Pope warns Catholic politicians who back abortion

[vern_humphrey]

The Democrat party used to be the Party of the Catholics. When they started their slide into deviancy in the late 60s the Bishops were loathe to criticize those they had voted for and become friends with. Roe V Wade would have been stillborn if the Bishops had declared any Catholic politican supporting abortion would be excomunicated.

If His Holiness were to ask my advice, I would tell him, “If the sheep are straying, you must hold the shepards responsible – and in future, send us better men to hold that job.”

 

[estesbob]

Is it your position that filling legislatures with pro-abortion politicians who call themselves “Catholic” is a better tactic?

As I have often noted the mental mastrubation required to jusitfy voting for pro-abortion politicans while claiming to be pro-life is a terrible thing to behold.

 

[mary_bobo]

Since the election is so far out, I was hoping we could postpone all the reasons not to follow the leadership of the Pope. We don’t even have the two nominees yet. We will not know who is for what until that time. Is it not boring to keep rehashing the same old same old that we had last election? Come up with some better reasoning to qualify your decision to back a candidate that the Pope (speaking for Mother Church) has said is not acceptable if and when that comes to pass.

 

[dmelosi]

Since the election is so far out, I was hoping we could postpone all the reasons not to follow the leadership of the Pope. We don’t even have the two nominees yet. We will not know who is for what until that time. Is it not boring to keep rehashing the same old same old that we had last election? Come up with some better reasoning to qualify your decision to back a candidate that the Pope (speaking for Mother Church) has said is not acceptable if and when that comes to pass.

Huh?

 

[Eireann]

They get away with it because Catholics who claim to be against abortion vote for them.

We can hide from our fellow man, but Jesus knows who we vote for.

 

[GreenJeans]

I’m not sure if it’s your intent, but you’re basically using the bigoted histrionic lines that have been used against Catholics. “Following orders from the Pope” is such an exaggeration and a distortion, and yet you seem to be intimating that that’s precisely what would happen.

In terms of the ideas you seem to be proposing, it simply sounds like an expedient excuse for lack of integrity. I’m not seeing how that constitutes a good leader.

That is my intent. Those bigoted and hackneyed lines were very effective against Catholics when there was no indication they were doing Rome’s bidding. It was unjust, untrue, and a slander.

However, let’s examine the charge of “taking orders from the pope” in the current context. First the pope tells politicians to vote against abortion, then a Catholic legislator changes his stance and votes against abortion, then his opponent in the next election says he is “taking orders fom the pope.”

Adding to that, we have many Catholics opining that the Catholic politician should be doing exactly that. He should be following the pope.

This sets up a far more rational basis for the charge than existed in the bigoted past. In the past it was not true. In the present it can probably be shown to be true in the scenario being discussed.

I suggest it is sufficient to get rid of many Catholic politicians who follow this path.

And integrity? That’s hardly necessary to win an election.

 

[dmelosi]

The pope is simply saying that if you promote abortion you should be excommunicated.

 

[GreenJeans]

He is an anit-Catholic, you should keep that in mind when you respond to him.

What would be the political analysis of someone who is pro-Catholic? Would they see the very real potential of an opponent using the situation to his advantage? I suggest faithful Catholics are very capable of this.

 

[Tom317]

That is my intent. Those bigoted and hackneyed lines were very effective against Catholics when there was no indication they were doing Rome’s bidding. It was unjust, untrue, and a slander.

However, let’s examine the charge of “taking orders from the pope” in the current context. First the pope tells politicians to vote against abortion, then a Catholic legislator changes his stance and votes against abortion, then his opponent in the next election says he is “taking orders fom the pope.”

Adding to that, we have many Catholics opining that the Catholic politician should be doing exactly that. He should be following the pope.

This sets up a far more rational basis for the charge than existed in the bigoted past. In the past it was not true. In the present it can probably be shown to be true in the scenario being discussed.

I suggest it is sufficient to get rid of many Catholic politicians who follow this path.

And integrity? That’s hardly necessary to win an election.

Those people are not Catholic and will simply continue to not be Catholic…the Pope’s statement will mean nothing to them because they are NOT Catholic. They need to be formally excommunicated and refused communion and then the Church moves on without them…simple.

It is false to say that there will be less Catholics as legislators because the people we are talking about are NOT Catholic anyway.

 

[vern_humphrey]

That is my intent. Those bigoted and hackneyed lines were very effective against Catholics when there was no indication they were doing Rome’s bidding. It was unjust, untrue, and a slander.

However, let’s examine the charge of “taking orders from the pope” in the current context. First the pope tells politicians to vote against abortion, then a Catholic legislator changes his stance and votes against abortion, then his opponent in the next election says he is “taking orders fom the pope.”

So what? People who are bigoted against Catholics are now using the pro-abortion stance of so-called Catholic politicians against us.

Adding to that, we have many Catholics opining that the Catholic politician should be doing exactly that. He should be following the pope.

Yes – Catholics should follow Catholic morality. Those who deviate from it in issues like this bring great scandal on the Church and do far more harm than a host of anti-Catholic bigots.

This sets up a far more rational basis for the charge than existed in the bigoted past. In the past it was not true. In the present it can probably be shown to be true in the scenario being discussed.

Bigots will be bigots – and caving into them, abandoning Catholic morality is neither moral nor logical.

I suggest it is sufficient to get rid of many Catholic politicians who follow this path.

And integrity? That’s hardly necessary to win an election.

Which is a lick on the voters.

 

[mommyof4]

I do not know how anyone can call themselves a Catholic and support Abortion at the same time. I am really for the excommunicating the politicians for supporting abortion and abortion rights, I just don’t see how they convinced themselves

They love power more than what is “right.”

 

[Tom317]

What would be the political analysis of someone who is pro-Catholic? Would they see the very real potential of an opponent using the situation to his advantage? I suggest faithful Catholics are very capable of this.

It is not important. Catholics (true Catholics) must follow their conscience, which in turn MUST be fully formed in the Catholic faith. No politician needs to say they are listening to the Pope, yet they must follow their Catholic conscience. In the end, it would be great for many Catholics to be in legislative positiobs, yet that is not what is happening today, we have many false Catholics in those spots and it is creating great scandal among the Catholic faithful.

God honors those who honor Him!

 

[GreenJeans]

If you follow that logic, then all Catholic politicians should vigorously push for more abotions – just to prove they aren’t controlled by the eeeeevil Catholic Church.

When I ran for Congress in '04 I found a lot of people who were neither Catholic nor pro-abortion.

My position on abortion is based on the concept of Human Rights. All living human beings have a right to live. If some of us don’t have that right, none of us have it. If society or the government decides when we get that right, it isn’t a right at all, but a mere privilige that society or the government can revoke or refuse.

Well, it appears a good number of Catholic politicians are doing just that - pushing for more abortions. It’s probably hard to get more, but they oppose any curbs. Catholic politicians have been in the forefront of the defense of abortion. Kennedy, Pelosi…

 

[Tom317]

Well, it appears a good number of Catholic politicians are doing just that - pushing for more abortions. It’s probably hard to get more, but they oppose any curbs. Catholic politicians have been in the forefront of the defense of abortion. Kennedy, Pelosi…

They are not Catholics! They use the Catholic label in order to get votes. If true Catholics ever catch-up to their lying ways, they will no longer get the votes to win future elections.

 

[GreenJeans]

Is it your position that filling legislatures with pro-abortion politicians who call themselves “Catholic” is a better tactic?

I haven’t taken that position. I am simply looking at the prospects for Catholic politicians who vote in accord with the public directives of the pope.

It doesn’t appear targeting politicians is an effective way to achieve the elimination of abortion. If the population wants it, it will have the politicians that will give it.

 

[Tom317]

The entire situation simply shows us the grat divide today. Something like 70% of people who claim to be Catholic, are not Catholic, they do not even believe fundamental truths of the faith.

Those people want birth control, abortion, living together, etc…which means this is a matter of slowly taking the faith back from those who have stolen it and desire to build it into something perverse and evil.

 

[GreenJeans]

It wouldn’t be true. Following our faith doesn’t mean “caring more for the pope than constituents.”

What disturbs me though is that you are implying Catholics should vote contrary to their conscience in order not to look like they care more for the pope and to get elected!

You don’t have a problem with that? You prefer Catholics to go against their conscience?

You don’t fight anti-Catholic bigotry by becoming non-Catholic.

I am looking at this from the perspective of the voters and the opposition, not from the personal perspective of the Catholic politician.

I don’t really care what they do. Their conscience is their own business. However, I do propose that if they do change position after the pope tells them to, it will be perceived they are following the pope’s orders, and that will lead to defeat at the polls.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I haven’t taken that position. I am simply looking at the prospects for Catholic politicians who vote in accord with the public directives of the pope.

Gee – maybe Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry, Obey, et all will have to get** real** jobs.

It doesn’t appear targeting politicians is an effective way to achieve the elimination of abortion. If he population wants it, it will have the politicians that will give it.

Nor does it appear than having ostensibly Catholic politicians support abortion seem to be an effective way to eliminate that horrible crime.

 

[GreenJeans]

Those people are not Catholic and will simply continue to not be Catholic…the Pope’s statement will mean nothing to them because they are NOT Catholic. They need to be formally excommunicated and refused communion and then the Church moves on without them…simple.

It is false to say that there will be less Catholics as legislators because the people we are talking about are NOT Catholic anyway.

OK. There will be fewer self-identified Catholic legislators.

 

[Tom317]

OK. There will be fewer self-identified Catholic legislators.

That’s fine, they are not Catholic anyway.