Is it a sin to vote for a pro-choice candidate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Daniel_Marsh
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There are a number of issues which are “non-negotiable” for Catholics. Those include not only abortion, but gay “marriage”, cloning, fetal stem cell research and euthanasia. It seems to be that to vote for a candidate that is in favor of any of these is sinful. As each election rolls around, we see the mental contortions which Catholics go thru to get around these principles. It is fascinating to watch how many of us seek to circumvent the things we know are wrong for reasons that I fail to see are as important as the saving of our immortal souls.
 
mary_bobo said:
There are a number of issues which are “non-negotiable” for Catholics. Those include not only abortion, but gay “marriage”, cloning, fetal stem cell research and euthanasia. It seems to be that to vote for a candidate that is in favor of any of these is sinful. As each election rolls around, we see the mental contortions which Catholics go thru to get around these principles. It is fascinating to watch how many of us seek to circumvent the things we know are wrong for reasons that I fail to see are as important as the saving of our immortal souls.
Click to expand...
I agree that these are indeed SOME of the top issues of our day. However, it would seem to focus EXCLUSIVELY on these issues is playing right into the hands of Karl Rove and his cronies. They have been reduced to political talking points. Taking innocent lives, at any stage of life, is wrong. Period.

Case-in-point: the decision to delay the control of mercury emissions of newly built coal power plants by 25 years will result in the deaths of thousands of children in the U.S… Protecting the unborn while neglecting the born is, in my mind, equally abhorrent.

I believe that our Church needs to start looking at the larger picture rather than rattling off a list of sound bites. Just picking out one or two issues and making a decision of who to vote without considering their overall character and their record on all of the issues is, in my mind, simply ignorant. The likes of Karl Rove count on you to vote in this manner (on both sides of the isle).

Bucky
 
So, if it comes down to voting for one of two pro-choice candidates…who do you vote for?

Voting for a pro-choice candidate would only be a sin if you were voting for them BECAUSE of their pro-abortion stance. Other factors MUST be considered.
 
Yerusalyim said:
So, if it comes down to voting for Hillary or Rudy…who do you vote for?
Voting for a pro-choice candidate would only be a sin if you were voting for them BECAUSE of their pro-abortion stance. Other factors MUST be considered.
Click to expand...
If it comes to this then look at who each of them would nominate to the supreme court. Or border security or peace or jobs. But, IMHO if there is no difference in the candidates but party affiliation then look toward a third party that is pro-life and vote for themthe loss of your vote won’t make a difference under this scenario.
 
Bucky24 said:
I agree that these are indeed SOME of the top issues of our day. However, it would seem to focus EXCLUSIVELY on these issues is playing right into the hands of Karl Rove and his cronies. No it is doing what God expects of us to protect life. They have been reduced to political talking points. Taking innocent lives, at any stage of life, is wrong. Period.

Case-in-point: the decision to delay the control of mercury emissions of newly built coal power plants by 25 years will result in the deaths of thousands of children in the U.S. The delay is also wrong and has wrong consequences. But the lives of all the babies not born in the next 25 years becomes a more grave issue. Protecting the unborn while neglecting the born is, in my mind, equally abhorrent. The congress makes the laws. The president does not. Civics 101.

I believe that our Church needs to start looking at the larger picture rather than rattling off a list of sound bites. So looking at social issues and not the lives of the millions of unborn babies is not looking at the bigger picture. Just picking out one or two issues and making a decision of who to vote without considering their overall character and their record on all of the issues is, in my mind, simply ignorant. And what if one of God’s children that was murdered was the child that was to cure cancer, HIV or any number of others things or issues? What if that child was another Mother Theresa? You don’t like Karl Rove and many don’t right or wrong I don’t know. But I love the souls of all those dead children that are crying out for justice. The likes of Karl Rove count on you to vote in this manner (on both sides of the isle).

Bucky
Click to expand...
when all things are said and done LIFE of an innocent is the trump card:thumbsup:
 
Yerusalyim said:
So, if it comes down to voting for one of two pro-choice candidates…who do you vote for?
Click to expand...
I encounter that all the time here in Vermont.

Since I vote exclusively on the abortion issue (it makes voting really simple for me…besides what else could possibly compare with 1.5 million innocent human lives unjustly killed per year) I have come up with the following guidelines.
  • Look at the area of abortion restrictions and possible supreme court nominations. If one candidate has the edge here, vote for him/her (example our governor).
  • If two candidates are about equal on abortion restrictions and both have redeeming qualities look at other issues. Here I would probably vote for the Democratic one because I have issues with killing soldiers as well as killing babies. I encountered this only once and I decided to reward Leahy for at least voting for the partial birth ban (I might have made a mistake here …I dunno).
  • If neither candidate has any redeeming qualities on abortion restrictions, vote for a third party. Unfortunately this happens far too often here. Fortunately there usually are acceptible third party choices, at least there were when the Senate choices were Jeffords and some liberal Democrat.
 
mozart-250 said:
I encounter that all the time here in Vermont.
Since I vote exclusively on the abortion issue (it makes voting really simple for me…besides what else could possibly compare with 1.5 million babies unjustly killed per year) I have come up with the following guidelines.
Click to expand...
Well, that explains how this President got elected twice (and how we got into this stupid war).

Bucky
 
Bucky24 said:
Well, that explains how this President got elected twice (and how we got into this stupid war).

Bucky
Click to expand...
As bad as killing 30,000 soldiers is, it does not compare with killing 40,000,000 babies.

And I was ornery and voted that it was a mortal sin even though I don’t technically believe in mortal sin.🙂
 
Bucky24 said:
I believe that our Church needs to start looking at the larger picture rather than rattling off a list of sound bites. Just picking out one or two issues and making a decision of who to vote without considering their overall character and their record on all of the issues is, in my mind, simply ignorant. The likes of Karl Rove count on you to vote in this manner (on both sides of the isle).

Bucky
Click to expand...
\

Your dislike of Karl Rove does not justify aiding and abetting those who have helped kill 50 million children and counting. How long does it take a coal plant to kill that many?
 
mozart-250 said:
As bad as killing 30,000 soldiers is, it does not compare with killing 40,000,000 babies.

And I was ornery and voted that it was a mortal sin even though I don’t technically believe in mortal sin.🙂
Click to expand...
What about the 600,000 Iraqi civilians that have been killed thus far? And for what?? Their oil?

Bucky
 
Bucky24 said:
What about the 600,000 Iraqi civilians that have been killed thus far? And for what?? Their oil?

Bucky
Click to expand...
  1. There have not been 600,000 Iraqi ciizens killed
  2. Thats still 49,400,000 less than abortion has killed in this country since Roe v wadw
  3. The US has not recieved one drop of Iraqi oil they have not paid market prices for
 
Bucky24 said:
What about the 600,000 Iraqi civilians that have been killed thus far? And for what?? Their oil?

Bucky
Click to expand...
And this relates to voting for pro-abortion candidates in the USA exactly how? To show that such a grossly exaggerated number is not equal to even 6 months of murdered American babies? Or that you believe the war is unjust because a mass murderer should be permitted to rule a nation?
 
estesbob said:
  1. There have not been 600,000 Iraqi ciizens killed
    2. Thats still 49,400,000 less than abortion has killed in this country since Roe v wadw
  2. The US has not recieved one drop of Iraqi oil they have not paid market prices for
Click to expand...
The death of 600,000 innocent civilians is indeed the latest estimate.
 
rpp said:
And this relates to voting for pro-abortion candidates in the USA exactly how? To show that such a grossly exaggerated number is not equal to even 6 months of murdered American babies? Or that you believe the war is unjust because a mass murderer should be permitted to rule a nation?
Click to expand...
600,000 dead Iraqi civilians in an unjust war. It would appear that our country is also ruled by a mass murderer.

I really hate what has been done to our country. :mad:
 
The war in Iraq and the grossly exaggerated body counts are off topic.

Please cease hijacking this thread.
 
In my opinion, touting numbers isn’t even necessary and somehow seems to diminish the wrongness of those deaths. One baby killed inside it’s mother is too much. One soldier or civilian killed in an unnecessary war is too much.
 
rpp said:
The war in Iraq and the grossly exaggerated body counts are off topic.

Please cease hijacking this thread.
Click to expand...
Agreed-I didnt want his nonsense to go unchalleged but will refrain from commenting on the boody count again.

We must recall that the Pope says that people of good faith can disagree on the necessity and/or morality of the Iraqi war but we can NOT support abortion under any circumstances.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top