Political Party in Re: to Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Scians_Daughter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Scians_Daughter

Guest
I grew up Southern Baptist, and for many reasons, could not handle the apparent elitism especially in regard to Social Justice I experienced during my Active years as a Church going Bible Thumping Baptist. Thank God and our Blessed Mother, and a series of Miraculous events, I was guided back to the Mother Church and became confirmed Catholic the year 2000. I cannot get enough or learn enough about our Blessed Faith. I am like a child who has been starved and now am seated before a beautiful Banquet Table and just can’t get enough. However, I recently had a discussion with the leader of a Catholic Bible Study, and Prayer Group that I have faithfully attended for a couple of years. He ask me what Political Party I belong to, and I made the Big Mistake of telling him I was inclined to vote Democrate. I am not by the way Prochoice, I am very much Pro Life, however, I am a firm believer that you cannot pick your candidates based on ONE issue. I now feel “the vibes” from most every one at my Bible Study Group and have pretty much been shunned. My heart is broken. I talked to my Prienst about it and he reassured me that I had the freedom of choice of Political Parties without being shunned by the group, however, the attitudes remain, and I have about decided to just leave the group. I am very sad about this. You would think I said “I believed in Murder” and believe me I don’t. This is my first post to CAF and I need to find others, if there are any out there, to help me to digest and understand this. I really thought I had left this mentality behind when I left the “Southern Baptist” It is beginning to feel alot like it did when I was in the Protestant Faith. I do live in Texas, and am aware of the extremely Conservative Republican majority, but I was hoping the Catholic Church would have a place for me. For all of you who would like to respond, remember, the issue is free choice of Political Party, NOT my stand on Roe vs. Wade. I am not for abortion. Neither am I for the Death Penalty, Unjust War, Genocide, or Euphanasia.
Please Help
In Christ Holy Love,
Sciansdaughter
P. S. I am 61 years
 
I live in a small town in Indiana and I believe most of the members of my parish are Democrats and I feel like a minority within my parish because I am far more in line with the beliefs of the GOP. So I guess my advice to you is that we can all be members of this church (it is the universal church!) and believe in our own political beliefs.

I’d be happy to argue with you all day long about politics :rolleyes: but really the Catholic church is open to both Democrats and Republicans. There is plenty of room to debate if we can vote for a party over ONE or TWO issues, and I tend to think (just my opinion) that we can never vote for a party but must vote for individuals.

When it comes to voting, there are some ‘non-negotiable’ positions that we must take into account. Those positions are “LIFE” issues and they are simply more important than “SOCIAL” issues. So feel free to vote for a Democrat (or two, or three) as long as they don’t advocate the “LIFE” issues that our church opposes. (Abortion, Embryonic Stem Cell Research, Euthanasia, Human Cloning, Gay Marriage). There are many members of the Democratic party that do not support those issues and there are many members of the Republican party that do support those. So look at the individual candidates and vote accordingly.

When it comes to “SOCIAL” issues then you can support any of the parties. Again, we can argue politics, but really it boils down to point of view. I believe one way to help the poor and you believe another, and the church allows for both! We do have to be aware that the church warns us about moral relativism and we should not fall into the theological trap of elevating social issues to the same importance as life issues. We need to make sure that we don’t ‘justify’ supporting an abortionist (1 issue) because we like their views on minimum wage, social policy, education (3 issues). 3 social issues does not equal 1 life issue. So take care to avoid ‘moral relativism’ in your choices, but again there are Democrats who are aligned with the Catholic beliefs.

JUST A WARNING, I do think that you will find a lot more Republicans on the internet forums than Democrats so asking here on the internet may end up giving you plenty of opposition! But while you and I may not be of the same political beliefs, I often feel the same way you feel because in my parish I find that I am the political outcast 😊
 
Interesting topic. I’d be inclined to think the Catholic Church should naturally lean Democratic. . . due to the strong concern for the poor and the general welfare. . . in addition to sharing the notion that we as a people have a shared responsibility to work together to solve our social problems.

But the Democratic Party went in league with feminists in the 60s, and the great litmus test of feminism is supporting for abortion. (I’m still not sure how they figure abortion is “pro-woman”; it seems like a neanderthal, harmful thing to do). This leaves people who seem abortion as murder seeking Republican candidates.

The real question should be “why has the Democratic Party left off its concern for the weak” with the abortion issue? Certainly, children in the womb need protection.

I’m not sure the Republicans are such a fine party, either. The more conservative you get, the more it’s “let everyone shift for himself in everything.” This leads to oppression of the weak, as sure as the silver dollar shines.
 
Scians_Daughter said:
I grew up Southern Baptist, and for many reasons, could not handle the apparent elitism especially in regard to Social Justice I experienced during my Active years as a Church going Bible Thumping Baptist. Thank God and our Blessed Mother, and a series of Miraculous events, I was guided back to the Mother Church and became confirmed Catholic the year 2000. I cannot get enough or learn enough about our Blessed Faith. I am like a child who has been starved and now am seated before a beautiful Banquet Table and just can’t get enough. However, I recently had a discussion with the leader of a Catholic Bible Study, and Prayer Group that I have faithfully attended for a couple of years. He ask me what Political Party I belong to, and I made the Big Mistake of telling him I was inclined to vote Democrate. I am not by the way Prochoice, I am very much Pro Life, however, I am a firm believer that you cannot pick your candidates based on ONE issue. I now feel “the vibes” from most every one at my Bible Study Group and have pretty much been shunned. My heart is broken. I talked to my Prienst about it and he reassured me that I had the freedom of choice of Political Parties without being shunned by the group, however, the attitudes remain, and I have about decided to just leave the group. I am very sad about this. You would think I said “I believed in Murder” and believe me I don’t. This is my first post to CAF and I need to find others, if there are any out there, to help me to digest and understand this. I really thought I had left this mentality behind when I left the “Southern Baptist” It is beginning to feel alot like it did when I was in the Protestant Faith. I do live in Texas, and am aware of the extremely Conservative Republican majority, but I was hoping the Catholic Church would have a place for me. For all of you who would like to respond, remember, the issue is free choice of Political Party, NOT my stand on Roe vs. Wade. I am not for abortion. Neither am I for the Death Penalty, Unjust War, Genocide, or Euphanasia.
Please Help
In Christ Holy Love,
Sciansdaughter
P. S. I am 61 years
Click to expand...
I understand your dilemma, however there are five issues that we cannot compromise on as Catholics. I think the poster before me listed those well. One can certainly choose the party of their choice and Catholics do. There is a place for everyone in the Catholic Church and just because the group you have been a part of does not agree with you, as long as you are strong on the five non-negotiables, you are fine. It have always found it best not to discuss politics with others. The Church does not feel the same about the death penalty, and unjust wars are often in the eye of the deholder. My dear grandfather, a staunch Irish Catholic Democratic would turn over in his grave if he could see where his party has gone.
 
Aside from a few (admittedly important) issues such as abortion, I feel that the democratic party is much more compatible with Catholic theory of social justice. Sure, it’s not the best party imaginable, but it’s better than others overall.

The problem is that, along with its emphasis on social justice, the democratic party also caters to an over-zealous liberal agenda. And that causes a lot of problems for conscientious Catholic voters.

A few years ago, Catholic Answers published the “Voter’s Guide for Serious Catholics,” which is an excellent resource that delineates five non-negotiable moral standards by which to judge political candidates (abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning and homosexual ‘marriage’). CA calls these moral standards “non-negotiable” issues – meaning that if a candidate is pro- any of these issues, a dutiful Catholic has the moral obligation to refrain from voting for that candidate.

While I don’t contest the importance of these issues, I always found this system disconcerting for two reasons:
  • First, the Voter’s Guide blatantly lacks another important issue that is very much related to the Catholic conception of social justice. In my article “Make it SIX non-negotiable issues,” I therefore proposed the addition of a sixth criterion for Catholic voters – namely, concern for the poor, infirm, elderly, etc.
    For these reasons, I am often stranded not being able to to vote for democrats, who usually violate one of the original five criteria; and not being able to vote for republicans, who usually violate the sixth. (I wish we had more independent candidates running… maybe then we would find good Catholic candidates.) So what is a conscientious Catholic voter to do?
  • This is precisely my second objection to the Voter’s Guide: Unfortunately, in the Real World (i.e., culture of death) and heavily party-based system in which we live, no candidate will hold all of the Catholic positions on these issues. To reflexively eliminate candidates from consideration because they break one of these standards – as egregious as that may be – will arguably leave us with no candidates for whom to vote. And that ignores our obligation as citizens to vote for the best leaders for our country.
    I propose that we should use the six non-negotiable issues as a framework – a litmus test, of sorts – by which to grade candidates. Then, we should vote for the candidate who espouses the most Catholic positions (or who violates the fewest of the non-negotiable criteria).
I would love if a candidate would satisfy all six non-negotiable criteria. I pray that this may be the case. But in the absence of such leadership, I believe this system will at least offers the possibility of “incremental gains” while guaranteeing “damage control.”

Following this litmus test, it is of course essential to consider other issues (such as national and foreign policy, etc.) that are important to the future of our country; although these are not “non-negotiable” issues.

Any thoughts or comments?

I recommend the following as useful resources:
  • [Campaign 2008: Foreign Affairs (http://www.miserere.org/m/archivedposts/269) – A closer look at the foreign policies each candidate would espouse if elected to office in 2008. Excellent articles from Foreign Affairs, the premiere journal on the subject.
  • [First Things (http://www.firstthings.com/) – The journal of religion, culture and public life. Also check out their [First Things (http://www.firstthings.com/blog/) blog.
  • [Catholics in the Public Square (http://thepublicsquare.blogspot.com/) – This well-written and informative blog principally discusses Catholic politicians and their stances on moral and political issues, although all Campaign 2008 candidates (Catholic or not) are fair game.
 
alessandro said:
Aside from a few (admittedly important) issues such as abortion, I feel that the democratic party is much more compatible with Catholic theory of social justice. Sure, it’s not the best party imaginable, but it’s better than others overall.

The problem is that, along with its emphasis on social justice, the democratic party also caters to an over-zealous liberal agenda. And that causes a lot of problems for conscientious Catholic voters.

A few years ago, Catholic Answers published the “Voter’s Guide for Serious Catholics,” which is an excellent resource that delineates five non-negotiable moral standards by which to judge political candidates (abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning and homosexual ‘marriage’). CA calls these moral standards “non-negotiable” issues – meaning that if a candidate is pro- any of these issues, a dutiful Catholic has the moral obligation to refrain from voting for that candidate.

While I don’t contest the importance of these issues, I always found this system disconcerting for two reasons:
  • First, the Voter’s Guide blatantly lacks another important issue that is very much related to the Catholic conception of social justice. In my article “Make it SIX non-negotiable issues,” I therefore proposed the addition of a sixth criterion for Catholic voters – namely, concern for the poor, infirm, elderly, etc.
    For these reasons, I am often stranded not being able to to vote for democrats, who usually violate one of the original five criteria; and not being able to vote for republicans, who usually violate the sixth. (I wish we had more independent candidates running… maybe then we would find good Catholic candidates.) So what is a conscientious Catholic voter to do?
  • This is precisely my second objection to the Voter’s Guide: Unfortunately, in the Real World (i.e., culture of death) and heavily party-based system in which we live, no candidate will hold all of the Catholic positions on these issues. To reflexively eliminate candidates from consideration because they break one of these standards – as egregious as that may be – will arguably leave us with no candidates for whom to vote. And that ignores our obligation as citizens to vote for the best leaders for our country.
    I
Click to expand...
Not all issues carry the same weight. Although I disagree with you that the Democrat party does more for the poor than the republican party does one must bear in mind that the poor can not be helped if they are not allowed to live in the first place. No right is more important than the right to life. All other rights flow from this right.

Heres how then cardinal ratzinger expined it:
  1. The Church teaches that abortion or euthanasia is a grave sin. The Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, with reference to judicial decisions or civil laws that authorize or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there is a “grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. …] In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to 'take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law or vote for it’” (no. 73). Christians have a “grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. …] This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it” (no. 74).
3.* Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia**. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy *
*Communion. *

While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.
----

I left the Democrat party when they decided that votes were more important than protectng the lives of the most vulnerable of all. If one is not only not willing to protect our children but also beleives taxpayers should pay to do the killing how could one ever entrust them in a postiion of leadership?
 
If you haven’t read this already, I recommend you read the book, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. (You can buy a hardcopy from USCCB Publishing, if you prefer to read hard copy vice reading on line)

This document gives a good overview of what the Magesterium actually teaches in regards to “social justice.” It also provides references to Magesterial documents that helped form the doctrine.

The point is that you, as a Catholic voter, need to understand the actual doctrine prior to judging the positions taken by candidates. Most folks who I hear state that the Dems are better on the majority of social justice issues than the Repubs haven’t considered the vital doctrinal issue of subsidiarity.

The upshot is that, while the Republicans mostly take the appropriate position on abortion, they embrace classical liberalism when it comes to economics (at least IMHO). Not ALL Republicans but the ‘party line.’ And the Democrats mostly take the position of classic socialism (at least a soft version of it as implemented throughout Europe). I do not believe that either is correct…

As stated by Pope Pius XI,

There would be today neither Socialism nor Communism if the rulers of the nations had not scorned the teachings and maternal warnings of the Church. On the bases of liberalism and laicism they wished to build other social edifices which, powerful and imposing as they seemed at first, all too soon revealed the weakness of their foundations, and today are crumbling one after another before our eyes, as everything must crumble that is not grounded on the one corner stone which is Christ Jesus.
 
Just my opinion here, but I don’t think the original poster came here to enter debates about political parties, I think she came here looking to see if her voice is welcome in our church. To that I say she is very welcome.

I’d also like to point out that Catholic Answers Social Justice area is heavily populated by Republicans and our answers about politics are clearly biased toward the G.O.P.
 
melensdad said:
Just my opinion here, but I don’t think the original poster came here to enter debates about political parties, I think she came here looking to see if her voice is welcome in our church. To that I say she is very welcome.

I’d also like to point out that Catholic Answers Social Justice area is heavily populated by Republicans and our answers about politics are clearly biased toward the G.O.P.
Click to expand...
Posting here as a godless liberal instead of colluding with my “friends” at the IIDB reminds me of the days when I played Duel Monsters and enunciated all my moves in Japanese.

Maybe this is a medium to recapitulate that “competitive urge.”

It seems that those under the spell of the GOP aren’t interested in “Social Justice” from my prespective. I prefer a Millsian approach as I was inspired by his essays *On Liberty *and Utilitarianism. Are those approaches compatible with Catholicism.

But I am probably the most pro-life person on this forum.
 
melensdad said:
Just my opinion here, but I don’t think the original poster came here to enter debates about political parties, I think she came here looking to see if her voice is welcome in our church. To that I say she is very welcome.

I’d also like to point out that Catholic Answers Social Justice area is heavily populated by Republicans and our answers about politics are clearly biased toward the G.O.P.
Click to expand...
No-heavily biased towards protection of the unborn-as is our Church. If the Republicans nominate a pro-abortion canoidate i wont vote for them either.
 
ribozyme said:
Posting here as a godless liberal instead of colluding with my “friends” at the IIDB reminds me of the days when I played Duel Monsters and enunciated all my moves in Japanese.

Maybe this is a medium to recapitulate that “competitive urge.”

It seems that those under the spell of the GOP aren’t interested in “Social Justice” from my prespective. I prefer a Millsian approach as I was inspired by his essays *On Liberty *and Utilitarianism. Are those approaches compatible with Catholicism.

But I am probably the most** pro-life **person on this forum.
Click to expand...
Is that why Peter Singer is one of you idols? Or was that a passing fad?
 
There are many many Catholics torn by this issue, and others not torn at all. Many, perhaps most here believe that the life issues trump every other issue and even all other issues added together. That is their right. This site is very conservative and mostly Republican as best I can discern. You need to realize that the actual state of the Church nation wide is substantially different. There simply is no Catholic vote that is a bloc. Each of us is called to work these issues out as best we can with respect and guidance from the Church of course. But no you are not alone in favoring Democrats on some issues certainly. But I warn you, for some here, to even suggest that there is any alternative than voting republican will raise rather some extreme anger.

I tend to agree with those who state that not much is really forthcoming from the republicans anyway. They say what they say to get your vote, but do little if anything except casual statements and weak legislation they know has no chance. Then its business as usual until they need your vote again. If you look historically, you can surely find that certain big wigs in the Republican party recognized an untapped source of votes and deliberately retailored their platform to secure that vote.
 
Scian’s Daughter:

I am a “cradle Democrat”. No ancestor of mine was ever anything else. I grew up thinking the Democrat Party was the party of the “common man”; the one with a social conscience. And, with all due respect to those on here who have always been Republicans, I think it was once largely true.

I held a leadership position within the Party for years. I was not fully aware (perhaps I didn’t want to be) when abortion began to be a Democratic Party “non-negotiable” issue. A moment of enlightenment came when a party leader announced to a committee of which I was a member, that we needed to be wary of “strong Catholics” within the upper reaches of the party structure, because they (we) “couldn’t be trusted” to support the “right to choose”. An old friend, a Democrat legislator who was not Catholic but was more prolife than many, told me he didn’t much like it, but he had been told in no uncertain terms by the abortion lobbyists that if he did not support their agenda, they would pour funds into the campaign of anyone who ran against him, Republican or Democrat. If he “played ball”, however, he was guaranteed funds, good publicity and organizational support. He “played ball”.

My Irish ancestors had an expression regarding those Irish during the Famine who compromised their faith for food. It was called “taking the soup”. I’m afraid the Democrat party as a whole has “taken the soup” and, whatever individual Democrat political hopefuls might think personally, almost none can buck the abortion lobby and survive, politically…and they know it. There has not been a single prolife Democrat for whom I could vote for a good thirty years, and there are none on the horizon.

When it comes to social issues, I don’t think there is much to choose between the parties anymore. As I said, there was a time when, as a party leader, one could actually get some things done for people. I was there, and intervened many times for folks. But, and I really think it started with Nixon, but Carter followed on with a vengeance, in time all “grass roots” ability to do anything for anyone waned. Now, political activity is pretty much a one-way street; fund raising, getting out the vote (but mostly fund-raising) There’s no “flow back” at the grass roots. Then there was deregulation. I know some Republicans will argue the merits of some of the regulation that used to exist, but “deregulation” of everything that really mattered cascaded over the decades. Some of that regulation really was helpful to people. Usury laws went away. Neighborhood financial institutions went under or were gobbled up. Air service disappeared in lots of places. Company after company went down in the face of that, and of “free trade”. Monopolies and oligopolies flourished under both parties. Lots of things changed, and not necessarily for the better.

I look back at my years as a former Democrat activist, and realize that what we have now are actually two parties that serve the big interests that serve them. The Democrat party “talks the talk” of social justice, but does not “walk the walk”. It has done nothing for the less fortunate for decades. The Republican party “talks the talk” of free enterprise, but does little to free small businesses from the “social” and “environmental” regulation that can be so oppressive; continues to “subsidize” the already wealthy, and does nothing to untangle the governmental policies that add much to the cost of healthcare for ordinary people.

So what’s left besides ideological posturing that rarely leads to anything that actually benefits ordinary people? Certainly, the “five non-negotiables” are left. I still believe in the “Democrat ideals” that my parents, grandparents and great-grandparents had. But I have no one for whom I can vote, except when it comes to “the five”. That causes me to cast a Republican ballot every time, and has for decades. So don’t feel all alone. I know lots and lots of “cradle Democrats” who are also “cradle Catholics”. Some have turned Republican and often have the sometimes annoying zeal of the “newly converted” in that. Some, like me, just figure my own personal salvation is not going to be served by party affiliation, but may be adversely affected by supporting those who support abortion. Those Republican Catholics should not be giving you a hard time, but if you think about it, I think there is a lot of frustration motivating it, and frustration often causes people to become strident.

(oops! Too long. Have to continue)
 
(continued. Thank you for your patience)

All of this has caused me to study the old “Distributist” writings of people like Belloc, Chesterton and at least three Popes. If we’re all going to be “on our own” in a not-too-charitable society, which is where both parties tend to put us, then we need to understand the philosophical approaches to it, and work to create the hopefully productive and charitable “mini-societies” that are our own families and circles of associates. That’s not so easy, and one has to adapt to the economics of our time, but I don’t suppose it ever was easy.

Hope this helps a little.
 
Glad I’m not American having to choose between one party that while it helps the poor (which Christians should support) also advocates abortion, gay marriage etc. but on the other hand there’s a party that stands up for Christian values on life issues but is also war mongering, pro-gun, pro death penalty and supports oppression of the poor, none of which are Christian ideals either.
Then again at least there’s a choice of party in the USA unlike in the UK where the Labour and Conservative parties are near identical (pretty much both like the Democrats), though Conservative are slightly better on life issues and Labour are slightly better on helping the poor
 
JMBNH said:
Glad I’m not American having to choose between one party that while it helps the poor (which Christians should support) also advocates abortion, gay marriage etc. but on the other hand there’s a party that stands up for Christian values on life issues but is also war mongering, pro-gun, pro death penalty and supports oppression of the poor, none of which are Christian ideals either.
Click to expand...
Being an American, I know that neither party is quite as abovedescribed, but am cognizant of the fact that one party is totally under the control of the abortion lobby, while the other isn’t.
 
Ridgerunner said:
(continued. Thank you for your patience)

All of this has caused me to study the old “Distributist” writings of people like Belloc, Chesterton and at least three Popes. If we’re all going to be “on our own” in a not-too-charitable society, which is where both parties tend to put us, then we need to understand the philosophical approaches to it, and work to create the hopefully productive and charitable “mini-societies” that are our own families and circles of associates. That’s not so easy, and one has to adapt to the economics of our time, but I don’t suppose it ever was easy.

Hope this helps a little.
Click to expand...
You very eloquently expressed the same journey this cradle democart took. I hope the time will come agan when i can again support the party that used to reoperesnt so well the teachings of our Church.
 
JMBNH said:
Glad I’m not American having to choose between one party that while it helps the poor (which Christians should support) also advocates abortion, gay marriage etc. but on the other hand there’s a party that stands up for Christian values on life issues but is also war mongering, pro-gun, pro death penalty and supports oppression of the poor, none of which are Christian ideals either.
Then again at least there’s a choice of party in the USA unlike in the UK where the Labour and Conservative parties are near identical (pretty much both like the Democrats), though Conservative are slightly better on life issues and Labour are slightly better on helping the poor
Click to expand...
There is a chance that this year we will be forced to make the same decision you have to make-picking between two pro-abortion canidates. This Catholic will vote for neither if that occurs.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Being an American, I know that neither party is quite as abovedescribed, but am cognizant of the fact that one party is totally under the control of the abortion lobby, while the other isn’t.
Click to expand...
The Democrats, at least on a national level, exclude those who don’t follow the official party line on abortion. Hence, you see many “pro-life” Democrats changing when they get to that level (Gore, Jackson, Kucinich, etc.) Many Republicans voice their support for a life agenda. I feared that Guiliani, who is socially liberal and economically conservative (the exact opposite of the USCCB/NCCB) would get the Rebulican nomination, but his chances have been diminishing.Unfortunately, abortion has kept rolling along to the tune of a million plus per year, no matter who is in office. And with every additional million in the books, it becomes that much more difficult to change. We now have a couple of generations accustomed to having their “backup plan” to sex-without-a-condom.
 
estesbob said:
Not all issues carry the same weight.
Click to expand...
This is the premise of the Voter’s Guide for Serious Catholics. The five non-negotiable issues (six, in my addendum) are of equal value.

There is room for argument that not all of the criteria are of equal importance. Should “gay marriage” be as important as “abortion”? Catholic Answers’ Voter’s Guide says yes. (Violation of even one of these standards excludes the candidate from consideration for office.) But many people would disagree with this.
I left the Demorat party when they decided that votes were more important than protectng the lives of the most vulnerable of all. If one is not only not willing to protect our children but also beleives taxpayers should pay to do the killing how could one ever entrust them in a postiion of leadership?
Click to expand...
Agreed. This is a huge problem.

But why can’t there be truly Catholic democrats? In theory, there should be – the original democratic party’s ideals were very much aligned with the Catholic theory of social justice. The problem is that the democratic party (as well as others) has been perverted by atheistic/secularist agenda.

That is why I wish it were easier for independent (non-partisan) candidates to run.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top