It is a Sin to Vote for Pro-Abortion Candidates

[kage_ar]

Yes, let us return to the government of 1776. A government that enforced the enslavement of an entire race. I am sure that Africans herded onto ships like cattle were happy to come to a country where there was limited government.

You’d do well to educate yourself.

No enslavement of an “entire race”. There were free black men and women, there were black slave OWNERS.

 

[CWBetts]

Yes, I agree CWBetts,

However, its also important to know that…

We can parcel out the goverment, as its a political tool… it has and should have nothing to do with our spirte and spirituallity… Just like the Church, the church is an organization that deals with spiritually, but it is also compleately separate from God… the two have nothing to do with each other. In the end, we learn, and make up our own minds (what we know God has always wanted)… If we let others (polotics and the church) enforce opinions… we are going against God, who has made it very clear that we are here, and he wants us to have “free choice”.

Best way to put it is… A truth is a truth, untill you orginzie it… then it becomes a lie.

Peace
k

Wow. Jesus established the Church to govern in His stead. It is apparent from the Gospels that Jesus was establishing the Church as His Kingdom

 

[Lypher]

There is only one God, but there are many religions. God is not responsible for the many religions. Man caused the division among believers. Jesus did not come to abolish the “Law,” but to fulfill it. Man is the one who messed up, not God.

:tiphat:

God Bless You…

 

[CPA2]

Yes, I agree CWBetts,

Best way to put it is… A truth is a truth, untill you orginzie it… then it becomes a lie.

Peace
k

I think that you are talking the federal bureaucracy and not the Catholic Church.

Note that bureaucracies are not about outputs. They are about process. And it’s been known since Weber’s time that bureaucracies take on lives of their own. They’re like one-celled organisms. Their only objective is survival. And survival in a bureaucracy is not about output but about process.

There’s a kind of entropy in a bureaucracy: it becomes more and more organized and less and less work gets done. There are fewer outputs.

The urge to advance in one’s profession and to prosper is natural in human beings, human nature if you will. How does one advance or prosper in a bureaucracy? First, you must conform to the established processes. Second, you must rise in the hierarchy and have more people reporting to you. This explains the tendency of bureaucracies to grow over time. And the application of a little network theory should show you that this growth can be very fast, indeed.

It’s the simultaneous features of process, organization, and the tendency to grow that results in Gammon’s Law. And, since these features are intrinsic to bureaucracies, it’s inevitable.

 

[Garland]

Worthy5, Kush and any other liberals that try to justify voteing for pro-death candidates. As a Catholic christian when you are looked at by anyone, they should see JESUS. When you enter the voteing booth, do you leave Jesus at the door? My vote should be exactly what JESUS would vote for in the booth. To do less means you are not really christian at all. One post compared Mr. Bush as a murderer of afgan children, to mr obama and his partys death to undersirables, mainly poor children. What a crock. Mr. bush helped more of the worlds children than clinton, carter, and obama combined. Wars are awful and Im sure no one wants one. Innocent people get killed, thats a fact, but to compare it to the 4000 children destroyed every day in america, by a preventable thing like abortion, is stupid. Had mr obama appointed a conserative to the supreme court, instead of a “latino liberal” Roe V Wade would be on its last leg. I dont think it is out of place to mention that 1886 of the 4000 are black babies. ruth v. ginsburg, supreme crt. justice, and liberal, said she supported R V W because it would get rid of some of the UNDESIRABLES in the nation. Are children undesirable? I think ms. ginsberg is the undesirable one here.
Wakeup christians, if people don`t see JESUS in you, your doing something wrong. Either he is real or he isn`t. Either you believe him or you don`t. Being Catholic is not a religion, it`s a way of LIFE, LIFE, LIFE. There is only one name given under heavn where we can be saved, JESUS, not mohammed, or the meriad of other"religions" found in the world. There is only one truth and it is expressed in its fullness only in the CATHOLIC CHURCH. Blessings . Garland

 

[CPA2]

Worthy5, Kush and any other liberals that try to justify voteing for pro-death candidates. As a Catholic christian when you are looked at by anyone, they should see JESUS. When you enter the voteing booth, do you leave Jesus at the door? My vote should be exactly what JESUS would vote for in the booth. To do less means you are not really christian at all. One post compared Mr. Bush as a murderer of afgan children, to mr obama and his partys death to undersirables, mainly poor children. What a crock. Mr. bush helped more of the worlds children than clinton, carter, and obama combined. Wars are awful and Im sure no one wants one. Innocent people get killed, thats a fact, but to compare it to the 4000 children destroyed every day in america, by a preventable thing like abortion, is stupid. Had mr obama appointed a conserative to the supreme court, instead of a “latino liberal” Roe V Wade would be on its last leg. I dont think it is out of place to mention that 1886 of the 4000 are black babies. ruth v. ginsburg, supreme crt. justice, and liberal, said she supported R V W because it would get rid of some of the UNDESIRABLES in the nation. Are children undesirable? I think ms. ginsberg is the undesirable one here.

Wakeup  christians, if people don`t see JESUS in you, your doing something wrong. Either he is real or he isn`t. Either you believe him or you don`t. Being Catholic is not a religion, it`s a way of LIFE, LIFE, LIFE.  There is only one name given under heavn where we can be saved, JESUS, not mohammed, or the meriad of other"religions" found in the world.  There is only one truth and it is expressed in its fullness only in the CATHOLIC CHURCH. Blessings . Garland

Amend!

 

[Kush]

Dude, you are so wrong…

Jesus did not establish the church… He was an enlightend man… I do not think he was into “organizing”. And I am more than sure he was not into putting a chuch together like ours… The Vatican would not have sat well with him if he was on earth today.

We all listen to what Jesus taught… Religons (having so many) separate people. there is no love and togetherness. I almost see our religouns as becoming a us vs them… when they all teach the same thing! Jesus was not into having people “separate”… He was into brining them together. He was not into saying - you need to belong to this or that… he sat by the sea, taught love, and said all are welcome… not all are welcome, but abandon everything else you belive. There was no control with Jesus, there was no judement with him, there was only love! I don’t see that being practiced by us today.

Also, you must remember when he visited a church once… probably the only time. He freaked out that people were selling chickens - in the same place they were practicing spirituality… he had a problem with that… how do you think he would see the issue of the Vatican today?

For us to be real followers… we need to actually hear what he is saying. The curch teaches people what is a sin and what is not… but many people do not even know what the word “sin” means… it acctually means “To miss the point”. We all miss his point a lot…

Anyhow, kinda why I am here… I hope to enforce my belives in him better… through discussions with cool poeple like you…

Peace
Kush

Wow. Jesus established the Church to govern in His stead. It is apparent from the Gospels that Jesus was establishing the Church as His Kingdom

 

[CWBetts]

Dude, you are so wrong…

Jesus did not establish the church… He was an enlightend man… I do not think he was into “organizing”. And I am more than sure he was not into putting a chuch together like ours… The Vatican would not have sat well with him if he was on earth today.

We all listen to what Jesus taught… Religons (having so many) separate people. there is no love and togetherness. I almost see our religouns as becoming a us vs them… when they all teach the same thing! Jesus was not into having people “separate”… He was into brining them together. He was not into saying - you need to belong to this or that… he sat by the sea, taught love, and said all are welcome… not all are welcome, but abandon everything else you belive. There was no control with Jesus, there was no judement with him, there was only love! I don’t see that being practiced by us today.

Also, you must remember when he visited a church once… probably the only time. He freaked out that people were selling chickens - in the same place they were practicing spirituality… he had a problem with that… how do you think he would see the issue of the Vatican today?

For us to be real followers… we need to actually hear what he is saying. The curch teaches people what is a sin and what is not… but many people do not even know what the word “sin” means… it acctually means “To miss the point”. We all miss his point a lot…

Anyhow, kinda why I am here… I hope to enforce my belives in him better… through discussions with cool poeple like you…

Peace
Kush

The Gospels are full of examples of how Jesus was establishing His kingdom, which is the Church

 

[CPA2]

Dude, you are so wrong…

Jesus did not establish the church… He was an enlightend man… I do not think he was into “organizing”. And I am more than sure he was not into putting a chuch together like ours… The Vatican would not have sat well with him if he was on earth today.

We all listen to what Jesus taught… Religons (having so many) separate people. there is no love and togetherness. I almost see our religouns as becoming a us vs them… when they all teach the same thing! Jesus was not into having people “separate”… He was into brining them together. He was not into saying - you need to belong to this or that… he sat by the sea, taught love, and said all are welcome… not all are welcome, but abandon everything else you belive. There was no control with Jesus, there was no judement with him, there was only love! I don’t see that being practiced by us today.

Also, you must remember when he visited a church once… probably the only time. He freaked out that people were selling chickens - in the same place they were practicing spirituality… he had a problem with that… how do you think he would see the issue of the Vatican today?

For us to be real followers… we need to actually hear what he is saying. The curch teaches people what is a sin and what is not… but many people do not even know what the word “sin” means… it acctually means “To miss the point”. We all miss his point a lot…

Anyhow, kinda why I am here… I hope to enforce my belives in him better… through discussions with cool poeple like you…

Peace
Kush

The Catholic Church is the Church that Jesus established. Get it from the horse’s mouth! Do some research on the early church fathers, like the third pope, St. Ignatius of Antioh around 100 A.D. You will find the same teaching then as it is now. The Church of100 A.D. is the Catholic Church today!

The Catholic Church has Divine Protection. All the scandals, bad theologians, bad bishops, bad popes and Satan himself have not been able to change the teachings of the Catholic Church one iota. No one has been able to change one word in the “Our Father,” for example! Now that is cool!

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Remain on topic please

 

[Kush]

Garland,

Jesus would have never voted for such nonsence!

I did not see him running around trying to find which Pharo fit his system of morals more than the other one?

Poloticians have tried to edge thier way into the church, to use the church as a tool… Unfortuanly, too many people are not seeing this, and it will lead to very bad things…

I only pray not to be around when the first holy war starts here…

Sad day for us all.

Worthy5, Kush and any other liberals that try to justify voteing for pro-death candidates. As a Catholic christian when you are looked at by anyone, they should see JESUS. When you enter the voteing booth, do you leave Jesus at the door? My vote should be exactly what JESUS would vote for in the booth. To do less means you are not really christian at all. One post compared Mr. Bush as a murderer of afgan children, to mr obama and his partys death to undersirables, mainly poor children. What a crock. Mr. bush helped more of the worlds children than clinton, carter, and obama combined. Wars are awful and Im sure no one wants one. Innocent people get killed, thats a fact, but to compare it to the 4000 children destroyed every day in america, by a preventable thing like abortion, is stupid. Had mr obama appointed a conserative to the supreme court, instead of a “latino liberal” Roe V Wade would be on its last leg. I dont think it is out of place to mention that 1886 of the 4000 are black babies. ruth v. ginsburg, supreme crt. justice, and liberal, said she supported R V W because it would get rid of some of the UNDESIRABLES in the nation. Are children undesirable? I think ms. ginsberg is the undesirable one here.

Wakeup  christians, if people don`t see JESUS in you, your doing something wrong. Either he is real or he isn`t. Either you believe him or you don`t. Being Catholic is not a religion, it`s a way of LIFE, LIFE, LIFE.  There is only one name given under heavn where we can be saved, JESUS, not mohammed, or the meriad of other"religions" found in the world.  There is only one truth and it is expressed in its fullness only in the CATHOLIC CHURCH. Blessings . Garland

 

[CallistusPM]

I have seen abortion referred to as murder and even homicide in this forum. What label do you place on capital punishment? What label do you place on abiding by the dictates of a living will? If, as some predict, the United States develops a health care program that withholds medical care from people who are, according to the powers that be, beyond medical help, what would you call this? Ladies and gentlemen, abortion is not the only life threatening policy that we face today.

 

[estesbob]

I have seen abortion referred to as murder and even homicide in this forum. What label do you place on capital punishment? What label do you place on abiding by the dictates of a living will? If, as some predict, the United States develops a health care program that withholds medical care from people who are, according to the powers that be, beyond medical help, what would you call this? Ladies and gentlemen, abortion is not the only life threatening policy that we face today.

Although I oppose Capital punishment it is now and has always been allowed by the Church. There is no moral equivalnece between Capital punishment and abortion. No on disputes there are other life isssues than abortion.The discussion is whether a Catholic can vote for a pro-abortion canidate-the answer is no UNLESS their opponet is more pro-abortion than they are.

 

[GhostOfReason]

Although I oppose Capital punishment it is now and has always been allowed by the Church. There is no moral equivalnece between Capital punishment and abortion. No on disputes there are other life isssues than abortion.The discussion is whether a Catholic can vote for a pro-abortion canidate-the answer is no UNLESS their opponet is more pro-abortion than they are.

Right, that’s why it would be fine to have voted for the nazi party if they would have outlawed abortion. There is no moral equivalence between capital punishment for Jews and abortion.

Pretend you had a morality balance. On one side you placed abortion. There exists some combination of other issues you can put on the other side which outweigh abortion. To claim otherwise is naive.

 

[estesbob]

The Church really is out of place by trying to dictate to us how to place our vote, and by trying to emotionally blackmail our Catholic politicians. This is not a Catholic country and it was founded, among other things, to provide freedom of religion and prevent the tyranny of religious bodies from enforcing religious-based laws on it’s citizens. We don’t have the right to impose Catholic law on those who do not follow a Christian religion or Catholicism. They have the right to live their lives as their conscience dictates to them, not how the Church dictates to them.

This is all just an effort to apply Catholic law to the masses. The Church just doesn’t have that power anymore. Before, they used to throw their weight around, and supporting countries used to conform to the Church’s demands or risk being excommunicated, and more importantly, risk losing political cloute. They even burned thousands of “heretics” at the stake and drowned “witches”, etc to appease the Church in it’s power. They’re not going to do that for the Church anymore. The masses won’t give it to them again because they value the freedom and autonomy that they have been enjoying. They have enjoyed being free from the tyranny of religious organizations.

If the Church wants to enforce it’s laws, it has to do so from within the Vatican, not by trying to get Catholic laws passed in other countries. The time for that is over. I know they’re not excommunicating people who don’t follow the rules because then there wouldn’t be too many Catholics left and they won’t have that. But the harder they try to push on the masses who don’t follow Catholic law, the harder the masses will push back. And it’s just an ugly battle. The Church would do better by working towards making people want to follow Catholic teachings, not by trying to force them. People won’t be backed into a corner anymore.

Dont Catholic have just as much right to influence law as any other individuals? You seem to be saying thats its OK for Panned Parenthodd and their supporters to oobby to chnage aborion laws but not Catholics?

Of course as catholics it not a matter of the Church forcing us to do anything-one accepts or rejects their teachings/ They reject at great risk to their immortal soul but that is a decision all catholics can freely make.

 

[estesbob]

I personally feel its wrong to vote for candidates for religous reasons… This is what caused a major issue with the Bush administration. (thousands of children murdered in Iraq)… He used the church as a tool to get into power…

We as Christians should lead by example (i.e. teach our children about the value of life - at any stage)… vs desparatly trying to have the government impose our views on people. Remember guys, the goverment is usually corrupt.

Look at countries that impose thier spiritual and religous views on people… Saudi, Iran, etc… It always causes problems.

Just remember, the evil in the world will always try to use religon for thier own benefits… We need to take religon back from the government… and decide on our own moralitis… Let the governments stick to fixing our roads, and building schools…

Peace
Kush

A very honest post. Usually the “It’s OK to vote for a pro-abortion Canidate because Bush ate kittens for breakfast” posts include rationalizations that one can make such a vote and still be accordance with the teachings of the Church. it is refreshing to see someone who just tells us to ignore the Church and vote the way we feel. I dont agree with that but at least you are honest!

 

[estesbob]

Right, that’s why it would be fine to have voted for the nazi party if they would have outlawed abortion. There is no moral equivalence between capital punishment for Jews and abortion.

Pretend you had a morality balance. On one side you placed abortion. There exists some combination of other issues you can put on the other side which outweigh abortion. To claim otherwise is naive.

Goodwins law is fullfilled again!

If the adhering to the teachings of the Church is naive I am guilty as charged.

 

[catharina]

Right, that’s why it would be fine to have voted for the nazi party if they would have outlawed abortion. There is no moral equivalence between capital punishment for Jews and abortion.

Pretend you had a morality balance. On one side you placed abortion. There exists some combination of other issues you can put on the other side which outweigh abortion. To claim otherwise is naive.

Your example strikes me as tedious and ridiculous (and extremely naive).

Do you actually believe/imagine that nazis extended “capital punishment” to the Jews?
The nazis EXTERMINATED the Jews. They saw no necessity of establishing law to do so.

 

[catharina]

Goodwins law is fullfilled again!

If the adhering to the teachings of the Church is naive I am guilty as charged.

I join you in that naivete.

 

[GhostOfReason]

Goodwins law is fullfilled again!

If the adhering to the teachings of the Church is naive I am guilty as charged.

How about a non-nazi and more current example.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a Muslim. As such he may very well be pro-life. However, he is accused of being largely corrupt, has called for elimination of Israel, thinks 9/11 was a US conspiracy, and is criticized for human rights issues. If given a choice between him and a pro-choice reformer, would the choice be so obvious?

What about the North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Il?