Election 2012 - Who to vote for?

[didymus]

Life (from natural birth to natural death).

Marriage (one man/one woman).

Family (protect tradtional).

Religious Freedom.

The only person who wants to protect all of those is Romney.

Mr Weathervane has been all over the map on all these issues. Pres Obama has all the wrong principles while Gov Romney has only one principle – getting elected (not uncommon).

My state is secure for Obama so I will probably vote third party as a futile protest or not at all.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

The Catholic nurses I used to work with always found a way to go to mass even when they worked 12 hour night shifts. Many parishes (including mine) have mass on Saturday and Sunday evenings as well as at least three morning masses on Sundays. We have a 1pm Spanish mass on Sunday.

Going to mass on a regular basis is a commandment because if we don’t go we will be at risk for falling away.

But, not always so easy in other professions. For example, railroad train crews don’t always get Saturdays or Sundays off and ER physicians have a similar problem. I’d say that it’s case-by-case as to whether one can make the Sunday obligation.

 

[CMatt25]

I am not discussing his spiritual wellbeing.

You questioned his spiritual life and religion when you stated he is a “convenient Christian”. President Obama states he is a Christian. Not a “convenient” one. He was baptized in and married in the United Church of Christ. He and his wife had their 2 daughters baptized in the UCC. He and his family have attended an Episcopal Church near the White House and have received Communion there. The last I checked both the UCC and TEC are considered Christian by your church.

 

[CMatt25]

I agree with you about being humble if we were discussing personal opinion. That said, the teachings of the Catholic church are infallible and any dissenting views that conflict with the teachings of Christ’s one true Church are simply incorrect. It would uncharitable for us to show tolerance for any beliefs that could potentially result in a soul going to hell.

That the teachings are infallible teachings of Christ’s one true Church and dissenting views are simply incorrect is a matter of your Catholic faith and belief which I know and respect you then believe to know to be true.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

You questioned his spiritual life and religion when you stated he is a “convenient Christian”. President Obama states he is a Christian. Not a “convenient” one. He was baptized in and married in the United Church of Christ. He and his wife had their 2 daughters baptized in the UCC. He and his family have attended an Episcopal Church near the White House and have received Communion there. The last I checked both the UCC and TEC are considered Christian by your church.

Obama states that he is a Christian. By rule I am not allowed to challenge that. I am merely observing that he evokes his Christianity when it helps build rapport with his audience, but then acts in direct opposition, and sometime with intentional antagonism, to accepted Christian belief and behavior. And, by the rules given to us by Christ Himself, which outweigh and overrule the rules of this forum, we are allowed to test the fruit of anyone who calls himself Christian to see if it is good or bad.

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them.”

Matt 7:15-20

 

[scipio337]

Obama states that he is a Christian. By rule I am not allowed to challenge that. I am merely observing that he evokes his Christianity when it helps build rapport with his audience, but then acts in direct opposition, and sometime with intentional antagonism, to accepted Christian belief and behavior. And, by the rules given to us by Christ Himself, which outweigh and overrule the rules of this forum, we are allowed to test the fruit of anyone who calls himself Christian to see if it is good or bad.

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them.”

Matt 7:15-20

This seriously reminds me of Eric Metaxas’ speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, where he desribes “religiousity” without faith, or action.

youtube.com/watch?v=Ahys8AhN-ho

National Review editorial on it here:

nationalreview.com/corner/290393/president-prophet-obama-s-unusual-encounter-eric-metaxas-mark-joseph

The President & The Prophet: Obama’s Unusual Encounter with Eric Metaxas

…“When he was tempted in the desert, who was the one throwing Bible verses at him? Satan. That is a perfect picture of dead religion. Using the words of God to do the opposite of what God does. It’s grotesque when you think about it. It’s demonic.”

“Keep in mind that when someone says ‘I am a Christian’ it may mean absolutely nothing,” Metaxas added for good measure, in case anybody missed his point.

…“Wilberfoce suddenly took the Bible seriously that all of us are created in the image of God, to care for the least of these.”

After carefully describing the inhumane treatment of both Jews and Africans by those claiming to be Christians, he asked then answered a question:

“You think you’re better than the Germans of that era? You’re not,” adding: “Whom do we say is not fully human today?”

 

[bellasbane]

I agree with you about being humble if we were discussing personal opinion. That said, the teachings of the Catholic church are infallible and any dissenting views that conflict with the teachings of Christ’s one true Church are simply incorrect. It would uncharitable for us to show tolerance for any beliefs that could potentially result in a soul going to hell.

You should always be humble, because while certain teachings of the Church are infallible, you are not and your interpretations of Church teachings are subject to error.

Peace

 

[bellasbane]

Obama states that he is a Christian. By rule I am not allowed to challenge that. I am merely observing that he evokes his Christianity when it helps build rapport with his audience, but then acts in direct opposition, and sometime with intentional antagonism, to accepted Christian belief and behavior. And, by the rules given to us by Christ Himself, which outweigh and overrule the rules of this forum, we are allowed to test the fruit of anyone who calls himself Christian to see if it is good or bad.

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them.”

Matt 7:15-20

It sounds like this really troubles you.

Are you saying Obama gives you the creeps or that he just “does not compute”?

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

It sounds like this really troubles you.

Are you saying Obama gives you the creeps or that he just “does not compute”?

His professed beliefs and the outer display of his actions are not co.gruent with each other.

 

[iamrefreshed]

“It is fair to discuss a politician’s or newsmaker’s position on the issues and their qualifications for office, it is not fair to discuss their spiritual well being. Criticisms of a anyone’s spiritual life or spirituality should be left between that person and their spiritual director or confessor. They are not allowed in the forums. If a politician or newsmaker states that they are a certain religion that is the assumed religion of the politician in this forum, please do not question it.”

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7224667&postcount=6

Yes, Obama self-identifies as Christian.

 

[irishpatrick]

To all,

If Romney picks Condi Rice as his VP running mate, would that influence your vote for Romney?

She is pro-legal abortion.

 

[stevegravy]

Nope because of all the other baggage Obama brings to the table. It makes abortion a wipe out.

Gun Runner Executive Privilege to cover Holder’s ineptness
Murdering bushel basket full of Libyans without congressional approval
Obamatax which has reduced citizenship rights putting us on the path to serfdom
Lowering of the countries credit rating
Not correcting the abuses of Fannie MA and Freddie Mac
Failure to protect the borders from illegals entering the country
Reversing the government’s position on the UN arms control treaty and trying to end run second amendment rights
Attack on religious liberty
Unconscionable support for killing babies
Heavy-handed takeover of Chrysler and GM through government extortion tactics on corporate bondholders
Cash for clunkers
Expansion of drone attacks
Rendition
Aiding Al-Qaida in Syria
Abuse of the regulatory process at EPA and NLRB
Oil drilling moratorium
Keeping gas prices exceedingly high
QE1 And QE2 stimulus plan Tarp and trillions in debt, no budget for three years
Failure to move the Keystone pipeline.
Class warfare rhetoric

 

[iamrefreshed]

To all,

If Romney picks Condi Rice as his VP running mate, would that influence your vote for Romney?

She is pro-legal abortion.

What policies do the VP make?

 

[estesbob]

You should always be humble, because while certain teachings of the Church are infallible, you are not and your interpretations of Church teachings are subject to error.

Peace

Which is why I am careful to post Church documents or statements from the magestrium rather than my personal interoperation. For instance Evangelium vitae directly addresses those catholics who support “reproductive rights” and claim that a candidates support of it is a positive factor in deciding whether to vote for them:

*It is frequently asserted that contraception, if made safe and available to all, is the most effective remedy against abortion. The Catholic Church is then accused of actually promoting abortion, because she obstinately continues to teach the moral unlawfulness of contraception. When looked at carefully, this objection is clearly unfounded. It may be that many people use contraception with a view to excluding the subsequent temptation of abortion. But the negative values inherent in the “contraceptive mentality”-which is very different from responsible parenthood, lived in respect for the full truth of the conjugal act-are such that they in fact strengthen this temptation when an unwanted life is conceived. Indeed, the pro- abortion culture is especially strong precisely where the Church’s teaching on contraception is rejected. Certainly, from the moral point of view contraception and abortion arespecifically different evils: the former contradicts the full truth of the sexual act as the proper expression of conjugal love, while the latter destroys the life of a human being; the former is opposed to the virtue of chastity in marriage, the latter is opposed to the virtue of justice and directly violates the divine commandment “You shall not kill”.

But despite their differences of nature and moral gravity, contraception and abortion are often closely connected, as fruits of the same tree. It is true that in many cases contraception and even abortion are practised under the pressure of real- life difficulties, which nonetheless can never exonerate from striving to observe God’s law fully. Still, in very many other instances such practices are rooted in a hedonistic mentality unwilling to accept responsibility in matters of sexuality, and they imply a self-centered concept of freedom, which regards procreation as an obstacle to personal fulfilment. The life which could result from a sexual encounter thus becomes an enemy to be avoided at all costs, and abortion becomes the only possible decisive response to failed contraception.
Ioannes Paulus PP. II
Evangelium vitae

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae_en.html

 

[irishpatrick]

What policies do the VP make?

The VP picks make a statement about the Presidential Candidate. If Romney picks Rice, he is saying the social issues are not important enough to make sure his VP candidate feels the same way.

Further, VP’s are one step away from the Presidency and we should be concerned with what they will do if they became President.

 

[estesbob]

To all,

If Romney picks Condi Rice as his VP running mate, would that influence your vote for Romney?

She is pro-legal abortion.

I would be very disappointed if he did that BUT neither Rice nor Romney support unrestricted taxpayer funded on demand, homosexual marriage or forcing employers to fund immorality. He would still get my vote

 

[irishpatrick]

I would be very disappointed if he did that BUT neither Rice nor Romney support unrestricted taxpayer funded on demand, homosexual marriage or forcing employers to fund immorality. He would still get my vote

Rice supports legal abortion and civil unions.

 

[iamrefreshed]

The VP picks make a statement about the Presidential Candidate. If Romney picks Rice, he is saying the social issues are not important enough to make sure his VP candidate feels the same way.

Further, VP’s are one step away from the Presidency and we should be concerned with what they will do if they became President.

No, you’re saying that social issues are not that important.

That statement is, and has always been, which VP will swing votes my way.

As to your second statement all I can say is…Joe Biden.

 

[irishpatrick]

No, you’re saying that social issues are not that important.

That statement is, and has always been, which VP will swing votes my way.

As to your second statement all I can say is…Joe Biden.

Wrong–I am saying the social issues matter, so what the VP thinks matters. Votes can be swung toward a candidate, or away. It goes both ways. Your Biden comment makes my point.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Wrong–I am saying the social issues matter, so what the VP thinks matters. Votes can be swung toward a candidate, or away. It goes both ways.

Wrong-- you are putting words in Romney’s mouth.

When did he say social issues don’t matter? Citation please.