We have one commandment that says “Thou Shalt Not Kill.” We have another commandment that says “Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery.” In God’s eyes both are very serious. Come to think of it, I think most Catholic women would prefer that their husbands said, “I’m pro-choice” rather than “I just committed adultery!”
As I said the rationale pro-abortion Catholics use to jusitify their rejection of the Chuch is often quite bizzare
But it’s a pretty hard thing to overlook.
As are the implications/accusations of some forumites.
Slapping a pro-abortion label on everyone who disagrees with you is…well…let’s just say a bit like the homosexual activists who call everyone who disagrees with "homophobes, bigots, etc.), not addressing the substance of the counter argument. As well, deflecting and ignoring questions, etc, is not expecially charitable dialogue.B, I think you’re missing my point. All I"m saying is that there are instances where stregic voting helps the pro-life movement. See post (I think 129) about voting in the other parties primary in order to get the weaker (as far as getting elected) pro-choice candiate into the primary, the intention to getting him or her trounced by the pro-life candidate.But it’s a pretty hard thing to overlook.
It’s like finding a candidate who states that the first thing they are going to do when they get into office is to nuke New Zealand.
And then thinking to oneself " OK, I don’t approve of THAT, but maybe they have a good taxation plan…"
There are somethings so WRONG, that when you encounter them, it should automaticaly remove a candidate from consideration.
Like abortion, or nuking New Zealand ( after all, we’re talking about approx the same number of innocent lives…)
Yes , and all those sins of adultery and fornication , incest and rape and on and on are the cause of no telling how many abortions and yet they are brushed off when it comes to some here.
. I’m not aware of any political party or candidate that has a platform calling for adultery, fornication, incest and rape. I am aware of a major political party calls for unrestricted taxpayer funded abortion on demand and the direct teachings of the Catholic Churchthat we cannot support a candidate who supports this policy. I know it is the custom of Catholic Democrats try to change the subject whenever theunfortunate truth of what their party stands for comes up, but there simply is no moral equivalence between supporting the slaughter of unborn children and the personal moral shortcomings of any particular candidate.Yes , and all those sins of adultery and fornication , incest and rape and on and on are the cause of no telling how many abortions and yet they are brushed off when it comes to some here.
God is going to judge all accordingly if guilty and no repentance having been sought.
Peace, Carlan
Right,you said it Newbie. :thumbsupAs are the implications/accusations of some forumites.
What you miss, Bob, is that some pro-life people in this forum disagree with you on the relative importance of all the factors that we take into account, but that does not make them pro-abortion. At worst, they are mistaken about the order of priority, but at best, have some very valid points that merit further discussion.
You have good arguments at times, but seem to fold when a good counterpont is made. Why not address them and help create a usefull discussion?
I have yet to see, in this post, anyone who has tried to advance the pro-abortion position. It’s not as black and white as you are trying to make it.
eace, CarlanSo this means strategic voting in a cross-party is allowed. One is not supporting the pro-choice candidate by voting for him or her in the primary, rather to the contrary; the voter is setting up the pro-choice to get creamed in the general election…again, under certain conditions.
Good point. I did vote for a president once who may have thought that the first thing he was going to do when he got into office was drop some bombs on Iraq. Is that nicer than nuking New Zealand? I wonder how many unborn babies died when innocent civilians were killed, not to mention the umpteen billions that were wasted on contractor fraud. I really hope I don’t make that mistake again!But it’s a pretty hard thing to overlook.
It’s like finding a candidate who states that the first thing they are going to do when they get into office is to nuke New Zealand.
And then thinking to oneself " OK, I don’t approve of THAT, but maybe they have a good taxation plan…"
There are somethings so WRONG, that when you encounter them, it should automaticaly remove a candidate from consideration.
Like abortion, or nuking New Zealand ( after all, we’re talking about approx the same number of innocent lives…)
For sure! Peace , Carlan
How is that possible when the Democrat party is funded by the abortion lobby, most Democrat politicians support legalised abortion and vote against any pro life legislation.Is it possible to vote democrat if you think they would help lower abortions?
I’m wondering since I see a lot of people voting democrat but at the same time some say that such a vote is a mortal sin. But if it were so, I doubt that people would continue something as controllable as voting so…