Politically Trapped

[4givemeasinner]

What am I politically?

On most economic issues I seem to be to the left. The Democrats are more in tune than Republicans to social justice issues, issues that we are directly commanded by Christ in the gospels to pay heed too (care the poor, etc.)

However, on issues like abortion, Republicans champion the catholic view. But with their cutthroat, “only the strong survive” economic policies, I feel alienated.

I want to be able to vote with a clear conscience.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Many Catholics disagree with me on this, just FYI – nobody has to come in here and flame me; they can just explain what they think is important and let the seeds grow together and let the harvester decide which shall prevail.

I think as citizens we should vote, and vote our Christian conscience to the best we can, taking all things into consideration. I was elected to a party position endorsed by conservative, pro-life Republicans (KRA – the Kansas Republican Assembly) and rubbed elbows with them. There were a couple gems, but almost everybody had an agenda, and was rabid about it. Honestly, though, the pro-lifers were very adamant and dedicated and “non-negotiating” like they are “supposed” to be, but in so being they bungled the only chance we had – for years to come and even now – to actually save late-term elective abortions from the infamous Dr. Tiller, whose politics were more cunning than the Republicans all put together. Finally a kook shot him in the head and that did what pro-lifers failed to do for decades – save babies from Tiller.

I say this not to tell you to vote pro-choice. Far from it. I’m just saying that voting for the most adamant pro-lifers on the ballot does not necessarily result in saving babies.

Not only that, but some of those guys were so sleazy you didn’t even want them in office pro-life or not. I voted for liberal Dan Glickman because I met the pathetic excuse for a human being, Roger Grund, who was running against him, at an anti-tax protest. OMG this person was despicable, and he even turned against the rest of us at the rally by saying he would handle the media, then giving them a different place to show up where he met with some of his goons. He could not be trusted to feel pain if I kicked him in the face. There are times you really have to vote, “non of the above.” And as bad as the Obamaman is, I couldn’t vote for Mint Romley who was a total jerk, who had constant foot-in-mouth disease. I could see him angering foreign powers by saying stupid things, and plus I thought he was a self-righteous buffoon. I think hes socially so clueless that he could actually invite attacks against our people all over the world. So who is worth voting for?

I’m in the red state Kansas, so our votes went to Romney no matter what, but I did have my silent protest by voting for Chuck Norris in 2012. I promise you, neither party has a corner on the evil market, and only a very small percentage of politicians I’ve met are really the kinds of people you want in leadership positions. Note that the ones who want to control other people the most are the ones who are going to.

With that out of the way, I think that the Church needs to promote the interior spiritual journey, and not be so loud and shrill about politics. Yes, tell us the issues, but then get back to items of faith, so we can all cleanse the planks out of our own eyes so we can go out into the world with greater power. Our faith is in Jesus, not in elected leaders. We know from Jesus’s prophecy that the corruption will increase; why let that get us down? Jesus’s peace He gave us is stronger than any political party, so if we get all worked up and emotional about who wins an election, then we are letting worldly problems prevent us from accepting the gift of peace from Jesus. I hear Christians whining and moaning all the time because of what politicians are doing, and going around being miserable because the world is going to hell. Hello? Isn’t this what our Savior said would happen? Sure we do what we can to slow it down, but if it even ruins one day than we have let the enemy win over Jesus in our hearts for that day. I mean really, can you just imagine what Jesus would tell His followers if they were so caught up in politics that the next news story determined their mood?

In case you can’t tell, I could write a great deal more, but I’ll leave this as my first shot.

Thank you for a great thread idea.

Alan

 

[CJECulver]

I´ll agree with most of what Alan said. Every time an election cycle rolls around, I find myself in a quandary that hounds me right into the voting booth. Again this year I woke up on election day still undecided. Though both candidates made me extremely uncomfortable, I finally chose Romney because I felt that of the damage both men would do to this country, Obama´s – pro-abortion, pro-SSM, HHS mandates – would have further-reaching and longer-lasting consequences.

Conversely from Alan, however, I voted in a blue state; so my Romney vote counted no more than his Obama vote.

There´s the old axiom that anyone who wants to be a leader is ipso facto unqualified for leadership. In politics the desire for leadership is all too rarely about service; itś almost always about power. And the very few who do enter politics out of a sense of service are all too quickly corrupted by the system.

My own personal solution to my perennial ethical dilemma is to vote for the losing candidate. That way I can at least console my aching conscience by saying, ¨Hey, I didn´t vote for him!¨

When it comes to politics, I´ll vote for anyone but a politician.

 

[Boy_Wonder]

We do God and ourselves a HUGE disservice if we try to align any political party or platform with our beliefs. The faith always suffers from such forced unions.

How many times did Jesus say that his kingdom is not of this world? In our civic lives we must always strive to live our faith. But we must also be aware that the choices any political system presents to us are never a perfect match with the faith or morals. Never.

Don’t sweat it. Live the faith honestly and as fully as you can - the rest will fall into place.

 

[Trigonometric]

To the original poster: I always vote pro-life, but I think it is important to remember (as you do) that Catholics don’t always endorse certain conservative fiscal policies, and we should listen to the Church first on these matters.

I voted for liberal Dan Glickman because I met the pathetic excuse for a human being, Roger Grund, who was running against him, at an anti-tax protest. OMG this person was despicable, and he even turned against the rest of us at the rally by saying he would handle the media, then giving them a different place to show up where he met with some of his goons

You’re seriously arguing that acting rude at a protest is worse than killing innocent children via abortion?

 

[PaulfromIowa]

Christianity is above political parties. Christians are commanded to put their beliefs to work in all aspects of their lives. Both political parties in the US have many non-Christian and anti-Christian people in leadership. That being said, the Democrat party has become violently anti-life and anti-Christian in recent years. The only way a Christian could justify involvement in such a party would be in open opposition to its’ current leadership.

No offense, but I think that your economic analysis is simplistic at best. Have state socialist policies really helped the poor, or have they created millions more poor? Is a free market economy a "cutthroat, “only the strong survive” economy, as you say; or does it provide much needed new jobs?

 

[Francoist]

As Catholics we can never vote for politicians who support abortion and gay marriage, unless those are the only candidates. We must vote pro-life.

This means that we cannot ever vote Democrat, because their party platform includes abortion. Every vote for a Democrat advances their agenda of the destruction of innocent babies.

However, you are right to criticize the Republicans. While individual Republicans may be very good (there are quite a few good ones in Texas), the fact is that their party does not completely represent the Catholic point of view.

We Catholics definitely need a party of our own in the United States. It should represent a third position between capitalism (which despite its association with the Republicans is essentially liberal in character) and socialism (which despite paying jejune lip service to “social justice” is really a Satanic movement meant to destroy the Church and the family). We need an authentically Rightist party that will countenance neither the destruction of the unborn nor the oppression of the poor.

 

[TexCatholic4JMJ]

What am I politically?

On most economic issues I seem to be to the left. The Democrats are more in tune than Republicans to social justice issues, issues that we are directly commanded by Christ in the gospels to pay heed too (care the poor, etc.)

However, on issues like abortion, Republicans champion the catholic view. But with their cutthroat, “only the strong survive” economic policies, I feel alienated.

I want to be able to vote with a clear conscience.

I’m going to give you a short answer because I am busy getting ready to go out of town.
However, I find that there is a real misconception of what it means to “be on the left” of
economic issues. I find the republicans more in line with subsidiarity. Helping the poor
disadvantaged, etc at the local/state level and helping them to find jobs, etc to be truly
what our faith tells us. NOT creating more poor so that the politicians can keep their job.
That’s in a nutshell. Helping at pregnancy centers, soup kitchens, thrift stores is not just
for the democrats (actually see more republicans at those places). So it is having different
ways of helping that is the crux. As a republican (could never be a democrat with their
support of non-negotiable issues, like pro death, gay marriage, embryonic stem cell
research) I work against the tide here, but hopefully some will come to see the light. In
my mind a politician who cares for the unborn, is, usually, going to care for the rest.
He’s going to respect my religious rights, children’s need to have a mother and father,
the dignity of the elderly, the rights of parents to educate their children, etc, etc. I see
that more in the republican party. Of course, there are those I would vote out if I could, but voting for a “good” democrat in this town has proven to be fruitless, they go with the
party in most of their decisions.

 

[Evania]

For the longest time I identified myself as Republican, but I no longer do so. I definitely don’t identify myself as a Democrat either. I noticed that each side criticizes the other on issues, but then when their party does the same exact thing, there’s always an excuse how it’s suddenly okay. I’m sick of the finger pointing. I wish our country could break out of the two party mold, because all it does is divide America. I guess I consider myself conservative, and vote pro-life no matter what.

 

[RubyT]

What am I politically?

On most economic issues I seem to be to the left. The Democrats are more in tune than Republicans to social justice issues, issues that we are directly commanded by Christ in the gospels to pay heed too (care the poor, etc.)

However, on issues like abortion, Republicans champion the catholic view. But with their cutthroat, “only the strong survive” economic policies, I feel alienated.

I want to be able to vote with a clear conscience.

I completely disagree. Please explain why you think that the Dems are more apathetic to the needy? Is it because you think they want to use tax dollars in general for charity? IMHO: More tax dollars get lost along the way through mandated charity than direct donations by individuals.
How much government money goes to planned parenthood? How much to foreign countries…this is not REAL charity. Real charity would have concern for the unborn. Real charity solves problems and doesn’t just make you “feel good”. Real charity does not just throw money at an issue but rather it helps to solve the issue at the root cause.

The democrats mandate charity and the Republicans chose the charity of their choice. But one cannot claim that they have less apathy for the needy. How so?
I would opt for personal choice of where my money goes over a mandated help the poor policy. Would we rather let the government decide where the money goes? It sure isn’t making it to the poor. It may make it to, a study about the poor.

It is my firm belief that if you feed a man a fish, then his hand will be out the rest of his life looking for a free fish. But if you teach a man to fish he will feed his family on his own. That is the Republican way of dealing with poverty…and you prefer the handouts that the Dems take from the working to give to the many… some needy and some not so much.

{But with their cutthroat, “only the strong survive” economic policies, I feel alienated.}
Please clarify…aren’t you reducing a very complicated issue into plain rhetoric here?The Dems have no control over spending. How is that preferable?

I think that liberalism promotes social imbalance and injustice…do you disagree?

Don’t teach a man to have his hand out…teach him a work ethic. Only the truly needy should be getting handouts from the government.

No ill will meant but rather just a different perspective for you to mull over.

Bless you brother.

 

[RubyT]

I’m going to give you a short answer because I am busy getting ready to go out of town.
However, I find that there is a real misconception of what it means to “be on the left” of
economic issues. I find the republicans more in line with subsidiarity. Helping the poor
disadvantaged, etc at the local/state level and helping them to find jobs, etc to be truly
what our faith tells us. NOT creating more poor so that the politicians can keep their job.
That’s in a nutshell. Helping at pregnancy centers, soup kitchens, thrift stores is not just
for the democrats (actually see more republicans at those places). So it is having different
ways of helping that is the crux. As a republican (could never be a democrat with their
support of non-negotiable issues, like pro death, gay marriage, embryonic stem cell
research) I work against the tide here, but hopefully some will come to see the light. In
my mind a politician who cares for the unborn, is, usually, going to care for the rest.
He’s going to respect my religious rights, children’s need to have a mother and father,
the dignity of the elderly, the rights of parents to educate their children, etc, etc. I see
that more in the republican party. Of course, there are those I would vote out if I could, but voting for a “good” democrat in this town has proven to be fruitless, they go with the
party in most of their decisions.

 

[4givemeasinner]

Christianity is above political parties. Christians are commanded to put their beliefs to work in all aspects of their lives. Both political parties in the US have many non-Christian and anti-Christian people in leadership. That being said, the Democrat party has become violently anti-life and anti-Christian in recent years. The only way a Christian could justify involvement in such a party would be in open opposition to its’ current leadership.

No offense, but I think that your economic analysis is simplistic at best. Have state socialist policies really helped the poor, or have they created millions more poor? Is a free market economy a "cutthroat, “only the strong survive” economy, as you say; or does it provide much needed new jobs?

The analysis was made to briefly sum up a point. Democrats clearly put policies into place that help the less fortunate. We might be better off fiscally if Republicans would not keep blocking what are minimal tax increases on the super wealthy. Individual charity is important, but government can have a role in helping ALL parts of society.

Yet Republicans defend right to life issues.

So the general sense is catholics should act as political moderates or independents?

 

[Wampa]

OP, you’re not alone. I feel largely the same way. Since we have, IMO, a broken and completely dysfunctional two-party system anyway, I have no problem voting for a third party candidate with a clear conscience. It’s an option you can consider.

I spend every election deciding between voting for a third party candidate and actually feeling good about my decision or holding my nose and voting for the Republican. I won’t vote for a pro-choice candidate (I’d be open to a pro-life Democrat, but there will never be any on my ballot, since I’m in a metro area and a liberal leaning state.)

 

[Auntie_A]

To follow Jesus Christ is to be a most radical conservative or a most conservative radical; in other words there is no worldly political group for a Christian.

HOWEVER, what is the name of that Catholic congressman from New Orleans who voted his conscience? Is it Cao? (See the documentary “Mr Cao goes to Washington”.) He was a Jesuit-trained lawyer who had a moral compass. He answered to no special interest except that of God in his conscience. They did not send him back for a second term…

 

[CJECulver]

the Democrat party has become violently anti-life

Only if you define “anti-life” as simply “pro-abortion”. Those of us who are pro-gun control and anti-capital punishment (both of which are also pro-life issues) get a much warmer welcome from Democrats.

 

[aspirant]

What am I politically? … I feel alienated. I want to be able to vote with a clear conscience.

You’re not alone. A lot of us feel what you feel. Even the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ bulletin insert acknowledged this: “In today’s environment, Catholics may feel politically disenfranchised, sensing that no party and few candidates fully share our comprehensive commitment to human life and dignity.” (The USCCB’s materials are excellent, but they won’t necessarily make voting any easier.)

For me, voting in the U.S. presidential election is especially difficult because I do not want to vote in favor of a candidate who endorses or supports intrinsically evil acts. Unfortunately, the Republican & Democratic nominees, and most of the third party nominees, have all done this in recent elections. Some Catholics choose one of these in spite of their objections to the intrinsic evils. Some Catholics will only vote for a candidate who does not support any intrinsic evils, which requires going to a small party candidate and means the probability of election is low. Some Catholics vote only in races in which there is an electable candidate who supports no intrinsic evils (e.g. skipping the presidential nominees and looking to other offices). There is no easy solution.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Not only that, but some of those guys were so sleazy you didn’t even want them in office pro-life or not. I voted for liberal Dan Glickman because I met the pathetic excuse for a human being, Roger Grund, who was running against him, at an anti-tax protest. OMG this person was despicable, and he even turned against the rest of us at the rally by saying he would handle the media, then giving them a different place to show up where he met with some of his goons. He could not be trusted to feel pain if I kicked him in the face.

You’re seriously arguing that acting rude at a protest is worse than killing innocent children via abortion?

No, I’m not. There are many who are rude. This person was untrustworthy and unpredictable (except you know anything he did was self-centered), he would say one thing to a person and a totally different thing to the next. He played his own party members against each other. In the case I mentioned, nearly all the media attention was on his own meeting, which he falsely portrayed as being related to the protest. And then after his “private” meeting with the press he had the gall to show up at the “actual” rally and spout off about how great it was going and his role in it, and lamented why there was only one radio station on one TV station there. He knew why, because he’s the one who turned them away. Of course he did get his face on the evening news, while he was at the protest, because he passed himself off as the organizer of the event when he did everything he could to undermine the event for his own gain. The guy was hardly even human as far as I could tell. Seriously I could imagine the whole party falling apart at this guy’s evil hands. Roger Grund, rest in peace – and thank you for not running for any more offices.

No, it wasn’t about someone being rude; it takes more than that to get me to vote for a pro-choice candidate.

Alan

 

[J_Peterson]

OP, you’re not alone. I feel largely the same way. Since we have, IMO, a broken and completely dysfunctional two-party system anyway, I have no problem voting for a third party candidate with a clear conscience. It’s an option you can consider.

I spend every election deciding between voting for a third party candidate and actually feeling good about my decision or holding my nose and voting for the Republican. I won’t vote for a pro-choice candidate (I’d be open to a pro-life Democrat, but there will never be any on my ballot, since I’m in a metro area and a liberal leaning state.)

My problem with 3rd parties is they are usually some sort of libertarian or socialist/communist types. They are worse than the 2 parties in my opinion. I may just go the anarchist route and vote for nobody. Need to think a bit more about it.

 

[Francoist]

Only if you define “anti-life” as simply “pro-abortion”. Those of us who are pro-gun control and anti-capital punishment (both of which are also pro-life issues) get a much warmer welcome from Democrats.

The Catholic Church teaches that you have a right to defend yourself and your family and has never been against private ownership of weapons. The Catholic Church teaches that the death penalty is allowable.

On the contrary, abortion is never allowable under any circumstances.

To try to equate these issues is itself a moral evil.

 

[Evania]

The Catholic Church teaches that you have a right to defend yourself and your family and has never been against private ownership of weapons. The Catholic Church teaches that the death penalty is allowable.

On the contrary, abortion is never allowable under any circumstances.

To try to equate these issues is itself a moral evil.

I agree. Just because you are for the Second Ammendment doesn’t mean you are anti-life. If an armed criminal ( who doesn’t obey existing gun laws) breaks into your house, and the cops are 10 minutes away…You should have a right to defend your family. Most people who own guns pray that they won’t ever have to use it. How is that comparable to abortion?