Too many right-wingers in this forum?

[TMC]

I’m sorry, but I just don’t buy that. On what issues other than Capital Punishment and War (in some instances) would Catholics lean to the Democratic side?

I am sure there are many issues. My comment is based on the many polls and so forth showing that over the last couple decades Catholics tend to vote around 50/50 for each party. I assume that there are a significant number of the GOP voters that are single issue abortion voters, but that is just an assumption.

 

[TMC]

Sad that politics, especially in the United States, should be viewed this way. As far as I know, there is no book defining all of the positions of the Left and Right. God is not concerned about politics per se, but about people living out their faith. The Holy Bible is our guide book, along with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

It saddens me how some people vote Democrat or Republican as if “their” party is always right. I’ve seen bad ideas come out of both parties. These are not football teams, but our country’s leadership.

As far as Marxism, there are people who love it. Unfortunately, the “new man” that fought in World War II had to live under an atheist, barbaric and murderous regime. Perhaps some people don’t know, but for decades, Americans lived under constant threat of Soviet ICBM attack, with, perhaps, 20 minutes warning. We were constantly reminded that the enemy was Godless Communisn, now the enemy is Godless Americanism.

God bless,
Ed

I agree, Ed. I have been telling people for years “Politics is not a sport.” Doesn’t seem to sink in. People will support “their guy” no matter what he does, and rail at the other guy no matter what, also. That’s fine if your talking Bears v Packers, but its no way to run a country.

 

[pnewton]

Are you trying to say that that the Church says there are things that are just a little bit wrong?

Absolutely. Venial sins and mortal sins. Have you not heard of these?

 

[surfinpure]

My point was simply that there is an element in this debate that keeps wanting to justify the war by covering it in the flag of the UN but then, when challenged, they want to rip it off and throw on the flag of the US instead. Just pick one - either be an honest nationalist or an honest globalist but don’t try to play both sides of the fence.

In that case, I only ask that you not lump me in with the others on this point. I have always opposed the UN. I defend the US in the matter of the war, because the US was viciously attacked by terrorists who at least seemed (though some debate the point) to have strong ties to Iraq, and therefore access to WMDs.

Whether or not you agree with me on the facts, know that I support the act of any nation to defend itself against terrorism.

 

[surfinpure]

I am sure there are many issues. My comment is based on the many polls and so forth showing that over the last couple decades Catholics tend to vote around 50/50 for each party. I assume that there are a significant number of the GOP voters that are single issue abortion voters, but that is just an assumption.

Consider, then, that the sad fact of American Catholicism is that a large portion of us have defected. I would suspect that those who vote against Church teaching on social and moral issues are also contracepting and attending Mass sporadically. So the mere fact that 50% of so-called American Catholics votes for one party or another does not mean that they are considering the teachings of the Church when doing so.

 

[Al_Masetti]

What, exactly, is a “right-winger”?

It must embrace more factors than just 1) the death penalty, and 2) the Iraq war.

 

[markomalley]

OH!!! You were just joking, right?

So glad you recognized that.

 

[hasikelee]

Thank you, Orion. You saved me a post.

Privatized institutions do a better job of upholding the dignity of the poor then mandated government provisioning, which inculcates an idol worship of the state and a slave class mentality. Charity is not Charity if it is taxed from me. We, not the government, are called to help the poor.

Governments do not serve Christian principles when they are given more authority. I fail to see any example of such a thing in history, quite the reverse actually. With a looming Democratic/socialist President–perhaps even a charismatic one, coupled with a democratic/socialist congress I fear for liberty. People are already convicted of thought crimes, labeled under hate crimes.

How safe will those aggressively but peacefully advocating the Church’s sexual teaching be in the not too distant future? It is all very frightening.

I take agreement with these two posts as well. From many different aspects, America is beginning to resemble Germany before Hitler’s appointment to Chancellor. We are starting to be “democratic” in name only.

I take it a little bit further by feeling both the left and the right are both going to lead America down the wrong path. For example, Bush might not have any malicious intent, as some leftists would have us believe, but he did consolidate power under his term and that leaves America vulnerable to a complete loss of democracy if we get a malicious or power hungry president.

As for the left, they as a group have handed our dignity, freedom and personhood over on a platter. Who will stand up for them when we have all been tortured, persecuted and killed?

Remember, conslidation of power and dehumanization of minorities/undesirables were the first steps in Hitler’s path to power.

 

[THurifer2]

As far as modern times goes the “right” used to be center…regardless of how conservative one may appear…in this day and age as time passes the world views them farther and farther right…center is always drifting leftwar in this wayward world.

 

[ribozyme]

What, exactly, is a “right-winger”?

It must embrace more factors than just 1) the death penalty, and 2) the Iraq war.

and is a sycophant to Grover Norquist who wants to strave the beast.

 

[SoCalRC]

From the Pope himself:
3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia." priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/04-07ratzingerommunion.htm

I think that quote is being signfiicantly missused. First of all, it was a letter from then Cardinal Ratzinger to the Bishops. The Bisohps were asking if voting for the death penalty or war rose to standard necessary to meet CIC 915 - that is, does support of the death penalty rise to obstinate grievous sin, premitting communion to be withheld by priests or Bishops. The Cardinal explained that, even among important teachings, there are differences. The Church concedes that there might be instances were war is just or the death penalty nec. for society’s self defense.

What makes this quote seem particularly disingenuous in this contrext isn’t that it was written by a Cardinal, not the Pope, or that it was addressed to the Bishops, not the laity. It isn’t even that it was on a completely different subject. What bothers me is we HAVE a statement ON VOTING from the Church, ADDRESSED to the laity. It is signed by a POPE and by the SAME Cardinal, as Prefect. That is, Cardinal Ratzinger attested that it is true and correct. That document, as I have shown, lists both torture and abortion among the things that cannot be compromised.

Regarding your first quote, no one disputes that abortion is an important teaching that does not allow compromise. The question is, is is so important that you can tolerate other grave evils because of it. As we have seen, your document seems to say no. It warns us that we cannot tolerate evil, even for Good ends, and it lists torture as something that cannot ever be tolerated.

The question of which is ‘worse’ is a red herring. It does not matter which I think is ‘worse’. What matters is that the Church teaches that both reach the threshold of zero tolerance. To me, this makes perfect sense. Say a politician supports an absolute ban on abortion, but also supports lowering the legal age of sexual consent to 5. Under the concept of abortion-first-and-foremost-even-at-the-expense-of-other-teachings it could be argued that voting for the politician might be licit.

However, “society’s protection of minors” is another item that the Church says does not allow compromise. It is another teaching which is the essence of moral law. The question is not, ‘which is worse, abortion of pedophilia?’ The question is only, ‘does the candidate support anything that the Church says reaches the threshold of zero tolerance for the Catholic faith?’

 

[SoCalRC]

That does not make the all equal. Yes, I am an anti-abortion voter first and foremost. When other issues arise on par with that, they will be included. “Prolife” is nothing but a label anyway, like “prochoice” and is subject to broad interpretation.

But the question isn’t if they are ‘equal’. The question is, do they raise to the level of non-negotiable. The Church does not say that torture and abortion are equal. It just says that “the properly formed Christian concience” cannot tolerate either under any circumstances.

A second question is where is a teaching from the Church supporting the concept of compromising on things the Church has labelled non negotiable moral concepts for the sake of another teaching?

I keep seeing quotes that, yes, abortion is important. But nowhere that it is so important than we are to tolerate other attacks on “the essence of moral law”.

 

[Hastrman]

“Personally, I think I’m a dead center moderate and all the rest of you are wacko.”

…is what everyone really thinks.

But I think there are too many people who think in terms of “liberal” and “conservative”. Kill that Buddha, guys.

 

[SoCalRC]

Then we’re kinda stuck aren’t we?

How can you try to change the system by not participating in it?

First, remember that God rewards, but not always in this world. Following one’s faith fully should be its own reward, even if it means losing a lot of elections.

Second, I think that it is all the compromising that robs us of power. We live in the largest concentration of Christians in one nation in the history of man. The country is roughly 1/4 Catholic, and the demographics are trending more towards 1/2 in the coming years.

Why on earth should I have to compromise on any of 9 grave evils identified as non-negotiable by Rome? If Catholics simply vote their faith, we would be a formidable political voice now. Compromising and selling ourselves short instead accomplishes what? If a party is punitive and devisive about immigration, it divides the Catholic vote further (and lest heads explode, I’m not saying that we have no right to protect our borders, only that we are still dealing with human persons, who we are supposed to love as much as fertilized zygotes - even if so many of them were not Catholic).

Likewise, when a party is at odds with the Rome over things like war and humanitarian responsibility for a refugee problem created by said war, Catholics are divided again.

With each compromise, we split, and with each split our voice is muted. I understand that people want to feel effective and make a difference right now, but when shortcuts involve tolerating grave moral disorders I don’t think we should be surprised if God does not reward us with positive results.

Peace

 

[pnewton]

It warns us that we cannot tolerate evil, even for Good ends, and it lists torture as something that cannot ever be tolerated.

The question of which is ‘worse’ is a red herring. ’

No, the red herring is all this talk of torture. Fair enough. I will not vote for a pro-torture candidate. I will also pass on the pro-pedophilia candidates.

Are these really issues you struggle with?

 

[surfinpure]

No, the red herring is all this talk of torture. Fair enough. I will not vote for a pro-torture candidate. I will also pass on the pro-pedophilia candidates.

Are these really issues you struggle with?

As a good faith effort, I vow not to vote for a pro-dog fighting candidate, or a pro-prostitution candidate. Oh, and none of them must listen to Weird Al Yankovic.

Is my sensitivity to other issues improving?

 

[pnewton]

Oh, and none of them must listen to Weird Al Yankovic.

Everybody listens to him. It’s just that no one admits it.

 

[TMC]

Consider, then, that the sad fact of American Catholicism is that a large portion of us have defected. I would suspect that those who vote against Church teaching on social and moral issues are also contracepting and attending Mass sporadically. So the mere fact that 50% of so-called American Catholics votes for one party or another does not mean that they are considering the teachings of the Church when doing so.

I wouldn’t consider voting Democrat as defecting from the Church. Are you saying the Church has a political affiliation? I don’t know if the Catholics voting Dem are more or less Catholic than those voting Rep. I would assume it is a mixed bag, like most things. There is no objective way to determine from where I stand.

 

[surfinpure]

Everybody listens to him. It’s just that no one admits it.

Oh, dear! I suppose I just won’t be able to vote this time around then. I mean, really, a bunch of closet Weird Al listeners. Surely there is a Papal document somewhere…

 

[surfinpure]

I wouldn’t consider voting Democrat as defecting from the Church. Are you saying the Church has a political affiliation? I don’t know if the Catholics voting Dem are more or less Catholic than those voting Rep. I would assume it is a mixed bag, like most things. There is no objective way to determine from where I stand.

Please, please, please don’t read more into what I wrote than is there. All I am saying is that the fact that a large percentage of Catholics vote one way or the other doesn’t make that way of voting more moral. And I am asking you to take into consideration that a large percentage of Catholics are “Cafeteria Catholics,” and don’t feel it necessary to adhere to all Church teaching.

That’s all.

Really. :yup: