Obama vs Romney, who are you voting for and why?

[_Abyssinia]

+1.

I have yet to have heard anyone provide the “proportionate reason”, or the logic behind it.

Let’s say a Republican president starts a war that kills around 1 million innocents. Now imagine this Republican president starting such a war EVERY YEAR for the past 40 years.

Are 1 million people dying of starvation in this country, per year? 1 million dying due to exposure to the elements every year?

We live in the most compassionate society in the history of mankind. Even our poor would be considered “rich” in most other nations, and in nearly every other point in history. Death from starvation is almost unheard of. A vast majority have suitible housing. Yet we partake in generational genocide and a eugenics program that most make even the most diabolical cringe.

I have no idea what anyone would consider a “proportionate reason”, especially given the layered “intrinsic evils” this administration supports.

Want to hear what proportionate reasons Catholic Obama supporters are using as a reason to support Obama that overrides the value of a million plus lives being killed annually. Not to mention religious freedom being infringed on and homosexual marriage being supported

Bishops have said reasons such as the economy, health care, tax, immigration, social security lack proportionality

 

[estesbob]

Both sides rely on Church documents for their position, and both sides make the case that the respective other side engages in unduly selective reading and interpretation of these Church documents. Go figure.

Interesting that you so wholeheartedly agree with a non-catholics view on what Catholics should believe. Go figure.

By the way if you can find even a single church document that says it is acceptable for a catholic to vote for a candidate who supports unrestricted taxpayer-funded abortion on demand and homosexual marriage please do so. I have posted tons of documents to the contrary and have yet to see anything to refute what i’ve posted.

If you find can find such documentation it would be helpful if it was as clear and concise is this:

*]No, you can never vote for someone who favors absolutely what’s called the ‘right to choice’ of a woman to destroy human life in her womb, or the right to a procured abortion," he said.

“You may in some circumstances where you don’t have any candidate who is proposing to eliminate all abortion, choose the candidate who will most limit this grave evil in our country, but you could never justify voting for a candidate who not only does not want to limit abortion but believes that it should be available to everyone,” he said.

Cardinal-designate Burke said Catholic politicians who support legal abortion were perfect examples of “scandal” – leading the faithful into moral confusion or error.*

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1004453.htm

What we usually get Democrat catholics trying to rationalize supporting pro-abortion candidates is a single line taken out of the single document and twisted like a pretzel to allegedly support voting for pro-abortion candidates. Why we have even been told that Obama is a true pro-life candidate in the race. This befuddled even archbishop Chaput

To portray the 2008 Democratic Party presidential ticket as the preferred ‘‘prolife’’ option is to subvert what the word ‘‘prolife’’ means. Anyone interested in Senator Obama’s record on abortion and related issues should simply read Prof. Robert P. George’s Public Discourse essay from earlier this week, ‘‘Obama’s Abortion Extremism,’’ and his follow-up article, ‘‘Obama and Infanticide.’’ They say everything that needs to be said.**

 

[estesbob]

O.k., bad wording, my apologies.

I was mixing up

a) reading the whole document and forming your conscience accordingly. I trust that everyone does that, without cherry-picking.

with

b) quoting back the documents in the discussion while leaving out certain passages such the one about “other grave moral reasons” in the USCCB document, paragraph 35, or the “proportionate reasons” in the Ratzinger document. I have repeatedly seen this here, over and over again, and that is cherry-picking to bolster your own position.

The interpretation of these passages is deliberately left open in the documents, otherwise it would have been settled within the documents themselves. The interpretation is left to the individual conscience of Catholics who are expected to form their conscience in an appropriate way. That some interpretations, also by some bishops, have gone beyond that is a different issue.

actually the interpretation has not been left open. I’ve posted several documents in this thread alone where members of the magestrium have clearly stated what constitutes proportionate reasons and what does not. There is absolutely no way that anyone can examine what the church teaches and come to the conclusion that there are proportionate reason in this years Presidents race that would allow Catholic to vote for Barack Obama

 

[estesbob]

Want to hear what proportionate reasons Catholic Obama supporters are using as a reason to support Obama that overrides the value of a million plus lives being killed annually. Not to mention religious freedom being infringed on and homosexual marriage being supported

Bishops have said reasons such as the economy, health care, tax, immigration, social security lack proportionality

They have also stated that the death penalty, and the war in iraq, and the war in afghanistan lack proportionality. in fact the only reason that would allow a catholic to vote for a pro-abortion candidate would be in a case where the opposing candidate is more pro-abortion than he is. Yet many democratic catholics would have us believe that Obama’s desire to raise taxes on the rich trumps his support of unrestricted taxpayer-funded abortion on demand

 

[seekerz]

They have also stated that the death penalty, and the war in iraq, and the war in afghanistan lack proportionality. in fact the only reason that would allow a catholic to vote for a pro-abortion candidate would be in a case where the opposing candidate is more pro-abortion than he is. Yet many democratic catholics would have us believe that Obama’s desire to raise taxes on the rich trumps his support of unrestricted taxpayer-funded abortion on demand

Do my concerns over what beliefs propel Romney’s desire to be president also lack proportionality? Who is he? What motivates him? What vision of his future/destiny pushes him forward? How might that influence his decisions?

There are more important issues in life than bread, war and yes, even babies. Above all there is God.

 

[Lapey]

Do my concerns over what beliefs propel Romney’s desire to be president also lack proportionality? Who is he? What motivates him? What vision of his future/destiny pushes him forward? How might that influence his decisions?

There are more important issues in life than bread, war and yes, even babies. Above all there is God.

Okay, now we are getting somewhere…am I reading your right here? It’s because he is a Mormon?

What were last weekend’s readings about? “if they are for us, they cannot be against us…”

What do you believe propels Romney?

Oh, and yes, everything you listed there according to the USCCB documents, and the one you keep misrepresenting from Cardinal Ratzinger, say that those reasons are not proportionate to abortion, racism, the sanctity of marriage, etc. You can go back up a few posts and see the documents from the bishops; I posted the sections that are pertinent.

 

[rlg94086]

Our bishops call for a renewed kind of Politics

I’m ready.

Focused more on moral principles than on the latest polls

Absolutely. Polls are of little interest to me.

Focused more on the needs of the weak than on benefits for the strong

Which is why I support Romney/Ryan versus Obama/Biden.

Focused more on the pursuit of the common good than on the demands of narrow interests

Which is why I support Romney/Ryan versus Obama/Biden.

This kind of political participation reflects the social teaching of our Church and the best traditions of our nation.

Agreed. We should all apply the Social Teaching of the Church in our voting. If voters did that, then Catholics wouldn’t be voting for Obama. The Church teaches against the socialist Welfare State and points out the proper role of government. Social Teaching also says that the protection of the most vulnerable members of society is paramount.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Okay, now we are getting somewhere…am I reading your right here? It’s because he is a Mormon?

What were last weekend’s readings about? “if they are for us, they cannot be against us…”

What do you believe propels Romney?

Oh, and yes, everything you listed there according to the USCCB documents, and the one you keep misrepresenting from Cardinal Ratzinger, say that those reasons are not proportionate to abortion, racism, the sanctity of marriage, etc. You can go back up a few posts and see the documents from the bishops; I posted the sections that are pertinent.

Thanks for hanging in there and proclaiming the Truth, if not for the dissenting Catholics here, at least for the lurkers.

 

[Lapey]

I never thought anyone here was bad or evil for disagreeing with me, and I fully and wholeheartedly respect their choice of conscience. Yet I would appreciate if others would not call another choice of conscience necessarily bad or evil either, or a choice of “cafeteria Catholics”, especially when this choice is allowed by a careful reading of Church documents (USCCB, Cardinal Ratzinger [the current Pope]).

Yes you have, and you’ve posted it. Let me remind you about the right wing bubble that we all live in who are against Obama. This in itself is insulting because you and others say and believe that if I am against him it has to be because I am a rep hack, or I hate him because he is black or some other silly notion that allows you to write me off as a legitimate opposing view. Our view is legitimate, if you continue to write us off as haters you will never hear the message.

Like the tax issues, you I’m sure say raise taxes, I say higher rates will stop job creation. Many on the left hear, “the deacon doesn’t care about the poor.” How can we hurt the poor anymore than slowing job creation like we have for the past probably 16 years? Regulations have choked off entire industries because of this man made scare of global warm…, oh sorry, “climate change.” President Obama himself is on video saying he will end the coal industry, and this will necessarily cause electricity rates to skyrocket. Who do you think these coal policies hurt the most? It’s not “big coal.” Yes it’s the little guy, whom only democrats love, oh wait, Obama is a democrat so it must be a good thing to shut down coal.

You want to know why I am qualified to comment on the coal industry and electricity; because I work for one of the nation’s largest electric utilities. We see the changes this administration is proud of. We also see who it hurts; the same poor people that the democrats claim to care so much about.

It’s truly hard to keep up with the logic in these discussions about leftist’s policies, because most often there is none.

 

[Lapey]

Thanks for hanging in there and proclaiming the Truth, if not for the dissenting Catholics here, at least for the lurkers.

You’re welcome…and right back at you!

We must keep preaching the Gospel, in season and out of season. In season is easy, when people agree with you. Out of season is where it gets tough, like it is here; especially with the Catholics who argue with us about the truth.

 

[Richca]

The Right to Life is just not one issue among many because the Right to Life is the first and most fundamental right of every human person and upon which all his/her other personal inalienable rights are founded. If you don’t have life, what do the other issues matter?

The fundamental duty of the State is to protect the life of its citizens from conception to death as well as to promote the common good. However, Pope John Paul II says:
“It is impossible to further the common good without acknowledging and defending the right to life, upon which all the other inalienable rights of individuals are founded and from which they develop.” (Gospel of Life).

President Obama and the democratic party is failing miserably with regard to every human being’s fundamental God given Right to Life which is the primary duty of the state. In essence, they are telling us ( either consciously or out of ignorance) that we don’t have the God given Right to Life. We, the state, possess this right to life over you. Thus, they are usurping God’s perogative who alone possesses the right to life and death over every human being.

Once our fundamental God given right to life is denied us, the deniel of other personal inalienable rights follow in its train. Our religous liberty is presently being attacked. Obama’s idea of the redistribution of wealth appears to me to be contrary to the right of every person to provide for himself and his family.

**I would like to strongly urge every catholic and especially those who may be thinking about voting for Obama in the upcoming election to prayerfully read Pope John Paul II’s encyclical “EVANGELIUM VITAE,” the Gospel of Life. **

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

Brilliant!

 

[Al_Moritz]

Yes you have, and you’ve posted it. Let me remind you about the right wing bubble that we all live in who are against Obama. This in itself is insulting because you and others say and believe that if I am against him it has to be because I am a rep hack, or I hate him because he is black or some other silly notion that allows you to write me off as a legitimate opposing view.

I never said that anyone living in a right-wing bubble is bad or evil, nor did I even say that you, Lapey, were living in a right-wing bubble. I also didn’t imply that anyone here hates Obama because he is black. Do not put words in my mouth that I didn’t say.

Putting words in someone else’s mouth that they didn’t say is neither truthful nor charitable.

(And I do not pretend that I have never made that mistake myself.)

 

[Robert_Bay]

Threads are closed when they exceed 1,000 posts for technical reasons, thank you for participating.