Mortal sin not to vote?

[Dr.Bombay]

Doc … go vote.

Our obligation to vote (in places where we are able) is rooted in the fact that we must help bring about the good of the state for the sake of the whole community and the world. If you do not participate it may be an omission not only of civic responsibility but also an omission when it comes to your countries ethical behavior. To sit on ones hands like A. Neville Chamberlain is a crime against humanity at least to some degree.

And what is wrong, may I ask, with desiring Peace in Our Time???

You’re ruining my good vibe, mosher. I guess I’ll go vote, even though I think they’re all a bunch of reprobates and this nation is doomed. DOOMED, I say!

And I think compulsory voting is idiotic. There are already too many stupid people who vote as it is. Compulsory voting would just increase the stupidity percentage.

 

[EBSSTF4]

And what is wrong, may I ask, with desiring Peace in Our Time???

You’re ruining my good vibe, mosher. I guess I’ll go vote, even though I think they’re all a bunch of reprobates and this nation is doomed. DOOMED, I say!

And I think compulsory voting is idiotic. There are already too many stupid people who vote as it is. Compulsory voting would just increase the stupidity percentage.

Couldn’t agree more. Though it would increase the unpredictably of elections. Advertising agencies would love it, and whoever spent the most money would probably win.

 

[LilyM]

And what is wrong, may I ask, with desiring Peace in Our Time???

You’re ruining my good vibe, mosher. I guess I’ll go vote, even though I think they’re all a bunch of reprobates and this nation is doomed. DOOMED, I say!

And I think compulsory voting is idiotic. There are already too many stupid people who vote as it is. Compulsory voting would just increase the stupidity percentage.

And I suppose you think our leaders are more idiotic than yours???

Somehow I doubt it. The advantage is that at least we can’t say the majority of our country didn’t vote for the party and leader currently in power.

 

[thistle]

Sorry to rain on your parade, but Catholics have a moral obligation to vote.

CCC 2240 Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one’s country:

Pay to all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.

[Christians] reside in their own nations, but as resident aliens. They participate in all things as citizens and endure all things as foreigners. . . . They obey the established laws and their way of life surpasses the laws. . . . So noble is the position to which God has assigned them that they are not allowed to desert it.
The Apostle exhorts us to offer prayers and thanksgiving for kings and all who exercise authority, “that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way.”

Our civic duty to vote is covered by the fourth commandment. We are obliged to vote for the candidate who best exemplifies Christian principles. If none of the candidates are Christians with good moral views, we should vote for the one least hostile to Christian principles and who is the most moral in their qualitites. By that same token we are not to vote for candidates who despise the teachings of Christianity.

There is no moral duty to vote if all candidates propose or support anything considered grave matter by the Church, eg if all candidates supported abortion you have no moral duty to vote for any of them. You most certainly do not try to choose the least evil candidate.

 

[thechrismyster]

OPTION ONE - YOU VOTE

if you vote and a great guy gets into office:

you voted for him, you are responsible for him
you didn’t vote for him, you are not responsible, but it’s a moot point. he’s a good guy.

if you vote and a maniac gets in office, there are 2 outcomes:

you voted for him, you are responsible for him
you didn’t vote, you are not responsible.

---

THE OTHER OPTION… YOU DON’T VOTE

Candidate A - the good guy
you would have voted for him, you are responsible for him
you wouldn’t have voted for him, you would have been responsible for candidate B getting elected

the maniac gets in office, there are 2 outcomes:

you would have voted for him, you are responsible for him
you wouldn’t have voted for him, you are not responsible.

---

See bombay - you’re options are more moral if you don’t vote because there is less of a chance of you being responsible for a maniac getting into office.

 

[aurora77]

As my former boss used to say–if you don’t bother to vote, you don’t have the right to complain!

A local radio station is running an ad that I think is pretty good. It starts out with one person saying “My vote won’t make a difference.” Then, you hear several people, and on and on until it sounds like a big crowd saying this. It made me think.

Bombay–aren’t you in MO? If so, you’d better get out and vote. At least vote on Amendment 2, if nothing else.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

And I suppose you think our leaders are more idiotic than yours???

Somehow I doubt it. The advantage is that at least we can’t say the majority of our country didn’t vote for the party and leader currently in power.

I can’t really speak on the relative intelligence of Australian politicians, but I understand that your toilets run backwards and there’s a plague of baby-snatching dingos roaming the land so, obviously, somebody’s asleep at the switch.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Howdy.

Is it a mortal sin not to vote? Does the Church require us to vote?

I hate politics. I’d rather not deal with it. Give me an out. Please.

In Nevada, Doc, you’d have an out. Here, I can vote as is just and proper and my civic duty. I can simply push the button that says “none of the above.” My vote is counted and the body politic knows of my attitude (though they don’t seem to be letting it bother them any).

 

[Dr.Bombay]

OPTION ONE - YOU VOTE

if you vote and a great guy gets into office:

you voted for him, you are responsible for him
you didn’t vote for him, you are not responsible, but it’s a moot point. he’s a good guy.

if you vote and a maniac gets in office, there are 2 outcomes:

you voted for him, you are responsible for him
you didn’t vote, you are not responsible.

---

THE OTHER OPTION… YOU DON’T VOTE

Candidate A - the good guy
you would have voted for him, you are responsible for him
you wouldn’t have voted for him, you would have been responsible for candidate B getting elected

the maniac gets in office, there are 2 outcomes:

you would have voted for him, you are responsible for him
you wouldn’t have voted for him, you are not responsible.

---

See bombay - you’re options are more moral if you don’t vote because there is less of a chance of you being responsible for a maniac getting into office.

Get thee behind me, Satan! You just want me to fall into mortal sin so you can drag me down to hell with your jean shorts wearing self. No way, buster.

BTW, I already wrote in my own name for president a few years ago when Mumbly Joe and the Hillbilly were running and I couldn’t stand either of them. So…I’ve already voted for a maniac once.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

As my former boss used to say–if you don’t bother to vote, you don’t have the right to complain!

A local radio station is running an ad that I think is pretty good. It starts out with one person saying “My vote won’t make a difference.” Then, you hear several people, and on and on until it sounds like a big crowd saying this. It made me think.

Bombay–aren’t you in MO? If so, you’d better get out and vote. At least vote on Amendment 2, if nothing else.

Yes, I am in Missouri. And the good people in my state, it looks like, are poised to legalize Nazi eugenics, under the code name Amendment 2. I hardly think my little vote is going to stop the miracle of the lame walking, the blind seeing and the deaf hearing once embryonic stem cell research is legal here. Can’t stop progress.

There’s a terrible judgement coming against this nation. I was hoping my own state would be spared the worst of it. Now it looks like…not so much.

God sees all but waits. But for how much longer?

 

[Dr.Bombay]

In Nevada, Doc, you’d have an out. Here, I can vote as is just and proper and my civic duty. I can simply push the button that says “none of the above.” My vote is counted and the body politic knows of my attitude (though they don’t seem to be letting it bother them any).

Does the voting machine dispense tokens when you vote? Just curious.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Does the voting machine dispense tokens when you vote? Just curious.

Do you mean chips? No, but a barmaid occasionally wanders over to see if you want a watered-down drink.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Do you mean chips? No, but a barmaid occasionally wanders over to see if you want a watered-down drink.

Chips? Wow. I never knew. We get tokens at our gambling joints. Which are supposed to be riverboats placidly trolling the river…straight out of Mark Twain. In reality, they’re huge, flat barges permanantly moored in stagnant swimming pools hundreds of yards away from the river.

Something else the good people of my state voted to approve that didn’t quite work out as advertised. But we keep going back for more. And people wonder why I don’t want to vote. HA!

 

[SeekerJen]

I have no problem with it. However, I think that the qualifications for voting should be similar to the original American system. Only those who have taxable property should be allowed to vote with an exception made for those who serve at least one term in the military as both of these types of people actually have a vested interest in the proper running of the nation. All the rest of us do not in the same magnitude. Of course I fear true democracies so anything that has changed the US closer to a democracy from a strict Republic in my opinion is dangerous - just like the direct election of Senators (worst amendment ever).

So a single mother living in a rented apartment who works two jobs so she can care for her kids and not go on welfare doesn’t get a vote under your system?

College kids who are expected to get fired up to eventually take the reins as adults don’t get a chance to vote?

A senior citizen who rents a townhouse in a seniors’ complex because home upkeep was too hard to maintain loses the vote he’s held for years?

A husband and wife who had to sell their house because the husband lost his job due to the tanking auto industry would both lose their previously held voting rights?

Sorry, that doesn’t sound fair or equal. Care to explain?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I have no problem with it. However, I think that the qualifications for voting should be similar to the original American system. Only those who have taxable property should be allowed to vote with an exception made for those who serve at least one term in the military as both of these types of people actually have a vested interest in the proper running of the nation. All the rest of us do not in the same magnitude. Of course I fear true democracies so anything that has changed the US closer to a democracy from a strict Republic in my opinion is dangerous - just like the direct election of Senators (worst amendment ever).

I rather think that the taxes they take out of my salary ought to give me a voice.

 

[LilyM]

I can’t really speak on the relative intelligence of Australian politicians, but I understand that your toilets run backwards and there’s a plague of baby-snatching dingos roaming the land so, obviously, somebody’s asleep at the switch.

Can’t let that post go unchallenged. Our toilets run the correct way and always have. It’s yours that run backwards, just like it’s everyone else that has the accent and we who speak proper

As for the dingos - I’m only aware of two or three attacks in my (30-some year) lifetime. Far less dangerous than cars and disgruntled high school students and postal workers by the sounds of it.

 

[Questionsabound]

This can’t be any kind of sin, at least not of serious nature. If you can’t agree with the issues (that the candidate may stand for) that may affect you (and your beliefs) today or in the future. Or affect others whether here, abroad or even those that have no ability to vote (unborn, children, elderly, etc) then how can you sin?
If you can’t make a decision and know the outcome, then it’s not in your capacity to be in the state of any serious sin. To label this a mortal sin is ridiculous. Some would label stealing a 5 cent piece of candy a mortal sin and throw it in the same context as a murder. I don’t know how not voting can be in the same boat.

I won’t vote, nor will my wife. We don’t care (or shall I say, devout enough time to disect each candidate’s worriness - because no matter the person, or partyline, we’d always disagree with some issue and would probably present a bigger moral dilema and feel no one should be elected.) It’s all about all the “politics” that go on. That, in our opinion is a worse sin, far worse, in fact due to the deceit and playing of games (hence the word “politics”) that go on than us not taking a stand and voting.

 

[mosher]

I rather think that the taxes they take out of my salary ought to give me a voice.

I agree but that is why I am also against Income Taxes.

So a single mother living in a rented apartment who works two jobs so she can care for her kids and not go on welfare doesn’t get a vote under your system?

College kids who are expected to get fired up to eventually take the reins as adults don’t get a chance to vote?

A senior citizen who rents a townhouse in a seniors’ complex because home upkeep was too hard to maintain loses the vote he’s held for years?

A husband and wife who had to sell their house because the husband lost his job due to the tanking auto industry would both lose their previously held voting rights?

Sorry, that doesn’t sound fair or equal. Care to explain?

Yes they all can’t vote. Voting is not a right it is a privledge. Modern leftist education has tried to impose the idea that we are a democracy but in fact we are a Republic and as such voting is not a right.

And I suppose you think our leaders are more idiotic than yours???

Somehow I doubt it. The advantage is that at least we can’t say the majority of our country didn’t vote for the party and leader currently in power.

That is because a majority of voters in the last election were morons. Plus, using that logic Abraham Lincoln would have never been president.

Things like education to at least a certain level, and the safety of your person and property (however much or little you may have) ARE basic human rights.

If health care isn’t it should be - I think there are very few countries in the world that don’t have a minimum safety net for health. The US is absolutely pathetic in this regard. Absolutely a society must provide the things that are necessary for its members to survive and be productive.

Plenty of such rights were enshrined in law in the US and other countries well before there was universal suffrage. They were enshrined for a reason - ‘all men were created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights’, or do you not believe this?

Those things that are human rights are not entitlements by definition. And you are correct at some base level proper health care is a right. However it is not true to say that the US does not have this already in place. Just ask all the Mexicans that are using it for free at my expense. In fact they get better care than I do at times. Also, there is a law that states that a Hospital cannot refuse to treat because the patient can’t pay - so the hype about the evil American health care system is about as stable North Korea. However, again, entitlements are not rights they are gifts that can be revoked at any time.

 

[AndyF]

Howdy.

Is it a mortal sin not to vote? Does the Church require us to vote?

I hate politics. I’d rather not deal with it. Give me an out. Please.

No.

The objects of a vote could be a good.vs.evil, an evil.vs.evil or lessorevil.vs.evil.

Since choosing good is the only option, two of the above can never be one. Lack of interest at the polls should be an indicator of the moral worth of the issues presented.

AndyF

 

[mosher]

No.

The objects of a vote could be a good.vs.evil, an evil.vs.evil or lessorevil.vs.evil.

Since choosing good is the only option, two of the above can never be one. Lack of interest at the polls should be an indicator of the moral worth of the issues presented.

AndyF

There is another option which you have missed and that is choosing that which will do the least harm. This is also a factor that must be considered. This is a little different than choosing the lesser of two evils as the intention is not choosing a evil but choosing a good while tolerating an evil.