Pro life but liberal on social, justice issues?

[Matthew_25]

Hi,

I am a 52-year old “protestant.” I know some (most?) of you may not look upon me as a Christian brother, but I have great respect and admiration for Catholicism in many, many areas. One of those is in the “life isssues.”

Now, this is the first time I have posted here, so please forgive me because I am probably going to ask a question that has been discussed many times here in the past.

I am strongly pro-life and pro-sanctity of life (the Terri Schiavo situation literally broke my heart). I believe that America is embracing a culture of death.

On the other hand, I am a social liberal (harkening back to John and Robert Kennedy, Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson) and believe that conservative philosophy in this area is not consistent with Our Lord’s teachings to care for the poor, afflicted, suffering, sick, etc.

So, every election, I am torn. Do I vote for the liberal (usually Democrat) who is committed to helping the poor and afflicted more than his or her opponen - but who is “pro choice”? Or, do I vote for the conservative who claims the Pro Life position but who is so often indifferent to the plight of the poor and afflicted?

I would like to hear anyone’s thoughts on this, particularly anyone who has felt “torn” in these areas.
Blessings to all!

 

[Sgt_Sweaters]

Vote Constitutionalist party. You keep your conscience clean, and you have the consolation that you did vote. Cheers.

 

[Guar_Fan]

Matthew 25:

Hi,
I am a 52-year old “protestant.” I know some (most?) of you may not look upon me as a Christian brother

I am saddened to read that you feel this way. But I guess I can understand that the more militant amongst us may send a signal which is un-fraternal.

I am strongly pro-life and pro-sanctity of life (the Terri Schiavo situation literally broke my heart). I believe that America is embracing a culture of death.

On the other hand, I am a social liberal (harkening back to John and Robert Kennedy, Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson) and believe that conservative philosophy in this area is not consistent with Our Lord’s teachings to care for the poor, afflicted, suffering, sick, etc.

I am not one for political ideology. I really don’t care about a person’s party or proclaimed liberal/conservative leanings.

But I do agree with you that Christ wants us to care for the poor and powerless. And certainly the Catholic Church holds this position as well - traditions as basic as the Acts of Corporal Mercy bear this out.

I support the Seamless Garment perspective. Pro-Life means much more than simply anti-abortion. It means we support the development of human life and oppose policies, actions and ideas which destroy life or which hinder its development.

I believe that life doesn’t end at birth…so I am not a one issue voter. But I don’t have a handy yardstick by which I can measure candidates - I have to take each political contest separately and look at the candidates views, and their lives.

 

[puzzleannie]

Matthew 25:

Hi,

I am strongly pro-life and pro-sanctity of life (the Terri Schiavo situation literally broke my heart). I believe that America is embracing a culture of death.

On the other hand, I am a social liberal (harkening back to John and Robert Kennedy, Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson) and believe that conservative philosophy in this area is not consistent with Our Lord’s teachings to care for the poor, afflicted, suffering, sick, etc.

this is a consistent Catholic position, since the Church has a strong social justice history. you may be interested in the website
www.tcrnews2.com which is run by people who are strongly pro-life, pro-peace and justice, for instance Dorothy Day workers are regular contributors. they have a great news roundup, and great links, plus editorials and commentary on topics that touch all aspect of Catholic teaching on these issues.

As far as voting, the CA voters guide is the best help you can get anywhere for making these decisions

 

[YinYangMom]

If you usually vote Democrat check out Democrats for Life.
I’m in the same boat you’re in and as the election year draws nearer and the request for Democrat contributions keep coming anxiety increases.

I have replied to every Democrat request for contribution with the same response: Until somebody from the party writes to explain what the party plans to do to dramatically decrease the outrageous number of abortions in this country I cannot contribute another penny to the party.

Of course I haven’t heard back from any of the senators or from Howard Dean…so, that’s their problem. But I’m trying to read up on what these Democrats for Life have to say, what they’re doing, because I’d rather repair the party than abandon it. Still, the party may leave me no choice.

Pray about it, keep an eye on this DFL group and keep an eye on the independent parties, that’s the approach I’m taking.

 

[1ke]

The right to life is a social justice issue. It is the gravest of injustice. There are what are known as non-negotiable issues. The right to life is one of them.

Other social justice issues, such as how we help the poor, homeless, etc, are important but they are not in the same league as the taking of human life.

I do not vote “Democrat” or “Republican”… I vote for the person, what they stand for, who they are as a person… and in some cases the lesser evil when there is no 100% pro-life candidate.

A candidate who does not respect human life does not respect the poor, the homeless, or anyone else. They are much more dangerous in power-- Terri Schiavo is a good example of that. Those who do not respect all life will have a utilitarian ethic when these sorts of situations arise. How much of a leap is it to have this same ethic with the poor, sick, homeless?

 

[john_ennis]

I see two big aspects of the issue.

1. Agreed–while the pro-life concern is most important, other issues of charity have to be looked at. However, I haven’t seen many proposals on the liberal side that would truly *help *the poor and needy, aside from things that are typically supported by pro-life politicians as well.

The difference usually amounts to the more liberal guy proposing more money, with fewer restrictions, and no time constraints (e.g., unemployment compensation, welfare, etc.). Common sense and the experience of the past several decades show that this doesn’t help people.

1. In the end, I always come back to the truth that an aborted baby is never going to benefit from a compassionate welfare system, or a perfect system of education. All other charity is subordinate to (and in fact is derived from), a love of life.

Peace.
John

 

[Matthew_25]

Hi folks,

Man, what thoughtful and intelligent answers I have received - and from all of you!

And nobody blasted me because I stated I am protestant - how refreshing! (I quit posting on another thread a couple of months ago after it seemed like some were ready to toss me into Hades because I’m not Catholic - smile).

“I am saddened to read that you feel this way. But I guess I can understand that the more militant amongst us may send a signal which is un-fraternal.”

Yes, friend, I got that message quite often.

Maybe I’m delusional, but I really feel that we protestant and Catholics have much more in common than we disagree about. And, I am saying this from the vantage point of being an evangelical Christian.

Most important, we believe that Jesus Christ died on the Cross for us to take away our sin, that He is seated at the right hand of the Father, and that He is coming again someday. We also believe in the sanctity of all human life and in Jesus’ instruction that we care for “the least of these.”

We do have differences in certain doctrinal areas, but I’m interested in building bridges, not walls.

All of your posts here have been very encouraging to me.
Blessings to all

 

[buffalo]

Review the Catholic Voters Guide

The Biblical Basis for Voting Pro-life

 

[koda]

Guar Fan:

I am saddened to read that you feel this way. But I guess I can understand that the more militant amongst us may send a signal which is un-fraternal.

I am not one for political ideology. I really don’t care about a person’s party or proclaimed liberal/conservative leanings.

But I do agree with you that Christ wants us to care for the poor and powerless. And certainly the Catholic Church holds this position as well - traditions as basic as the Acts of Corporal Mercy bear this out.

I support the Seamless Garment perspective. Pro-Life means much more than simply anti-abortion. It means we support the development of human life and oppose policies, actions and ideas which destroy life or which hinder its development.

I believe that life doesn’t end at birth…so I am not a one issue voter. But I don’t have a handy yardstick by which I can measure candidates - I have to take each political contest separately and look at the candidates views, and their lives.

Matt25 - I’ve seen some of your posts and agree with you and with the poster quoted above. Many pro-lifers seem to have a double standard when it comes to laws regarding morality. They are all for making abortion illegal but think the government social programs are wrong because they “force people to pay into these programs via taxes”. So it’s okay for the government to interfere before birth (and save lives), but once you’re in the world the governent has no responsibility for you - so no decent housing, no decent food, no medical care - and if you die from one or a combination of these factors, well too bad. Life is life and we’ve been told by Jesus to take care of each other. A quick look at the world situation will show you that if you depend on voluntary generosity, you’re going to fall way short. Too many people who say they are good Christians would rather let people die on the street than have to pay more in taxes. Really sad.

 

[Della]

Matthew 25:

Hi,

I am a 52-year old “protestant.” I know some (most?) of you may not look upon me as a Christian brother, but I have great respect and admiration for Catholicism in many, many areas. One of those is in the “life issues.”

Welcome to the board, Matt! We’ll hold on calling in the Inquisition for now.

Now, this is the first time I have posted here, so please forgive me because I am probably going to ask a question that has been discussed many times here in the past.

I am strongly pro-life and pro-sanctity of life (the Terri Schiavo situation literally broke my heart). I believe that America is embracing a culture of death.

You’re right. The issue has been discussed a lot here, but then just about everything has been discussed. It’s always great to hear a fresh voice.

Oh, I am still incensed by the execution of poor Terri Schiavo for the horrible crime of not being perfect. We have GOT to do something about that and pronto!

On the other hand, I am a social liberal (harkening back to John and Robert Kennedy, Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson) and believe that conservative philosophy in this area is not consistent with Our Lord’s teachings to care for the poor, afflicted, suffering, sick, etc.

I’m a social conservative and, believe it or not, I’m all for caring for “the poor, afflicted, suffering, sick, etc.” too.

So, every election, I am torn. Do I vote for the liberal (usually Democrat) who is committed to helping the poor and afflicted more than his or her opponen - but who is “pro choice”? Or, do I vote for the conservative who claims the Pro Life position but who is so often indifferent to the plight of the poor and afflicted?

I would like to hear anyone’s thoughts on this, particularly anyone who has felt “torn” in these areas.

            Blessings to all!

Well, I’d have to challenge the notion that the Democrats care more about the poor and afflicted, etc. merely because they throw a lot of money at entitlements. So far, that method hasn’t worked very well. There are other, better ways to accomplish the same goals. Unfortunately, the liberal media won’t give them a fair hearing or a fair airing, but like to give the impression that all conservatives are heartless, clueless, selfish oafs who are only interested in what makes them rich and comfortable. Am I right?

I think you really ought to look into Conservative solutions to such problems from Conservatives instead of relying on Democratic talking points when deciding how to vote on such vital issues.

 

[aurora77]

I agree with you, Matthew, I honestly don’t believe either party is really pro-life, and neither are they for these social justice issues. This will get people riled up, but I believe that pro-life is conception until natural death, so no death penalty. Voting is tough for me, but it comes down to this–at least those on death row have had a chance at life, the unborn have had no chance. To me, voting is usually about the lesser of the two evils. But, then, I don’t really think that the government is the way to help the poor–the government as an entity doesn’t care about it’s citizens. Church groups and civic organizations do a much better job in this case.

 

[Knight003]

The answer is somewhere in the middle. Private charity, I feel, is superior to government assistance, but can fall short from time to time. This is why a strong “safety net” is required. The problem, however, is that charity can decrease if people feel that their taxes take care of the problem. This will lead to a situation were the poor are beholden to the government, and not thankful recipients of the community. This also disconnects the community from the act of charity, because taxes are forced upon them. So what I try to do in this current political environment, is vote pro-life, but be active in supporting charitable groups. :twocents:

 

[rlg94086]

Matthew 25,

I concur with Knight003. Part of the reason I left the Democratic Party and support the Republicans is that Social Justice is not a black and white position - i.e. government-only or private charity-only. Most Republicans understand that a strong safety net is required. The argument is “where do you draw the line?” Too much government assistance is destructive to an individual and a society. The overall view on the conservative side is that we need to take more personal responsibility for ourselves and our family’s well being and rely less on government. Jesus’ teachings are all about how we live our lives personally - he didn’t teach in front of the Roman Senate; he taught people directly.

God Bless,

Robert

Knight003:

The answer is somewhere in the middle. Private charity, I feel, is superior to government assistance, but can fall short from time to time. This is why a strong “safety net” is required. The problem, however, is that charity can decrease if people feel that their taxes take care of the problem. This will lead to a situation were the poor are beholden to the government, and not thankful recipients of the community. This also disconnects the community from the act of charity, because taxes are forced upon them. So what I try to do in this current political environment, is vote pro-life, but be active in supporting charitable groups. :twocents:

 

[my_agatha]

rlg94086:

Most Republicans understand that a strong safety net is required.

Oh, you’re so right. They certainly believe that every effort should be made to protect the rich.

 

[rlg94086]

my agatha:

Oh, you’re so right. They certainly believe that every effort should be made to protect the rich.

Matthew 25,

You might also note that conservatives tend to make more logical arguments regarding social justice, rather than resorting to class warfare. Being that the President and majorities of both the House and Senate were elected by the majority and the majority aren’t rich, it doesn’t make much sense to say the “Republicans” only represent the rich.

God Bless,

Robert

 

[Brain]

Matthew 25:

Hi,

I am a 52-year old “protestant.” I know some (most?) of you may not look upon me as a Christian brother, but I have great respect and admiration for Catholicism in many, many areas. One of those is in the “life isssues.”

Now, this is the first time I have posted here, so please forgive me because I am probably going to ask a question that has been discussed many times here in the past.

I am strongly pro-life and pro-sanctity of life (the Terri Schiavo situation literally broke my heart). I believe that America is embracing a culture of death.

On the other hand, I am a social liberal (harkening back to John and Robert Kennedy, Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson) and believe that conservative philosophy in this area is not consistent with Our Lord’s teachings to care for the poor, afflicted, suffering, sick, etc.

So, every election, I am torn. Do I vote for the liberal (usually Democrat) who is committed to helping the poor and afflicted more than his or her opponen - but who is “pro choice”? Or, do I vote for the conservative who claims the Pro Life position but who is so often indifferent to the plight of the poor and afflicted?

I would like to hear anyone’s thoughts on this, particularly anyone who has felt “torn” in these areas.

Blessings to all!

I have this problem too. But the way i figure, i ether vote constitutional, or republican becuse if you arent alive in the first place, there is no point working to better that life.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Brain:

becuse if you arent alive in the first place, there is no point working to better that life.

An excellent condensation of the words of HH Pope John Paul the Great.

 

[my_agatha]

rlg94086:

Matthew 25,

You might also note that conservatives tend to make more logical arguments regarding social justice, rather than resorting to class warfare. Being that the President and majorities of both the House and Senate were elected by the majority and the majority aren’t rich, it doesn’t make much sense to say the “Republicans” only represent the rich.

God Bless,

Robert

Honey, logically, they don’t have any problem with enormous handouts to the business community. I fail to see how that promotes “personal responsibility.”

 

[rlg94086]

Honey?

…Well, anyway who is “they” and what enormous handouts have they given out that differentiates them from the enormous handouts given out by other politicians? All politicians do it, and I’m against corporate welfare and pork barrell spending even more than I’m against individual welfare, as are many Republicans.
my agatha:

Honey, logically, they don’t have any problem with enormous handouts to the business community. I fail to see how that promotes “personal responsibility.”