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

[Ridgerunner]

Believe it or not, there is middle ground in all of this; even through the apparent condescension.

That’s all I’m saying and trying to make a point of. If our politicians weren’t so far to the right, or to the far left, most Americans are in the middle. The first politician that figures it out will find a lot of support, if he can get by the self interests of people to make it as the nominee of a party.

Condescension? I thought I was only being witty in spots. Oh well. Fell flat, I guess.

As little as you might believe this, I don’t care a thing about “party positions”. I was orphaned by the Dem party and have not taken up with the Repubs. I will probably never be a “party person” again. It is my position that the teachings of the Church ought to guide our political actions. In the “social justice” issues I mentioned, I look to the Social Encyclicals. It is abundantly clear in them that when it comes to “social justice”, the very first priority is the truly poor; the ones who cannot, by their own efforts, obtain sufficient resources to live decent and dignified lives. Since this society presently fails in that regard, it is my position that it comes before all other “social justice” issues. If we do nothing in that realm, we are not free to concern ourselves with, say, how much debt students incur to go to college.

And frankly, if the poorest of all are not taken care of, how in the world can a nation justify giving tax breaks to lavishly wealthy institutions or individuals?

That’s not condescension. Did I leave out the Hoover Institution or something? Tax their income too.

But we still have to make the lives of the unborn our foremost concern and point of action. It’s as the Pope said, if there is no right to life, there is no right to anything at all.

 

[_Abyssinia]

MillTownCath:

lol you voted for a pro-choice Mormon?

Bishop Gracida said sometimes you have to choose the lesser of 2 evils to prevent greater harm, and although Romney was not 100% pro life, he would of been much better than Obama

Romney said abortion should be legal for cases of rape, incest or if the mother’s life is in danger

Obama supports unrestricted abortion throughout all 9 months of prgenancy

Romney supported defunding Planned Parenthood

Obama supports funding for Planned Parenthood and planned parenthood president Cecile Richards campaigned for Obama and PP spent $15 million trying to reelect Obama

Romney would have reinstated the Mexico City Policy

Obama rescinded the policy

Romney defended religious freedom for Catholic hospitals not to provided the morning after pill as governor

Obama wants to force employers to pay for contraception, sterilisation and abortifacients through the hhs mandate

Romney vetoed embryonic cloning legislation

Obama admin has authorised funding for embryonic stem cell research

Romney said he would support and advocate Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act

Obama was silent on the Act when it went before the House

Romney said marriage should only be between 1 woman and 1 man and the signed the National Organisation’s for Marriage pledge

Obama supports homosexual ‘marriage’ and according to his senior advisor Valerie Jarrett is ‘absolutely delighted’ that Maine, Washington and Maryland legalised homosexual ‘marriage’

 

[JimG]

We are all growing and evolving towards a good. We cannot judge others for where they may be in their walks. We can take their hand and walk with them, knowing we will make some mistakes, and they will make some mistakes. Being supportive of each other does not mean taking a big stick and walloping each other to get points across. Love and charity in all things.

People who voted a particular way did not do it maliciously, as is being insinuated by some. People did not vote a particular to intentionally do a sin, if it were truly a sin to begin with.

My point is being made on many of this ‘post election’ threads on these forums. There is clearly lacks of charity, love, or any kind of real compassionate support.

I certainly agree with most of what you say here. I don’t advocate judging others. (Well, except for actual judges, moms, dads, teachers, spiritual directors, and others whose job it is to judge.)

My point is merely that “to instruct the ignorant” is one of the spiritual works of mercy. That would certainly include help in correcting a wrongly informed conscience.

Are you really advocating that if my neighbor truly believes that armed robbery is a perfectly acceptable manner of earning a living, and is in conformity with his own conscience, that I have no duty to correct his conscience?

Does pointing out moral error mean that one is lacking in charity?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Condescension? I thought I was only being witty in spots. Oh well. Fell flat, I guess.

As little as you might believe this, I don’t care a thing about “party positions”. I was orphaned by the Dem party and have not taken up with the Repubs. I will probably never be a “party person” again. It is my position that the teachings of the Church ought to guide our political actions. In the “social justice” issues I mentioned, I look to the Social Encyclicals. It is abundantly clear in them that when it comes to “social justice”, the very first priority is the truly poor; the ones who cannot, by their own efforts, obtain sufficient resources to live decent and dignified lives. Since this society presently fails in that regard, it is my position that it comes before all other “social justice” issues. If we do nothing in that realm, we are not free to concern ourselves with, say, how much debt students incur to go to college.

And frankly, if the poorest of all are not taken care of, how in the world can a nation justify giving tax breaks to lavishly wealthy institutions or individuals?

That’s not condescension. Did I leave out the Hoover Institution or something? Tax their income too.

But we still have to make the lives of the unborn our foremost concern and point of action. It’s as the Pope said, if there is no right to life, there is no right to anything at all.

I agree about abortion, but we have to take a new approach. We can’t wait until nominees are chosen and tell everyone, you have to forget all issues because we have these non negotiable issues.

A better example would be to show that by getting to our politicians and telling them to knock the stuff off. Everyone holds Democrats responsible for pro choice issues, even though not all Democrats are pro choice. Well it works two ways, We set an example by getting Republicans to change their position on lesser issues and then they’re not distracting in an election. Abortion wins!!

That’s the same as telling a voter, you can’t weigh lesser issues because of the non negotiable issues.

Pro life politicians, lesser issues are not as important and concessions must be made on them so that we can advance the pro life position.

What’s wrong with that?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I certainly agree with most of what you say here. I don’t advocate judging others. (Well, except for actual judges, moms, dads, teachers, spiritual directors, and others whose job it is to judge.)

My point is merely that “to instruct the ignorant” is one of the spiritual works of mercy. That would certainly include help in correcting a wrongly informed conscience.

Are you really advocating that if my neighbor truly believes that armed robbery is a perfectly acceptable manner of earning a living, and is in conformity with his own conscience, that I have no duty to correct his conscience?

Does pointing out moral error mean that one is lacking in charity?

I am not advocating armed robbery. If my neighbor told me he truly believed it was acceptable, I’d call a law enforcement officer whose conscience told him he must protect society from a bank robber. But, only because that’s what my conscience would lead me to do.

We have to instruct the ‘ignorant’, but you know if we tell them, ‘you’re ignorant and I must correct…’ we lost them at ignorant. It’s all about love and charity in all things. And be honest, are we seeing a lot of that on these forums, especially in political discussions?

 

[JimG]

I am not advocating armed robbery. If my neighbor told me he truly believed it was acceptable, I’d call a law enforcement officer whose conscience told him he must protect society from a bank robber. But, only because that’s what my conscience would lead me to do.

We have to instruct the ‘ignorant’, but you know if we tell them, ‘you’re ignorant and I must correct…’ we lost them at ignorant. It’s all about love and charity in all things. And be honest, are we seeing a lot of that on these forums, especially in political discussions?

Love and charity in political discussions?? Forgive me, but isn’t that a formal heresy?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Love and charity in political discussions?? Forgive me, but isn’t that a formal heresy?

Yea, in the eyes of the political folks it would be.

 

[DLG123]

Thanks. I prefer to be a hard working idiot. I think a fair tax would be on expenditures, and not on incomes. Tax people on what they spend and be done with it. That way any time any of us buys a private jet, we pay our fair share accordingly.

Now we are seeing eye to eye!!! I completely agree on a consumption tax…

But I dont see how you can say that business owners and CEO are not hard workers? I am the VP of a smaller family company and last week I put 94 hours… Thats 3X more than all my empoyees each put in.

 

[DLG123]

MillTownCath:

That’s actually incorrect.

My priest, who has his doctorate in Church/Cannon law, told us at mass that it’s not a sin to vote one way/other.

I can’t wait until ignorant old Catholics like you die off.

Wow

Please go troll somewhere else… We can disagree without wishing death on someone.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Now we are seeing eye to eye!!! I completely agree on a consumption tax…

But I dont see how you can say that business owners and CEO are not hard workers? I am the VP of a smaller family company and last week I put 94 hours… Thats 3X more than all my empoyees each put in.

I didn’t say business owners and CEOs are not hard workers. I said we all need to be paying an equal percentage of tax, on all monies considered income.

Dump the IRS and start collecting taxes through dollars spent.

Next, watch Colorado and see how the local economy goes with it’s new tourism incentive. There may be some tax dollars there that the feds may want to reconsider.

 

[oldcelt]

I didn’t say business owners and CEOs are not hard workers. I said we all need to be paying an equal percentage of tax, on all monies considered income.

Dump the IRS and start collecting taxes through dollars spent.

Next, watch Colorado and see how the local economy goes with it’s new tourism incentive. There may be some tax dollars there that the feds may want to reconsider.

Tourism incentive…I like that. Welcome to Jamaica…errr…Colorado…except reefer is legal here.

John

 

[pete_29]

I didn’t say business owners and CEOs are not hard workers. I said we all need to be paying an equal percentage of tax, on all monies considered income.

Dump the IRS and start collecting taxes through dollars spent.

Next, watch Colorado and see how the local economy goes with it’s new tourism incentive. There may be some tax dollars there that the feds may want to reconsider.

They already have the perfect slogan “Rocky Mountain High”

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Tourism incentive…I like that. Welcome to Jamaica…errr…Colorado…except reefer is legal here.

John

Vacation plans all over the country are changing as we speak.

 

[Midwest88]

MillTownCath:

I can’t wait until ignorant old Catholics like you die off.

Give me a break.

Are you serious? That’s more offensive than saying Obama voters committed a mortal sin. Good grief.

 

[anjoh66]

DLG123:
Wow

Please go troll somewhere else… We can disagree without wishing death on someone.

Milltowns account has been hacked

 

[Mijoy2]

That is a really horrible thing to say to someone.

Yeah it certainly is. But it was so out of line it gave me a chuckle.

I suspect a “banned” in the future, if my crytal ball is working correctly

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

They already have the perfect slogan “Rocky Mountain High”

If nothing else, they’ve boosted the comedic economy for sure.

 

[DoubtingEdward]

I won’t say for whom I voted. And while I always enjoy an intricate debate, when it comes to the Magisterium, I would have figured that the broad issue posed in this thread would be rather easily analyzed. To borrow a phrase from the Supreme Court on another moral issue, I know sin when I see it.

When it comes to matter of a well-formed conscience, I am an adult and I strive to learn what the Church teaches. And indeed, I alone will answer to God for my sins. I have no doubts whenever I step into the Confessional for the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

I hope that we can agree that we are all sinners. And so, in hopefully an appropriate way, I would like to comment on two things I have observed here: first, while the topic quickly turned to abortion, many are seemingly ignoring the HHS’s express and direct attack on the Church regarding contraception and abortifascient drugs. And secondly, those that spoke of the President or Democrats favoring the poor (or rather the Republicans abhorring the poor), seem to ignore the likelihood that the HHS mandates will severely cripple the ability of the Church and its institutions to help those of us, like the poor, sick, and hungry, who need help the most. Ironic, isn’t it?

I hope that we as a people of faith do not mistake the “charity” of the secular church of the State, for the Graces that genuinely flow from the Church. We sadly seem to be half-way down that path.

Peace be with you.

 

[catholicanne]

Can you show me where the Church is stating the a Catholic that voted for a particular candidate ‘betrayed God’? Does God not have the power over all things to prevent such ‘betrayals’?

God does not interfere with free will. We all have the right to turn our backs on God and support evil. It makes me sad to think that a Catholic would do such a thing. In my eyes, that is a betrayal of God.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I won’t say for whom I voted. And while I always enjoy an intricate debate, when it comes to the Magisterium, I would have figured that the broad issue posed in this thread would be rather easily analyzed. To borrow a phrase from the Supreme Court on another moral issue, I know sin when I see it.

When it comes to matter of a well-formed conscience, I am an adult and I strive to learn what the Church teaches. And indeed, I alone will answer to God for my sins. I have no doubts whenever I step into the Confessional for the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

I hope that we can agree that we are all sinners. And so, in hopefully an appropriate way, I would like to comment on two things I have observed here: first, while the topic quickly turned to abortion, many are seemingly ignoring the HHS’s express and direct attack on the Church regarding contraception and abortifascient drugs. And secondly, those that spoke of the President or Democrats favoring the poor (or rather the Republicans abhorring the poor), seem to ignore the likelihood that the HHS mandates will severely cripple the ability of the Church and its institutions to help those of us, like the poor, sick, and hungry, who need help the most. Ironic, isn’t it?

I hope that we as a people of faith do not mistake the “charity” of the secular church of the State, for the Graces that genuinely flow from the Church. We sadly seem to be half-way down that path.

Peace be with you.

I know, at least I hear of, Catholic institutions that help the poor, sick, and hungry. I’ve worked at the local food bank, which has a lot of Catholic participants, but is not a Catholic charity per se.

I mentioned I work EMS, on an ambulance, in a rural area. A couple of years ago a Sacred Heart Hospital opened in the neighboring county, about 20 miles away. We have a small county hospital in this county. Sacred Heart offers sonograms, which is the only difference between the two hospitals. We have picked up some patients, who immediately request the ‘new’ hospital. We always explain that insurance companies will not pay for the mileage and therefore could present them with a bill for bypassing our hospital. Some patients have no money, and no intention of paying, don’t care, ‘take me to Sacred Heart.’ So, we call for bypass orders and take them to Sacred Heart, where the staff berates the ambulance crew for bringing them a patient who has no way to pay. I understand, but really have to bite my tongue.