Papal nuncio: Catholic division undermines religious freedom

  • Thread starter Thread starter Samson01
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m wondering why this thread is still alive. The Obama supporters on this forum would vote they way they did, regardless of what individual bishops, the USCCB, or the Pope would say.

To one willing to engage in cognitive dissonance, the oft-cited “proportionate reasons” becomes subjective at best, or entirely arbitrary.

“I support funding for the National Endowment for the Arts, that’s proportionate!”

“Romney declared war on Big Bird™, that’s proportionate!”

“Only 1 out of every ten Republican drafted pro-life laws are passed over Democratic opposition in the legislature, or confirmed by SCOTUS (while Democratic appointed Justices unanimously vote against), therefore, Republican’s can’t be trusted to be pro-life, and that’s proportionate!”

The one thing this election taught me is that some people will always justify their actions, no matter what the Church says.

If people could vote for this presidential candidate, who openly supports 3 intrinsic evils, and has challenged the conscience of the Church and Church run institutions, they will continue to vote that way, regardless of what the Bishops (not an official USCCB release!), or the Pope (he said ‘proportionate’, see!) will say.

You could have a candidate stand on the steps of The Capitol, burn the Pope in effigy, while desecrating a crucifix, and some would still claim “But he’s really going to help the poor!!”

Christ have mercy on us all
 
wynnejj said:
Here is the indecipherable formula …

Given that all Catholic acknowledge …
Abortion = Child Abuse
Forming Conscience for Faithful Citizenship = Bishop’s Guidelines
Faithful Catholic Democrats exist within set of Catholic Democrats
… when applying Other Proportionate Reasons

Therefore, substituting and summarizing …

Faithful Catholic Democrats defend & support 100% Pro-Child-Abuse Candidates for Other Proportionate Reasons which fully complies with best practices of the Bishop Guidelines.

Wasn’t that reasoning something that nearly sent the Catholic church into bankruptcy

when neglecting child abuse in the priesthood?

Won’t that reasoning be something that will tend toward sending America into bankruptcy when neglecting child abuse in our society?

Isn’t that typical of the Devil to suggest ideas that represent a good end via bad means … i.e., reduce abortion via social justice that neglects a baby’s rights … then making a total loss of proposition accepted?
Click to expand...
Yes yes and YES!
 
scipio337 said:
I’mIf people could vote for this presidential candidate, who openly supports 3 intrinsic evils, and has challenged the conscience of the Church and Church run institutions, they will continue to vote that way, regardless of what the Bishops (not an official USCCB release!), or the Pope (he said ‘proportionate’, see!) will say.

You could have a candidate stand on the steps of The Capitol, burn the Pope in effigy, while desecrating a crucifix, and some would still claim “But he’s really going to help the poor!!”
Click to expand...
Good point. It is very sad.

For the poor you have always with you: but me you have not always. For she in pouring this ointment upon my body, hath done it for my burial. Amen I say to you, wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, that also which she hath done, shall be told for a memory of her. Then went one of the twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, to the chief priests, And said to them: What will you give me, and I will deliver him unto you? But they appointed him thirty pieces of silver.
 
wynnejj said:
Weren’t we the ones who blindly bowed our heads in the liturgy of the Mass and asserted for years that Jesus was Born and became Man before we caught our error and re-asserted the age-old Nicene Creed that Jesus was Incarnate and became Man?
Click to expand...
Not the Latin Mass Catholics, who had it right all along. 😉
 
NeedsMercy said:
I almost missed this. Hey, take a shot at Kerry for his goofy 2004 campaign but he was talking about the war. “He was for it before he was against it” was crazy. But wait a minute…wasn’t the 2012 Republican nominee for abortion before he was against it? :confused:
Click to expand...
 
ProVobis said:
So much for party platforms.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. Let’s see. There is one party’s platform which favors abortion-on-demand…gay unions…and…uh…oh yeah…they attempted to remove God and then booed when it was reversed.

Let us all heed the words of the Papal Nuncio and stand against this intrinsic evil!
 
wynnejj said:
Would any Catholic feel comfortable with saying I voted for the 100% Pro-Child-Abuse candidate and I am in full compliance with Catholic social doctrine?
Click to expand...
Oh, wynnejj, you disappoint me! “The 100% Pro-Child-Abuse candidate”? You already know what kind of argument that one could make about child abuse…
 
NeedsMercy said:
Oh, wynnejj, you disappoint me! “The 100% Pro-Child-Abuse candidate”? You already know what kind of argument that one could make about child abuse…
Click to expand...
I would think that killing children is the ultimate form of child abuse. Since the advent of the contracetive society and the strenghthining of the culture of death child abuse has increased significantly. Abortion does not exist in a vacuum. It is an evil that permeates every corner of out society.
 
Lucky7 said:
Not to muddy the waters more than they already are, but this sounds just like what pro-choice Catholics would say…I am politically pro-choice but personally pro-life. And no matter how they want to rationalize it, they are supporting the “right” for someone else to end the life of the child in their womb. They won’t kill their own baby, but it’s okay if someone else kills theirs.
Click to expand...
Let’s get something straight–I can only speak for myself, but I am **not ** “pro-choice”. I think that I made that abundantly clear in my posts. Why do you insist on derogatorily labeling a person? You can’t believe that this is a perfectly acceptable way for you to address someone–no, not even if they do support abortion. Oh, don’t try to rationalize it by saying it’s a “spiritual work of mercy.” To “admonish the sinner”? Maybe, if you knew, in their heart, that they had indeed sinned, which you don’t. To “instruct the ignorant”? Yes, if the person were truly ignorant, which you also don’t know. Nowhere does it say to “point righteous fingers and name-call”, does it?

Now, Lucky7, why don’t you take up my question? How do you know that I am, personally, in my heart, “pro-abortion”? Don’t give me those “this sounds just like yadda, yadda, yadda” generalizations. Let’s get down to reality.
 
NeedsMercy said:
Let’s get something straight–I can only speak for myself, but I am **not ** “pro-choice”. I think that I made that abundantly clear in my posts. Why do you insist on derogatorily labeling a person? You can’t believe that this is a perfectly acceptable way for you to address someone–no, not even if they do support abortion. Oh, don’t try to rationalize it by saying it’s a “spiritual work of mercy.” To “admonish the sinner”? Maybe, if you knew, in their heart, that they had indeed sinned, which you don’t. To “instruct the ignorant”? Yes, if the person were truly ignorant, which you also don’t know. Nowhere does it say to “point righteous fingers and name-call”, does it?

Now, Lucky7, why don’t you take up my question? How do you know that I am, personally, in my heart, “pro-abortion”? Don’t give me those “this sounds just like yadda, yadda, yadda” generalizations. Let’s get down to reality.
Click to expand...
I have no idea if you are pro choice or pro abortion but as a voter who voted for Pres. Obama it doesn’t make a difference with regard to your vote what your personal beliefs are. You voted for Obama. A person who with your vote will expand even more abortion. A person who will appoint more Supreme Court jurists that are Pro-Choice with the potential of keeping abortion legal at the federal level for another generation. A person who wants to force Catholic employers and Catholic institutions to provide artificial birth control as part of a health care package. Voting has consequences.
 
Mickey said:
You should be talking about it. I am appalled at his stance on abortion on demand and infanticide. I am horrified at his staunch support of Planned Parenthood. I am terrified that he is attempting to force the contraception mandate on the Catholic Church.

And I am mystified as to how any Christian could have possibly voted for him.
Then you should not have supported BO.
Click to expand...
C’mon! You didn’t answer the question, either! You are correct to be upset at Mr. Obama’s stance on abortion. I, too, am appalled, though you do not believe me. And, that, my friend, is the point of what I am trying to tell you. This thread was not a thread that was called “Hey! Let’s Trash the President!”. (That would be wrong, don’t you think?) I–silly me–thought it was about discussing Archbishop Vigano’s statement. The nice posters here turned it into an opportunity to weed out Obama-voters and abuse them. As far as your retort “Then you should not have supported etc.”, are you suggesting that I do as I had stupidly done in the past (2004) and be a one-issue voter? Tell me the truth, were you a one-issue voter? Were any of you?
 
Lucky7 said:
Not to muddy the waters more than they already are, but this sounds just like what pro-choice Catholics would say…I am politically pro-choice but personally pro-life. And no matter how they want to rationalize it, they are supporting the “right” for someone else to end the life of the child in their womb. They won’t kill their own baby, but it’s okay if someone else kills theirs.
Click to expand...
Mickey said:
You should be talking about it. I am appalled at his stance on abortion on demand and infanticide. I am horrified at his staunch support of Planned Parenthood. I am terrified that he is attempting to force the contraception mandate on the Catholic Church.

And I am mystified as to how any Christian could have possibly voted for him.
Then you should not have supported BO.
Click to expand...
All these expressions cannot distort truth. The truth is this: there is no one out there who is guilty of either being pro-abortion or pro infanticide, but rather far more concerned about these social evils than those who make a lot of noise about it.

It is ABSOLUTELY UNFAIR to label anyone as pro-abortion and is apparently a large scale re-enacting of the dramas of OT days when the self-righteous cornered hapless individuals to brand and demand penal action. I hope there is no return to the days of Spanish Inquisition that charged the Venerable Louis of Granada with Heresy and even jailed St. Ignatius of Loyola for preaching the Gospel.

History has proven that abortion remains a complex evil and though rampant, has case-to-case variation in circumstances and causes. No amount of lip service and noise will serve to alleviate the evil but will only achieve negative purposes like branding some and spreading hatred. I think the victims of this hate campaign are truly the most concerned about and silently contributing their mite to end this elusive social evil.
 
Hmmm. Let’s see. There is one party’s platform which
Click to expand...
The point is ultimately they’re worthless. Definitely non-binding.

One can make a case that the Libertarian Party’s platform is the worst evil as it is pro-choice and doesn’t provide anything for the pregnancy. But did that disqualify Ron Paul when he ran as a libertarian presidential candidate in 1988?
 
NeedsMercy said:
C’mon!
Click to expand...
You c’mon!
NeedsMercy said:
You didn’t answer the question, either!
Click to expand...
Of course I did.
NeedsMercy said:
You are correct to be upset at Mr. Obama’s stance on abortion.
Click to expand...
Yes.
NeedsMercy said:
I, too, am appalled
Click to expand...
And yet you supported him.
NeedsMercy said:
And, that, my friend, is the point of what I am trying to tell you.
Click to expand...
And that, my friend is the point I am trying to answer. You voted for the champion of abortion-on-demand and the advocate for Planned Parenthood.
NeedsMercy said:
This thread was not a thread that was called “Hey! Let’s Trash the President!”.
Click to expand...
Nope. It is a thread about the Papal Nuncio talking about the intrinsic evil of the party of the man you voted for.
NeedsMercy said:
are you suggesting that I do as I had stupidly done in the past (2004) and be a one-issue voter?
Click to expand...
Well, if you had voted regarding opposition to abortion only…I could not blame you because there is nothing as proportionately evil as abortion. But BO also is the champion of infanticide, euthanasia, gay unions, Planned Parenthood…and oh yeah…he is attacking the Catholic Church by forcing the contraception mandate down their throat. So you had the opportunity to oppose him on** MANY** issues.
NeedsMercy said:
Tell me the truth, were you a one-issue voter?
Click to expand...
As I just stated…I opposed BO on many issues. But if abortion had been the only issue…I would have unashamedly opposed him based on that alone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top