E
elts1956
Guest
How many times to the Bishops have to say it for you to read it?
- Status
E
elts1956
Guest
L
Luis_Santiago
Guest
As Catholics, it would be wrong to endorse abortion through the way we vote. However, it would not be wrong to vote for a candidate in spite of being pro-choice, if other considerations are given greater priority. This is what the USCCB’s position has consistently been. You guys keep asking each other to post links, so here’s one for you:
usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/FCStatement.pdf
Because no presidential candidate has the power to change the legality of abortion, it could be considered prudent to vote based primarily on other considerations.
Barack Obama has actually taken steps to add language to the Democratic party platform committing to reducing the number of abortions. He has said that he would sign a partial-birth abortion ban, provided it contained provisions for if the life of the mother was in danger. Any such bans he has voted against, have not had those provisions. So even though the man’s pro-choice he’s still been able to make progress, albeit slowly. But he’s hardly the baby-butcher some people have been making him out to be.
usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/FCStatement.pdf
Because no presidential candidate has the power to change the legality of abortion, it could be considered prudent to vote based primarily on other considerations.
Barack Obama has actually taken steps to add language to the Democratic party platform committing to reducing the number of abortions. He has said that he would sign a partial-birth abortion ban, provided it contained provisions for if the life of the mother was in danger. Any such bans he has voted against, have not had those provisions. So even though the man’s pro-choice he’s still been able to make progress, albeit slowly. But he’s hardly the baby-butcher some people have been making him out to be.
B
buffalo
Guest
Some tough questions - watch this
T
Trader
Guest
I also don’t think that Notre Dame supports unlimited abortion, as President Obama does. Father Jenkins did issue a pretty weak statement that their action did not show agreement with the President Obama’s position. It left out the part about what the university does believe.
It is also true that the USCCB does not have judicial authority in the Church. The USCCB exists to help bishops develop policy for their individual dioceses. The individual bishop exercises authority in his diocese and no bishop except the pope can overrule another bishop.
It is a fact that in issuing the invitation and awarding and honorary degree, Notre Dame defied the clear recommendation of the US Bishop’s Conference and the clear will of the local bishop, John Michael D’Arcy. It is also clear that this action is a source of scandal for many and the Notre Dame Board of Trustees had to know that.
T
Trader
Guest
T
Trader
Guest
This is at least partly wrong on the facts. In only a few weeks President Obama has already used his executive authority to authorize the spending of US foreign aid to promote abortion abroad, and to allow federal funding of stem cell research that destroys individual human beings. Very little in private funding is available for embryonic stem cell research because it does not work. Private money is backing adult stem cell research which is actually improving the lives of thousands and does not have moral problems.
The President also has the authority to make lifetime appointments of federal judges with the advice and consent of the senate. It was federal judges stretching the US Constitution into an unrecognizable document that got us Roe v Wade. President Obama’s radical pro-abortion statements suggest that he would appoint many pro-abortion judges.
L
Luis_Santiago
Guest
And you miss the point. A practicing Catholic may not vote with the intent to advance grave intrinsic evil, but he or she may use discretion when choosing between candidates that both support things that are good and evil to various degrees.
Hmm, interesting priorities. Just curious, when John Paul II spoke out against the US going to war in Iraq, whose side were you on? What’s your opinion on capital punishment? Both would be considered intrinsic evils.
Not to promote abortion, to fund NGOs that will provide abortion counseling. For instance, if a poor 9-year-old girl comes with her mother to one of these NGOs who is pregnant due to being raped, the workers would be allowed to give abortion as an option. For most NGOs who lost funding under the Mexico City policy, abortion counseling was a tiny fraction of what they did. I’m not saying abortion is ok, just that the lives saved by these groups is probably actually greater than the number of abortions.
As for stem cells, these have all come from fertility clinics and would have been thrown out anyway, stem cell research or not. I know the Church is opposed to embryonic stem cell research, but if they would be thrown away anyway, I’m not sure why it’s so bad. Also, adult stem cell research was made possible through embryonic stem cell research.
In 1992, a majority of the supreme court was Republican-appointed, but they still upheld Roe vs. Wade in Planned Parenthood vs. Casey. Consistently electing Republicans in order to make abortion illegal is an exercise in futility, and in my opinion that will only get us endless wars and a government that ignores the poor in favor of the rich, while abortion meanwhile is still legal.
E
elts1956
Guest
While not specifically talking about the uproar at NDU In 2004 the USCCB had the following to say. To read the full statement, go to the following link.
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/jun/04062102.html
U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference Says Pro-Abortion Politicians Should be Shunned
Warns lawmakers against “cooperating in evil and in sinning against the common good”
WASHINGTON, June 21, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The United States of Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has adopted a statement, “Catholics in Political Life,” by a vote of 183-6, which says pro-abortion politicians should not be honored by Catholic community and Catholic institutions. “They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions,” says the statement. On the question of withholding Communion from pro-abortion politicians, the document leaves the final decision to local bishops.
The statement came after the Task Force on Catholic Bishops and Catholic Politicians made an extensive interim report at the USCCB’s special assembly,
held in Denver, June 14-19, 2004
.[usccb.org/bishops/catholics(name removed by moderator)oliticallife.shtml](http://www.usccb.org/bishops/catholics(name removed by moderator)oliticallife.shtml)
We speak as bishops, as teachers of the Catholic faith and of the moral law. We have the duty to teach about human life and dignity, marriage and family, war and peace, the needs of the poor and the demands of justice. Today we continue our efforts to teach on a uniquely important matter that has recently been a source of concern for Catholics and others.
The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.
Catholics in Political Life was developed by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Task Force on Catholic Bishops and Catholic Politicians in collaboration with Francis Cardinal George, OMI, Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, OFMCap, and Bishop Donald W. Wuerl. It was approved for publication by the full body of bishops at their June 2004 General Meeting and has been authorized for publication by the undersigned.
Msgr. William P. Fay
General Secretary, USCCB
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops | 3211 4th Street, N.E., Washington DC 20017-1194 | (202) 541-3000 © USCCB.
I would think this statement would cover all future activities and choices of any Catholic Institution.
T
Trader
Guest
First, voting with the intent to advance grave intrinsic evil has nothing to do with being
Catholic, practicing or not. It is a matter of natural law and applies to all people at all times.
Second, discretion to sort out the good and bad parts of candidates is necessary, but not unlimited. There are no perfect candidates. The last perfect person was crucified with only a few dozen supporters after a three year campaign. There has to be a heirarchy of values and even one instance of grave evil is not balanced by a score of minor faults. It is possible to be mistaken about what constitues grave evil, but it is not permissible to choose grave evil unless there is a proportional reason.
T
Trader
Guest
Neither war nor capital punishment are intrinsic evils. Both are permissible and even necessary in some circumstances. Both are based on the natural law right of self-defense posessed by both individuals and states. I would agree that the circumstances that justify either war or capital punishment are rare.
An intrinsic evil is by definition always wrong in every circumstance. Abortion is intrinsically evil. Capital punishment for the innocent is would be too. I don’t know of any candidate who supports the death penalty for a person found not guilty at trial.
L
Luis_Santiago
Guest
I see. You are a Republican first and a Catholic second. That’s all I needed to know.
M
magdelaine
Guest
Can’t argue against that with Church teaching, so you resort to ad hominem. Nice.
L
Luis_Santiago
Guest
Who can’t argue against what? That the Pope denounced the Iraq war? That capital punishment IS an intrinsic evil in the eyes of the Church? That the American Republican party goes against virtually everything Jesus ever said or did?
I can’t argue with that because it’s clear where his loyalties lie, and it’s not with Christ or the Catholic Church.
And before anyone accuses me of the reverse, I’m against abortion and gay marriage, I just think that first, it is impossible to make abortion illegal in the US through voting and second, that gay marriage is hardly among the biggest problems facing the world today.
B
bbarrick8383
Guest
Whoa, hey there…the american “Republican” party is not much less socialist than the american Democrat party. They are both crooked as all get out. Right now there is no difference in the two other than the name.
If you mean the values the Republican party use to hold then I’d like to understand better how they go against everything Jesus said or did.
J
jean8
Guest
That’s a good question.
I’m sure isn’t for his pro-abortion views.
And his twenty year association with Jeremiah Wright.
jean
D
diggerdomer
Guest
This is what he’s being honored for: president.nd.edu/events-and-communications/communications/fr-jenkins-statement-on-2009-commencement-speakerThat’s a good question.
I’m sure isn’t for his pro-abortion views.
And his twenty year association with Jeremiah Wright.
jean
E
elts1956
Guest
Dear Luis, you have it backwards. He is a Catholic first. I don’t know his political leanings and quite frankly don’t care. We are talking morals here, not politics.
How so many Catholics could have screwed up on the interpretation of Church Doctrine regarding Intrinsic Evils is a puzzle to me. I think one problem is that so many Bishops have made Social Justice (ie the war, poverty, environment economy ) the keystones of the Catholic Faith, they forgot the real catechesis of the Church is there is ALWAYS an ABSOLUTE evil just as there is ALWAYS an ABSOLUTE TRUTH. These are written in something more powerful than concrete, God’s law. Purdential judgement may be used to discern the good and bad of those issues I have place in parentheses, BUT NOT SO INTRINSIC EVILS AND ABSOLUTE TRUTHS… To many Catholics there is no longer a moral compass in existence on which to weigh judgements of right and wrong. We need to get back to basics and level out on the “freedoms” of the sixties and seventies. That is where everyone began to diverge from the basic truths of the Church and what it teaches and believes.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
Both morals and politics are being discussed here.
Some here apparently reject Obama despite what the Church teaches. That’s clearly politics…no?
I support Obama in general while adamantly opposing certain views he has. Would you call that politics? Morals?
I don’t know how many or which Catholics have, as you claim, “screwed up” on the interpretation of Church teaching regarding intrinsic evils. I know that Church teaching on intrinsic evil (and politics, and morality) did not require U.S. Catholics in the 2008 presidential elections to vote either for or against any particular candidate or party.
I expect some here will disagree with that last sentence, which is fine. As long as they recognize that’s their opinion and not Catholic Church teaching.
E
elts1956
Guest
:banghead: It IS Church teaching.
Digger, you are still confused on what the Church teaches. The Bishops DID NOT say a Catholic can vote for a pro abortion candidate using their own judgement as to what issues were comparable to the Intrinsic Evil of abortion, euthanasia, cloning, homosexual marriage. There were NONE in THIS election. To get it straight, you and others are going to have to let go of your liberal mindset and see the truth for what it is.
I don’t know how else to explain it to you.
- Status