How can you be Democratic and also be Catholic?

[MagdalenaRita]

The Democratic platform is for ALL Americans.

Three-quarters of Americans say they want to keep in place the landmark Supreme Court ruling, Roe v. Wade, that made abortion legal in the United States

The Democratic platform is not for All Americans. It is not for me, it is not for the Catholic faith.

It doesn’t matter how many Americans want to keep Roe v Wade, it still is not what everyone wants.

It also shows how far from God our world has gone.

https://www.democratsforlife.org/

Hopefully they get louder and the rest of the Democratic party listens to them and changes because that is not what the lead politicians, and especially those who want in the White House right now, in the Democratic party want. It is NOT their platform.

 

[Inquisitor85]

Ok, that’s why nearly 20 years worth of American soldiers blood, sweat and lives were thrown away in Iraq, thanks to one impulsive decision made by a Commander In Chief who doesn’t understand the idea of long form strategy. It’s why western allies are increasingly distrustful of US.

If that’s your idea of “great” foreign policy, I’d hate to see your idea of bad foreign policy.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

As for “pro-choice,” which is NOT the same as “pro-abortion,” let me quote from the Catechism:

1782 "Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. “He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.”

1789 "…charity always proceeds by way of respect for one’s neighbor and his conscience: “Thus sinning against your brethren and wounding their conscience . . . you sin against Christ.” Therefore “it is right not to . . . do anything that makes your brother stumble.”

On virtually all moral issues, all religions (and even atheists) agree. But this is not the case with abortion. Even among Catholics, as I pointed out on another thread, only 21% of Catholics agree with the official Church position. But the US is not composed of Catholics. There are Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, many other Protestant groups, and yes, atheists, whose consciences and the teachings of their own religions lead them in a different direction. As the Catechism says, we should respect the consciences of our neighbor so that our neighbor is not “prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.”

Meanwhile, as another poster pointed out, the best course of action is not to make abortion illegal, but to find the causes of abortion (usually economic) and try to eliminate the causes.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

What country are you talking about? Surely not the US. Take, for example, yesterday’s vote in the Security Council about Iranian sanctions. The US lost the vote 13-2. Or imposing tariffs on Canadian aluminium? How is that “great” foreign policy when the US only produces about 20% of what it needs? They need to buy the other 80% somewhere…is Canada the “enemy” and an unreliable source? Why do foreign leaders tell jokes about Trump when they get together? Because they think he’s a stable genius? Why did the General Assembly of the UN laugh at him? Because they respect him? Please. Have a reality check.

 

[nicholasG]

The Democratic platform is not for All Americans. It is not for me, it is not for the Catholic faith.

It doesn’t matter how many Americans want to keep Roe v Wade, it still is not what everyone wants.

It’s not meant to be just for YOU. That’s the point. This is a country of many different people and beliefs. Why should your belief be the one that counts. There are many Catholics in that Three-quarters number.

 

[27lw]

StudentMI:

Here again the principle of subsidiarity must be respected: a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to coordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.

Sounds good. But in practice, where are almost all cases of embezzlement and corruption? At the local level. Why? Because there are fewer watchdogs. It’s almost impossible to open a paper without seeing that the local church business administrator stole $100,000 or the mayor took a kickback from a developer. On the federal level, their are a lot more people watching, and their are a lot more controls. Corruption happens, but more rarely. When is the last time you heard about a corruption scandal at AID? Or FEMA? Or the Post Office? (Leaving aside of course Trump’s appointees who feel the urge to re-decorate their offices for hundreds of thousands of dollars or fly on personal business and charge it to the taxpayers, or help their cronies they had been lobbyists for for decades when they become cabinet secretaries–all this is outside the usual norms, and will end Jan. 20.)

You’re kidding, right? No fraud at the federal level?

Medicare fraud - Wikipedia

https://www.ssa.gov/antifraudfacts/

 

[OKComputer]

Speaking as a Catholic Dem, t’s getting a bit wearing to be constantly asked the question on here.

From one Catholic democrat to another, I salute you!

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Can you be a Catholic independent?

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

No need. There’s a particular third party that reflects all of Catholic social teaching in the US. If one feels conflicted about choosing one of the two parties, they’re the best choice.

Surprised by the number of “we can’t infringe on someone’s religion if it allows them to murder babies” posters, considering the Court has already said that’s not true.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

There are many Catholics in that Three-quarters number.

Well I hope the Catholics in those three quarters that support Roe v Wade remember that abortion and the supporting of those who promote it puts their eternal soul in danger. That is Catholic teaching and eternity is a very long time to pay to support such a “landmark decision”

 

[Inquisitor85]

Yes, because if he had done that you’d hand Afghanistan back to the Taliban. Then he managed to throw away the work done in Iraq and put it into the Russian sphere of influence, ditto Iran (despite them actually honoring their agreement with the West). He then let Syria fall into the Russian sphere of influence, threw the West’s strongest allies, the Kurds, under the bus, and into the… You guessed it… Russian sphere of influence. Any ground gained by the West in the Middle East this century has been destroyed in three and a half years.

But it gets worse. Thanks to the US reneging on its deal with Iran, shows that the US, and by extension the entire western world, can’t be trusted. How on earth is the west going to negotiate with other rogue actors if its seen as untrustworthy?

But it gets even worse than that. By slapping tariffs on your allies, you show that you’re unlikely to keep your word to your allies. For example let’s say Estonia comes under direct attack from Russian forces and enacts A5 of the Washington Treaty, would the US respond? Who knows, maybe, maybe not. Theres a reason the buzzword in European defence circles at the minute is “independent European assets.” Put simply your allies are starting to see you in a dangerous light.

 

[whatistrue]

You’re kidding, right? No fraud at the federal level?

Try reading it again:

But in practice, where are almost all cases of embezzlement and corruption? At the local level. Why? Because there are fewer watchdogs. It’s almost impossible to open a paper without seeing that the local church business administrator stole $100,000 or the mayor took a kickback from a developer. On the federal level, their are a lot more people watching, and their are a lot more controls. Corruption happens, but more rarely.

The post referred to corruption, especially embezzlement, not fraud, and specifically stated that corruption does occur at the Federal level. A citizen (or physician) filing a fraudulent Medicare claim is different from a federal employee misdirecting funds for their own enrichment.

 

[27lw]

27lw:

You’re kidding, right? No fraud at the federal level?

Try reading it again:

But in practice, where are almost all cases of embezzlement and corruption? At the local level. Why? Because there are fewer watchdogs. It’s almost impossible to open a paper without seeing that the local church business administrator stole $100,000 or the mayor took a kickback from a developer. On the federal level, their are a lot more people watching, and their are a lot more controls. Corruption happens, but more rarely.

The post referred to corruption, especially embezzlement, not fraud, and specifically stated that corruption does occur at the Federal level. A citizen (or physician) filing a fraudulent Medicare claim is different from a federal employee misdirecting funds for their own enrichment.

Oh - silly me! Here I was thinking that fraud is a form of corruption.
Okay.

 

[whatistrue]

Yes, fraud by a citizen is a different thing than corruption by an official. But the actual main point is that your statement that the claim was made that there wasn’t any at the Federal level is demonstrably false.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

You’re kidding, right? No fraud at the federal level?

Not nearly as much. For the reasons I gave–people are watching. Locally, not so much.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

your statement that the claim was made that there wasn’t any at the Federal level is demonstrably false.

That wasn’t close to my statement! I wrote “Corruption happens, but more rarely.”

You’re kidding, right? No fraud at the federal level? [and you went on to cite Medicare fraud]

Yes, federal fraud is rare–for example the “Keating Five” was fraud. But the fact that I can remember it 20+ years later shows how rare it is. Medicare fraud is generally local–some doctor or hospital is running some scam. And there are national scams, but the point is they are not generally politicians or officials who are involved. They’re private parties.

To me “federal” or “national” corruption is corruption by elected politicians or gov. employees. That’s rare at the federal level.

 

[Dovekin]

Do you oppose the govern mandate against murder? Why? That’s a choice of the murderer, is it not, being dictated against?
Do you oppose the legal intrusion into medical decisions to prescribe or not, opioids for recreational use? Poisons for suicide? Why?

My opinions are not up for discussion, except that ProLife is a complex question.

Your ProLife position includes that the government can dictate the choices of a pregnant woman. You agree with me that that is part of being ProLife.
You agree with me that medical decision making is part of being ProLife.

You have not addressed whether other voters can disagree with you on these issues. You seem to think you can convince others about them with your questions. That strategy marginalizes your opinions.

 

[whatistrue]

That wasn’t close to my statement!

That’s why that was directed to the one who misrepresented your actual statement.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

I have no “globalist agenda.” I have a common sense agenda. I have an efficiency agenda. Saudi Arabia can produce steel–at about 5 x the world price. Should they? We could probably grow our own bananas instead of importing them. Should we?

Since I brought up aluminium, let’s take a look at world production:

China-- 33 million metric tons
India-- 3.7 million
Russia-- 3.7 million
Canada-- 2.9 million

then 5 more countries (three Arab countries, Australia, and Norway)

Then we come to the US-- 890,000 tons. Less than a third of Canada’s production. And about half the US production comes from re-cycling scrap.

So could the US produce all it needs? Probably, at great cost. And where would you rather import it from? China? Russia? the Arab world? or Canada?

And if we turn to steel, I hope you are aware that steel undergoes multiple steps in production, and not all (probably very few) smelters are equipped to do that. So smelter #1 does the first step, then they send it to the same company’s smelter #2, and so on. But you know what? The same companies own smelters in Canada, the US, and Mexico. So US Steel (as an example) would do step #1 in Cleveland, then ship that to Hamilton Ontario for step #2, then they would ship it to Detroit for step #3, and so on. To put tariffs on what is a totally integrated system is beyond stupid. And if you bothered to look at the top 10 steel companies at the time Trump put on his tariffs, one was owned by a Russian oligarch, and most of the others were foreign owned. These are not “American” companies except for the location of some of their plants.

And yet…what to you propose replacing it with? How did it work out when the US refused to join the League of Nations? And it’s not just the UN laughing at Trump, it’s world leaders. I would say the first step in foreign relations is to get other countries to take you seriously, not treat you like a bad joke.

 

[puer.dei]

Which, of course, no one said.