Trump v. Clinton matchup has Catholic leaders scrambling

[Convert_in_99]

Can you point out someone who said a Catholic has to vote republican?

Bullying us to vote for Trump vs a 3rd party candidate (saying if we don’t vote Trump that we are actually siding with Hilary) IS bullying us to vote Republican in this instance. There really is a lot of bullying going on in this thread and I find it very UNChristian-like.

 

[livnlern]

I am Catholic.

What I find inappropriate is telling Catholics that it is evil to do anything other than voting for whomever the GOP nominates. That may be your opinion, or at least the opinion you want to spread to support your partisan endeavors. But it is not appropriate to pretend or suggest that position is supported by the Church.

Haven’t you been watching the news? The leaders of the GOP are doing everything they can to get rid of Trump, regardless of the fact that he’s garnered the most votes from people in the primaries. Most people I know who would normally support the Republican party are heartily disgusted with it and it’s lack of backbone in fighting against liberal issues. Many people want a return to conservative principles and Trump, while he’s far from perfect is at least going in that direction.
Regarding the Church, the fact that Hillary is so pro-abortion caused every other issue to fade into oblivion. How anyone could vote for her is beyond me, especially after the videos about the selling of baby body parts. Have you watched those videos? The sight of someone picking through a lab tray full of little arms and legs looking for prime organs is like looking at a vision of Hell.

 

[livnlern]

Bullying us to vote for Trump vs a 3rd party candidate (saying if we don’t vote Trump that we are actually siding with Hilary) IS bullying is to vote Republican in this instance. There really is a lot of bullying going on in this thread and I find it very UNChristian-like.

There’s no bullying here. People are stating their opinions just like you are.
The truth is, if enough people don’t vote against Hillary, guess who we’ll have as our next president? We all have to think about that. She’s as bad if not worse as Obama when it comes to being pro-abortion and pro gay marriage and more governmental control. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want the government telling me I have to help pay for abortions and have to use the bathroom with transgenders, etc.

 

[estesbob]

Bullying us to vote for Trump vs a 3rd party candidate (saying if we don’t vote Trump that we are actually siding with Hilary) IS bullying is to vote Republican in this instance. There really is a lot of bullying going on in this thread and I find it very UNChristian-like.

1. Who is bullying anyone?
   2,. Who said a Catholic must vote republican?

To tell the truth I find it strange that explaining Church teaching is “Bullying”

 

[GaryTaylor]

any pro-choice candidates which would include not voting for Hilary OR Trump. .

Clinton and Trump are not a like comparison with abortion thats a logical fallacy, basic propaganda by the leftist.

Hillary 1-million deaths yearly, Trump-0.

Thanks

 

[Convert_in_99]

There’s no bullying here. People are stating their opinions just like you are.
The truth is, if enough people don’t vote against Hillary, guess who we’ll have as our next president? We all have to think about that. She’s as bad if not worse as Obama when it comes to being pro-abortion and pro gay marriage and more governmental control. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want the government telling me I have to help pay for abortions and have to use the bathroom with transgenders, etc.

Ok that’s your opinion, your right, your vote. However, stating that 3rd party voting is the same as siding with Hillary IS bullying us to vote for Trump. We are cooperating with evil of abortion (so it has been said) by not voting for Trump, even if the candidate we choose (3rd party) is more pro-life than Trump. That’s what I and the others are saying. Quit telling us we are siding with choice by voting for another more pro-life candidate than Trump. Good grief how many times to I have to type this.

 

[Convert_in_99]

Clinton and Trump are not a like comparison with abortion thats a logical fallacy, basic propaganda by the leftist.

Hillary 1-million deaths yearly, Trump-0.

Thanks

But we are NOT voting for Hillary. We are voting a whole separate candidate, a third party. Quit saying we are voting for Hillary cause we are NOT!

 

[estesbob]

But we are NOT voting for Hillary. We are voting a whole separate candidate, a third party. Quit saying we are voting for Hillary cause we are NOT!

So if all those who are pro-life refused to vote for candidates who support abortion only in cases of rape or incest even when their opponent favors abortion on demad would that further or hinder the goal of making abortion illegal in this country? Again IMO we can not let the perfect be the enemy of the possible. To demand doctrinal purity from candidates cedes the political playing field to the culture of death

 

[Convert_in_99]

1. Who is bullying anyone?
   2,. Who said a Catholic must vote republican?

To tell the truth I find it strange that explaining Church teaching is “Bullying”

You are by saying that if I vote for a 3rd party candidate that I have l, in fact, sided with Hillary and pro-choice. That is bullying.

We are NOT required by the Catholic Church to vote for the “lesser of two evil” candidates. We are also allowed, if you read carefully the handy-dandy guides you’ve been posting, to vote for a Third Party candidate, or even to abstain from voting all together if we find all candidates to be against life. We are simply saying we believe Trump, while he is less pro-choice than Hillary, he is STILL pro-choice and hence why we don’t wish to vote for him. We will instead vote third party or refrain from voting in this election.

 

[Convert_in_99]

So if all those who are pro-life refused to vote for candidates who support abortion only in cases of rape or incest even when their opponent favors abortion on demad would that further or hinder the goal of making abortion illegal in this country? Again IMO we can not let the perfect be the enemy of the possible. To demand doctrinal purity from candidates cedes the political playing field to the culture of death

We are NOT supporting the culture of death.

 

[GaryTaylor]

But we are NOT voting for Hillary. We are voting a whole separate candidate, a third party. Quit saying we are voting for Hillary cause we are NOT!

.

To be clear I never address who you vote for. .I addressed a fallacy you typed suggesting to indicate Trump and Clinton are the same. Not true

he said he won’t vote for any pro-choice candidates which would include not voting for Hilary OR Trump.

 

[Convert_in_99]

.

To be clear I never address who you vote for. .I addressed a fallacy you typed suggesting to indicate Trump and Clinton are the same. Not true

No, Hillary and Trump are not the same. I didn’t say that. I said they were both pro-choice and they are. Yes, Trump is less pro-choice, but he is still pro-choice in at least some instances. In my mind, that means he is still pro-choice, at least in part.

 

[livnlern]

So if all those who are pro-life refused to vote for candidates who support abortion only in cases of rape or incest even when their opponent favors abortion on demad would that further or hinder the goal of making abortion illegal in this country? Again IMO we can not let the perfect be the enemy of the possible. To demand doctrinal purity from candidates cedes the political playing field to the culture of death

Exactly! Hillary supporters will get as many as they can out to vote. If the other side is split, there will be no opposition to her. A third party vote is a thrown away vote.

 

[Convert_in_99]

Exactly! Hillary supporters will get as many as they can out to vote. If the other side is split, there will be no opposition to her. A third party vote is a thrown away vote.

At last! Thank you! I’m cool with this post. I don’t mind if people feel that my third party vote is “thrown away.” What I do have a problem with is people telling me that I side with Hillary and choice if I don’t vote for Trump and vote third party instead.

 

[estesbob]

You are by saying that if I vote for a 3rd party candidate that I have l, in fact, sided with Hillary and pro-choice. That is bullying.

We are NOT required by the Catholic Church to vote for the “lesser of two evil” candidates. We are also allowed, if you read carefully the handy-dandy guides you’ve been posting, to vote for a Third Party candidate, or even to abstain from voting all together if we find all candidates to be against life. We are simply saying we believe Trump, while he is less pro-choice than Hillary, he is STILL pro-choice and hence why we don’t wish to vote for him. We will instead vote third party or refrain from voting in this election.

I never said a Catholic could not throw away their vote on a third party candidate. I expressed my opinion that such a vote empowers those who have embraced the culture of death

 

[Convert_in_99]

I never said a Catholic could not throw away their vote on a third party candidate. I expressed my opinion that such a vote empowers those who have embraced the culture of death

Nope you didn’t. And it’s you and a few others who I still am upset with. It is THESE statements, indicating we are siding with choice or have embraced the culture of death by voting third party that I find bullying me to vote for Trump and an insult to my very pro-life stance.

 

[estesbob]

Nope you didn’t. And it’s you and a few others who I still am upset with. It is THESE statements, indicating we are siding with choice or have embraced the culture of death by voting third party that I find bullying me to vote for Trump and an insult to my very pro-life stance.

Rather than being upset with those who point out the obvious i suggest you ponder what is being said. Disputing your views, BTW, is not bullying. its called “discussion”

 

[Convert_in_99]

You win. You “TRUMPED” me. You have bullied me right off of this thread and I refuse to stand for it any further. Now have your little “TRUMP” party, and when you discover he’s not who he said he was, don’t blame me. Cause I will NOT have voted for him. :nope:

 

[Crossbones]

But there is no need to interpret anything -Church teaching is quite clear and explicit. In fact the only people calling for interpretation are those trying to rationalize rejecting Church teaching.

*“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). *

I’m not surprised that you feel that way and I am glad you provided other quotes for newcomers and lurkers to review when they make their decision.

 

[estesbob]

I’m not surprised that you feel that way and I am glad you provided other quotes for newcomers and lurkers to review when they make their decision.

*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*