Non-Negotiable Issues

  • Thread starter Thread starter midnightstar17
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

midnightstar17

Guest
I was reading a thread here recently and someone posted the “Non-negotiable” issues of the church. I was just had a couple of questions. I was wondering how far that goes? Like, i’m against abortion unless having the baby will kill both the mother and the baby. But was it wrong to support John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election (including your parents voting for him). Our family does not like Bush. My mom works for the government and gets so annyoed with Bush’s policies toward them. Was it a sin (even mortal) to vote for Kerry? I could never support Bush! Also is it wrong to support stem-cell research as used for medical purposes (such as paralysis)? How about gay rights for civil unions? I just dont’t know where the line is drawn?

Thanks, Jenny
 
40.png
midnightstar17:
I was reading a thread here recently and someone posted the “Non-negotiable” issues of the church. I was just had a couple of questions. I was wondering how far that goes? Like, i’m against abortion unless having the baby will kill both the mother and the baby.
Click to expand...
One must attempt to save both lives, but it is permissible to prioritize treatment that might mean the unintentional death of one or the other. There is absolutely no situation in which one may directly kill the baby.
But was it wrong to support John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election (including your parents voting for him). Our family does not like Bush. My mom works for the government and gets so annyoed with Bush’s policies toward them. Was it a sin (even mortal) to vote for Kerry?
Click to expand...
I’m going to say it was probably not any kind of sin on your part due to your uncertainty, but I’m no authority. Since Kerry supports an intrinsicly immoral act, it is wrong in general to vote for him.
I could never support Bush!
Click to expand...
You don’t have to. Unfortunately your vote should have gone to someone other than Kerry.
Also is it wrong to support stem-cell research as used for medical purposes (such as paralysis)?
Click to expand...
Depends on what you mean by stem-cell research. If you mean stem-cell research that does not involve the killing of human embryos, it is perfectly legitimate.
How about gay rights for civil unions?
Click to expand...
Because civil unions for homosexuals would constitute moral approval for an objectively immoral act, they cannot be supported in any circumstance.
I just dont’t know where the line is drawn?
Click to expand...
Living and voting according to Catholic teaching is a tough and increasingly unpopular road to walk on. But it is has the advantage of being unambiguous. 🙂

Scott
 
Jenny,

Scott has given you several very good answers. Moral issues are a lot clearer than most people would like them to be, and a lot of our society seems to have gotten the idea that morality is to be followed until it gets inconvenient.
  • Liberian
 
40.png
midnightstar17:
Our family does not like Bush. My mom works for the government and gets so annyoed with Bush’s policies toward them. Was it a sin (even mortal) to vote for Kerry? I could never support Bush!
Click to expand...
According to church teachings, you couldn’t have really voted for Bush either because he supports the death penalty. How many executions were carried out while he was governor of Texas?

The church officially speaks out against the death penalty. I found the following at the Vatican’s website.
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm
2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
Click to expand...
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Click to expand...
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."68
Click to expand...
In order to be truly pro-life, you would have had to vote for a candidate that did not openly support abortion or the death penalty. Pro-life means you respect ALL life.
 
however, the Catholic Church still permits the death penalty and just believes it is no longer necessary. The Catholic Church does not think of it as a sin to support the death penalty.
 
40.png
midnightstar17:
I was reading a thread here recently and someone posted the “Non-negotiable” issues of the church. I was just had a couple of questions. I was wondering how far that goes? Like, i’m against abortion unless having the baby will kill both the mother and the baby. But was it wrong to support John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election (including your parents voting for him). Our family does not like Bush. My mom works for the government and gets so annyoed with Bush’s policies toward them. Was it a sin (even mortal) to vote for Kerry? I could never support Bush! Also is it wrong to support stem-cell research as used for medical purposes (such as paralysis)? How about gay rights for civil unions? I just dont’t know where the line is drawn?

Thanks, Jenny
Click to expand...
When it comes to voting the Church tells us that if neither candidate is just what you’d want the one that either does not support the unsupportable, such as abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, same sex “partnerships”/marriage, etc. or for the one least likely to support these things as much as the other is the one to vote for.

I don’t know what issues your family has with Bush, but Kerry certainly supported all the things on the list that the Church teaches are unsupportable and then some! When weighing one candidate against another, these basic human rights come first before government programs or entitlements or any other such thing.

You can support third party candidates if you wish to, but you also have to take into consideration the fact that a vote for a third party candidate that doesn’t have a chance of winning is really a vote for the candidate with the most likely chance of winning. So, if that candidate is pro-death, you are only helping him/her into office.
 
40.png
wjp984:
however, the Catholic Church still permits the death penalty and just believes it is no longer necessary. The Catholic Church does not think of it as a sin to support the death penalty.
Click to expand...
Right. The death penalty is not intrinsicly immoral, so this would not eliminate Bush automatically.
 
Bush supports abortion, so that should have ruled him out, right?
 
40.png
Benedictus:
Bush supports abortion, so that should have ruled him out, right?
Click to expand...
HUH? Bush is absolutely against abortion. Kerry was one of the few senators (along with Russ Feingold of Wisconsin) who voted against banning partial birth abortion.

If Russ Feingold’s name ever appears on the presidential ballot, PLEASE do not vote for him.
 
40.png
neweyes:
HUH? Bush is absolutely against abortion. Kerry was one of the few senators (along with Russ Feingold of Wisconsin) who voted against banning partial birth abortion.
Click to expand...
I thought everyone knew that Bush supports abortion, subject to certain conditions.
 
You would need to link us to something substantiating that. We have seen some posters trying to make hay out of the possibility that Bush isn’t really doing anything of note to end abortion, but this didn’t really convince anyone that he was an abortion supporter.
 
Scott Waddell:
…We have seen some posters trying to make hay out of the possibility that Bush isn’t really doing anything of note to end abortion, but this didn’t really convince anyone that he was an abortion supporter.
Click to expand...
I have always been under the impression that his court appointments (not just the supreme court) were a pretty ingenius step.
 
I’ll agree that it does not meet the non-negotiables, but wouldn’t it be more accurate to say that Bush opposes abortion with exceptions?

This would get us into the “proportionate reasons”, wouldn’t it?
 
40.png
gogogirl:
According to church teachings, you couldn’t have really voted for Bush either because he supports the death penalty. How many executions were carried out while he was governor of Texas?

The church officially speaks out against the death penalty. I found the following at the Vatican’s website.
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm

In order to be truly pro-life, you would have had to vote for a candidate that did not openly support abortion or the death penalty. Pro-life means you respect ALL life.
Click to expand...
Have you read your catechism lately? it does allow for the death penalty! It is very disingenuous to throw the death penalty in the debate. We are trying to save inocent defenseless lives here, not criminal. Also remember when Pope JP2nd was trying to convince various officials not to go through with capital punishment did he never did say it would be a sin. I take umbridge at anyone who would equate the life of an inocent helpless unborn child with a criminal. Not even my anti death penalty parents do that. Its domogoggery like that , that will keep it open season on the unborn in the USA. Abortion is a right to life issue, the quentisential one as a matter of fact, capital punishment most definitely is not.
 
Scott Waddell:
I’ll agree that it does not meet the non-negotiables, but wouldn’t it be more accurate to say that Bush opposes abortion with exceptions?
Click to expand...
Would you say the same of someone who opposed only late-term abortions? Where does one draw the line?

Note: these are serious questions. My whole point here is that it’s an imperfect world out there, and trade-offs must be made. I for one, would be willing to accept homosexual marriage in exchange for other things that might not be on the someone’s non-negotiable list.
 
40.png
midnightstar17:
I was reading a thread here recently and someone posted the “Non-negotiable” issues of the church. I was just had a couple of questions. I was wondering how far that goes? Like, i’m against abortion unless having the baby will kill both the mother and the baby. But was it wrong to support John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election (including your parents voting for him). Our family does not like Bush. My mom works for the government and gets so annyoed with Bush’s policies toward them. Was it a sin (even mortal) to vote for Kerry? I could never support Bush! Also is it wrong to support stem-cell research as used for medical purposes (such as paralysis)? How about gay rights for civil unions? I just dont’t know where the line is drawn?

Thanks, Jenny
Click to expand...
I can only speak for myself, but I would obstain from voting before voting for someone that was of the pro-death (sorry…pro-choice) mindset.
 
40.png
Benedictus:
Would you say the same of someone who opposed only late-term abortions?
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t say it was necessarily outrageous. I’ll grant that support is support no matter how you try to slice it.
Where does one draw the line?
Click to expand...
In the above case I agreed that Bush does not meet the non-negotiables, so any support of abortion is the line. Now when both candidates support intrinsic evils, we can vote for one based on which will do less harm, which is another thread.
I for one, would be willing to accept homosexual marriage in exchange for other things that might not be on the someone’s non-negotiable list.
Click to expand...
Correct me if I’m wrong, but do you mean you would vote for a candidate that supported homosexual marriage if the alternative candidate also supported something intrinsicly immoral? In that case possibly under the idea that we must limit the harm.
 
An Examination of Conscience on Catholic.org has “voting for a candidate who supports abortion” is a mortal sin. I tend to think that is a bit scrupulous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top