Trump v. Clinton matchup has Catholic leaders scrambling

[GaryTaylor]

So, the USCCB document that was approved by the vast majority of the bishops says that you should use this document or other documents provided by the diocese. I’ll go with that one instead of EWTN.

No one said you couldn’t but lets be clear the two are not at odds and I posted both.

It would seem by the same logic, a Catholic cannot vote for Trump.

I don’t see that, Trump hasn’t killed anyone as has Hillary and year after year.

Doing Good and Avoiding Evil
21. Aided by the virtue of prudence in the exercise of well-formed consciences, Catholics are called to make practical judgments regarding good and evil choices in the political arena.

1. There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society, because they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor. Such actions are so deeply flawed that they are always opposed to the authentic good of persons. These are called “intrinsically evil” actions. They must always be rejected and opposed and must never be supported or condoned. A prime example is the intentional taking of innocent human life, as in abortion and euthanasia. In our nation, “abortion and euthanasia have become preeminent threats to human dignity because they directly attack life itself, the most fundamental human good and the condition for all others” (Living the Gospel of Life, no. 5). It is a mistake with grave moral consequences to treat the destruction of innocent human life merely as a matter of individual choice. A legal system that violates the basic right to life on the grounds of choice is fundamentally flawed.

1. Similarly, human cloning, destructive research on human embryos, and other acts that directly violate the sanctity and dignity of human life are also intrinsically evil. These must always be opposed.

Other direct assaults on innocent human life, such as genocide, torture, and the targeting of noncombatants in acts of terror or war, can never be justified. Nor can violations of human dignity, such as acts of racism, treating workers as mere means to an end, deliberately subjecting workers to subhuman living conditions, treating the poor as disposable, or redefining marriage to deny its essential meaning, ever be justified.

1. Opposition to intrinsically evil acts, which undercut the dignity of the human person, should also open our eyes to the good we must do, that is, to our positive duty to contribute to the common good and to act in solidarity with those in need. As St. John Paul II said, “The fact that only the negative commandments oblige always and under all circumstances does not mean that in the moral life prohibitions are more important than the obligation to do good indicated by the positive commandment” (Veritatis Splendor, no. 52). Both opposing evil and doing good are essential obligations.

1. The right to life implies and is linked to other human rights-to the basic goods that every human person needs to live and thrive. All the life issues are connected, for erosion of respect for the life of any individual or group in society necessarily diminishes respect for all life. The moral imperative to respond to the needs of our neighbors-basic needs such as food, shelter, health care, education, and meaningful work-is universally binding on our consciences and may be legitimately fulfilled by a variety of means. Catholics must seek the best ways to respond to these needs. As St. John XXIII taught, “[Each of us] has the right to life, to bodily integrity, and to the means which are suitable for the proper development of life; these are primarily food, clothing, shelter, rest, medical care, and, finally, the necessary social services” (Pacem in Terris, no. 11).

1. St. John Paul II explained the importance of being true to fundamental Church teachings:

Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights-for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture-is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination. (Christifideles Laici, no. 38)
27. Two temptations in public life can distort the Church’s defense of human life and dignity:

1. The first is a moral equivalence that makes no ethical distinctions between different kinds of issues involving human life and dignity. The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many. It must always be opposed.3

1. The second is the misuse of these necessary moral distinctions as a way of dismissing or ignoring other serious threats to human life and dignity. The current and projected extent of environmental degradation has become a moral crisis especially because it poses a risk to humanity in the future and threatens the lives of poor and vulnerable human persons here and now. Racism and other unjust discrimination, the use of the death penalty, resorting to unjust war, the use of torture,4 war crimes, the failure to respond to those who are suffering from hunger or a lack of health care, pornography, redefining civil marriage, compromising religious liberty, or an unjust immigration policy are all serious moral issues that challenge our consciences and require us to act.

 

[Convert_in_99]

No one said you couldn’t but lets be clear the two are not at odds and I posted both.

I don’t see that, Trump hasn’t killed anyone as has Hillary and year after year.

Trump did previously contribute to Planned Parenthood. His “conversion” took place around the time he showed up in politics.

I truly hope he is a changed man, but it’s hard to believe someone who has been known to not always tell the truth.

 

[zz912]

Besides being pro-choice, what other things that you consider to be intrinsic evils does she support?

So-called same-sex “marriage”, embryonic stem cells, euthanasia, etc.

Her positions are horrific and reprehensible to faithful Christians.

What if a voter thought that Trump is so irresponsible and careless that he might start a nuclear war? Would that make voting for him worse on the intrinsic evil scale than voting for Hillary Clinton?

They are only kidding themselves.

I would say they are desperately trying to rationalize voting in support of evil.

In what way is Mrs. Clinton personally responsible for 1-million deaths per year? She isn’t personally running an abortion clinic, nor has she personally appointed any judges that have made any rulings on this issue. She has stated her personal opinion on this issue, but has not really had any personal impact that I know of.

Encouragement, promotion, and defense of evil makes you complicit in evil.

 

[Maximilan_Kolbe]

The same sentiment applies to those that slavishly defend Trump.

That’s the thing, few slavishly defend Tump. There was that queenofheartscv fellow, but beyond him, most defend a Trump vote because of the greater damage perceived by Hillary.

Now with Hillary, there is plenty of support among Catholic and non-Catholic posters, not just anti-Trump rhetoric. Lily Bernans and a few others come to mind.

You find plenty of “I’ll hold my nose and vote for Trump.” And plenty more “Hillary would be a good President.”

 

[Crossbones]

No one said you couldn’t but lets be clear the two are not at odds and I posted both.

I would disagree with you there. On one hand, Faithful Citizenship says you may disqualify a candidate for their support of abortion. On the other, EWTN suggest you must. Of course, I’ll go with one approved by the vast majority of the bishops in the US.

I don’t see that, Trump hasn’t killed anyone as has Hillary and year after year.

If he were given the power, he has said that he will target noncombatants (terrorist’s families) and ‘make them suffer’ for ‘retribution’. He has said that waterboarding is torture and he want to do worse. So, he hasn’t killed anyone yet.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Trump did previously contribute to Planned Parenthood. His “conversion” took place around the time he showed up in politics.

I truly hope he is a changed man, but it’s hard to believe someone who has been known to not always tell the truth.

He’s in good company Ronald Reagan evolved also. Maybe he’ll be like Ron!!

TRUMP: I’ve evolved on many issues over the years. And you know who else has? Ronald Reagan evolved on many issues. And I am pro-life. And if you look at the question, I was in business. They asked me a question as to pro-life or choice. And I said if you let [that quoted excerpt] run, that I hate the concept of abortion. I hate the concept of abortion. And then since then, I’ve very much evolved. And what happened is friends of mine years ago were going to have a child, and it was going to be aborted. And it wasn’t aborted. And that child today is a total superstar, a great, great child. And I saw that. And I saw other instances. And I am very, very proud to say that I am pro-life.

Hillary IS the advocate for abortion, she’s the world wide advocate among other issues against the Church as mentioned right above USCCB-Traditional marriage. In fact Hillary has attacked the Church and will continue …

HRC says religious beliefs ‘have to be changed’ on abortion. Here’s why that’s ironic.

or redefining marriage to deny its essential meaning-USCCB

theblaze.com/blog/2015/04/27/hillary-clinton-says-religious-beliefs-have-to-be-changed-on-abortion-heres-why-thats-ironic/

 

[Crossbones]

He’s in good company Ronald Reagan evolved also. Maybe he’ll be like Ron!!

You mean that he’ll nominate two pro-choice Supreme Court justices. Yes, I think that is entirely possible.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I would disagree with you there. On one hand, Faithful Citizenship says you may disqualify a candidate for their support of abortion. On the other, EWTN suggest you must. .

There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society, because they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor. Such actions are so deeply flawed that they are always opposed to the authentic good of persons. These are called “intrinsically evil” actions. They must always be rejected and opposed and must never be supported or condoned. A prime example is the intentional taking of innocent human life, as in abortion

There are some things we must never do! Namely Abortion. “must” So they both said “must”

 

[Crossbones]

There are some things we must never do! Namely Abortion. “must” So they bot said “must”

The USCCB document does not say that a Catholic cannot vote for someone who supports abortion, but does point out what a very serious issue it is.

 

[GaryTaylor]

The USCCB document does not say that a Catholic cannot vote for someone who supports abortion, but does point out what a very serious issue it is.

1. There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society, because they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor. Such actions are so deeply flawed that they are always opposed to the authentic good of persons. These are called “intrinsically evil” actions. They must always be rejected and opposed and must never be supported or condoned

 

[Crossbones]

GaryTaylor:
So, you won’t for Trump because torture is intrinsically evil.

 

[GaryTaylor]

So, you won’t for Trump because torture is intrinsically evil.

The content and context goes like this…

1. There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society, because they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor. Such actions are so deeply flawed that they are always opposed to the authentic good of persons. These are called “intrinsically evil” actions. They must always be rejected and opposed and must never be supported or condoned. A prime example is the intentional taking of innocent human life, as in abortion and euthanasia. In our nation, “abortion and euthanasia have become preeminent threats to human dignity because they directly attack life itself, the most fundamental human good and the condition for all others” (Living the Gospel of Life, no. 5). It is a mistake with grave moral consequences to treat the destruction of innocent human life merely as a matter of individual choice. A legal system that violates the basic right to life on the grounds of choice is fundamentally flawed.

1. Similarly, human cloning, destructive research on human embryos, and other acts that directly violate the sanctity and dignity of human life are also intrinsically evil. These must always be opposed. Other direct assaults on innocent human life, such as genocide, torture, and the targeting of noncombatants in acts of terror or war, can never be justified. Nor can violations of human dignity, such as acts of racism, treating workers as mere means to an end, deliberately subjecting workers to subhuman living conditions, treating the poor as disposable, or redefining marriage to deny its essential meaning, ever be justified.

Further Trump hasn’t done anything to date.

[Other direct assaults on innocent human life, such as genocide, torture, and the targeting of noncombatants in acts of terror or war, can never be justified. Nor can violations of human dignity, such as acts of racism, treating workers as mere means to an end, deliberately subjecting workers to subhuman living conditions, treating the poor as disposable, or redefining marriage to deny its essential meaning, ever be justified.

[/quote]

 

[Crossbones]

The content and context goes like this…

Further Trump hasn’t done anything to date.

[Other direct assaults on innocent human life, such as genocide, torture, and the targeting of noncombatants in acts of terror or war, can never be justified. Nor can violations of human dignity, such as acts of racism, treating workers as mere means to an end, deliberately subjecting workers to subhuman living conditions, treating the poor as disposable, or redefining marriage to deny its essential meaning, ever be justified./QUOTE]

 

[GaryTaylor]

GaryTaylor;13892888:

So, he says he’s going to torture and target noncombatants but since he hasn’t done it yet, you think it’s ok to vote for him.

No one “knows” what he is going to do in relation. Nor do you and that does make sense. In fact he’s still courting the conservative platform which is yet to be defined for the convention but it will be then.

What we DO know is abortion in particular is a priority of the Church and perpetual teaching because of the culture of death-America. And Hillary has multiple issues already in regards.

 

[Crossbones]

Crossbones;13892892:

No one “knows” what he is going to do in relation. Nor do you and that does make sense. In fact he’s still courting the conservative platform which is yet to be defined for the convention but it will be then.

Whats we DO know is abortion in particular is a priority of the Church and perpetual teaching because of the culture of death-America. And Hillary has multiple issues already in regards.

Ok then. I wonder how many Germans used the excuse of “We didn’t know that Hitler would murder the Jews of Europe” after he talked on murdering Jews in Mein Kampf.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Ok then. I wonder how many Germans used the excuse of “We didn’t know that Hitler would murder the Jews of Europe” after he talked on murdering Jews in Mein Kampf.

False analogy.

 

[Crossbones]

False analogy.

Not really. Trump said what he is going to do. Torture and target families of terrorists to make them suffer as retribution. Both are intrinsic evils and must always be opposed. And yet many here are justifying their vote for him because they don’t believe he’ll do it. Much like many Germans I’m sure didn’t believe that Hitler would do what he did.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Not really. .

Nonsense, its absolutely absurd to compare anyone to Hitler. In fact as close as Hillary and Obama are I would call even that a false analogy.

 

[Crossbones]

Nonsense, its absolutely absurd to compare anyone to Hitler. In fact as close as Hillary and Obama are I would call even that a false analogy.

Actually, I am comparing the actions of Trump’s supporters to those of Hitler’s. Hitler said he would do terrible things and his supporters still voted for him. Trump says he will do terrible things and his supporters aren’t dissuaded from voting for him (even Catholics who know that torture and targeting noncombatants are intrinsic evils). So, I think it’s a pretty precise analogy. Maybe you could provide a counterexample of someone who said they would do horrible things against the teachings of the Catholic Church and then didn’t after they were elected to power.

 

[Maximilan_Kolbe]

Actually, I am comparing the actions of Trump’s supporters to those of Hitler’s. Hitler said he would do terrible things and his supporters still voted for him. Trump says he will do terrible things and his supporters aren’t dissuaded from voting for him (even Catholics who know that torture and targeting noncombatants are intrinsic evils). So, I think it’s a pretty precise analogy. Maybe you could provide a counterexample of someone who said they would do horrible things against the teachings of the Catholic Church and then didn’t after they were elected to power.

Don’t all candidates say they are going to do terrible things? Hillary certainly does, even if is continuing the atrocities already in place.

I’d say terrible things is in the eye of the beholder, and since every candidate is guilty, why make this about Trump?