It is a Sin to Vote for Pro-Abortion Candidates

[estesbob]

I’ve learned today that I’m misguided and “a sinner of great magnitude” from your post. Let me try one more time. Even if you agree that abortion is the most important issue for voters to consider, I do not agree with the approach of many on CAF who collapse all issues to abortion, as if that was the only issue to consider. Neither the pope nor the bishops have offered the kind of guidance that would make a vote for a candidate from the Democratic Party, including Pres. Obama, a “sin of great magnitude.” I think that view is misguided. The Republicans have used abortion as a wedge issue to attempt to represent the Republican Party as the “Catholic Party.” I’m old enough to remember when the Democratic Party was supposedly the Catholic Party. I’ve seen the bishops and the U.S. (and worldwide) church move to the right, shifting the rhetoric from an emphasis on justic issues to an emphasis on abortion. I read and consider carefully the guidance offered by the Magisterium, and I find nowhere the notion that abortion is the only issue that matters. I understand the comfort offered by single-issue politics, but I don’t vote that way, not do I judge and condemn those who vote differently than I do.

On his third day in office Obama released funds to overseas abortion providers. During the Clinton administration these funds were not only used to fund abortions in third world countries, they were used to forcibly sterilize 18,000 women in Peru. McCain had promised not to release these funds. Can you tell us what porportionate reason there would be that would offset this and Obama’s support of unrestircted taxpayer funded abortion on demand.

You are incorrect when you say the Bishops didnt make it clear. Not one sinlge member of the Magestrium claimed there were proprotionate reaosn that would allow a Catholic to vote for Obama. 62 indicated there were not-several of which have been quoted to this thread. We also have the clear ,coconcise statement by the Pope that the tow most favorie items stated a being proportionate, support of Iraq War and/or The Death Penalty were NOT proportionate reason to allow a Caholic to vote for Obama. Of course whe one reads the various rationalization given for voting for Obama it becomes obvious that even if the Pope had issued a Statement saying a Catholic could not vote Obama they would have claimed he wasnt talking about this "Obama

It is nice of you to not judge those who voted differently than you but then there is nothing to judge them on. They adhered to the teachings of th Church. there is no need for them to continuylly rationalizetheir vote Thankfully many who were rejected the Church now see the wisdom of the Church’s teachings. Too bad so many children had to die as a result of their folly.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

I’ve learned today that I’m misguided and “a sinner of great magnitude” from your post. Let me try one more time. Even if you agree that abortion is the most important issue for voters to consider, I do not agree with the approach of many on CAF who collapse all issues to abortion, as if that was the only issue to consider. Neither the pope nor the bishops have offered the kind of guidance that would make a vote for a candidate from the Democratic Party, including Pres. Obama, a “sin of great magnitude.” I think that view is misguided. The Republicans have used abortion as a wedge issue to attempt to represent the Republican Party as the “Catholic Party.” I’m old enough to remember when the Democratic Party was supposedly the Catholic Party. I’ve seen the bishops and the U.S. (and worldwide) church move to the right, shifting the rhetoric from an emphasis on justic issues to an emphasis on abortion. I read and consider carefully the guidance offered by the Magisterium, and I find nowhere the notion that abortion is the only issue that matters. I understand the comfort offered by single-issue politics, but I don’t vote that way, not do I judge and condemn those who vote differently than I do.

The pope disagrees with you.

 

[CWBetts]

For those who are critical of “One issue voters” (such as those who vote pro-life), are there no single issues that would cause you to change your vote?

Would you vote for a candidate that wanted to repeal the Equal Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965?
Would you vote for a candidate that would seek to arrest pro-life demonstrators as terrorists?
Would you vote for a candidate that sought to round up all Muslims into “relocation cams” (as was done to Japanese Americans during WWII)?

You see, there are single issues that outweigh all others. Abortion is one such issue.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

For those who are critical of “One issue voters” (such as those who vote pro-life), are there no single issues that would cause you to change your vote?

Would you vote for a candidate that wanted to repeal the Equal Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965?
Would you vote for a candidate that would seek to arrest pro-life demonstrators as terrorists?
Would you vote for a candidate that sought to round up all Muslims into “relocation cams” (as was done to Japanese Americans during WWII)?

You see, there are single issues that outweigh all others. Abortion is one such issue.

Very good analogy.

 

[Alan55]

An intelligent, thoughtful Catholic voter will follow the advice of the bishops, avoiding two temptations: the temptation to treating pro-life issues too lightly, and the temptation to treat pro-life issues as if they are the only ones that matter. Unfortunately, the people who think that it’s a sin to vote for a Democrat, particularly Obama, succumb to the second temptation. I quote from the document provided in 2007 by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to guide Catholic voters:

*Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Call to Political Responsibility from the Catholic Bishops of the United States *(USCCB 2007):

1. Two temptations in public life can distort the Church’s defense of human life and dignity:
2. The first is a moral equivalence that makes no ethical distinctions between different kinds of issues involving human life and dignity. The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many. It must always be opposed.
3. The second is the misuse of these necessary moral distinctions as a way of dismissing or ignoring other serious threats to human life and dignity. Racism and other unjust discrimination, the use of the death penalty, resorting to unjust war, the use of torture, war crimes, the failure to respond to those who are suffering from hunger or a lack of health care, or an unjust immigration policy are all serious moral issues that challenge our consciences and require us to act. These are not optional concerns which can be dismissed. Catholics are urged to seriously consider Church teaching on these issues. Although choices about how best to respond to these and other compelling threats to human life and dignity are matters for principled debate and decision, this does not make them optional concerns or permit Catholics to dismiss or ignore Church teaching on these important issues. Clearly not every Catholic can be actively involved on each of these concerns, but we need to support one another as our community of faith defends human life and dignity wherever it is threatened. We are not factions, but one family of faith fulfilling the mission of Jesus Christ.

 

[CWBetts]

An intelligent, thoughtful Catholic voter will follow the advice of the bishops, avoiding two temptations: the temptation to treating pro-life issues too lightly, and the temptation to treat pro-life issues as if they are the only ones that matter. Unfortunately, the people who think that it’s a sin to vote for a Democrat, particularly Obama, succumb to the second temptation. I quote from the document provided in 2007 by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to guide Catholic voters:

*Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Call to Political Responsibility from the Catholic Bishops of the United States *(USCCB 2007):

1. Two temptations in public life can distort the Church’s defense of human life and dignity:
2. The first is a moral equivalence that makes no ethical distinctions between different kinds of issues involving human life and dignity. The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many. It must always be opposed.
3. The second is the misuse of these necessary moral distinctions as a way of dismissing or ignoring other serious threats to human life and dignity. Racism and other unjust discrimination, the use of the death penalty, resorting to unjust war, the use of torture, war crimes, the failure to respond to those who are suffering from hunger or a lack of health care, or an unjust immigration policy are all serious moral issues that challenge our consciences and require us to act. These are not optional concerns which can be dismissed. Catholics are urged to seriously consider Church teaching on these issues. Although choices about how best to respond to these and other compelling threats to human life and dignity are matters for principled debate and decision, this does not make them optional concerns or permit Catholics to dismiss or ignore Church teaching on these important issues. Clearly not every Catholic can be actively involved on each of these concerns, but we need to support one another as our community of faith defends human life and dignity wherever it is threatened. We are not factions, but one family of faith fulfilling the mission of Jesus Christ.

what is your point? All major candidates wanted to bring an an end to the war quickly. Both were opposed to racism. Obama however is pushing for the expansion of genocide against the unborn. Rationalize all you want. A vote for Obama is in direct conflict with the teaching of the Church.

 

[estesbob]

An intelligent, thoughtful Catholic voter will follow the advice of the bishops, avoiding two temptations: the temptation to treating pro-life issues too lightly, and the temptation to treat pro-life issues as if they are the only ones that matter. Unfortunately, the people who think that it’s a sin to vote for a Democrat, particularly Obama, succumb to the second temptation. I quote from the document provided in 2007 by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to guide Catholic voters:

*Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Call to Political Responsibility from the Catholic Bishops of the United States *(USCCB 2007):

1. Two temptations in public life can distort the Church’s defense of human life and dignity:
2. The first is a moral equivalence that makes no ethical distinctions between different kinds of issues involving human life and dignity. The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many. It must always be opposed.
3. The second is the misuse of these necessary moral distinctions as a way of dismissing or ignoring other serious threats to human life and dignity. Racism and other unjust discrimination, the use of the death penalty, resorting to unjust war, the use of torture, war crimes, the failure to respond to those who are suffering from hunger or a lack of health care, or an unjust immigration policy are all serious moral issues that challenge our consciences and require us to act. These are not optional concerns which can be dismissed. Catholics are urged to seriously consider Church teaching on these issues. Although choices about how best to respond to these and other compelling threats to human life and dignity are matters for principled debate and decision, this does not make them optional concerns or permit Catholics to dismiss or ignore Church teaching on these important issues. Clearly not every Catholic can be actively involved on each of these concerns, but we need to support one another as our community of faith defends human life and dignity wherever it is threatened. We are not factions, but one family of faith fulfilling the mission of Jesus Christ.

However you cant cherry pick cites and ignore explict Church teachings. The Pope said support of the Iraq war did not constitue a proportionate reason to support a canidate who supported unresticted taxpayer funded abortion on demand. Since no one in their wildest dreams would accuse McCain of promoting racism, war crimes or torture the above in no way allows a Catholic to have voted for Obama.

As Faithful Citizenship states:

**22. **There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society, because
they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor. Such actions are so
deeply flawed that they are always opposed to the authentic good of persons. These
are called “intrinsically evil” actions. They must always be rejected and opposed
and must never be supported or condoned. A prime example is the intentional
taking of innocent human life, as in abortion and euthanasia. In our nation,
“abortion and euthanasia have become preeminent threats to human dignity
because they directly attack life itself, the most fundamental human good and the
condition for all others” (Living the Gospel of Life, no. 5). It is a mistake with grave
moral consequences to treat the destruction of innocent human life merely as a
matter of individual choice. A legal system that violates the basic right to life on
the grounds of choice is fundamentally flawed.

 

[estesbob]

:

Herer is what preceded what you posted. it puts it into context and empahsizes that abortion does trump the issues you noted:

**22. **
There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society, because
they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor. Such actions are so
deeply flawed that they are always opposed to the authentic good of persons. These
are called “intrinsically evil” actions. They must always be rejected and opposed
and must never be supported or condoned. A prime example is the intentional
taking of innocent human life, as in abortion and euthanasia. In our nation,
“abortion and euthanasia have become preeminent threats to human dignity
because they directly attack life itself, the most fundamental human good and the
condition for all others” (

Living the Gospel of Life**, no. 5). It is a mistake with grave**
moral consequences to treat the destruction of innocent human life merely as a
matter of individual choice. A legal system that violates the basic right to life on
the grounds of choice is fundamentally flawed.
Similarly, direct threats to the sanctity and dignity of human life, such as
human cloning and destructive research on human embryos, are also intrinsically
evil. These must always be opposed. Other direct assaults on innocent human
life and violations of human dignity, such as genocide, torture, racism, and the
targeting of noncombatants in acts of terror or war, can never be justified.
Opposition to intrinsically evil acts that undercut the dignity of the human
person should also open our eyes to the good we must do, that is, to our positive
duty to contribute to the common good and to act in solidarity with those in
need. As Pope John Paul II said, “The fact that only the negative commandments
oblige always and under all circumstances does not mean that in the moral life
prohibitions are more important than the obligation to do good indicated by the
positive commandment” (

Veritatis Splendor, no. 52). Both opposing evil *and *doing
good are essential obligations.

 

[Garland]

All,there is no blinder person than he that will not see or deafer than he who refuses to hear. Abortion is MURDER and no christian can vote for a person or party that espouses such and be true to JESUS the CHRIST. I speak as a democrat who has seen the party sink into moral decay and become the enemy of the CHURCH. Social issues can never trump MURDER, so there are no reasons grave enough to cancel the abortion plank adopted by the democratic party in its platform. When christians stop voteing for pro abortion candidates in the dem. party they will see the reversal of this most heinous activity and regain control of the party. Until then the blood of the most innocent of GODS creation will be on the hands of the dem. party and its supporters. May God open the eyes of the blind and ears of the deaf and the hearts of those who refuse to see. Blessings. garland

 

[Gloria1]

I don’t support Abortion. I think Abortion is very wrong and sinful. However, We can persuade people to agree and accept our christian views but we cannot FORCE people to abide by our christian views. When it comes to politics, it is always good to give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God. Don’t combine politics with religion especially in the United States because not everybody in the US is a christian. Vote for the Candidate you believe can bring positive change and not a candidate who will force his religious views on others.

 

[Windfish]

Sigh.

In one of the earliest general election forums, Obama said that he was pro-choice but opposed abortion, saying that we should all take measures to help pregnant women seek alternatives. Outlawing abortion will not stop abortions; it will only create a dangerous black market. I think people on this board vastly underestimate this horrific possibility. At least with the current laws, abortions can be performed more visibly and can possibly be prevented by a just as visible community of pro-life people. I don’t think, with such a view in mind, a vote for a candidate like an Obama is a vote for abortions. I’M not forcing women to go in there and have abortions, that is THEIR choice. I will try to persuade and pray for them not to, but I am not responsible for their decision. God, in my heart of hearts, knows this.

The alternative, McCain, to my mind, was unacceptable. Hypocrisy, incompetence, shady politics, race-baiting, leading bigoted throngs of people, grand-standing foolishness (do you remember when he called his campaign off for the economic issue? so stupid), a shallow and irresponsible choice as a running mate (who, unless you’re hopelessly biased, has shown herself only to look out for herself and for money), callousness towards the poor, and I could go on and on.

 

[estesbob]

I don’t support Abortion. I think Abortion is very wrong and sinful. However, We can persuade people to agree and accept our christian views but we cannot FORCE people to abide by our christian views. When it comes to politics, it is always good to give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God. Don’t combine politics with religion especially in the United States because not everybody in the US is a christian. Vote for the Candidate you believe can bring positive change and not a candidate who will force his religious views on others.

Do you have the same view on incest? Rape? Robbery? Assault? Would you support a canidate whos views you supported other than the fact they supported legalizing rape?

I also wonder why people are so quick to make an exception for abortion.

 

[estesbob]

Sigh.

In one of the earliest general election forums, Obama said that he was pro-choice but opposed abortion, saying that we should all take measures to help pregnant women seek alternatives. Outlawing abortion will not stop abortions; it will only create a dangerous black market. I think people on this board vastly underestimate this horrific possibility. At least with the current laws, abortions can be performed more visibly and can possibly be prevented by a just as visible community of pro-life people. I don’t think, with such a view in mind, a vote for a candidate like an Obama is a vote for abortions. I’M not forcing women to go in there and have abortions, that is THEIR choice. I will try to persuade and pray for them not to, but I am not responsible for their decision. God, in my heart of hearts, knows this.

The alternative, McCain, to my mind, was unacceptable. Hypocrisy, incompetence, shady politics, race-baiting, leading bigoted throngs of people, grand-standing foolishness (do you remember when he called his campaign off for the economic issue? so stupid), a shallow and irresponsible choice as a running mate (who, unless you’re hopelessly biased, has shown herself only to look out for herself and for money), callousness towards the poor, and I could go on and on.

Sure he opposed abortion-which is why on his third day in office he released funds to international abortion providers. your post is a perfect example of the convoluted thinking a catholic must go through to rationalize their support of an intrinsic evil

 

[Gloria1]

Do you have the same view on incest? Rape? Robbery? Assault? Would you support a canidate whos views you supported other than the fact they supported legalizing rape?

I also wonder why people are so quick to make an exception for abortion.

I just answered a thread here about a 13yr old girl who used pencil to perform self-abortion. The girl was raped by a 30yr old guy. The first thing I expected the girl to do was to inform her parents or the law and the self-abortion she performed was “unwise” because she could have died in the process.

Had the girl inform her parents about this earlier on, the parents might have considered going in for abortion. In a situation like this, even though abortion is sinful, it makes some sense (in human terms) to go in for abortion because the girl was raped in the first place and secondly, she isn’t old enough to to undergo 9 months of pregnancy and she isn’t old enough to be a mother.

when it comes to robbery, rape, incest,etc, they make no sense even in human terms and I wouldn’t support any such candidate.

 

[AnimalGal]

We must work very hard to bring the issues of life, faith, and family to the forefront of the November elections. Catholics have the votes to eliminate all politicians in Washington who support abortion!

No they don’t.

How in the world do you support such a statement?

 

[estesbob]

I just answered a thread here about a 13yr old girl who used pencil to perform self-abortion. The girl was raped by a 30yr old guy. The first thing I expected the girl to do was to inform her parents or the law and the self-abortion she performed was “unwise” because she could have died in the process.

Had the girl inform her parents about this earlier on, the parents might have considered going in for abortion. In a situation like this, even though abortion is sinful, it makes some sense (in human terms) to go in for abortion because the girl was raped in the first place and secondly, she isn’t old enough to to undergo 9 months of pregnancy and she isn’t old enough to be a mother.

when it comes to robbery, rape, incest,etc, they make no sense even in human terms and I wouldn’t support any such candidate.

So becuase a 13 years girl self aborted its OK for Catholics to support the most pro-abortion President in History? The menatl gymanstics required for a catholic to rationalize supporting abortion is a terrible thing to behold.

 

[elts1956]

I’ve learned today that I’m misguided and “a sinner of great magnitude” from your post. Let me try one more time. Even if you agree that abortion is the most important issue for voters to consider, I do not agree with the approach of many on CAF who collapse all issues to abortion, as if that was the only issue to consider. Neither the pope nor the bishops have offered the kind of guidance that would make a vote for a candidate from the Democratic Party, including Pres. Obama, a “sin of great magnitude.” I think that view is misguided. The Republicans have used abortion as a wedge issue to attempt to represent the Republican Party as the “Catholic Party.” I’m old enough to remember when the Democratic Party was supposedly the Catholic Party. I’ve seen the bishops and the U.S. (and worldwide) church move to the right, shifting the rhetoric from an emphasis on justic issues to an emphasis on abortion. I read and consider carefully the guidance offered by the Magisterium, and I find nowhere the notion that abortion is the only issue that matters. I understand the comfort offered by single-issue politics, but I don’t vote that way, not do I judge and condemn those who vote differently than I do.

Are you Catholic first, or Democrat then Catholic? You are right at one time the Clergy here in the US held the Democratic Party in high regard. That has changed somewhat. Although I suspect we have some very Democratic Clergy. But that does not make even them right in their choices of politicians.

You will note in my previous post to you, I said I believe you to be very misguided. Misguided because apparently you were not taught the correct catechesis of the Magisterium of the Church. This was not entirely your fault. I also said the USCCB did not state CLEAR CONCISE directions as to what party should not be voted for.

Do you have any idea why Archbishop Raymond Burke said in one of his articles that the Democratic Party was fast becoming the PARTY OF DEATH? I wouldn’t want to be a part of it myself. No, I am not a Republican, I consider myself Independent enough to vote issues not party. Why is it that questions of the morality of voting for the Dem Party in this past election, or voting for the Pubs. becomes a political fight, when it should be a moral fight. You claim anti bo voters are one issue voters. The Church said in this past election that ABORTION was the MAIN issue that must be fought. I truly cannot understand, being given that mesaage, if it was listened to, why a Catholic could vote for the most por abort pol in history.

 

[elts1956]

I’ve learned today that I’m misguided and “a sinner of great magnitude” from your post. Let me try one more time. Even if you agree that abortion is the most important issue for voters to consider, I do not agree with the approach of many on CAF who collapse all issues to abortion, as if that was the only issue to consider. Neither the pope nor the bishops have offered the kind of guidance that would make a vote for a candidate from the Democratic Party, including Pres. Obama, a “sin of great magnitude.” I think that view is misguided. The Republicans have used abortion as a wedge issue to attempt to represent the Republican Party as the “Catholic Party.” I’m old enough to remember when the Democratic Party was supposedly the Catholic Party. I’ve seen the bishops and the U.S. (and worldwide) church move to the right, shifting the rhetoric from an emphasis on justic issues to an emphasis on abortion. I read and consider carefully the guidance offered by the Magisterium, and I find nowhere the notion that abortion is the only issue that matters. I understand the comfort offered by single-issue politics, but I don’t vote that way, not do I judge and condemn those who vote differently than I do.

No they don’t.

How in the world do you support such a statement?

I think what he meant and I am pointing out, that if all those calling themselves Cathoic here in the US had their heads screwed on right and the their souls in order, we could beat the Pro Death party. However, if the Pubs. do win, we have to hold their feet to the fire to make sure they follow through on what they say they will do. Both parties are so dysfunctional, it is not hard to follow the trail of slime they leave.

Our only hope is in Catholics sticking together to be A People Of Life from conception to natural death.

 

[elts1956]

An intelligent, thoughtful Catholic voter will follow the advice of the bishops, avoiding two temptations: the temptation to treating pro-life issues too lightly, and the temptation to treat pro-life issues as if they are the only ones that matter. Unfortunately, the people who think that it’s a sin to vote for a Democrat, particularly Obama, succumb to the second temptation. I quote from the document provided in 2007 by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to guide Catholic voters:

*Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Call to Political Responsibility from the Catholic Bishops of the United States *(USCCB 2007):

1. Two temptations in public life can distort the Church’s defense of human life and dignity:
   28.COLOR=“DarkRed”] The first is a moral equivalence that makes no ethical distinctions between different kinds of issues involving human life and dignity. The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many. It must always be opposed.
   And this is where the good Bishops messed up and caused great confusion. While all below are of importance, they are NOT PROPOTIONATE to the evil of ABORTION. They are not intrisically evil nor were they a part of any political platform in this past election.

.29. The second is the misuse of these necessary moral distinctions as a way of dismissing or ignoring other serious threats to human life and dignity. Racism and other unjust discrimination, the use of the death penalty, resorting to unjust war, the use of torture, war crimes, the failure to respond to those who are suffering from hunger or a lack of health care, or an unjust immigration policy are all serious moral issues that challenge our consciences and require us to act. These are not optional concerns which can be dismissed. Catholics are urged to seriously consider Church teaching on these issues. Although choices about how best to respond to these and other compelling threats to human life and dignity are matters for principled debate and decision, this does not make them optional concerns or permit Catholics to dismiss or ignore Church teaching on these important issues. Clearly not every Catholic can be actively involved on each of these concerns, but we need to support one another as our community of faith defends human life and dignity wherever it is threatened. We are not factions, but one family of faith fulfilling the mission of Jesus Christ.

What you are quoting is the Seamless Garment Theology by Bernadin in which all issues are of equal seriousness. This is not so. There is a hierarchy of evil which Bernadin, in his attempts to describe a Utopia, failed to discern and teach. This theory has caused difficulties of great magnitude among those who wish to follow the teachings of Mother Church. It has been disavowed by many Bishops and Archbishops.

 

[Windfish]

Sure he opposed abortion-which is why on his third day in office he released funds to international abortion providers. your post is a perfect example of the convoluted thinking a catholic must go through to rationalize their support of an intrinsic evil

I’ll have to research that more. This may not be the case with your source, but I do not trust conservative sources for information on high-profile Democrats like Obama.

Still, what I say stands. I am not forcing pregnant women to choose abortion by voting for a candidate that happens to be pro-choice, like Obama. They are responsible for their decisions, and I, quite often, engage them when and where I can to explain to them that what they are doing is callous and irresponsible. I also pray for them. Obama’s other positions heavily aligned with my Catholic values, and so I chose to vote for him. The alternative, as I explained earlier, was unacceptable. This is not convoluted at all.