Sanders Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter SuperLuigi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yet from the USCCB citizenship guide.
  1. There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position even on policies promoting an intrinsically evil act **may reasonably decide to vote for that candidate **for other morally grave reasons.
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).

Pope Benedict XVI

“No, you can never vote for someone who favors absolutely what’s called the ‘right to choice’ of a woman to destroy human life in her womb, or the right to a procured abortion,”

“You may in some circumstances where you don’t have any candidate who is proposing to eliminate all abortion, choose the candidate who will most limit this grave evil in our country, but you could never justify voting for a candidate who not only does not want to limit abortion but believes that it should be available to everyone”

Cardinal Burke

In considering “the sum total of social conditions,” there is, however, a certain order of priority, which must be followed. Conditions upon which other conditions depend must receive our first consideration. The first consideration must be given to the protection of human life itself, without which it makes no sense to consider other social conditions. “The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 2273).

Cardinal Burke

]Note that “proportionate reasons’] does not mean simply weighing a wide range of issues against abortion and euthanasia and concluding that they cumulatively outweigh the evil of taking an innocent life. Rather, for there to be proportionate reasons, the voter would have to be convinced that the candidate who supports abortion rights would actually do more than the opposing candidate to limit the harm of abortion or to reduce the number of abortions

Bishop Joseph A. Galante

There is only one thing that could be considered proportionate enough to justify a Catholic voting for a candidate who is known to be pro-abortion, and that is the protection of innocent human life. That may seem to be contradictory, but it is not.

"Consider the case of a Catholic voter who must choose between three candidates: candidate (A, Kerry) who is completely for abortion-on-demand, candidate (B, Bush) who is in favor of very limited abortion, i.e., in favor of greatly restricting abortion and candidate (C, Peroutka), a candidate who is completely against abortion but who is universally recognized as being unelectable.

"The Catholic voter cannot vote for candidate (A, Kerry) because that would be formal cooperation in the sin of abortion if that candidate were to be elected and assist in passing legislation, which would remove restrictions on, abortion-on-demand.

“The Catholic can vote for candidate (C, Peroutka) but that will probably only help ensure the election of candidate (A, Kerry). Therefore the Catholic voter has a proportionate reason to vote for candidate (B, Bush) since his vote may help to ensure the defeat of candidate (A, Kerry) and may result in the saving of some innocent human lives if candidate (B, Bush) is elected and introduces legislation restricting abortion-on-demand. In such a case, the Catholic voter would have chosen the lesser of two evils, which is morally permissible under these circumstances.”

Bishop Rene Gracida

What are “proportionate reasons”? To consider that question, we must first repeat the teaching of the church: The direct killing of innocent human beings at any stage of development, including the embryonic and fetal, is homicidal, gravely sinful and always profoundly wrong . . . .

What evil could be so grave and widespread as to constitute a “proportionate reason” to support candidates who would preserve and protect the abortion license and even extend it to publicly funded embryo-killing in our nation’s labs?

Certainly policies on welfare, national security, the war in Iraq, Social Security or taxes, taken singly or in any combination, do not provide a proportionate reason to vote for a pro-abortion candidate

Archbishop John J. Myers

What is a proportionate reason to justify favoring the taking of an innocent, defenseless human life? That’s the question that has to be answered in your conscience. What is the proportionate reason? . . . It is difficult to imagine what that proportionate reason would be

Cardinal Burke
 
A nice reminder to those Catholics who claim Faithful Citizenship gives them Church approval to vote in support of evil .
I have no problem with that, but it’s remote material cooperation with evil.
 
I have no problem with that, but it’s remote material cooperation with evil.
IF there are proportionate reasons. I know you don’t want to answer about proportionate reasons but to any Catholics who support Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton, I’d be interested to hear your response to this question by then Archbishop Burke (who is now a Cardinal):
“What is a proportionate reason to justify favoring the taking of an innocent, defenseless human life? And I just leave that to you as a question. That’s the question that has to be answered in your conscience. What is the proportionate reason?”
catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=31955
 
Some more…though it may come in one ear and leave through the other one…but still here we go:

Catholics In Political Life

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.

As our conference has insisted in Faithful Citizenship…

usccb.org/issues-and-action/faithful-citizenship/church-teaching/catholics-in-political-life.cfm
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.
Bernie Sanders says he met with Pope Francis.
ROME (AP) — Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders said in an interview with The Associated Press that he met with Pope Francis, describing the meeting as a “real honor.”
Sanders said the meeting took place Saturday morning before the pope left for his one-day visit to Greece. He said he was honored by the meeting, and that he told the pope he appreciated the message that he is sending the world about the need to inject morality and justice into the world economy. Sanders said it’s a message he has been sending as well.
“We had an opportunity to meet with him this morning,” Sanders said. “It was a real honor for me, for my wife and I to spend some time with him. I think he is one of the extraordinary figures not only in the world today but in modern world history.”

Sanders and wife, Jane, stayed overnight at the pope’s residence, the Domus Santa Marta hotel in the Vatican gardens, on the same floor as the pope.

However, Francis has been known to flout Vatican protocol, and the meeting with Sanders is evidence that his personal desires often trump Vatican diplomacy.

But the chancellor for the pontifical academy, Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, said he invited Sanders because he was the only U.S. presidential candidate who showed deep interest in the teachings of Francis.
Ooooopppppppssss…
 
Some more…though it may come in one ear and leave through the other one…but still here we go:
Indeed.

“In some ways, the point of “Faithful Citizenship” was precisely to avoid simplistic reductions, wasn’t it?”

Bishop Kicanas: Exactly.

“If I’m hearing you correctly, you’re saying that for a Catholic who wants to approach his or her vote in three weeks with the mind of the church, it’s not a slam-dunk which way that vote should go. Is that right?”

Bishop Kicanas: "Yes, and I think that’s what “Faithful Citizenship” is saying. As a disciple, as a citizen, you have to weigh issues, you have to **consider the character of candidates, what you think they will be able to do **in terms of affecting the society and the culture in which we live. Clearly, the document is saying that to vote for someone who is proposing actions that are intrinsically evil, because of their position on those intrinsically evil acts, is certainly problematic for someone who is a believer in Christ. You don’t believe in Christ and then vote for a person **simply, or primarily,**because they hold a position that’s contrary to the church. You have to take those positions into consideration, and then make a choice. These are never easy choices."

“Do you think there’s a consensus in the conference on whether a pro-choice vote, in itself, amounts to formal cooperation?”

Bishop Kicanas: No, I’m sure there isn’t.

priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/kicanas-synod.htm
 
If Trump gets the Republican nomination, that’s a vote for evil too.
How so? Cause of the wall he wants to build that may be as high and as solid as the one surrounding the Vatican?

Mexico has a wall on their southern border.

Funny.

BTW, every man is a sinner. I know I am. Trump at the very least is showing that he is not bought and paid for by special interests. The professional politicians are about as evil as they come.

Bernie is on other side of the spectrum. Of course, when you take a look at Bernie and his reality, it is not a good picture. It really is not.

Read this article:

*If Sanders were vying for a Cabinet post, he’d never pass an FBI background check. There’d be too many subversive red flags popping up in his file. He was a communist collaborator during the height of the Cold War.

Rewind to 1964.

While attending the University of Chicago, Sanders joined the Young People’s Socialist League, the youth wing of the Socialist Party USA. He also organized for a communist front, the United Packinghouse Workers Union, which at the time was under investigation by the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

After graduating with a political science degree, Sanders moved to Vermont, where he headed the American People’s History Society, an organ for Marxist propaganda. There, he produced a glowing documentary on the life of socialist revolutionary Eugene Debs, who was jailed for espionage during the Red Scare and hailed by the Bolsheviks as “America’s greatest Marxist.”*

nypost.com/2016/01/16/dont-be-fooled-by-bernie-sanders-hes-a-diehard-communist/

Go ahead and read it.
 
Indeed.

“In some ways, the point of “Faithful Citizenship” was precisely to avoid simplistic reductions, wasn’t it?”

Bishop Kicanas: Exactly.

“If I’m hearing you correctly, you’re saying that for a Catholic who wants to approach his or her vote in three weeks with the mind of the church, it’s not a slam-dunk which way that vote should go. Is that right?”

Bishop Kicanas: "Yes, and I think that’s what “Faithful Citizenship” is saying. As a disciple, as a citizen, you have to weigh issues, you have to **consider the character of candidates, what you think they will be able to do **in terms of affecting the society and the culture in which we live. Clearly, the document is saying that to vote for someone who is proposing actions that are intrinsically evil, because of their position on those intrinsically evil acts, is certainly problematic for someone who is a believer in Christ. You don’t believe in Christ and then vote for a person **simply, or primarily,**because they hold a position that’s contrary to the church. You have to take those positions into consideration, and then make a choice. These are never easy choices."

“Do you think there’s a consensus in the conference on whether a pro-choice vote, in itself, amounts to formal cooperation?”

Bishop Kicanas: No, I’m sure there isn’t.

priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/kicanas-synod.htm
👍

Thank you, Sy. I don’t have the inclination to keep going over it.
 
How are his economic policies differ from hers? What is it specifically about him that makes him a socialist?
The views that Sanders has are closer to the economic views of Marx. Sanders saying that he is a socialist makes him a socialist.
 
I’m glad he got to meet with him! 😉 He admires him so much.
I haven’t had the media on and actually didn’t know about the meeting until just a short time ago when I saw a thread on CAF. But I am so glad too, Lily. What an honor! They do seem to have similar concerns about so many issues. And I know Bernie has often spoken about mutual dialogue on other moral issues even if there is disagreement on abortion and marriage. The Pope seems to be big on discussing other things as well such as the moral consequences of growing income disparity, human effects on climate change, the death penalty and more. For all the reasons Bernie does, I too admire this Pope. God bless them both in their efforts.
 
👍

Thank you, Sy. I don’t have the inclination to keep going over it.
Yes-much better to go with ones personal interpretation of what one bishop said than to look at the voluminous documentation provided showing a Catholic can not vote for a pro-abortion candidate unless there opponent is more pro-abortion than they are.

How do you reconcile your interpretation of what this bishop “meant” with this:

“No, you can never vote for someone who favors absolutely what’s called the ‘right to choice’ of a woman to destroy human life in her womb, or the right to a procured abortion,”

“You may in some circumstances where you don’t have any candidate who is proposing to eliminate all abortion, choose the candidate who will most limit this grave evil in our country, but you could never justify voting for a candidate who not only does not want to limit abortion but believes that it should be available to everyone”

Cardinal Burke

Or this:

"Consider the case of a Catholic voter who must choose between three candidates: candidate (A, Kerry) who is completely for abortion-on-demand, candidate (B, Bush) who is in favor of very limited abortion, i.e., in favor of greatly restricting abortion and candidate (C, Peroutka), a candidate who is completely against abortion but who is universally recognized as being unelectable.

"The Catholic voter cannot vote for candidate (A, Kerry) because that would be formal cooperation in the sin of abortion if that candidate were to be elected and assist in passing legislation, which would remove restrictions on, abortion-on-demand.

“The Catholic can vote for candidate (C, Peroutka) but that will probably only help ensure the election of candidate (A, Kerry). Therefore the Catholic voter has a proportionate reason to vote for candidate (B, Bush) since his vote may help to ensure the defeat of candidate (A, Kerry) and may result in the saving of some innocent human lives if candidate (B, Bush) is elected and introduces legislation restricting abortion-on-demand. In such a case, the Catholic voter would have chosen the lesser of two evils, which is morally permissible under these circumstances.”

Bishop Rene Gracida

Also can you give us a link to where Bishop Kicana explicitly said a catholic could vote for a pro-abortion candidate?
 
I understand. It does get old after awhile to me too.
"Yet for thirty-five years I’ve watched prominent ‘pro-choice’ Catholics** justify themselves with the kind of moral and verbal gymnastics that should qualify as an Olympic event,
**
Archbishop Charles Chaput
 
IF there are proportionate reasons. I know you don’t want to answer about proportionate reasons but to any Catholics who support Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton, I’d be interested to hear your response to this question by then Archbishop Burke (who is now a Cardinal):
“What is a proportionate reason to justify favoring the taking of an innocent, defenseless human life? And I just leave that to you as a question. That’s the question that has to be answered in your conscience. What is the proportionate reason?”

catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=31955
Don’t hold your breath. I don;t see where pro-choice people will answer the question.
 
Don’t hold your breath. I don;t see where pro-choice people will answer the question.
I do not believe in abortion as a way to solve one’s issues. I also don’t believe in war, capital punishment, unfettered capitalism, magic hand of the markets, trickle down economics. Where does that leave me? Neither the Republicans or the Democrats meet my opinion of a perfect society.
 
I do not believe in abortion as a way to solve one’s issues. I also don’t believe in war, capital punishment, unfettered capitalism, magic hand of the markets, trickle down economics. Where does that leave me? Neither the Republicans or the Democrats meet my opinion of a perfect society.
The Church has rejected war, capital punishment and disagreements on economic issues as proportionate reasons that would allow a catholic to vote for a pro-abortion candidate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top