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

[estesbob]

Precisely my point. There are no anti abortion candidates. Only those who make clear their intentions and those who hide behind them claiming to be champions of the unborn. If you vote for any politician you have voted for abortion in America. Don’t cast a vote and think, well I’ve done all I can do, at least he/she is against it.

You do not count, your family does not count and the unborn children do not count, only money. That is THE ONLY thing that
matters to our politicians. If the republicans thought that being pro choice was the only thing would keep them on the hill, guess how they would vote. Please remember that America has the finest politicians that money can buy.

Ill give you two reasons why you are wrong that all parties are equal on abortion:

Roberts

Alito

 

[mozart-250]

I guess that we will have to simply agree to root for the Red Sox!

Of course!

One comment…

We actually agree in principle on the war. Where we disagree is here.

I see abortion in black/white terms with no shades of grey. It is killing innocent life, period. There is no other side.

As far as the Iraq war goes, even though I believe our initial involvement was tragically bad judgement and our continued involvement just componds the initial bad judgement, I at least understand the other side even though I disagree with it.

But even if I were to see the war equally as black and white as I see abortion, we still have the scale issue. 600K-700K dead does not compare to 40M-50M.

If I am serious about believing that abortion is the killing of innocent human life a scale that surpasses the Nazi holocaust, no other issue can possibly approach this one.

 

[Bucky24]

You refuse to keep on the topic. We are discussing whether or not it is a sin to vote for a pro-choice candidate. Karl Rove has nothing to do with that. I hardly think most of us choose a candidate based on one issue, but there are those issues which are not up for grabs. And I do not think many of our posters are either ignorant or irresponsible. Please read the forum rules.

Mary,

There was one poster this afternoon that said that he did vote based on this one issue. I was reacting to that (and several fellow Catholics that I know who DO claim that they vote based on this one issue).

As for being on topic, do elections happen in a vacuum?? How can one determine whether or not it’s a sin to vote for a pro-choice candidate without knowing their stance on a wider-range of issues?

Based on that criteria, you could elect a murderer/rapist/thief/child pornographer that happened to be pro-choice. I know that’s an exaggeration, but I think you can see my point. I think that it’s prudent to carefully consider each candidate on a wide-range of issues. I’ve yet to see a candidate that fully supports Catholic teaching for any office.

I never called any posters ignorant or irresponsible. I said that voting just based on one issue is ignorant and irresponsible. I stand by that for my reasons stated above.

It seems that this whole ideology is based upon one letter written by then Cardinal Ratzinger. It wasn’t a lengthy teaching, just a short letter with very little explanation. Many have cited this letter to me but few have been able to offer any explanation other than that there are issues that aren’t negotiable.

I am interested in learning more about our Churches position on this issue. Can anyone point me to other sources that explain the churches position more fully?

I find it hard to fathom Jesus drawing in the sand saying that one type of murder was more acceptable than another. Why is it more acceptable to execute someone on death row or during a Pope John Paul II-declared un-just war or a premature child death/birth defect due to the failure to regulate mercury than it is to have an abortion or help someone to die that is suffering or to do medical research on embryonic stem cells?

To me, all of these issues relate to the Sanctity of Life as defined in Pope John Paul’s Gospel of life.

**Who **came up with this hierarchy and why? What piece of the puzzle am I missing?

Thanks for listening. I truly want to learn from this discussion, I am NOT just out to argue about it.

Peace,

Bucky

 

[estesbob]

Pope John Paul II declared before the 2003 war that it was an unjust war. Don’t take my word for it, see the following article: cjd.org/paper/jp2war.html

If you don’t see the connection to the Gospel of Life then I can’t help you.

As for bringing Karl Rove in to the discussion, up until a couple of weeks ago, he was the architect of this administration’s propaganda machine. The sound bites I am referring to are his tactics not the teachings of the church.

I NEVER called the Church’s teachings ignorant, only those who blindly select a candidate based on one issue without looking the rest of their platform or their record. Ignorant and irresponsible!!

Bucky

The Church says we should consider abortion first and foremost when considering a canidate. They have said that no issue or combination of issue trumps abortion. They specifically stated that the war was NOT on equal footing with abortion. And they never said one word about Karl Rove.

The mental mastubation required by one to claim to be pro-life while voting pro-abortion is a terrible thing to behold.

 

[Bucky24]

Of course!

One comment…

We actually agree in principle on the war. Where we disagree is here.

I see abortion in black/white terms with no shades of grey. It is killing innocent life, period. There is no other side.

As far as the Iraq war goes, even though I believe our initial involvement was tragically bad judgement and our continued involvement just componds the initial bad judgement, I at least understand the other side even though I disagree with it.

But even if I were to see the war equally as black and white as I see abortion, we still have the scale issue. 600K-700K dead does not compare to 40M-50M.

If I am serious about believing that abortion is the killing of innocent human life a scale that surpasses the Nazi holocaust, no other issue can possibly approach this one.

Thanks for this follow up post. I find your explanation here very helpful. I am not writing all of this to be a jerk. I really struggle with this. I want to better understand those I’ve been disagreeing with. Few take the time to explain their views as you just did.

Sorry to hear about the Red Sox tonight. At least they didn’t lose any more ground to the Yankees!

Thanks,
Bucky

 

[estesbob]

Mary,

Who came up with this hierarchy and why? What piece of the puzzle am I missing?

Thanks for listening. I truly want to learn from this discussion, I am NOT just out to argue about it.

Peace,

Bucky

The Pope did. He said that NO isssue or combination of issues trumps abortion. none.

Its not a matter of blindly voting for someone who is pro-life. Its a matter of not even considering voting for a person who thinks killing our children should be legal. Why would you ever turst someone who supports killing our children in ANY postiion of leadership?

Many of us may have a hard tme in next years Presidential election. I will not vote for a canidate who supports abortion regardless of which party they belong to and regardless of how much I approve of all the other postions they take. I will not leave the polls with the blood of the innocents on my hands.

 

[Bucky24]

The Church says we should consider abortion first and foremost when considering a canidate. They have said that no issue or combination of issue trumps abortion. They specifically stated that the war was NOT on equal footing with abortion. And they never said one word about Karl Rove.

The mental mastubation required by one to claim to be pro-life while voting pro-abortion is a terrible thing to behold.

Please clarify what you mean by “the Church says”. What teaching are you referring to?

As for your second line, very few candidates have run on a pro-abortion line. Most claim a belief that it should be a women’s right to chose not the governments. Very few claim to actually be pro-abortion. … but I think you probably know that.

Perhaps this is one point that’s the source of my difficulty with this. I suspect many see this second line as being the same thing. I see it as being very different.

Bucky

 

[Bucky24]

The Pope did. He said that NO isssue or combination of issues trumps abortion. none.

Which Pope are you referring to and to what teaching? Are you referring to then Cardinal Ratizinger’s short letter that offered little explanation or is there something more substantial like an encyclical on the topic. I’ve read Pope John Paul’s encyclical on the Sanctity of Life and I do not see this hierarchy. I want to read more!

Thanks,

Bucky

 

[Bucky24]

Of course!

As far as the Iraq war goes, even though I believe our initial involvement was tragically bad judgement and our continued involvement just componds the initial bad judgement, I at least understand the other side even though I disagree with it.

One further comment about this part. I see it as being very beyond bad judgment. There were plans in place long before Bush was elected to Invade Iraq and to establish a “democracy” in the Middle East. It was all outlined in the PNAC report:

www.newamericancentury.org

The specific report:

www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

Notice how many names listed here are or were in this administration. This mess we are in was not a reaction to 9/11, it was part of an overall strategy. This goes way beyond bad judgment.

Bucky

 

[KathleenElsie]

One further comment about this part. I see it as being very beyond bad judgment. There were plans in place long before Bush was elected to Invade Iraq and to establish a “democracy” in the Middle East. It was all outlined in the PNAC report:

www.newamericancentury.org

The specific report:

www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

Notice how many names listed here are or were in this administration. This mess we are in was not a reaction to 9/11, it was part of an overall strategy. This goes way beyond bad judgment.

Bucky

Conspiracy theory?

 

[Bucky24]

Conspiracy theory?

This is not a conspiracy theory. Take a look at the report. This report has been referenced widely but not widely reported by the US media.

The Project for a New American Century is very real. Read the list of those who participated. The amazing thing is that they still make this report available.

Bucky

 

[Excelency]

Ill give you two reasons why you are wrong that all parties are equal on abortion:

Roberts

Alito

If only I had known. Well thats good news. And here I thought the republicans were really pro choice, how foolish of me. Now that I know the republicans are the real patriots, I no longer need to fear. So just keep voting the republicans in and this abortion holocaust will go away, right? I mean voting for the republicans will solve the problem won’t it? Huh? You know, trust the guys who gave us the abortion holocaust in the first place.

That has to be the way, just trust them and it will all work out won’t it. Yeah, don’t vote for the democrats they openly advocate abortion while the republicans would never have allowed something like this to start would they? Vote for a pro choice and it’s a sin, vote for a pro lifer and it’s just fine because we know they would never do anything to harm the unborn. And in thirty more years, we can be sure that the republicans will be just as effective at saving the unborn as they have been all these years.

Are you getting my point? You cannot vote for a pro lifer because there are none. They need your vote then it’s F@#! you buddy, try to contact them and your on a list of suspected terrorists. Oh yeah, they’ll protect the unborn alright and your money as well. Notice how GWB is undoing everything that JPII and Ronald Reagan acomplished, namely ending the cold war. There is still time for him to cause catastrophic damage and leave us with another cold war.

That is what I notice about the republicans. When they leave, they curse the country. GB did it when Clinton won, he got us in a little war with Somalia which we lost BTW. He did it because he lost, he sent Americans to their deaths to punish us. When GWB took office he also took the trillion dollar surplus that Bill Clinton had built up and got us into another war. Funny how that works. I despise abortion, but don’t tell me that the republicans will save us, they have NO intention of helping anyone other than their rich buddies who are decidedly richer since Jr. took over.

 

[RobHom]

Ill give you two reasons why you are wrong that all parties are equal on abortion:

Roberts

Alito

The Supreme Court is not a political tool. It is out of necessity not to foster the agenda of any political party. Therefore, the fact that Alito and Roberts were appointed by GWB, that does not make them beholding to him.

The simple and ugly truth is that neither party has a candidate that actually stands out, and both parties are actually equal on abortion…

 

[Bella3502]

Maybe someone has already said this, but here goes.

I think if Giuliani is the Republican candidate vs Hillary Clinton, one must vote for Giuliani, even if he/she has to hold his/her nose to do it. Giuliani might by lying, but he says he will appoint Supreme Court justices of the Thomas and Scalia type. That’s clearly a message intended for those who are prolife. But, of course, maybe by that he meant “otherwise conservative” (but not prolife). But we know what Clinton is and what she’ll do. At least with Giuliani (and he’s certainly not my favorite) there’s a chance for a prolife court. With Clinton, there’s none.

I also think voting for Clinton is, indeed, a sin. That’s a knowing vote for a pro-abortion candidate, who will absolutely fill any court vacancies with pro-abortion judges. No doubt about it. Beside that, all promised “social programs” pale. Besides, Democrats (and I was born and raised one and held office in the party) haven’t done anything for the poor or working people in decades. They’re just as much in bed with big business as the Republicans are. At least the Republicans admit it.

Giuliani is pro-abortion rights and anti-family. No thanks, I’m sticking with Clinton.

 

[Yerusalyim]

The Church says we should consider abortion first and foremost when considering a canidate. They have said that no issue or combination of issue trumps abortion

I’d like to see that in an official Church document please.

Pope John Paul II declared before the 2003 war that it was an unjust war.

This was in no way a binding teaching. Catholics were charged to duly note his opinion, and just as free, using due discretion, to disagree, which I certainly have.

 

[dmelosi]

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

WOW over 40 million and this is a smaller issue?

 

[Bucky24]

WOW over 40 million and this is a smaller issue?

Who said this is a smaller issue? Why must we focus only on **one **issue? What is God calling us to do? We are his hands - we have a responsibility for doing his work on ALL issues. That’s why voting based on just one issue is simply wrong and irresponsible.

As I said before, there is not one candidate or party that even comes close to representing the views of the Catholic Church. Until we hold our candidates to task on the broad spectrum of issues we will be in this situation. Focusing just on the abortion issue is simply playing into the hands of the strategists from both parties.

Wake up and smell the coffee!

 

[mary_bobo]

The Supreme Court is not a political tool. It is out of necessity not to foster the agenda of any political party. Therefore, the fact that Alito and Roberts were appointed by GWB, that does not make them beholding to him.

The simple and ugly truth is that neither party has a candidate that actually stands out, and both parties are actually equal on abortion…

Assuming that this is true, and I do not think that is so, what about the other non-negotiable issues? Who supports cloning, gay “marriage”, euthanasia and fetal stem cell research? As good Catholics, I don’t think we can just shy away from these other issues.

 

[Bucky24]

Assuming that this is true, and I do not think that is so, what about the other non-negotiable issues? Who supports cloning, gay “marriage”, euthanasia and fetal stem cell research? As good Catholics, I don’t think we can just shy away from these other issues.

While these are indeed fundamental to our beliefs, there are also a whole host of other issues that we cannot shy away from either. I see no mention of issues such as the effort to privatize the global water supply. Water is a fundamental human right. Is it moral to vote for a pro-water privatization candidate?

Google: Water Privatization Bechtel

 

[Julian_Peters]

Thank you to all who have participated. This thread is now closed.