Obama won Catholic vote, regular churchgoers chose Romney [CC]

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Press
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
…direct murder by the mother herself, NOT by the lawmakers.
Those who make this murder possible are material participators in that evil, and are guilty of the sin as well as the mother. The doctors, the law makers, the people who knowingly and purposefully vote for them for this reason are materially involved as well. This is universal Church teaching, not only USA. You should know this.
 
Can’t you see the radiant glow on his face? God is with him and will uphold him with His righteous right hand.
I’m praying that you are joking here…no other way for me to see this unfortunate staement.😦
 
Why is it you are still only doubting Romney and/or republicans? There is no need to doubt Obama, is there? We know what he stands for.

It always seems you are on the other side of this debate. What do you really believe, I couldn’t say because your words give mixed messages; just my humble opinion.
The individual conscience can doubt any man, including Obama. What seems to be going on is some want to restrict the doubting of one candidate, or party.
 
Those who make this murder possible are material participators in that evil, and are guilty of the sin as well as the mother. The doctors, the law makers, the people who knowingly and purposefully vote for them for this reason are materially involved as well. This is universal Church teaching, not only USA. You should know this.
The murder happens because of some mothers not wanting to have babies after conceiving. Church has no jurisdiction over the state or its laws but is only known to voice its dissent against particular repressive laws directed against the church. Not defining a Penal law against mothers who choose to abort their own babies does NOT amount to partaking in the wrong of abortion. How can the Church or any institution force a state to penalise mothers who abort their own babies? Church can only excommunicate a Catholic who performs abortion or aborts her own child.
 
President Barack Obama won a slim majority of votes from self-identified Catholics, according to exit polls conduct by CNN. The polls shows that 50% of voters who identified themselves …

More…
Completely predictable and upheld by consistent data. People who go to church at least once a week vote differently than people who claim to be Christian but don’t go to church at least once a week. That SHOULD make you stop and think about what that could mean.
 
The individual conscience can doubt any man, including Obama. What seems to be going on is some want to restrict the doubting of one candidate, or party.
It is instructive to look at the party platforms, the nature of the financial supporters, the public statements of support and the actions of both parties in voting. If one does, then one must conclude that the Democrat party objectively supports abortion on demand.

On the other hand, if one does the same with the Repub party, only one’s subjective suspicions of duplicity can cause one to think the Repubs do.

At some point, one has to opt for the clear and expressed reality of the situation over the suspicions one might entertain in one’s own mind, particularly if one favors the Dems for other reasons.
 
The murder happens because of some mothers not wanting to have babies after conceiving. Church has no jurisdiction over the state or its laws but is only known to voice its dissent against particular repressive laws directed against the church. Not defining a Penal law against mothers who choose to abort their own babies does NOT amount to partaking in the wrong of abortion. How can the Church or any institution force a state to penalise mothers who abort their own babies? Church can only excommunicate a Catholic who performs abortion or aborts her own child.
But surely, one has to see that those who promote abortion being funded by the government have to admit in that they play a role in abortion.

And Obama signed that Mexico City amendment, however that works, to abort overseas, so he promotes this as well.
 
Analysts are saying Hurricane Sandy helped Obama win. You folks agree?
 
The murder happens because of some mothers not wanting to have babies after conceiving. Church has no jurisdiction over the state or its laws but is only known to voice its dissent against particular repressive laws directed against the church. Not defining a Penal law against mothers who choose to abort their own babies does NOT amount to partaking in the wrong of abortion. How can the Church or any institution force a state to penalise mothers who abort their own babies? Church can only excommunicate a Catholic who performs abortion or aborts her own child.
Who is trying to penalize mothers? Back when abortion was illegal, it was the abortionists they went after, not the mothers. If abortion was outlawed or limited, it would be that way. Penalizing mothers is a strawman.

And every law in western socieities is based on moral precepts. You all adopted quite a bit from the English Common Law, and you should know that.
 
It is instructive to look at the party platforms, the nature of the financial supporters, the public statements of support and the actions of both parties in voting. If one does, then one must conclude that the Democrat party objectively supports abortion on demand.

On the other hand, if one does the same with the Repub party, only one’s subjective suspicions of duplicity can cause one to think the Repubs do.

At some point, one has to opt for the clear and expressed reality of the situation over the suspicions one might entertain in one’s own mind, particularly if one favors the Dems for other reasons.
Even when reviewing parties, we are left with individuals who represent. Conscience ‘absorbs’ objective and subjective, and then the individual is left alone with God within his innermost conscience.

Just as it is possible for Democrats to favor for other reasons, it is very possible for Republicans to do likewise.

There are no assurances, either way, and there is no obligation to accept one over another as guarantees.

Now, we’re beyond the political reality, but still in God’s reality. What are our options to remove a repeat of what we’ve seen election, after election? We’re not going to convince others to a side by castigation, and pushing away.
 
In the scenario you paint, someone would be voting contrary to their conscience.
I understand that perfectly well, as I do “conscience”. I just do not understand the statement attributed to Fr Serpa.
 
=vz71;9990064]Sadly, they are Catholics.
Perhaps not faithful, but the Baptism is not conditional on their faith remaining intact.
Without knowing what is going on in their head, it is extremely difficult to determine if any particular sin is mortal or not.
The exception is 'Intrinsic Evils"; ALWAYS and everytime a Mortal sin

2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:

You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.

God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.

'THOU SHALL NOT KILL" as God’s Command is NOT a secret.

God Bless,
Pat

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,” “by the very commission of the offense,” and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

2322 From its conception, the child has the right to life. Direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, is a “criminal” practice (GS 27 § 3), gravely contrary to the moral law. The Church imposes the canonical penalty of excommunication for this crime against human life.
 
I voted for Obama as well. I did not vote for him because I agreed with his policies on everything, I don’t. I truly wish we had a better pick then we did. I voted for him based on social issues.
Please tell me HOW abortion, the deliberate ending of life, is not a social issue.
 
Even when reviewing parties, we are left with individuals who represent. Conscience ‘absorbs’ objective and subjective, and then the individual is left alone with God within his innermost conscience.

Just as it is possible for Democrats to favor for other reasons, it is very possible for Republicans to do likewise.

There are no assurances, either way, and there is no obligation to accept one over another as guarantees.

Now, we’re beyond the political reality, but still in God’s reality. What are our options to remove a repeat of what we’ve seen election, after election? We’re not going to convince others to a side by castigation, and pushing away.
Formation of conscience should be the conformation of conscience to truth, which is objective reality. It is not a blend of truth with imagination.

The point about Democrats who support the party for reasons other than abortion was to point out that such people are more likely to doubt Repub bona fides because they want to doubt them.

Sometimes telling the truth does push others away. But that does not excuse compromising with evil.
 
Formation of conscience should be the conformation of conscience to truth, which is objective reality. It is not a blend of truth with imagination.

The point about Democrats who support the party for reasons other than abortion was to point out that such people are more likely to doubt Repub bona fides because they want to doubt them.

Sometimes telling the truth does push others away. But that does not excuse compromising with evil.
It is, but when we take what an individual says as a guarantee we have to use a blend of truth with imagination.

I don’t see a difference of Democrats and Republicans doubting the other for the sake of other issues.

So, we should divide up the body of Christ and move on? And again, there is a degree of compromising with evil with either side. Does God grade us on the curve?
 
Banning abortion will make people revert back to extremely unsafe abortions. Giving someone the safe environment to go through with an abortion and then be there for that person afterwards is what these ladies need.

If you’ve never sat down and spoken to a woman that had an abortion afterwards stop talking about the issue. You’re too disconnected.
Well, I’m a woman and not disconnected at all. In fact, I was in ministry giving prayer support to some souls who had had abortions and deeply regretted the fact. Some were even in professional counseling due to post traumatic stress disorder over their decision.
 
Should all Catholics vote for Democrats because they say they’ll take care of the poor? Will that make God happy?
 
Well, I’m a woman and not disconnected at all. In fact, I was in ministry giving prayer support to some souls who had had abortions and deeply regretted the fact. Some were even in professional counseling due to post traumatic stress disorder over their decision.
Yes, bet they were surprised too. The culture tells women that they can just have this little thing removed and everything will be just as it was before. But this is not at all true. Not at all.

A woman can be the most progressive most bra-burning zealot ever, but an abortion will change her life forever. And probably drive her into psychological counseling.
 
THIS devout Catholic/Seminary candidate voted for Obama
I voted for Obama as well
I voted for Barack Obama
I voted Obama
I have 15 questions for Obama voters. They are not intended to be post mortem for either side; I simply want to know why so many supported Obama because I frankly do not understand your point of view.

1.President Obama spent about $1.3 Trillion each year in deficit, adding about $5 Trillion to the national debt during his term. He offered no leadership to reduce spending and ignored the recommendations of his own Simpson-Bowles commission. Is this level of deficit spending and Obama’s indifference to it okay with you?
2.Clearly, the president lied when he said everyone/anyone could keep their former health coverage under ObamaCare. The increased requirements for coverage require all who buy insurance to alter their coverage and the existence of a ‘rationing panel’ for Medicare assure that health coverage will change for seniors as well. Is this slight-of-hand by President Obama okay with you?
3.At last count, ObamaCare has about 15 new taxes in it, all timed to begin after the 2012 election. Is that okay with you?
4.Likewise, the president lied about the attack on our Benghazi consulate by spreading the story that a spontaneous mob was involved when the earliest reports said otherwise. The Administration’s story was so consistent that it had to be the product of the president’s own decision to obfuscate. Was his misleading of the American people okay with you?
5.There had been a similar incidence of White House cover-up earlier, when the gun-running project known as Fast and Furious was under investigation. President Obama prevented Congress from obtaining the facts surrounding this horrendously misguided activity by claiming executive privilege after Atty General Holder had exhausted his attempts to hide the truth. Was this cover-up okay with you?
6.Conversely, the Administration readily leaked classified details of the Bin Laden raid, including the name of our operative in Pakistan who is now doing a 30 year jail term for helping us. Seal Team operational methods were also released, all in an effort to create favorable publicity for the Administration’s single foreign policy achievement by making a film about the event. Future special operations of this type are thus put in jeopardy. Is this okay with you?
7.Notwithstanding clear and repeated warnings from several government agencies that both Social Security and Medicare are in dire financial straits, President Obama made no attempt to restructure either program to preserve it. Was this avoidance of a major fiscal issue okay with you?
8.The Obama Administration refused to enforce existing laws regarding immigration and attempted to stop the state of Arizona from dealing with its significant illegal immigration problem that included the murder of a rancher by illegal immigrants… Was the Administration’s action okay with you?
9.President Obama advocates even higher taxes for the wealthy even though the resulting revenue is miniscule. Such tax policy rewards those who take from the public treasury and penalizes those who work hard and earn more. Is that okay with you?
10.Faced with Lockheed-Martin’s need to deliver 60 day layoff notices under the Warren Act just prior to the election, the Obama Administration directed L-M not to do so and promised that the government would cover any cost of failing to comply with the law. This to remove negative news just before the election. Was this violation of the law alright with you?
11.In his initial trip abroad as president, Obama bowed to several foreign heads of state and issued apologies for America ’s behavior? Was this alright with you? What did Americans have to apologize for?
12.In his now-famous aside, President Obama told Russian President Medvedev that he’d (Obama) “have more flexibility after the election.” This apparently referred to the reduction of nuclear weapons the Administration is pursuing with Russia . But regardless of the issue, is it okay for our president to conspire with another nation for something that would be perceived negatively at election time?
13.The Obama Administration sought to grant waivers to the Welfare program’s work requirement passed during the Clinton Administration in spite of the fact that the enacting legislation did not empower the granting of waivers. Do you approve of this flaunting of the law?
14.The restructuring of GM engineered by the Administration ignored the interests of GM shareholders who would normally have first claim on any settlement and granted a sizable share of GM stock to the UAW, which normally would have no standing at all in such a matter. This was an obvious reward to a strong political contributor. Was this okay with you?
15.Secretary of State Hilleary Clinton endorsed the International Arms Control treaty in August 2011. As I understand it, this treaty makes US citizens subject to international law and supersedes the Second Amendment rights Americans now enjoy. Is this subjugation of US law to international law acceptable to you?

I’ve tried hard to stick to facts and believe I’ve done so. I thank you in advance for your response.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top