Trump v. Clinton matchup has Catholic leaders scrambling

[TMC]

The Church does not tell Catholics to vote Republican or Democrat. It does, however, tell us we should not support intrinsic evil like abortion. And yet, we do.

I have said for years, and I will likely say for years more that the only way the Dem party can be shaken from its full and universal support for abortion on demand, including partial birth abortion, is for Catholics to hand it a couple of sound defeats, and because of that support of abortion.

Look at the endorsements of NARAL and NRL. Almost no Democrats are shown as prolife by NRL, and nearly all are endorsed by NARAL. Almost no Repubs are shown as favorable by NARAL, but nearly all are by NRL. All prolife legislation managed in the last few years on a state level, including partial birth abortion bans, have been by Republican legislatures. No prolife justices have been appointed to the Supreme Court other than by Republican president George Bush. Obama’s appointments are pro-abortion.

Yes, there is a difference in the parties when it comes to abortion.

Will I ever favor a Democrat? Not as long as they are pro-abortion, I won’t. You probably missed where I favor Senator Joe Manchin, though. Notwithstanding that he is a Democrat, I would vote for him for president, and certainly over Trump. He isn’t perfect in his prolife position, but he very nearly is. In fact, if you had researched my posts, you would even see that I expressed the (undoubtedly foolish) wish that Trump would name him as his VP running mate, which would put Manchin in line to ultimately win the office.
But since he is almost totally prolife, the Dems will never nominate him unless he is VP first.

Nice try, but no cigar.

But you and others go much further than that. You claim that voting Democrat is evil. You claim that voting for a pro-life third party candidate is evil. You claim that not voting is evil. Your position is that Americans that do not vote Republican are supporting evil. The Church does not teach that, and has never taught that.

 

[Little_Sheep]

… Hillary Clinton is somebody who supports Planned Parenthood for the work they do including abortion…

Hard as it is to accept if your beliefs are the opposite, the majority of voters (to include Christians of all stripes) in our country support the work that Planned Parenthood does. The majority of voters (to include Christians of all stripes) believe that abortion should remain safe, legal and accessible in at least some cases.

Of course, that’s only one of the reasons that Hillary will win in November. It’s actually a perfect storm for progressives as the states have been trying to chip away at abortion rights since 1993.

If I felt the way that you do about abortion, I would find a political party that agreed with me. I understand that Republicans say they are" pro-life", but a look at the actions of Republicans in “power” just don’t back that up. And this year’s presumptive nominee for the Party is as questionable as they come on the issue. That’s saying a lot since the Party’s last Presidential candidate, Mr. Romney, was pro-choice forever before it became politically expedient to be the opposite. If I understand correctly, Romney lost a lovely cousin to a back-alley abortion in the pre-Roe era, so one can genuinely understand his dilemma.

That said, I am certainly not trying to sway you anywhere. I accept that you are devout about this. I respect that about you. But, for me, abortion has been turned into a political football - I don’t believe for a second that either Party has any intention of trying to change our current laws - both parties just “use” it to rile people up. My opinion only, of course. YMMV.

 

[Little_Sheep]

But you and others go much further than that. You claim that voting Democrat is evil. You claim that voting for a pro-life third party candidate is evil. You claim that not voting is evil. Your position is that Americans that do not vote Republican are supporting evil. The Church does not teach that, and has never taught that.

 

[Little_Sheep]

Whats rhetoric, single issue voters proposed above because no-one knows who they are? Sure is rhetoric but the fact is you have no answer? Hillary kills 1-mil a year. Thats already verified. As is the Church documentation on intrinsic evil. Its speculation to assume what someone will do as opposed to knowing what another is doing and will continue to do.

I don’t see the great value of that point nor can it be rationalized by the priority of the Church with intrinsic evil.

It’s rhetoric to say that a pro-choice candidate “kills a million a year.” In fact, I think it’s worse than rhetoric; I think it’s nonsense. But - in the spirit of charity - I am willing to assume that you and most people that engage in this type of rhetoric are more intelligent than such statements would, on the surface, lead one to believe.

 

[GaryTaylor]

You claim that voting Democrat is evil.

Cooperation with Hillary and the democrats is evil. Not because they are “democrats” but because they continue to cooperate with intrinsic evil. The evil is accepted and thus its cooperated with and then as we see its promoted by default like right now with Hillary.

Its a far cry from Trumps meandering which we know not what will come of it yet and is still being discussed. To date he hasn’t killed anyone compared to the Hillary 1-million a year and every year and promised another 4-years. I fail to see a comparison.

 

[Crossbones]

Straw man?

Trump didn’t say what you’re attributing to him. Pure and simple, he didn’t say it. That’s your interpretation of it. Never did he advocate deliberately targeting the families of terrorists.

In the context, he was talking about excessively restrictive rules of engagement. I happen to think he is wrong about whether terrorists care enough about their families to stop hiding behind them. People who strap bombs onto their children or (like Bin Ladin) put their wives in front of the gun, aren’t terribly concerned about their families.

“And the other thing is with the terrorists, you have to take out their families. When you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don’t kid yourself. But they say they don’t care about their lives. You have to take out their families."

Yep, he’s advocating exactly what you say he’s not and you’re adding a context that isn’t there. Sorry, this is a call to murder the families of terrorists and you are ignoring this intrinsic evil in your support of this man by claiming he meant something different.

 

[GaryTaylor]

It’s rhetoric to say that a pro-choice candidate “kills a million a year.” In fact, I think it’s worse than rhetoric; I think it’s nonsense. But - in the spirit of charity - I am willing to assume that you and most people that engage in this type of rhetoric are more intelligent than such statements would, on the surface, lead one to believe.

Are we now questioning peoples intellect before you make any point? I disagree completely with you so lets be clear and get to the point, The only rhetoric I have heard is in regards to Trump who in fact killed no-one. Thats not rhetoric?

Are you saying its not a fact the abortion industry kills 1-million a year and Hillary is not a avid supporter of abortion and PP and abortion on demand. Thats not rhetoric its factually documented.

 

[Ridgerunner]

But you and others go much further than that. You claim that voting Democrat is evil. You claim that voting for a pro-life third party candidate is evil. You claim that not voting is evil. Your position is that Americans that do not vote Republican are supporting evil. The Church does not teach that, and has never taught that.

The Church does not endorse any political party.

But failing to oppose evil when we can is, itself, evil.

Supporting evil is, itself, evil.

What political candidates that have any chance of defeating the party of abortion are there?

If one is going to oppose evil, one has to oppose it, not just talk about how one sure would if only its opponent was perfect in every way one thinks he should be perfect.

This reminds me so much of Edward Rowland Sills’ poem “Opportunity”. So many of us are cowards, slinking around the edge of the battlefield excusing ourselves because we don’t have a perfect sword. No, Trump isn’t a perfect sword. Nor was Romney. Nor was McCain. Nor is anybody.

But to break the sword we have in hand, out of disdain for its lack of perfection and slink away from confrontation with the greatest evil of our time is moral cowardice.

 

[Crossbones]

Look what Bishop Gracida says regarding the 2004 election and 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.”

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=6159

And yet, Bishop Kicanas says that it isn’t a slam dunk in 2008.

INTERVIEWER: 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.

And there’s Archbishop Cupich who says

“While commerce in the remains of defenseless children is particularly repulsive, we should be no less appalled by the indifference toward the thousands of people who die daily for lack of decent medical care; who are denied rights by a broken immigration system and by racism; who suffer in hunger, joblessness and want; who pay the price of violence in gun-saturated neighborhoods; or who are executed by the state in the name of justice.”

So, I would suggest all Catholics carefully read the USCCB’s Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship and reflect upon that when they choose who to vote for.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Okay, here it is for all to snicker at who wish to do it:

This debate so reminds me of that poem “Opportunity” by Edward Rowland Sills.

This I beheld, or dreamed it in a dream:
There spread a cloud of dust along a plain;
And underneath the cloud, or in it, raged
A furious battle, and men yelled, and swords
Shocked upon swords and shields. A prince’s banner
Wavered, then staggered backward, hemmed by foes.
A craven hung along the battle’s edge,
And thought, “Had I a sword of keener steel —
That blue blade that the king’s son bears — but this
Blunt thing—!” He snapped and flung it from his hand,
And lowering crept away and left the field.
Then came the king’s son, wounded, sore bestead,
And weaponless, and saw the broken sword,
Hilt-buried in the dry and trodden sand,
And ran and snatched it, and with battle-shout
Lifted afresh, he hewed his enemy down,
And saved a great cause that heroic day.

 

[Ridgerunner]

And yet, Bishop Kicanas says that it isn’t a slam dunk in 2008.

INTERVIEWER: 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.

And there’s Archbishop Cupich who says

“While commerce in the remains of defenseless children is particularly repulsive, we should be no less appalled by the indifference toward the thousands of people who die daily for lack of decent medical care; who are denied rights by a broken immigration system and by racism; who suffer in hunger, joblessness and want; who pay the price of violence in gun-saturated neighborhoods; or who are executed by the state in the name of justice.”

So, I would suggest all Catholics carefully read the USCCB’s Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship and reflect upon that when they choose who to vote for.

Which one of them said it was okay to support an abortion-promoting candidate?

Answer: Neither of them. .

And when one party is everything Cupich is appalled by, and promotes abortion on demand besides, he couldn’t.

And Bp Kicanas? Does anyone imagine he supports voting for a pro-abortionist who also started two wars with no justification whatever, has done nothing at all for the poor, is in bed with Wall Street, and sells influence?

I’ll wait for the quotes from both in which they endorse Hillary Clinton.

 

[Ridgerunner]

And yet, Bishop Kicanas says that it isn’t a slam dunk in 2008.

INTERVIEWER: 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.

And there’s Archbishop Cupich who says

“While commerce in the remains of defenseless children is particularly repulsive, we should be no less appalled by the indifference toward the thousands of people who die daily for lack of decent medical care; who are denied rights by a broken immigration system and by racism; who suffer in hunger, joblessness and want; who pay the price of violence in gun-saturated neighborhoods; or who are executed by the state in the name of justice.”

So, I would suggest all Catholics carefully read the USCCB’s Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship and reflect upon that when they choose who to vote for.

Are you Catholic? If not, then what? It isn’t by your name.

 

[GaryTaylor]

So, I would suggest all Catholics carefully read the USCCB’s Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship and reflect upon that when they choose who to vote for.

Abortion, the deliberate killing of a human being before birth, is never morally acceptable and must always be opposed.

usccb.org/issues-and-action/faithful-citizenship/forming-consciences-for-faithful-citizenship-title.cfm

Whats the point, I heard this before but haven’t came to the point of the proposal. I don’t see any way around their priority which is abortion/intrinsic evil and the priority.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I don’t see any way around their priority which is abortion/intrinsic evil and the priority.

But to rationalize and excuse. You know Bernie could amend his position nationally and “maybe” win all this. Pro Life Bernie would blow everyones mind. The point is well taken about Donalds wild gibberish but then again that doesn’t top the massive numbers of the unborn which no-one disagrees needs to be mitigated. You never hear anyone arguing for higher abortion numbers. Not even to tie last years stunning numbers. Sheez its a terrible point no-one even really wants to debate, which goes to show the move toward consensus to mitigate the numbers.

Some one, in a word has to mitigate the killing. Really all there is to it in my mind. And thats not really Catholic but more rational and plain honest.

 

[estesbob]

I am NOT an abortion on demand supporter, simply because I choose to not vote “the lesser of two evils.”

If you want Trump as your leader for the next four to eight years, that’s your perogative.

And if you want Hillary as your leader for the next 4 to 8 years that is your perogative

 

[jeffrey_erwin]

usccb.org/issues-and-action/faithful-citizenship/forming-consciences-for-faithful-citizenship-title.cfm

Whats the point, I heard this before but haven’t came to the point of the proposal. I don’t see any way around their priority which is abortion/intrinsic evil and the priority.

**Our Christian Church has prohibited abortion, so we do not, as members of that Church, engage in the practice.
However, what constitutes a priority with our Creator may be a different matter.
The first record of abortion is found in ancient Egypt, prior to when Israel was enslaved there.
But of all of the 600 plus Laws that YHWH gave to Israel, many of which refer to human reproductive practices, none mention abortion.
Our Blessed Savior did not mention it either.
Since neither YHWH or His Son seem to have made abortion a priority, I fail to see why humanity should do so.
Rather we should make our priority the two great Laws and ask ourselves if we are allowing our country to commit a gross violation of these Laws.

Let’s stop ignoring the elephant in the room. **

 

[GaryTaylor]

**Our Christian Church has prohibited abortion, so we do not, as members of that Church, engage in the practice.
However, what constitutes a priority with our Creator may be a different matter.
The first record of abortion is found in ancient Egypt, prior to when Israel was enslaved there.
But of all of the 600 plus Laws that YHWH gave to Israel, many of which refer to human reproductive practices, none mention abortion.
Our Blessed Savior did not mention it either.
Since neither YHWH or His Son seem to have made abortion a priority, I fail to see why humanity should do so.
Rather we should make our priority the two great Laws and ask ourselves if we are allowing our country to commit a gross violation of these Laws.

Let’s stop ignoring the elephant in the room. **

Whats the elephant? Listen , these Catholics speaking objectively if I may, believe the Church is Christ. The Bible itself states the Church is the pillar of truth of which they compiled the NT-27 and named it “Bible”?. That may be a point to non Catholics though.

I still don’t know why we want to cooperate with anyone promising another million deaths. Aside no-one is arguing in favor of that statistic. Not really, I see consensus coming. I predict victory! I can’t say when but I feel it coming.

 

[Convert_in_99]

Cooperation with Hillary and the democrats is evil. Not because they are “democrats” but because they continue to cooperate with intrinsic evil. The evil is accepted and thus its cooperated with and then as we see its promoted by default like right now with Hillary.

True. Voting for Hilary is not a pro-lifer’s option. However, you are saying that failure to vote for Trump is equivalent to voting for Hilary. That is not true.

 

[Convert_in_99]

And if you want Hillary as your leader for the next 4 to 8 years that is your perogative

But I’m not morally bound to vote for Trump. If Trump gets elected, you WILL be morally culpable for Trump being in office.

 

[GaryTaylor]

However, you are saying that failure to vote for Trump is equivalent to voting for Hilary. That is not true.

Ah, I don’t “think” I said that but OK I can see your logic. Is that proven factual?