Only if it makes it to the Vatican “supreme court” and there is a decision made, I would think. Meanwhile back at the ranch, the bishops each have their jurisdiction where their opinions rule where it does not openly conflict with the Magisterium. When Cardinal Burke makes an opinion, it is weighty indeed … no question being one chosen by the Vatican to interpret law. Yet, it is not binding … and more importantly, it is not infallible.
The innocent lives of the babies represent a lost potential, the potential to make a free will offering to say “Yes” to Jesus as his Bride, the Church. True, innocent lives will never see eternal death, but will they see eternal life? Whatever, it will be good, but will it rise to the potential good reward of a free will offering of “Yes” to God. But it is true that the greatest tragedy in the act of abortion is the damage to the souls of those who actively participate. (BTW, excellent post.)
Good news, it’s not Alzheimers. Bad news, it could be Partimers.I don’t even remember why we are arguing anymore…
There is no doubt about that…and that is what the Papal Nuncio is saying.
100% correct and this is undeniable.
The Church must ALAWAY be subservient to ones political views if one buys the rationale of Obama Catholics.
And where it will end…is anybody’s guess.
With this ring, I, the party of the 1st part, do thee wed, the party of the 2nd part, to have & to hold until divorce do we part due to breach of contract or benefits run dry, whichever comes first. You may now engage in any form of PDA that you so choose. Now children watch & learn. (Or is it, the parents will now be asked to leave the room, so the children can watch & learn without parental control.)
Libertarian Party’s platform is even worse by your standards. Yet Ron Paul was the most pro-life, anti-war candidate.
The fact that a Ron Paul can run without party platform reprisal attests to the inaccuracy of your assertion. Minus the Ron Paul factor, you need to explain your position, instead of teasing.
You are correct sir…thank you. So what word am I looking for? Is there something that sounds like that that means the opposite? This will now bug me like whoa.Reading your post, it is clear that you do not mean the word “tantamount” = equivalent.
(Use the force, young Jedi. Don’t get pulled to the Dark Side.)
Paramount may fit the bill, but not exactly. It seems to be more superlative than comparative. I’m groping too.
Yet Ron Paul voted against banning sex selection abortions a few months ago. I know, I know its unconstitutional but that doesn’t change the fact that he isn’t as pro-life as say Santorum.
Ron Paul ran as a Libertarian Party candidate for president in 1988. The platform bothered me then as it resembled something right out of the Ayn Rand playbook but I voted for him anyway.
We can argue till the cows come home as to who is more pro-life but my point remains, party platforms are non-binding and no where on the ballot are you asked to vote on party platforms. Even signing a Norquist anti-tax hike agreement doesn’t bind a candidate but you have to give him credit for trying.
Is it your belief that Catholics should ignore the Democratic platform in regard to abortion?
I don’t know if it’s a coincidence or not but “left” and “right” came as a result of the translation of the Latin sinister and dexter respectively, though it seems that most arguments here point to the elected Democrats as being more sinister because of their platform. Sort of a reversal of the sheep and goats, I think.
I don’t think there is a theological basis one way or another to believe anything a candidate or party says. That said, the Republican platform does have more enticing language but then so do used car salesmen.
And so you shun the Republican platform because you have this cyicism toward them…and you accept the democrat platform even though they follow through on all their isues regarding abortion-on-demand, infanticide, gay unions, HHS mandate, etc.
