Three Positive Signs for Obama's Re-Election Chances

[estesbob]

Of course. Any other straw dummies you feel the need the set up

Again: I have never met a Catholic who voted Democrat BECAUSE of their support of abortion and gay marriage. I have met many Catholics who have voted Democrat IN SPITE OF abortion and gay marriage.

Which is, of course, a direct rejection of the teachings of the Church.

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," he said.

“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,” he said

Cardinal Raymond Burke

Because they have heeded the USCCB admonition that we are not to be one issue voters:tsktsk:

The usual out of context quote used to rationalize rejecting Church teaching. heres what the document really says;

As Catholics we are not single-issue voters. A candidate’s position on a single
issue is not sufficient to guarantee a voter’s support. Yet a candidate’s position on a
single issue that involves an intrinsic evil, such as support for legal abortion or the
promotion of racism, may legitimately lead a voter to disqualify a candidate from
receiving support.

Because they support the majority of the Democratic Platform:shrug:

What in the Democrat party platform mitigates in any way their support of unrestricted taxpayer funded abortion on demand?

Obviously, we have other important issues facing us this fall: the economy, the war in Iraq, immigration justice. But we can’t build a healthy society while ignoring the routine and very profitable legalized homicide that goes on every day against America’s unborn children. The right to life is foundational. Every other right depends on it. Efforts to reduce abortions, or to create alternatives to abortion, or to foster an environment where more women will choose to keep their unborn child, can have great merit–but not if they serve to cover over or distract from the brutality and fundamental injustice of abortion itself. We should remember that one of the crucial things that set early Christians apart from the pagan culture around them was their rejection of abortion and infanticide. 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. All they’ve really done is capitulate to Roe v. Wade.

Archbishop Charles Chaput

Because, apart from abortion, they find little in the GOP platform to support:dts:

Then they dont have to vote for Republicans. This reminds me of one of the absolute truisms concerning democat Catholics":

Abortion will reamain legal in this country until Democrat Catholics come to love the unborn more than hate Republicans"

Because they know the word “intrinsic” does not mean “infinite”

A catholic can not support intinsic evil no matter how people want to twist the word to support their political views.

Because they are grownups, and spell the name as “Obama”, not “obama”

Hard to respect a man who supports such evil.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Here is your party guys:

the Senate was debating whether to ban partial-birth abortion, Santorum asked two pro-choice senators opposed to the ban, Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., this: Suppose the baby slips out of the birth canal before it can be killed. Should killing it even then be a permissible choice? Neither senator would say no.

Read more: billingsgazette.com/news/opinion/editorial/columnists/george_will/george-f-will-iowa-gives-santorum-s-campaign-momentum/article_3ce7b1e4-4e51-5ef0-b221-5e80ffe74a11.html#ixzz1itmeyc56

***Santorum: Because we are talking about a situation here where the baby is almost born. So I ask the question of the senator from California, if the baby was born except for the baby’s foot, if the baby’s foot was inside the mother but the rest of the baby was outside, could that baby be killed?

Boxer: I am not answering these questions! I am not answering these questions.***

(from an exchange between DEmocrat senator Barbara Boxer and Rick Santorum)

nrlc.org/abortion/pba/notansweringboxersantorum.html

and, Obama’s Secretary of HHS Kathleen Sebelius at a NARAL lobby:

*** “We’ve come a long way in women’s health over the last few decades, but we are in a war.”***

So, Ringil, Cmatt, and BVM 1221, what do you think of your party which can’t say they are against partial birth abortion. Which side are you on in Obama’s and Sebelius’ war?

Ishii

One of the most liberal U.S. politicians, Ed Koch, former mayor of NYC, said he was opposed to partial birth abortion because it was infanticide.

So, how do Senator Boxer and the others feel about infanticide?

 

[CountrySteve]

Of course. Any other straw dummies you feel the need the set up

Again: I have never met a Catholic who voted Democrat BECAUSE of their support of abortion and gay marriage. I have met many Catholics who have voted Democrat IN SPITE OF abortion and gay marriage.

Because they have heeded the USCCB admonition that we are not to be one issue voters:tsktsk:

Because they support the majority of the Democratic Platform:shrug:

Because, apart from abortion, they find little in the GOP platform to support:dts:

Because they know the word “intrinsic” does not mean “infinite”

Because they are grownups, and spell the name as “Obama”, not “obama”

a simple yes would have worked

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Would Senator Boxer and the rest be willing to be present during an abortion?

 

[estesbob]

You certainly wasted no time invoking the shibboleth.

Funny how they always neglect to quote the paragraph in its entirety. Archbishop Chaput aptly descibed this attitude:

.To suggest - as some Catholics do - that Senator Obama is this year’s ‘‘real’’ prolife candidate requires a peculiar kind of self-hypnosis, or moral confusion, or worse.

Cardinal Burlke was a little more blunt:

At this point the Democratic Party risks transforming itself definitely into a ‘party of death’ because of its choices on bioethical questions."

 

[CMatt25]

You certainly wasted no time invoking the shibboleth.

Actually it was poster “Not Sure” who invoked that single issue he/she accused Ringil of supporting. And I just knew from reading his posts that Ringil does not.

 

[ishii]

One of the most liberal U.S. politicians, Ed Koch, former mayor of NYC, said he was opposed to partial birth abortion because it was infanticide.

So, how do Senator Boxer and the others feel about infanticide?

I would like an answer from our liberal Democrat abortion rights candidate supporting posters. So far their silence speaks volumes. Maybe they agree with Barbara Boxer who when exposed as supporting infanticide says, “I will not answer!”

Ringil, Cmatt, BVM 1221, what do you think of your party?

Ishii

 

[CMatt25]

Oh, you don’t support it, you just keep those who support it in office. Big distinction.

Ishii

Yes Ishii, apparently for Ringil and other Catholics following the USCCB Faithful Citizenship document which clearly states, “it does not offer a voters guide, scorecard of issues or direction on how to vote”, and says not to reduce Catholic moral concerns to “one or two matters”, there is a distinction.

 

[ringil]

Funny how they always neglect to quote the paragraph in its entirety. Archbishop Chaput aptly descibed this attitude:

.To suggest - as some Catholics do - that Senator Obama is this year’s ‘‘real’’ prolife candidate requires a peculiar kind of self-hypnosis, or moral confusion, or worse.

Cardinal Burlke was a little more blunt:

At this point the Democratic Party risks transforming itself definitely into a ‘party of death’ because of its choices on bioethical questions."

There’s your typical quotations from Burke and Chaput. They don’t cut it.

You are interpreting Catholic dogma to fit your agenda. The Church has not stated that Catholics cannot vote for a Pro-Choice candidate.

If the Bishops state that I cannot vote for a candidate or that I cannot vote for a particular party in a given race, or in general, then I will listen.

This hasn’t happened, despite your constant appeals to Burke and your quotes from Chaput.

We are to use our conscience and prayer in casting our vote. I, despite what you would say, have a WELL FORMED conscience shaped by reading what the Church teaches and what I have prayed on.

 

[ringil]

I would like an answer from our liberal Democrat abortion rights candidate supporting posters. So far their silence speaks volumes. Maybe they agree with Barbara Boxer who when exposed as supporting infanticide says, “I will not answer!”

Ringil, Cmatt, BVM 1221, what do you think of your party?

Ishii

I hate it that the Democratic Party supports abortion, I really do. OK?

 

[CMatt25]

I would like an answer from our liberal Democrat abortion rights candidate supporting posters. So far their silence speaks volumes. Maybe they agree with Barbara Boxer who when exposed as supporting infanticide says, “I will not answer!”

Ringil, Cmatt, BVM 1221, what do you think of your party?

Ishii

Ishii, reread BMV and Ringil’s posts. And again I think BMV said it pretty well for instance here.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8794499&postcount=13

 

[irishpatrick]

I agree with you.

Though Obama hasn’t been perfect I do hope for his re-election. It is good to see the GOP worried.

Actually, I wish the GOP was worried–they seem to think Obama has no chance, and yet I think the GOP has only a slim chance. The GOP has it backwards, imo.

 

[jwakja]

Obama is an anti-American socialist raised by Marxist communists who has and is bringing America to it’s knees! Please pray he will NOT be reelected by the ignorant masses in what was once a great country. OBAMA IS A DETRIMENT TO THE WORLD!

 

[estesbob]

There’s your typical quotations from Burke and Chaput. They don’t cut it.

You are interpreting Catholic dogma to fit your agenda. The Church has not stated that Catholics cannot vote for a Pro-Choice candidate.

If the Bishops state that I cannot vote for a candidate or that I cannot vote for a particular party in a given race, or in general, then I will listen.

This hasn’t happened, despite your constant appeals to Burke and your quotes from Chaput.

We are to use our conscience and prayer in casting our vote. I, despite what you would say, have a WELL FORMED conscience shaped by reading what the Church teaches and what I have prayed on.

You simply can not reject the members of the magestium because what they say conflicts with your political veiws. likewise youo cant reject Church teaching on conscience to achieve a imilar goal:

*In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path,54 we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord’s Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and **guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.55 ***

---

Cathecsim of the Catholic church

---

---

---

Another source of error of judgment in moral conduct is the “assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience.” It is true that one should not be forced to act against one’s conscience. But it’s quite another to assert that a Catholic with a well-formed conscience may put the Church’s teachings in the areas of faith and morals through his or her own “approval process.”

Leon J. Suprenant catholic.com/magazine/articles/more-than-a-feeling

Although you have a duty to follow your conscience, you have a prior duty to form your conscience well. You do this through following the moral teaching of the Church, through prayer, and through close attention to Scripture. Neglect those, and you will end up with either an empty conscience, which won’t be able to guide you at all, or with a cramped conscience, which will see sin where there is no sin.

Karl Keating

---

---

It would be helpful in the discussio if you could post links to a member of the megstrium or any church document that backs up your assertions.

---

 

[estesbob]

I hate it that the Democratic Party supports abortion, I really do. OK?

Yet you support them anyway? What good are the rights the democrats supposedly promotes to those who are denied the right to life? What in the democrat party platform mitigates their support of unresricted taxpayer funded abortion on demand?

 

[irishpatrick]

Placing the so-called social aside for now, it really does amaze how the leaders of the left have managed to fool their own. The housing crisis was the very thing that led to our horrible economy, and the housing crisis was caused by the Democrats, not the Republicans. People hate to hear truths about Bush that go against their irrational dislike of him, but Bush fought to get tighter controls placed on mortages, yet the Democratically controlled Congress refuse to go along with him. Anyone with eyes to history can see the truth of that.

People also forget that the Democrats took control of the Congress after the 2006 elections, and all they need to do is to look at how the economy was before they took over Congress, and how it has been ever since they took control. The Democrats have had one form of control or another since the 2006 elections, and THAT is the time of the economic crunch!

Yet, of course, it does not matter what the truth is (after all the left swept the nation with that ridiculous statement, ‘Bush lied and people died’), so in the end Obama will likely win because many people just do not want to know or even follow the truth.

Sadly.

 

[CMatt25]

There’s your typical quotations from Burke and Chaput. They don’t cut it.

You are interpreting Catholic dogma to fit your agenda. The Church has not stated that Catholics cannot vote for a Pro-Choice candidate.

If the Bishops state that I cannot vote for a candidate or that I cannot vote for a particular party in a given race, or in general, then I will listen.

This hasn’t happened, despite your constant appeals to Burke and your quotes from Chaput.

We are to use our conscience and prayer in casting our vote. I, despite what you would say, have a WELL FORMED conscience shaped by reading what the Church teaches and what I have prayed on.

:clapping: I’ve noticed too that some quote the bishops guide and he quotes Burke and Chaput. Peace to you Ringil.

 

[estesbob]

I would like an answer from our liberal Democrat abortion rights candidate supporting posters. So far their silence speaks volumes. Maybe they agree with Barbara Boxer who when exposed as supporting infanticide says, “I will not answer!”

Ringil, Cmatt, BVM 1221, what do you think of your party?

Ishii

This is the way these discussion usually go. On one side we quote Bishops, popes, cardinals, vatican documents, etc. On the other side all we ever get is misquotes from “faithful” citizenship and assertions that all they have to do is follow their conscineces.

 

[SVP]

From the 2008 Democratic Party platform:

“The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports
Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay,
and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.”

By supporting the Democratic Party, or any candidate of, one is a de-facto supporter of abortion as determined by the official party platform.

 

[CMatt25]

You simply can not reject the members of the magestium because what they say conflicts with your political veiws. likewise youo cant reject Church teaching on conscience to achieve a imilar goal:

*In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path,54 we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord’s Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and **guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.55 ***

---

Cathecsim of the Catholic church

---

---

---

Another source of error of judgment in moral conduct is the “assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience.” It is true that one should not be forced to act against one’s conscience. But it’s quite another to assert that a Catholic with a well-formed conscience may put the Church’s teachings in the areas of faith and morals through his or her own “approval process.”

Leon J. Suprenant catholic.com/magazine/articles/more-than-a-feeling

Although you have a duty to follow your conscience, you have a prior duty to form your conscience well. You do this through following the moral teaching of the Church, through prayer, and through close attention to Scripture. Neglect those, and you will end up with either an empty conscience, which won’t be able to guide you at all, or with a cramped conscience, which will see sin where there is no sin.

Karl Keating

---

---

It would be helpful in the discussio if you could post links to a member of the megstrium or any church document that backs up your assertions.

---

Ringil already said, “despite what you would say”, he has “a WELL FORMED conscience shaped by reading what the Church teaches” and what he has prayed on. In any case not sure why you quote Karl Keating now. He’s not a member of the USCCB or the magestium the last I checked.