The will still be the same GOP apologist preaching the same message here that they are still the lesser of two evils. After McCain, wouldn’t this time be the time they should suffer loss of support? No? Well in four years we will be hearing the same arguments with new names, at least by the GOP faithful that never look longer than the next four years.
In response to the silly statement that a third party vote is gravely sinful.
I hope you are stating that as an opinion and not fact. I like Ryan and he seems to have energized a lot of the GOP base.
How exactly is Ryan toxic?
There are four other non-negotiables that we are leaving out here. Obama is for all of them. And the Church has spoken on just war and yet they did not say who should judge a war as such. But popes and bishops have spoken on euthansia, gay marriage, cloning and fetal stem cell research.
The obligatory response to those five issues in voting is not part of Catholic doctrine. All we can say for sure is that those five things are wrong in every circumstance and no competing good can ever balance them out and make them good in some negotiated combination. That does not mean each and every question that involves these five issues must be decided in the strongest way possible to oppose those evils, as some people tend to think.
Ah, but is it dumb if one’s vote is ineffective anyway?
Dumb and ineffective, perhaps, but not gravely sinful.
That sounds like the same thing my apathetic, non-voting co-workers say.
Asks, like your co-workers ask. I phrased it in a question for a reason, namely, that I do vote, even though my vote has a 1/8000000th of a say in who our electors go to. As my state is as far from a pivotal state as can be, I think I am accurate in labeling it ineffectual. Thus, why would I be considered dumb for voting for a third party?
Yep. You might as well vote for Mickey Mouse or stay home. It’s a total waste of your time. Look at the polls. It’s already pre-decided. You’ve convinced me.
I have seen it “decided” that a third party can not win, yet you find my statement strange (based on the Mickey Mouse comment). I desire to convince no one (unlike most here). I prefer to follow the Chuch on this one and allow all to use their informed conscience.
Given what Obama has done already to our country, and what he’d likely do with another four more years, it would be an act of moral negligence to not vote effectively against him. Of course the sin depends on how much someone truly understands the evil of Obama policies and isn’t just confused. But I wouldn’t want to not vote against Obama out of a willful ignorance.
Much like voting for the GOP.
And two popes denounced the invasion of Iraq. I think we should take their judgement seriously.
I wonder if we can consider the pro-life Democrats third party?
I agree that it would be negligent to not vote Obama out of office. I’m not sure that the nation can survive another four years of his administration, and even less sure that religious liberty can withstand another four years of assault. And I’m certain that he will do nothing to stop the debt bubble. It will burst under his next administration, plunging us into economic chaos.
Well, not all Democrats are happy about that.
No, the sin will be judged by God alone, not the Republican Party. The Church has never said there is even the tiniest bit of any sin voting third party. It is a conclusion one may come to personally, as eating meat might be something one is compelled by conscient to give up. What you call sin, is **not **the teaching of the Catholic Church.
