Election 2012 - Who to vote for?

[Corki]

Our founding fathers believed that one’s personal religion had an absolutely essential bearing on one’s public service.

What if a candidate was a member of the Church of Satan? I know that is an extreme scenario that is highly unlikely, but are you telling me that, as a Catholic, I am to simply ignore the core beliefs of a candidate for the highest office in the country? According to a 2001 decision by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and approved by Pope John Paul II, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is not even Christian (ewtn.com/library/theology/mormbap1.htm).

I’m sorry, but the religious beliefs of a candidate for the Presidency are one of the first things that I look at, as a Catholic. Then I look at their record WHILE THEY WERE IN OFFICE and had power - in other words, how well they put their principles into practice. The last thing I consider is their campaign rhetoric and promises, especially when they fly in the face of their record. That’s puts up a red flag.

The problems I would have with a member of a Satanic cult would still be more moral than theological.

But look at the OP. If you use your same yardstick to judge all the candidates, who are you left with? Romney is far from Catholics in terms of theology but close to Catholic teaching regarding morality. Obama is far on both sides and when you throw in record he is off the chart. Who is left to vote for?

 

[kitkatty]

There is no such thing as a perfect candidate–we must always make a choice between imperfect people.

Many conservatives are unhappy with Romney, yet I am just not sure what they are looking for–it seems they are looking for perfection. Personally, I would have enjoyed seeing Santorum in this thing, but Romney took the GOP nomination and he is still “correct” on many really critical issues.

Agreed Irish Patrick,.He wasnt my first choice of a candidate but I will be voting for Romney

 

[Elizabeth502]

There is no such thing as a perfect candidate–we must always make a choice between imperfect people.

And I’ll second that well. Imperfect people. Imperfect histories. Imperfect parties. Imperfect campaign spending legislation. Imperfect religions attached to political personalities.

It is not only our right and privilege, but our responsibility if we feel so impelled, to create alternate allowable political structures, alternate dynamics between spending laws and campaigns, not to mention alternative parties to represent more authentically the common good and commonly held values, which in turn may align more with Catholic values than the current out-of-control train toward official amorality which we are headed toward.

 

[Mickey]

It is not only our right and privilege, but our responsibility if we feel so impelled, to create alternate allowable political structures, alternate dynamics between spending laws and campaigns, not to mention alternative parties to represent more authentically the common good and commonly held values, which in turn may align more with Catholic values than the current out-of-control train toward official amorality which we are headed toward.

Yes. And four more years of Obama will usher in a period wrought with such evil, division, and immorality…that the country may never recover. We are on the precipice after the first four years.

Vote Romney!

 

[Jeanne_S]

Yes. And four more years of Obama will usher in a period wrought with such evil, division, and immorality…that the country may never recover. We are on the precipice after the first four years.

Vote Romney!

Amen brother:thumbsup:

 

[rlg94086]

You keep telling me that you have “the facts” and “real research.” But I have yet to see any of it.

Everytime you post, you keep telling me of these “facts” and “research” that I lack and yet you have not disputed one of the points that I raised, and have not taken the time to show me where I am wrong.

If the stories and facts that I have reported are nothing more than “propaganda” then please, kind sir, do tell me where I am wrong. I am a big boy. I can take a correction. I would like to be informed. Please don’t keep telling me that I am wrong and expect me to take your word for it when all the information I have referenced undermines your narrative.

Find it yourself. I had to, and I have posted it before on CAF. I didn’t accept the yellow journalist reports as easily as you did.

 

[eightandsand]

Find it yourself. I had to, and I have posted it before on CAF. I didn’t accept the yellow journalist reports as easily as you did.

Okay.

If you “have posted it before on CAF” then it shouldn’t be that hard to find your own statements.

I come prepared with my research and I have taken the time to present it to you. The least you could do (since you have spent plenty of time doing nothing but personally attack me as a “tin-foil hat-wearing-regurgitator of yellow propaganda”) is to reference you own posts or at least give some idea where to find them.

I look forward to hearing a legitimate rebuttal rathter than continuous personal attacks.

 

[rlg94086]

Okay.

If you “have posted it before on CAF” then it shouldn’t be that hard to find your own statements.

I come prepared with my research and I have taken the time to present it to you. The least you could do (since you have spent plenty of time doing nothing but personally attack me as a “tin-foil hat-wearing-regurgitator of yellow propaganda”) is to reference you own posts or at least give some idea where to find them.

I look forward to hearing a legitimate rebuttal rathter than continuous personal attacks.

:yawn:

You’re right. It’s easy to find. Go find it. I have better things to do with my time.

 

[eightandsand]

If you go back and read from the start of this thread you will see your “facts” have been pasted here ere many times and refuted even more times than they have been posted.

I don’t see any refutation.

Could you please provide a post number for reference.

If my facts are incorrect I look forward to being corrected and educated on the matter.

Not one person responding to my comments on Romney has yet even attemtped to begin to point out where I am wrong. All they do is tell me that I am wrong and that I need to take my tin-foil hat off. How disappointing.

 

[eightandsand]

:yawn:

You’re right. It’s easy to find. Go find it. I have better things to do with my time.

Well, after finding the time for multiple posts and multiple personal attacks, I think this is what you do with your time.

The only problem is, you never actually disputed anything I said with a factual counter-argument. You didn’t even try to dispute a single sentence regarding my take on Romney.

I’ll take that as a an admission of defeat.

Oh, well.

 

[rlg94086]

Well, after finding the time for multiple posts and multiple personal attacks, I think this is what you do with your time.

The only problem is, you never actually disputed anything I said with a factual counter-argument. You didn’t even try to dispute a single sentence regarding my take on Romney.

I’ll take that as a an admission of defeat.

Oh, well.

Absolutely. I am defeated! Vanquished! How will I recover??

 

[Pork_Roll]

I probably will end up voting for Romney even though I’m seriously concerned about his religion. I suspect that most people here are observant Catholics and only cultural secular Catholics tend to vote for Obama. It doesn’t matter for us living in Alaska as we don’t count with only 2 electoral votes.

 

[Nec5]

I think it’s important for those here that view Romney as rotten to understand that there is little point in debating people who refuse to wake up. Remember Plato’s Allegory of the Cave and those folks chained to the wall? No? Then remember Logan’s Run or the Matrix films about how people will literally fight to remain asleep.

Here’s a pretty good rundown of the sham. The imbedded video of how alike Romney and Obama are is also on the money. The only thing missing from that article is the discussion of God, or rather, the rejection of God common among the parties.
alt-market.com/articles/838-the-lesser-of-two-evils-con-game

It’s sad really. It’s just a big game where the only real losers are the people who buy into it. The rest of us suffer too, but at least we can see it for what it is.

 

[rlg94086]

I think it’s important for those here that view Romney as rotten to understand that there is little point in debating people who refuse to wake up. Remember Plato’s Allegory of the Cave and those folks chained to the wall? No? Then remember Logan’s Run or the Matrix films about how people will literally fight to remain asleep.

Here’s a pretty good rundown of the sham. The imbedded video of how alike Romney and Obama are is also on the money. The only thing missing from that article is the discussion of God, or rather, the rejection of God common among the parties.
alt-market.com/articles/838-the-lesser-of-two-evils-con-game

It’s sad really. It’s just a big game where the only real losers are the people who buy into it. The rest of us suffer too, but at least we can see it for what it is.

Yes…we are all part of the Matrix.

You may watch too many movies.

 

[St_Francis]

:yawn:

You’re right. It’s easy to find. Go find it. I have better things to do with my time.

You do realize that when you are asked to back up an assertion, that you should do so? I don’t think that anyone should vote for Obama because his stance on abortion is een more radical than NARAL’s, and cannot understand how anyone would even consider voting for him just based on that, but in a discussion, if you make an assertion and want anyone to take you seriously, then you have to provide back-up.

 

[Mickey]

I don’t think that anyone should vote for Obama because his stance on abortion is even more radical than NARAL’s, and cannot understand how anyone would even consider voting for him just based on that…

Indeed.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

As a Catholic, you should understand that “religion” is composed of two sides - Faith and Moral teaching. When it comes to politics, a person’s faith should be irrelevant. However, their beliefs in terms of morals are core to their suitability as leaders.

I have seen no reports of Romney trying to impose his religion during his campaign or planning to impose it if he were to be elected. Nor did I see, when Santorum was still in the race, any allegations that he would attempt to impose Catholicism on our country. We may believe that Catholicism is just the greatest and Romney may believe similarly about his faith, but those positions are irrelevant to a campaign unless they were connected with attempts at proselytization. And, neither candidate has done that.

 

[irishpatrick]

eightandsand:
)

Here is a concise statement from Romney:

Romney: I agree with Senator (Fred) Thompson, which is we should overturn Roe v. Wade and return these issues to the states. I would welcome a circumstance where there was such a consensus in this country that we said, we don’t want to have abortion in this country at all, period. That would be wonderful. I’d be delighted.

Romney states strongly he is prolife. I personally I am NOT going to call the man a liar…I will take him at his word.

He also promised to choose a prolife VP running mate, and two days the media asked him if he would keep that promise, and he stated that he “stands behind the things he said during the campaign.” Which means he will NOT pick a prolife running mate. If he does pick a prolife running mate, then that would be a true flip flop and at that time his prolife credentials would disappear.

 

[Mickey]

If he does pick a** prolife** running mate, then that would be a true flip flop and at that time his prolife credentials would disappear.

You mean pro-death…correct?

 

[rlg94086]

You do realize that when you are asked to back up an assertion, that you should do so? I don’t think that anyone should vote for Obama because his stance on abortion is een more radical than NARAL’s, and cannot understand how anyone would even consider voting for him just based on that, but in a discussion, if you make an assertion and want anyone to take you seriously, then you have to provide back-up.

I have…more than once. I don’t feel compelled to search for the data again for another person bringing up the same tired argument, so I fully concede the point to our new poster. He wins! Yay for him.

If he feels compelled to learn more, he can dig deeper. I suppose he will, if he is really interested. If he only interested in defeating me, then he has accomplished his goal.