"One Issue Voter"

  • Thread starter Thread starter buffalo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Then abortion is not an issue and you can vote for either. And I fell to see how the question is not answered in post 59. I suspect the truth is you just don’t like the answer
So you’re now saying that a person can vote for a pro-abortion candidate, right? Under specific circumstances, granted.

But if you cast a vote for either one, you’re voting for a Pro-abortion candidate.

I think you’re misstating what the Church teaches on this, Bob.
 
So you’re now saying that a person can vote for a pro-abortion candidate, right? Under specific circumstances, granted.

But if you cast a vote for either one, you’re voting for a Pro-abortion candidate.

I think you’re misstating what the Church teaches on this, Bob.
It is apparent you don’t understand church teaching. Please go read posts 59 again. One can vote for a pro-abortion candidate if their opponent is more pro-abortion than they are. As archbishop Chaput put it we are not voting for the lesser of two evils -we are voting to lessen evil.
 
It is apparent you don’t understand church teaching. Please go read posts 59 again. One can vote for a pro-abortion candidate if their opponent is more pro-abortion than they are. As archbishop Chaput put it we are not voting for the lesser of two evils -we are voting to lessen evil.
I do understand that teaching.

However, the discussion has centered thus far around the notion that we as Catholics cannot vote for a pro-choice candidate, no?

So I’m asking what does one do when there are two choices; a pro-choice candidate and a pro-choice candidate who are equally, as far as the voter can tell, able to advance their pro-abortion agenda.

Do you understand what I’m asking?
 
I do understand that teaching.

However, the discussion has centered thus far around the notion that we as Catholics cannot vote for a pro-choice candidate, no?

So I’m asking what does one do when there are two choices; a pro-choice candidate and a pro-choice candidate who are equally, as far as the voter can tell, able to advance their pro-abortion agenda.

Do you understand what I’m asking?
what you’re asking has been answered again and again and again. A Catholic can vote for a pro-abortion candidate if his opponent is more pro-abortion than they are.

For example John McCain support abortion only in cases of rape and incest. Barrack Obama supported unrestricted taxpayer funded abortions on demand. Both could be described as pro-abortion. A Catholic could vote for McCain(but was not required to) but could not vote for Obama. I don’t understand why you’re having such a hard time getting this
 
what you’re asking has been answered again and again and again. A Catholic can vote for a pro-abortion candidate if his opponent is more pro-abortion than they are.

For example John McCain support abortion only in cases of rape and incest. Barrack Obama supported unrestricted taxpayer funded abortions on demand. Both could be described as pro-abortion. A Catholic could vote for McCain(but was not required to) but could not vote for Obama. I don’t understand why you’re having such a hard time getting this
OK, Bob…sigh…

Two candidates have identical records and positions on abortion i.e. they both support it and their histories on voting for it are IDENTICAL.

MY SCENARIO IS NOT COMPARING TWO CANDIDATES WITH DIFFERING VIEWS ON ABORTION. THEY ARE IDENTICAL. THE SAME. NO DIFFERENCE.

PLEASE DO NOT CHANGE MY EXAMPLE. Just answer the question.
 
No, the question has been deflected.

Suppose they’re ***equally ***pro-life, as far as one can tell. What then?
OK, Bob…sigh…

Two candidates have identical records and positions on abortion i.e. they both support it and their histories on voting for it are IDENTICAL.

MY SCENARIO IS NOT COMPARING TWO CANDIDATES WITH DIFFERING VIEWS ON ABORTION. THEY ARE IDENTICAL. THE SAME. NO DIFFERENCE.

PLEASE DO NOT CHANGE MY EXAMPLE. Just answer the question.
We have the duty to vote. If both are Pro Choice, then one looks at other issues to see how the candidates have voted, ie. War. Econmics, Environment etc. Those issues of Prudential judgement.
 
I agree with you, elts.

But if I’m understanding Bob’s position correctly, both would have to be disqualified because they support abortion; if we’re not voting for the lesser of two evils, the evil of abortion that both candidates equally hold doesn’t cancel each other out. i.e. just because they are equally as bad in this regard, we cannot just ignore their position, no?

I don’t agree with Bob’s position, I’d just like to hear his explanation.
 
I agree with you, elts.

But if I’m understanding Bob’s position correctly, both would have to be disqualified because they support abortion; if we’re not voting for the lesser of two evils, the evil of abortion that both candidates equally hold doesn’t cancel each other out. i.e. just because they are equally as bad in this regard, we cannot just ignore their position, no?

I don’t agree with Bob’s position, I’d just like to hear his explanation.
You really arent reading my posts are you ? Or you are being deliberately obutse.
 
You really arent reading my posts are you ? Or you are being deliberately obutse.
Forget it, Bob. We aren’t communicating well. It isn’t worth the effort to get your response.

I won’t even ask what obutse is. 😉
 
Forget it, Bob. We aren’t communicating well. It isn’t worth the effort to get your response.

I** won’t even ask what obutse is. ;)**
When I was in high school they forced us to take typing class-I knew it waqs an absolute waste of time so I made no effort to learn to type. I am still paying the price for that today:)
 
“If we do not soon stop the genocide of abortion in the United States, we shall run the course of all those that prove by their actions that they are enemies of God – total collapse, economic, social, and national. The moral demise of a nation results in the ultimate demise of a nation. God is not a disinterested spectator to the affairs of man. Life begins at conception. This is an unalterable teaching of the Catholic Church. If you do not accept this you are a heretic in plain English. A single abortion is homicide.”

“No other issue, not all other issues taken together, can constitute a proportionate reason for voting for candidates that intend to preserve and defend this holocaust of innocent human life that is abortion (Father John Corapi).”
 
I agree with you, elts.

But if I’m understanding Bob’s position correctly, both would have to be disqualified because they support abortion; if we’re not voting for the lesser of two evils, the evil of abortion that both candidates equally hold doesn’t cancel each other out. i.e. just because they are equally as bad in this regard, we cannot just ignore their position, no?

I don’t agree with Bob’s position, I’d just like to hear his explanation.
From the USCCB.ORG site below

usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/FCStatement.pdf

Why Does the Church Teach About Issues
Affecting Public Policy?
  1. The Church’s obligation to participate in shaping the moral character of society is a requirement of our faith. It is a basic part of the mission we have received from Jesus Christ, who offers a vision of life revealed to us in Sacred Scripture and Tradition. To echo the teaching of the Second Vatican Council: Christ, the Word made flesh, in showing us the Father’s love, also shows us what it truly means to be human (see Gaudium et Spes,
22). Christ’s love for us lets us see our human dignity in full clarity and compels us to love our neighbors as he has loved us. Christ, the Teacher, shows us what is true and good, that is, what is in accord with our human nature as free, intelligent beings created in God’s image and likeness and endowed by the Creator with dignity and rights.
  1. The formation of conscience includes several elements. First, there is a desire to embrace goodness and truth. For Catholics this begins with a willingness and
    openness to seek the truth and what is right by studying Sacred Scripture and the
    teaching of the Church as contained in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It is
    also important to examine the facts and background information about various
    choices. Finally, prayerful reflection is essential to discern the will of God. Catholics
    must also understand that if they fail to form their consciences they can make
    erroneous judgments.
  2. When all candidates hold a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, the conscientious voter faces a dilemma. The voter may decide to take the extraordinary step of not voting for any candidate or, after careful deliberation, may decide to vote for the candidate deemed less likely to advance sucha morally flawed position and more likely to pursue other authentic human goods.
  3. In making these decisions, it is essential for Catholics to be guided by a well-formed conscience that recognizes that all issues do not carry the same moral weight and that the moral obligation to oppose intrinsically evil acts has a special claim on our consciences and our actions. These decisions should take into account a candidate’s
    commitments, character, integrity,and ability to influence a given issue.
  4. It is important to be clear that the political choices faced by citizens not onlyhave an impact on general peace and prosperity but also may affect the individual’s salvation. Similarly, the kinds of laws and policies supported by public officials affect their spiritual well-being. Pope Benedict XVI, in his recent reflection on the Eucharist as “the sacrament of charity,” challenged all of us to adopt what he calls a Eucharistic form of life.” This means that the redeeming love we encounter in the Eucharist should shape our thoughts, our words, and our decisions, including those that pertain to the social order. The Holy Father called for “Eucharistic consistency” on the part of every member of the Church:
Personally I could not bring myself to vote for anyone who is pro death, be it support of abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell reasearch, homosexual marriage, or cloning. I would vote for a third party pro life candidate.
 
The above referenced document also says:
  1. In this statement, we bishops do not intend to tell Catholics for whom or against whom to vote. Our purpose is to help Catholics form their consciences in accordance with God’s truth. We recognize that the responsibility to make choices in political life rests with each individual in light of a properly formed conscience, and that participation goes well beyond casting a vote in a particular election.
And
Racism and other unjust discrimination, the use of the death penalty, resorting to unjust war, the use of torture,4 war crimes, the failure to respond to those who are suffering from hunger or a lack of health care, or an unjust immigration policy are all serious moral issues that challenge our consciences and require us to act. These are not
optional concerns which can be dismissed. Catholics are urged to seriously consider
Church teaching on these issues. Although choices about how best to respond to these and other compelling threats to human life and dignity are matters for principled debate and decision, this does not make them optional concerns or permit Catholics to dismiss or ignore Church teaching on these important issues.
A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter’s intent is to support that position. In such cases a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. At the same time, a voter should not use a candidate’s opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues involving human life and dignity.
  1. There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable
    position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons.
    Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to
    advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental
    moral evil.
Of course the Church doesn’t want one to vote in favor of something that goes against Church teaching, such as abortion. But they do NOT tell us HOW to vote, but give specific guidelines that we are told to consider. Yes, abortion is a very important consideration. But it is not the ONLY consideration. Yes, we are to use a well informed conscience. Yes, the Church wants us to vote to eradicate abortion. But we are not sinning if we do vote for a pro-choice candidate depending on our intent. If you vote for a pro-choice candidate because they are pro-choice, that is sinning. But if you vote for a pro-choice candidate because you feel other important areas will be impacted, and those areas are important to you as well, that is a lesser evil.

Of COURSE the Church wants you to vote with all their rules and regulations in mind, and of course they want you to vote to outlaw abortion, and of course they will groom Catholics to do so, but one won’t go to Hell for voting for the other guy. Nor will one a “bad” Catholic for doing so. As the above document says, there are also other ways to participate besides voting, in our daily lives to encourage good and not evil.

But no where in that document (or others shown from the Vatican or Bishops) say you absolutely have to vote one way or another, else be separated from the Church. If that was our instruction, they would say so. Just like they are specific - to the letter about - other issues in which we are required to do or not do in order to be compliant with the Church.

If we are forbidden from voting for a pro-choice candidate, they would say it, just like we are forbidden from using artificial birth control, and MUST attend Mass. If this is an area unbending, they would make that as clear as the other areas that are unbending.
 
From a moral perspective not all issues are qualitatively equal. Some values carry more weight than others. Some values are more fundamental than others. There is justification for placing more emphasis on some issues than other issues, and there is justification for placing more emphasis on some issues at certain times.

Abortion is the preeminent threat to human life. Abortion attacks life itself. The most fundamental moral good is life itself. Life is the condition necessary for all the good works that we may do. Ignoring the problem of abortion is to misunderstand the nature of the threat of abortion.

Some on this thread think that the age of the fetus (unborn human being) makes a difference. It does not.

Mother Theresa emptied herself of her possessions so that she could be free to have compassion for others. That would be the religious definition of compassion. A false compassion is that practiced by black-robed justices who are fearful of restraining a liberty that has turned into a vice (e.g. Roe vs. Wade). Pardon the murderer and ignore the murdered.

A very old practice in Christianity is to admonish the sinner. Actually this is a work of mercy. Sin hurts the sinner as well as the victim. The door of the Church is always open for those who are ready to repent of baby-killing. Now that is compassion.
 
From a moral perspective not all issues are qualitatively equal. Some values carry more weight than others. Some values are more fundamental than others. There is justification for placing more emphasis on some issues than other issues, and there is justification for placing more emphasis on some issues at certain times.
I agree with you on this CPA2, but even the most important issues are not always deal breakers, just as even the most important issues are not always an automatic vote. I’m not saying that abortion isn’t important. I know it’s probably one of the very most important. But it’s not the only issue.
 
One thing that is apparent is that when a Catholic proclaims they are not a single issue voter they are really saying is " I vote Democrat"
 
I agree with you on this CPA2, but even the most important issues are not always deal breakers, just as even the most important issues are not always an automatic vote. I’m not saying that abortion isn’t important. I know it’s probably one of the very most important. But it’s not the only issue.
Poverty and abortion are not separate issues! I do not think that we should start with feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, housing the homeless.

Let’s start with opposition to abortion. There are many who praise Mother Theresa for her work with the poor. However, they do not share her opposition to abortion. **Failure to understand her opposition to abortion is also a failure to understand her work for the poor. The two concepts are inseparable. **

Mother Theresa’s understanding of poverty was much more profound than most of us realize. She would often say that we were made to love and be loved. Poverty is the failure to love. The height of poverty is the failure to recognize another person as a human being, and legally destroying that human being.

What about the poverty of the unborn? The unborn babies are the weakest and the most defenseless. Unborn babies are “out-of-sight and out-of mind.” They do not speak. They do not march, and they do not stand up for their rights. Unborn babies cannot even make an impact on our minds and our hearts, as evidenced by the comments on this thread. That is why I stand up for the rights of unborn babies!
 
The unborn babies are the weakest and the most defenseless. Unborn babies are “out-of-sight and out-of mind.” They do not speak. They do not march, and they do not stand up for their rights. Unborn babies cannot even make an impact on our minds and our hearts, as evidenced by the comments on this thread. That is why I stand up for the rights of unborn babies!
And so you should. I never said you shouldn’t, but abortion is not the beginning and the end of a vote, and that all issues need to be considered as well. I didn’t even say abortion was the least important, because it’s not. Rather, all issues need to be considered as well. If you want to base your vote on abortion, I have no problem with that. You have the right to vote as your conscience dictates. Mine tells me that there is more to the story than just abortion. The Church doesn’t tell us that voting for a pro-choice candidate will separate us from the Church.
 
And so you should. I never said you shouldn’t, but abortion is not the beginning and the end of a vote, and that all issues need to be considered as well. I didn’t even say abortion was the least important, because it’s not. Rather, all issues need to be considered as well. If you want to base your vote on abortion, I have no problem with that. You have the right to vote as your conscience dictates. Mine tells me that there is more to the story than just abortion. The Church doesn’t tell us that voting for a pro-choice candidate will separate us from the Church.
Trust is #1! Trust is so important in business that it should be on the balance sheet. The same holds true for politics. If you cannot trust a politician to defend the rights of the unborn, you cannot trust him to defend the rights of the living.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top