It is a Sin to Vote for Pro-Abortion Candidates

[Lypher]

CWBetts, nothing lacking but a SOUL if ensoulment hasn’t taken place. You even at first stated IF the fertilized egg is human before adding in parenthesis “it is”. Perhaps somewhere deep within, your inner conscience knows it is IF due to it being a matter of faith and belief. But you just haven’t allowed the realization of knowing the difference between “belief” and “for certain” to surface yet between the black and white. God bless you on your journey. And peace.

Come on Matt, you know it has a soul… If we could implant that embryo in a Cow and bring it to term would it be a Cow or a human?.. Soul is there, you can argue… actually did you work for the Tobacco Institute a few years back??? (Sarcasm) they often said Smoking does NOT cause cancer…because a lot of people die that are smokers that are very old, and they did NOT have cancer. Smoking, according to their logic, did not cause emphysema because a LOT of people died of cancer that did NOT have emphysema.

Took years to prove the link…but I think most people knew in their hearts that smoking causes both cancer and emphysema.

 

[PJM]

=RobGeoAnthony;6759928]And you are needlessly being combative. Fact is the Catholic Bishops have no say over your vote or mine. They can suggest, even conjole. I will decide, based on the whole package of the candidate for a particular office whether he/she gets my vote. I do not, will not, and have not voted for Republicans because their sense of ethics seems off kilter. You are not profound, though quoting St. Sir Thomas More who believed in following the law and his conscience and was martyred for that stand by King Henry VIII. Furthermore, you have cited what you don’t like about President Obama. Pure vindictive against the current, duly elected and sworn president of this nation.

If anyone is bankrupt on ideas on this issue it is you sir. As for abortion the subject of this thread, there is a considerable case to be made for abortion on two and only two reasons: Rape and Incest. In both, there are criminal acts without the passion and the consent of the victim. Both are crimes of violence. No one with half a brain goes out of their way to be raped. It is pure violence against the person of another with consequences such as STD’s. I work with those victims on a daily basis sir. I investigate those crimes and give evidence against those suspected of rape, incest, and sexual assault and battery.

***Friend you are COMPLETELY in the WRONG here.

Bishops have a GRAVE MORAL OBLIGATION to explain God’s position of Moral issues, even when they become political issues.

There are no conditions of equal value to that of protecting innocent life; not monatary, not ecology, not politics or any other issue can MORALLY exceed the importance of protecting life.***

Deut.30: 19 “I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that you and your descendants may live,”

CODE OF CANON LAW

Can. 752 While the assent of faith is not required, a religious submission of intellect and will is to be given to any doctrine which either the Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic magisterium, declare upon a matter of faith or morals, even though they do not intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act. Christ’s faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine.

Can. 753 Whether they teach individually, or in Episcopal Conferences, or gathered together in particular councils, Bishops in communion with the head and the members of the College, while not infallible in their teaching, are the authentic instructors and teachers of the faith for Christ’s faithful entrusted to their care. The faithful are bound to adhere, with a religious submission of mind, to this authentic magisterium of their Bishops.

Can. 754 All Christ’s faithful are obliged to observe the constitutions and decrees which lawful ecclesiastical authority issues for the purpose of proposing doctrine or of proscribing erroneous opinions; this is particularly the case of those published by the Roman Pontiff or by the College of Bishops.

Can. 755 §1 It pertains especially to the entire College of Bishops and to the Apostolic See to foster and direct among catholics the ecumenical movement, the purpose of which is the restoration of unity between all christians which, by the will of Christ, the Church is bound to promote.

§2 It is a matter likewise for Bishops and, in accordance with the law, for Episcopal Conferences, to promote this same unity and, in line with the various needs and opportunities of the circumstances, to issue practical norms which accord with the provisions laid down by the supreme authority of the Church.

One is NOT PERITTED in our outside the CC to put there personal ajenda before the saving of Life Issues. hat friend is Conspiracy to cooperate with murder. A Mortal Sin! If you don’t know this you ought too. It’s common sense.

 

[mickeyfan35]

Our Pope, our Church and commonsense and sense of Moral justice say your priest is SERIOUSLY WRONG.

You would do well to research the position of the CC and provide him with it.

I think you misunderstood. He basically said that that would be an impossible thing to do. Could anyone seriously stand before all those poor souls and justify that? He is very pro-life and very traditional.

 

[elts1956]

It is an interestng paradox here . One who has stated that he can ignore the Church if it conflicts with what Jesus is telling him is trying to use the Church’s teaching on ensoulment to justify abortion. Basically he is saying the Church is right only when it agrees with him. He has met god and it is he.

I wonder what prayers he says to himself every night? I’ll have to give that some thought. He has already created his own universe so I suppose he doesn’t need much.

 

[elts1956]

Ok got it. You don’t believe all humans have a soul.

Okay lets go back to about eighth grade and begin reading lessons. Part of those lessons will be in comprehension. Sometimes folks get it, sometimes they don’t. You were so quick to get your words back, you also lost your sense of logic. :whacky:

 

[elts1956]

Ok got it. You don’t believe all humans have a soul.

He didn’t? Here’s what he said. He said he is not talking about when the soul enters the body. He said that is solely a matter of faith. He said science can not prove the soul. He said however science can prove human life.

Interesting. So he agrees ensoulment is purely faith based. Which means he doesn’t know when that occurs other than whenever he happens to believe it occurs. But he knows when human life begins. So it’s a given if his **belief **on the moment of ensoulment happens to be wrong and if it actually occurs after he knows when human life begins, then he is saying human life could exist without a soul.

You guys do a great job talking black and white. But you forget one important thing. When you mix black and white together, it comes out gray.

I believe the soul enters the body upon conception. That is my PERSONAL belief. The Church has not, as far as I know, made an infallible statement as to when the body is ensouled. That is a matter of FAITH. Science backs the Church up in STATING LIFE begins at conception. For something to be alive, it must be able to grow and move of its own volition. I think that basically describes what happens when a sperm and egg meet and becomes a unique human being. Does the soul cause life to begin? I PERSONALLY think it does, but the Church has not made a definitive statement about this. Please don’t put words at the tip of my fingers. And yes, there is a grey area. You are living in it.

Peace and Love brother.

 

[CMatt25]

I believe the soul enters the body upon conception. That is my PERSONAL belief.

 

[CMatt25]

I believe the soul enters the body upon conception. That is my PERSONAL belief. The Church has not, as far as I know, made an infallible statement as to when the body is ensouled. That is a matter of FAITH. Science backs the Church up in STATING LIFE begins at conception. For something to be alive, it must be able to grow and move of its own volition. I think that basically describes what happens when a sperm and egg meet and becomes a unique human being. Does the soul cause life to begin? I PERSONALLY think it does, but the Church has not made a definitive statement about this. Please don’t put words at the tip of my fingers. And yes, there is a grey area. You are living in it.

Peace and Love brother.

Here’s the problem with this. You’re saying science proves life is something growing and moving. Good so far. But then you’re also saying you personally believe and think the soul enters at conception and causes human life to begin. That’s fine.

However since you only believe and think the soul enters at conception, and because it is required for human life, you truly only believe and think human life begins at conception. You don’t really know. You know life begins when the embryo/fetus is growing and moving. But human life depends on what you believe and think about the soul. And if as far as you know the CC doesn’t infallibly define enoulment, then it doesn’t even make sense for them to define life as human at conception if they don’t know whether ensoulment occurs at conception.

See you are trying to justify your beliefs and make yourself feel better about your desire to force your beliefs onto all by mixing in some science without any proof about ensoulment. So in the end when human life begins is actually based on faith and belief due to the question about the soul.

What you think is great, Elts. However your Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, Episcopal, or United Church of Christ neighbor might think differently. And you don’t have the right to force the Catholic belief onto them. Nor do they have the right to force theirs onto you. So in a democracy that’s where the govt, courts, what have you, must come up with a solution for what will be the law of the land. And as I have stated previously, not everyone is going to be happy. But alas that is the difference between living in a democracy or living in a Catholic theocracy. And is why Catholics might vote for candidates you do not after they weigh a candidate’s position on other life issues.

Thank you, Elts, God bless you on your faith walk and peace and love to you as well.

 

[CMatt25]

I know for a fact.

CW, I’m unsure if I should bow, genuflect or what. So I’ll bow with a smile. :bowdown2: God bless you.

 

[elts1956]

Here’s the problem with this. You’re saying science proves life is something growing and moving. Good so far. But then you’re also saying you personally believe and think the soul enters at conception and causes human life to begin. Science say the combination of human sperm and human egg creates human life. That’s fine.

However since you only believe and think the soul enters at conception, and because it is required for human life, you truly only believe and think human life begins at conception. You don’t really know. You know life begins when the embryo/fetus is growing and moving. But human life depends on what you believe and think about the soul. And if as far as you know the CC doesn’t infallibly define enoulment, then it doesn’t even make sense for them to define life as human at conception if they don’t know whether ensoulment occurs at conception. Remember the scientific definition of LIFE.

The scientifc definition of Human life does not scientifically depend upon ensoulment. You are mixing apples and oranges. No matter when ensoulment exactly takes place, the combination of human sperm and human egg makes the result human. That is the province of Science. When ensoulment takes place is in the spiritual realm and is the province of Faith.

See you are trying to justify your beliefs and make yourself feel better about your desire to force your beliefs onto all by mixing in some science without any proof about ensoulment. So in the end when human life begins is actually based on faith and belief due to the question about the soul.

]That is what you said, I didn’t.

What you think is great, Elts. However your Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, Episcopal, or United Church of Christ neighbor might think differently. And you don’t have the right to force the Catholic belief onto them. Nor do they have the right to force theirs onto you. So in a democracy that’s where the govt, courts, what have you, must come up with a solution for what will be the law of the land. And as I have stated previously, not everyone is going to be happy. But alas that is the difference between living in a democracy or living in a Catholic theocracy. And is why Catholics might vote for candidates you do not after they weigh a candidate’s position on other life issues. So very wrong.

But those who do not believe the meeting of human sperm and human egg instantly result in a brand new unique human with all human attributes implanted in those small cells, are forming a society I do not wish to live in. (Please note, I did not mention ensoulment). Since no one knows when that happens without a doubt, I will not force that opinion on anyone. That what develops when a sperm and egg unite is definitely and scientifically detailed as human, I do have the right to FORCE that belief on any individual, or group I want…

What you are blithering about is slipshod thinking and even less unerstanding of the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Thank you, Elts, God bless you on your faith walk and peace and love to you as well.

Thank you, This is my last post to you. May you someday grow ears and true faith. I will pray for you.

 

[elts1956]

I am sure I haven’t read or thought enough about it. I’ll never be able to read or think enough about how important life is.

What does it matter who’s more vulnerable?

Yes, I’ve read Evangelium Vitae.

I never suggested the Pope would write about lives he didn’t care about. Evangelium Vitae was about the Gospel of Life, not only about abortion.

Remember the Gospel from last Sunday? Those who sin much are so much more grateful for God’s love and mercy?

What does it matter who’s more vulnerable?/COLOR I can’t believe you said that. Okay, lets picture this. Two people, one disabled in a wheelchair, no protection. Another very physically and metally able person with a means of defense. In order to save my own life, I have to kill one of them. Which do I choose? Or another scenario, we are in a boat that capsizes. There are three of us, another adult and a child. I can save one of them. Which do I choose?

 

[estesbob]

Thank you, This is my last post to you. May you someday grow ears and true faith. I will pray for you.

16 They have mouths, but cannot speak,
eyes, but they cannot see;
17 they have ears, but cannot hear,
nor is there breath in their mouths. 18 Those who make them will be like them,
and so will all who trust in them.

Psalm 135

 

[PJM]

=CMatt25;6760211]:bounce: Oh oh oh let me answer! Proportionate reasoning is when your conscience reasons following much prayer and contemplation that there are actually other reasons besides a single one which may allow one to vote for a candidate estesbob dislikes. Sorta like you MAY vote single issue but not a must. There answered but now you don’t like that one.

YOUR WRONG FRIEND! Name just ONE “Proportionate” reason that is GREATER than saving inocent life.

**Is being an accessory to murder a crime?

In the same way being an acessory to murder **…THAT FRIEND IS WHAT IT IS… is a Mortal sin. You read the document seeking a loop-hole. There are none. Not even the fact that your against war.

But God let’s us make excuses and decide where we choose to spend Eternity. “Choose Life.”

 

[CMatt25]

Elts, ok so in summation here’s what you’ve said:

You continuously say you are not talking ensoulment as it relates to human life.

But then when I point out you apparently in that case don’t believe life requires a soul to be human, Betts jumps in saying you never even suggested humans do not need a soul. Therefore implying you do believe it.

But now you’re saying science proves human life irregardlesss of ensoulment. And that I’m the one who says it requires a soul, not you.

I’m glad your last response to me was your last to me. Because you guys are talking out of both sides of your mouths and want to have it both ways. On the one hand you say human life exists irregardless of ensoulment. And that I’m the one saying human life needs a soul to be human. But then on the otherhand you believe human life must have a soul to be human. Or maybe you don’t. Though Betts assures me you never suggested it doesn’t.

Oh well.

Anyway I understand the Catholic faith btw. Just because one does not agree with everything does not equate to not understanding it. Nor by Church definition does it equate to not being Catholic before you get the desire to go there.

But related to the definition of human life, you saying you have and I quote, “the right to FORCE that belief on any individual, or group I want”, is quite amazing since even God gave us free will. But if you do, more power to not only CW but to you too Elts! :bowdown2: Yet nevertheless God bless you all and peace along your journeys. Amen.

 

[CMatt25]

YOUR WRONG FRIEND! Name just ONE “Proportionate” reason that is GREATER than saving inocent life.

**Is being an accessory to murder a crime?

In the same way being an acessory to murder **…THAT FRIEND IS WHAT IT IS… is a Mortal sin. You read the document seeking a loop-hole. There are none. Not even the fact that your against war.

But God let’s us make excuses and decide where we choose to spend Eternity. “Choose Life.”

Well not getting again into plural faith beliefs in our democracy regarding the definition of human life and the govt’s role then to form a law for the land, just ONE? You apparently have missed Christ’s many other reasons for voting to affect life. A person who dies because their insurance company denies them coverage due to a pre-existing condition or a person who has to choose to buy food or their medications. The homeless vet. The pedestrian whose brains are blown out by a bomb. All certainly innocent life. Peace.

 

[Garland]

Cmatt, Digger, D. Dan, I have observed this thread and you post with some intrest. I find that in all you post you are addament that those bad old Repubs. are out to destroy you way of life while those glorius Dems ride to the rescue. Political hocum rules the day. If there was a real difference in either party economically or any other way, except life issues, it would be lost in the load of **** put out by washington and the power behind the throne, so to speak. I am not an educated man by todays standards, but have lived a productive life as a farmer and trucker. I have seen a lot of water go under the bridge when both parties were in power. The only real difference in the two is LIFE ISSUES. I have seen this trying to be explained in the positive light of church teaching, by elts, cwbetts, lypher, and others, to you with all kinds of spin being put into play to justify your Dem. leanings, you twist Jesus into something unimportant by saying, FORCE SOMEONE ELSE TO BELIEVE WHAT I BELIEVE, or A BIG TENT GOSPEL THAT COVERS EVERYONE DIFFERENTLY. What a load of ****.
Your post tell me that you are first, last and always A DEMOCRAT. every other thing comes after that, including Jesus. I am not trying to cut you in any way, however if I saw you about to step on a copperhead, I most certainly would try to warn you in order to save your life. Our const. guarantes first LIFE. Without that no other rights are important. That fundamental right is being denide to a whole generation of our people. This in the land of the free. That very thought is abhorrent to an athiest I know and is found in no other species on the planet. The fact that a child is murdered and you give your vote to those who espouse such an evil boggles the mind. All other animals on earth will die to protect their babies in and out of the womb. In a country that has been given the best of everything by the GREAT GOD OF ABRAHAM, the true GOD, and through his SON JESUS given LIFE forever has a law and PARTY that wishes and supports death not only for its own citizens, but under this admin. to export death to others in foreign lands by using my taxes to pay for it. IT is PURE EVIL. Wake up people. You are being lead down the garden path by lucifer himself. Hitler and his minions were not as bad. Only 11 million under him. 50 plus million by the party of death. You don`t actually believe that the good GOD will allow this to go unpunished, do you?

 I am and have been all my long life a democrat. I will vote for a prolife democrat. They are few and far between, that will actually stand up for all americans, born or unborn. There is one thing politician believe. If they lose they change. Thats the only thing they [either party] understand. Do you want to bring the party back to its roots or are you happy with the homosexual, abortion, agenda put forth by the present people in charge. If they lose they change. How hard is that to understand. THEY LOSE, THEY CHANGE.  I pray that hearts of people will change and love and protection will be granted to all our people from conception to natural death. No other way is acceptable to GOD or his CHURCH. If you espouse any other way, your fooling yourself and denighing LIFE to the most vunerable of our citizens. If you think JESUS would authorize killing one child, your wrong. If you think voteing for a prodeath candidate is justifiable to him, your wrong. I pray your hearts and minds will open to the truth of this before you pass to the judgement. Woe to him who calls good, evil and evil, good.  Do not be political, but BE  CHRISTIAN, FIRST LAST AND ALWAYS.

OH deacon Dan, if you think your post say you are prolife you need to go back and read them again. Blessings Garland. RCIA Dir. for my parish

 

[elts1956]

Cmatt, Digger, D. Dan, I have observed this thread and you post with some intrest. I find that in all you post you are addament that those bad old Repubs. are out to destroy you way of life while those glorius Dems ride to the rescue. Political hocum rules the day. If there was a real difference in either party economically or any other way, except life issues, it would be lost in the load of **** put out by washington and the power behind the throne, so to speak. I am not an educated man by todays standards, but have lived a productive life as a farmer and trucker. I have seen a lot of water go under the bridge when both parties were in power. The only real difference in the two is LIFE ISSUES. I have seen this trying to be explained in the positive light of church teaching, by elts, cwbetts, lypher, and others, to you with all kinds of spin being put into play to justify your Dem. leanings, you twist Jesus into something unimportant by saying, FORCE SOMEONE ELSE TO BELIEVE WHAT I BELIEVE, or A BIG TENT GOSPEL THAT COVERS EVERYONE DIFFERENTLY. What a load of ****.
Your post tell me that you are first, last and always A DEMOCRAT. every other thing comes after that, including Jesus. I am not trying to cut you in any way, however if I saw you about to step on a copperhead, I most certainly would try to warn you in order to save your life. Our const. guarantes first LIFE. Without that no other rights are important. That fundamental right is being denide to a whole generation of our people. This in the land of the free. That very thought is abhorrent to an athiest I know and is found in no other species on the planet. The fact that a child is murdered and you give your vote to those who espouse such an evil boggles the mind. All other animals on earth will die to protect their babies in and out of the womb. In a country that has been given the best of everything by the GREAT GOD OF ABRAHAM, the true GOD, and through his SON JESUS given LIFE forever has a law and PARTY that wishes and supports death not only for its own citizens, but under this admin. to export death to others in foreign lands by using my taxes to pay for it. IT is PURE EVIL. Wake up people. You are being lead down the garden path by lucifer himself. Hitler and his minions were not as bad. Only 11 million under him. 50 plus million by the party of death. You don`t actually believe that the good GOD will allow this to go unpunished, do you?

 I am and have been all my long life a democrat. I will vote for a prolife democrat. They are few and far between, that will actually stand up for all americans, born or unborn. There is one thing politician believe. If they lose they change. Thats the only thing they [either party] understand. Do you want to bring the party back to its roots or are you happy with the homosexual, abortion, agenda put forth by the present people in charge. If they lose they change. How hard is that to understand. THEY LOSE, THEY CHANGE.  I pray that hearts of people will change and love and protection will be granted to all our people from conception to natural death. No other way is acceptable to GOD or his CHURCH. If you espouse any other way, your fooling yourself and denighing LIFE to the most vunerable of our citizens. If you think JESUS would authorize killing one child, your wrong. If you think voteing for a prodeath candidate is justifiable to him, your wrong. I pray your hearts and minds will open to the truth of this before you pass to the judgement. Woe to him who calls good, evil and evil, good.  Do not be political, but BE  CHRISTIAN, FIRST LAST AND ALWAYS.

OH deacon Dan, if you think your post say you are prolife you need to go back and read them again. Blessings Garland. RCIA Dir. for my parish

I don’t know if those who uphold the party of death are confused Catholics, or confused Democrats, but what you have said is the TRUTH. I reapeat, the TRUTH.

May God Bless you and Protect you for supporting the Truths of the Church and fighting the plight of the vulnerable from conception to natural death. I could just give you a GREAT BIG HUG. In fact, I think I will. :hug1::hug1::

 

[CMatt25]

Hello Garland, actually I’m not happy with either party myself. I’d like to think if they lose they change. But when just enough Dems voted for Ralph Nader in FL in 2000 and cost Al Gore a clear win in FL and then the election was eventually decided in GW’s favor by the Republican leaning SC, the Dems did not get more liberal to pacify those Nader voters. They continue to take the more liberal voter for granted. I didn’t see single payer insurance even allowed on the table last yr under the “dreaded socialist” Obama and I didn’t see a public option transpire either. Both of which trust me, we liberals wanted. But what do we do? Vote for more liberal 3rd party candidate rather than the Centrist Dems and hand the election to the conservative Republicans, many of which want to dismantle what health care was passed to care for the sick. And caring for the sick was certainly something Christ commanded the righteous to do. But anyway I’m not sure they change. Either party in the end. Both are influenced by special interests. God bless you and peace.

 

[diggerdomer]

I don’t have the time to review all 51 pages on this thread, but just in case no one has posted it , here is a link to the USCCB site that answers this question
usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/FCStatement.pdf
It comes down to an informed conscience, and I can not read anyone else’s mind. I’ve formed mine and others form theirs and we may not agree.
It is not a black and white issue as some here may see it. Unbelievable flaming and excommunications flying about. All in the name of Christ.

another useful links from the US Bishops:
faithfulcitizenship.org/

That has been brought up before, yet many Catholics in the U.S. disregard, or dismiss, or disagree with (for what reason?) it.

 

[diggerdomer]

Of course. The USCCB document lets you see things your way. Fr. Stephen F. Torraco, PhD origin.ewtn.com/vote/brief_catechism.htm

This is not “opinion” but straighforward Catholic teachings which should be taught by the Bishops. Do you think EWTN would let Father Torraco put this on their website if they didn’t support what he says? Have you read the CAF booklet on Conscience when voting?
It says practically the same thing. How blind can you be?

Wait…you’re saying that following the teaching of the USCCB is a personal thing, while following the teaching of someone from a TV show is universally catholic and obligatory?

HELP?