. They are an equally bad choice for different reasons

 

[SeekNFind]

Why should I vote for either? One is a false rightist(which means he’s a leftist in rightist clothing), and the other is a leftist. Distributism is what Catholics should support, not greedy Capitalists.

Bolded and repeated for emphasis. Romney is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

 

[pnewton]

I totally get why Catholics are against Obama, but it amazes me how many Catholics are on the Romney/Ryan bandwagon. They are an equally bad choice for different reasons

Why should it be amazing? For many the promotion of abortion by Obama is really, really bad. That’s a Catholic issue.

 

[Traditionalism]

Why should it be amazing? For many the promotion of abortion by Obama is really, really bad. That’s a Catholic issue.

The promotion of Capitalism goes against it too. “Three acres and a cow” is what we need, it’s the Catholic way. Wait for America’s falling, so Monarchies can come back.

 

[SeekNFind]

Why should it be amazing? For many the promotion of abortion by Obama is really, really bad. That’s a Catholic issue.

So is social justice. So Romney and Ryan are really, really bad as well.