Election 2012 - Who to vote for?

  • Thread starter Thread starter edwest2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Scott_Lafrance said:
Conservatives and libertarians with no party affiliation admire Buchanan’s thorough analysis and out of the box thinking. Country Club Republicans and Democrats hate him.
Click to expand...
Whoa, whoa, whoa. “Hate” is a strong word. Just because I think he’s a nutter on some issues, doesn’t mean I hate the man. And, I’m hardly a Country Club Republican. I am a Catholic conservative who affiliates with the Republican Party because it is the closest of the two major parties to my views. I like to be part of a party that actually matters, so I can vote in the primary and have some influence.

You and I agree on much more than we disagree.
 
edwest2 said:
I am open to hearing about which of the two leading Presidential candidates are more in line with Catholic teaching (yes, I know one is a Mormon).
Peace,
Ed 🙂
Click to expand...
There’s no such thing as the perfect candidate. But at least Mormons agree with the Catholic Church on the moral issues. That’s more than we can say about Obama. And the fact that Democrats are at war with the Catholic Church but Republicans are not makes it an easy choice.
 
Interesting debate. How can you vote for someone, that’s not a christian and who’s church (morman) was founded by satan. (both which i discovered here on catholic answers)
Won’t the fact that he is president give the LDS faith a boost an a sense of being right and ok. Could lead to strong recruitment of the misinformed and lead all who follow it, straight to the gates of hell.
 
ru1too said:
How can you vote for someone, that’s not a christian
Click to expand...
I have a better question.

How can you vote for a pathological lying sociopathic narcisist who believes in murdering a child in the womb at all phases of pregnancy and has declared war on the Catholic Church?
 
I can’t and won’t, your question still doesn’t answer my question.
Are the salvation of souls a non-issue?
 
ru1too said:
Are the salvation of souls a non-issue?
Click to expand...
There is nothing that can be done about his faith…except to pray for him.

He claims that he stands for the defense of the child in the womb.

He also claims that he believes in traditional marriage.

Economically, I believe he will attempt to reverse this course towards socialism.

I will take him at his word.

He has my vote.
 
LisaA said:
First I want to say I appreciate your extremely well reasoned and convincing posts regarding abortion and the humanity of the unborn. I’ve always thought this was the key to the issue, getting others to recognize the unborn as a human being, distince, separate and unique. Although the unborn is helpless and dependent upon the mother’s body for continued development and readiness for birth, it doesn’t negate the innate humanity of the child.

That being said, I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree on Romney. Your statements regarding his “not having a chance” that Romneycare is the same as Obamacare (Mona Charen has a great editorial on this subject please read it), that he was chosen for us by some mysterious body that apparently took over the brains of tens of thousands of voters who pulled the lever without a gun to their head are just plain wrong. Honestly I read the stuff you write and wonder if we live in the same country. Anyway you are clearly convinced and so am I. Romney was my pick in 08 and he’s been my pick since then. I am neither ignorant nor swayed by white shoe Republicans. I think he is a magnificent candidate and will be an outstanding president.

Lisa
Click to expand...
I am always ready to agree to disagree.

I do not believe that Romney was “chosen by a mysterious body” that put a “gun to the head of the voters.” I realize that many people actually do believe what Romney says rather than what he does, and vote accordingy. I simply refuse to ignore what the man did while in power when it counted. I refuse to sugarcoat Romney just because his opponent is the Obamination. I refuse to subscribe to the Machiavellian, anti-Catholic notion of the “lesser of two evils.”

Romney’s RECORD on pro-life issues is abysmal. In 2005, when it mattered, he caved under pressure, flip-flopped, and stabbed Catholics and the Constitution in the back. Romney insists and promises that he is now pro-life and that, if elected, he promises to govern as a pro-life President. But, his record belies that promise. As Reagan said, “Trust, but verify.” I wish there was a candidate that could represent Catholics this Fall, but Romney is not that candidate and I will refuse to vote for him simply because the alternative is that much worse. Primum non nocere.

Remember, the political process has its limitations. We are Catholics first, everything else second. Instead of voting for either of these two frauds, I would suggest daily recitation of the Rosary for our country as well as the First Saturdays Devotion. Pray for Mercy. Pray for Peace.
 
Why would a catholic vote for a morman? They push the same agenda Satan does. You will become like Gods! Obama is no prize either. Am I missing something?
 
For those who are NOT going to vote, please think and re-think. If you don’t want our nation to be completely destroyed and has no return, then you must vote, and vote for Romney. Evil prevails because of the majority silence. So is this election. Not voting for Romney is voting for Obama.

Romneycare is very different from Obamacare. It was around 70 pages instead of 2700 pages. Romneycare does not contain any those immoral laws and numerous irrelevant regulations as Obamacare. Romney is good at creating jobs and turn around the economy. He will not persecute the Catholic church.

This election is not about what you like or dislike. It is not about “you” at all. It is about the future of our nation.
 
pnewton said:
Seems more that a wee bit sensationalistic. Some how, I do not believe his prophecy.
Click to expand...
Father George Rutler is not a person given to sensationalism. His writings tend rather to be rather too cerebral and analytical.

The HHS mandate is the first step in the marginalization of Catholics, and in the marginalization of any Christians who take their faith seriously as something that affects more than just their life during one hour on Sunday.

HHS has taken upon itself to decide just which institutions are religious enough to be considered religious for purposes of 1st Amendment protection of religious liberty. That HHS liberty to decide will certianly be expanded.

First, Catholic institutions under the existing HHS mandate now have the option to decide whether to continue being Catholic, to go out of business, or to pay a fine.

This is similar to the situation in which Christians find themselves in some Islamic nations: convert or pay a fine for the privilege of remaining Christian, while remaining second class citizens.

Soon Catholics will find that their own 2,000 year old moral precepts are considered as civil rights violations and hate speech. Gay marriage will be the test case.

Once religion has been tamped down sufficiently that most formerly religious institutions have caved in to the demands of the government, religious freedom will be a mere memory.
 
I wish our country voted like you guys do on here than obama would lose in a landslide.
 
JimG said:
Father George Rutler is not a person given to sensationalism. His writings tend rather to be rather too cerebral and analytical. .
Click to expand...
I understand that, but this particular statement is simply not believable. I see no way that this would end up the last free election if Obama is re-elected. Even though the president is the CIC of the military, every member in the military swears an oath to support and defend the Constitution.

It would be easier to rally Christians around a single candidate if the one that we were to rally under was the Christian, not the one running against the Christian. I understand what Fr. Rutler is saying. I just do not agree with either his time table or how the fall of America will come about.
 
Father Rutler’s article in Crisis magazine was picked up and commented on by Father James Schall in Catholic World Report, who said this:

“The path we are on whereby we will lose our public presence will not be, on the surface, dramatic. It won’t be a bolt of lightning. It will come by small but quick steps, such as the HHS mandate. Yet, without a “dramatic change” in current political direction, many laws and policies in the country are already on the books whereby, when enforced, Catholics will be gradually forced out of the public sphere as enemies to its common good. Everything that they do that is “Catholic” in terms of schools, hospitals, property, and other such initiatives, will be taken over by the all-caring state.”

In other words, Catholics will simply be forced out of public life, out of charitable work, out of hospitals, out of education, marginalized.

Goodbye, religious liberty.

Source:
catholicworldreport.com/Item/1488/blithe_christianity_and_the_last_free_election.aspx
 
JimG said:
In other words, Catholics will simply be forced out of public life, out of charitable work, out of hospitals, out of education, marginalized.
Click to expand...
That I can see happening, and I do not think it is avoidable. It does not mean, however, that free elections will cease.
 
pnewton said:
That I can see happening, and I do not think it is avoidable. It does not mean, however, that free elections will cease.
Click to expand...
You think it is unavoidable that Catholics must lose their ability to operate charities, schools, hospitals? That in itself will be a great loss of religious liberty.

Rutler seems to acknowledge that his statement about the “last free election” might be taken as hyperbole, yet he goes on to say this:

“The national election in November, 2012 will either give Christians one last chance to rally, or it will be the last free election in our nation. This can only sound like hyperbole to those who are unaware of what happened to the Slavic lands after World War I and to Western Europe in the 1930’s. St. Paul was writing to us when he wrote to the Galatians and Corinthians and Washingtonians – or rather, Romans – in his lifetime.”

I think he views the election of 2012 as a watershed moment which will be viewed, in retrospect, as either a turning point for the demise of religious freedom, or a beginning in helping to save it.
 
JimG said:
Father George Rutler is not a person given to sensationalism. His writings tend rather to be rather too cerebral and analytical.
Click to expand...
Correct.
JimG said:
Once religion has been tamped down sufficiently that most formerly religious institutions have caved in to the demands of the government, religious freedom will be a mere memory.
Click to expand...
If anyone has not seen the movie, “For Greater Glory”, I would suggest viewing it.

An elderly American Catholic bishop just recently stated…and I paraphrase:

If this country continues on the path that has been instituted by this administration, I will die a natural death…because I am elderly. But my successor will die in prison…and his successor will die a martyr.

Be watchful.
 
JimG said:
YI think he views the election of 2012 as a watershed moment which will be viewed, in retrospect, as either a turning point for the demise of religious freedom, or a beginning in helping to save it.
Click to expand...
Absolutely!

Vote Romney!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top