U.S. bishops: Vote your conscience Catholics urged to weigh stands on all issues

  • Thread starter Thread starter buffalo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
maggiemay2u said:
Any statistics to determine the percentage of that nebulous assertion? Now you’re being silly.
Click to expand...
You are apparently confusing two different things here:
  1. A poster said she was interested in the statistics showing how Catholic women contracept at a rate greater than that of the general population. In answer to that question I said the following:
    Catholic Medical Weekly: Friday, March 16, 2007:
    “In 1995, 70% of all U.S. Catholic women of childbearing age used some form of contraception. Since 64% of all women, regardless of faith, use contraception, the proportion of Catholic women who contracept is actually slightly higher than women at large.”
    And please see:
    Data from the National Center for Health Statistics, published in Fehring, R. and Schlidt, A.M. “Trends in Contraceptive Use Among Catholics in the United States: 1988-1995” The Linacre Quarterly - Journal of the Catholic Medical Association Vol.68 No. 2, May 2001. Pp. 170-185.
  2. A different poster said that “If the women is on the pill then the COUPLE is contracepting. Read up on the Theology of the Body”
    In answer to that statement, I submit that it is not always true that it is the fault of the husband, since there are cases when the husband will object to the use of the contraceptive pill. I made no assertion as to the statistics in this particular case.
    So, no, I am not being silly, I am not being misogynistic. I am simply referring in case 1 to the percentage of US Catholic women who are contracepting. In case 2, I am responding to a different point as to whether or not it is always the couple who are guilty. In some cases, the couple may be guilty, however, in other cases the husband may bear no guilt for the woman taking the contraceptive.
    There is nothing silly about any of this. It is very serious, since the use of contraceptives, as far as I know, constitutes, according to Catholic theology, grave matter, and is seriously wrong. If the other conditions for mortal sin are present, then there is mortal sin and the punishment for unrepentant mortal sin is, according to my knowledge of Catholic theology, eternal damnation in hell.
    To say that any of this is silly is plain wrong in my personal opinion.
 
Ok. I’m sorry. I had to come back and post something.

Yes, bobzills is correct that too many Catholics are using contraceptives. (regardless of whether it is the woman and/or the man and/or the couple.)

What’s the point in pointing out that Catholic women are contracepting a bit more than other women? Let’s assume that the statistic is true. That only leads to maryJohnZ’s point.

Yes, maryJohnZ is correct that many Catholics are misinformed about the Church’s position on contraception.

If we assume that maryJohnZ is wrong, then it means that these women are contracepting with full knowledge of their sin. These women will be condemned to eternal damnation if they don’t seek forgiveness.

So…where do we go from here?
  1. Vote for those who will support life. Reason? See my discourse above in post #97.
  2. Take personal responsibility to spread the truth about contraceptives and abortion. Also pray for messengers to be sent to those you can’t reach physically.
  3. Pray for those who chose not to listen and heed the message.
So…what is the point here again? I see this all as very simple. The current state of affairs is never a justification for its continued existence.

As a side note, a husband who knows that his wife is on the pill has the moral obligation to not have intercourse with her. To do so will condemn him and her.
 
JB2VI said:
As a side note, a husband who knows that his wife is on the pill has the moral obligation to not have intercourse with her. To do so will condemn him and her.
Click to expand...
Where is your reference for that assertion?
My information and understanding is different. If the husband knows that his wife is on the pill and he tells his wife that he objects to her being on the pill and does not want her to use the contraceptive pill, and his wife continues to use the contraceptive pill anyway, the husband is not guilty of sin if he has relations with his wife.
 
bobzills said:
Where is your reference for that assertion?
My information and understanding is different. If the husband knows that his wife is on the pill and he tells his wife that he objects to her being on the pill and does not want her to use the contraceptive pill, and his wife continues to use the contraceptive pill anyway, the husband is not guilty of sin if he has relations with his wife.
Click to expand...
You are correct. I just checked too and I’m wrong on this point. BUT, I have issues with this personally. I cannot see having marital relations knowing that one of my children may be aborted because of the pill.
 
JB2VI said:
You are correct. I just checked too and I’m wrong on this point. BUT, I have issues with this personally. I cannot see having marital relations knowing that one of my children may be aborted because of the pill.
Click to expand...
Of course the husband is not required to have relations with his wife if she insists on using the pill.
 
bobzills said:
Catholic Medical Weekly: Friday, March 16, 2007:
“In 1995, 70% of all U.S. Catholic women of childbearing age used some form of contraception. Since 64% of all women, regardless of faith, use contraception, the proportion of Catholic women who contracept is actually slightly higher than women at large.”
And please see:
Data from the National Center for Health Statistics, published in Fehring, R. and Schlidt, A.M. “Trends in Contraceptive Use Among Catholics in the United States: 1988-1995” The Linacre Quarterly - Journal of the Catholic Medical Association Vol.68 No. 2, May 2001. Pp. 170-185.
Click to expand...
I asked where the stats came from. As in who did they actually talk to. I know what has been written as being a stat. But what was the cohort group and does anyone know of anyone that has been asked for information?

Also it is true that many that follow NFP think this is only a catholic form of birth control. So stats could very well be segued with this.
 
This was a hgood website for Catholics looking into Obama’s record on the 'born alive" abortion survivor bill that he voted against.
Catholics in the Public Square
thepublicsquare.blogspot.com/2008/08/nrlc-obama-cover-up-revealed-on-born.html

They had an editorial piece with links to a Catholic sister’s thoughts about Jeremiah as a treu prophet of God bringing God’s Word to the people Vs the false prophet and I thought the message was appropriate for the topic:

“Jeremiah and the Gift of Discernment in an Election Year
thepublicsquare.blogspot.com/2008/08/jeremiah-and-gift-of-discernment-in.html
Today I heard Sister Ann Shields of the Servants of God’s Love give her daily Scripture commentary on Michigan’s Ave Maria Radio (you can listen on the internet daily at this link to her show “Food for the Journey,” which runs from 10 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.) commenting on today’s reading from Jeremiah 28:1-17. I highly recommend listening to her short, incisive commentaries as often as you can. The theme of the Jeremiah reading is the conflict between two prophets: the prophet Jeremiah who gives the true message from the Lord that warns the people to repent and the false prophet Hananiah who gives the people the soothing message that they want to hear. As is to be expected, Sister said that she would not go into details about the application of this passage to America today; but, speaking in appropriate and prudent general terms, she did say that America needs leadership that will tell the nation the hard truth about what’s wrong with the way we live. She noted that God will not allow the high level of sin in today’s America to persist without repercussions.”
thepublicsquare.blogspot.com/2008/08/jeremiah-and-gift-of-discernment-in.html

So, as we look at the platforsm of the two parties:
the Democratic party supporting abortion at all stages, homosexual unions and marriage, euthansia,…
it is just very hard to support those views and call yourself Catholic. And there are repurcussions to these policies. We see the increased violence in our young people. The U-tube videos of girls beating up other girls is one example.

I really believe a lot of this type of violence stems from the way the human person has been degraded by abortion and a tendency to view even the human being as an onject or an animal of some kind. The result is animal behavior…not virtue and holiness which we are called to.

Voting a Catholic conscience would have to involve looking at which Candidate is steering us back toward a true sense of the dignity of each human life.

You won’t have peace in the world as long as violence in the womb is sanctioned.

In Christ, maryJohnz
 
For people who want some articles related to harmful effects of contraception, especially the ‘pill’ I received these links in my e-mail today and am passing them on. These studies show that the “pill” is extremely harmful to men and women and families.

"“Oral contraceptives totally disrupt the normal hormonal cascade. When the hormonal system is disrupted, cardiovascular disease, cancer, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome and other serious illnesses will increase. My clinical experience has clearly shown that it is impossible to adequately treat these illnesses if there is an imbalanced hormonal system.” (Read “Oral Contraceptives May Be Linked to Atherosclerosis” lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jul/08071202.html)

In addition to altering women’s natural attraction to suitable partners, the pill also permanently damages sex drive over long-term use, according to one study (Read lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/may/05052603.html)).

Related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Birth Control Pill May Cause Prostate Cancer and Bladder Disease in Mothers’ Children
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/may/05050411.html

The Pill is Deadly to Babies and Women
lifesitenews.com/ldn/1999/jan/99011203.html

Online Video: Noted Endocrinologist Explains How the Birth Control Pill Causes Abortion
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/aug/07080303.html

In Christ. maryJohnZ
 
The Kansas Bishop has issued a no nonsense statement that Catholics cannot support pro-abortion candidates.:

"No Compromises: Kansas State Bishops Declare Voting for Abortion Candidate is “Evil”

By Peter J. Smith

KANSAS CITY, August 12, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A vote cast for a politician who supports abortion and same-sex “marriage” is nothing less than casting a vote for “evil” says a state conference of Catholic bishops.

In a voter’s guide released for the second time since 2006, the Kansas Catholic Bishops make it clear that Catholics would “commit moral evil” by voting for a candidate who embraces abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning, and same-sex “marriage,” when a morally acceptable candidate is available.

The voter’s guide signed by Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, bishops Ronald Gilmore of Dodge City, Paul Coakley of Salina, and Michael Jackels of Wichita sends a strong message to Catholics that advancing pro-abortion candidates and their aims is incompatible with the Catholic Faith. "
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08081207.html

In Christ, maryJohnZ
 
MaryJohnZ said:
The Kansas Bishop has issued a no nonsense statement that Catholics cannot support pro-abortion candidates.:

"No Compromises: Kansas State Bishops Declare Voting for Abortion Candidate is “Evil”

By Peter J. Smith

KANSAS CITY, August 12, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A vote cast for a politician who supports abortion and same-sex “marriage” is nothing less than casting a vote for “evil” says a state conference of Catholic bishops.

In a voter’s guide released for the second time since 2006, the Kansas Catholic Bishops make it clear that Catholics would “commit moral evil” by voting for a candidate who embraces abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning, and same-sex “marriage,” when a morally acceptable candidate is available.

The voter’s guide signed by Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, bishops Ronald Gilmore of Dodge City, Paul Coakley of Salina, and Michael Jackels of Wichita sends a strong message to Catholics that advancing pro-abortion candidates and their aims is incompatible with the Catholic Faith. "
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08081207.html

In Christ, maryJohnZ
Click to expand...
Now lets get the other Bishops to do the same.👍
 
MaryJohnZ said:
The Kansas Bishop has issued a no nonsense statement that Catholics cannot support pro-abortion candidates.:

"No Compromises: Kansas State Bishops Declare Voting for Abortion Candidate is “Evil”

By Peter J. Smith

KANSAS CITY, August 12, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A vote cast for a politician who supports abortion and same-sex “marriage” is nothing less than casting a vote for “evil” says a state conference of Catholic bishops.

In a voter’s guide released for the second time since 2006, the Kansas Catholic Bishops make it clear that Catholics would “commit moral evil” by voting for a candidate who embraces abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning, and same-sex “marriage,” when a morally acceptable candidate is available.

The voter’s guide signed by Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, bishops Ronald Gilmore of Dodge City, Paul Coakley of Salina, and Michael Jackels of Wichita sends a strong message to Catholics that advancing pro-abortion candidates and their aims is incompatible with the Catholic Faith. "
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08081207.html

In Christ, maryJohnZ
Click to expand...
What about if you have to vote for a ticket of two and one of the candidates is mildly pro-life, but the other is pro-choice?
 
bobzills said:
What about if you have to vote for a ticket of two and one of the candidates is mildly pro-life, but the other is pro-choice?
Click to expand...
What if? How about waiting to see what is.

And while you’re ruminating on what ifs, then how about what if the top of the ticket, the one that counts, is pro-life, and the top of the other ticket is demonstrably pro-abortion?
 
bobzills said:
What about if you have to vote for a ticket of two and one of the candidates is mildly pro-life, but the other is pro-choice?
Click to expand...
You have to look at the potential outcomes of a substantial number of people voting as you do.

For example, Candidate C is pro-choice, Candidate L is mildly pro-life. The main function of the president in this issue is the nomination of Supreme Court Judges.

What kind of judges would each of them nominate? Would we get more Scalias or more Ginsbergs?

Another aspect, wrt 3rd parties, is again, the outcome of the substantial number voting as you do. Suppose you vote for a third party in a very hotly contested state. Candidates C and L are running neck and neck. If you say, well, Candidate L is not *sufficiently *pro-life for my taste, so I’m going to vote for a 3rd party and a substantial number of people did the same, the end result would be a victory for Candidate C, which would be worse than a substantial number voting for Candidate L and putting him over the top.

OTOH, if you live in a state where the outcome is pretty much a forgone conclusion, and a substantial number of people is unlikely to make any difference in the outcome (you know, it would have to be a *huge *number rather than merely substantial), then voting for a third party would probably make no difference, and I believe it is true that a number of people voting third party might start sending a message.

I do not believe that not-voting sends a message: I think they figure that those who do not vote do not care, they don’t see it as a rejection but as apathy.
 
My understanding from Vatican II documents is that Bishops have infallibility for teaching the faith only as long as they are faithful to the Pope. Since the Kansas Bishop has said voting for any candidate that is not pro-life is immoral, I believ he is teaching the faith…leading us as to what we must do. other Bishops who waffle on this are not being 100% faithful to the Magesterium. They lose their infallibility in terms of teaching the faith when they fail to follow the Pope by not advising some of our pro-choiuce Catholic politicians that they are incurring excommunication by their public policies in reagrd to abortion. By allowing these public figures to continue to receive communion during mass without saying anything or telling their Priests not to give them communion, is being unfaithful to the Pope in my view and they lose their infallibility as teachers of the faith by doing this.

If one faith ful Bishop like the Kansas Bishop comes out with a statement in regards to voting for a pro-choice candidate being sinful, then I have to take that as an infallible teaching on the faith and chosse the most pro-life candidate (most anti-abortion) for each of the offices.

Also the party platform represents the view of the party members and the candidates of that party. If the party platform has a pro-abortion plank it taints all the candidates in that party from my point of view. I would say the same thing if the party was pro-slavery and had a plank supporting slavery, it would taint everyone running under the banner of that party.

In Christ,
maryJohnZ
 
MaryJohnZ said:
My understanding from Vatican II documents is that Bishops have infallibility for teaching the faith only as long as they are faithful to the Pope. Since the Kansas Bishop has said voting for any candidate that is not pro-life is immoral, I believ he is teaching the faith…leading us as to what we must do. other Bishops who waffle on this are not being 100% faithful to the Magesterium. They lose their infallibility in terms of teaching the faith when they fail to follow the Pope by not advising some of our pro-choiuce Catholic politicians that they are incurring excommunication by their public policies in reagrd to abortion. By allowing these public figures to continue to receive communion during mass without saying anything or telling their Priests not to give them communion, is being unfaithful to the Pope in my view and they lose their infallibility as teachers of the faith by doing this.

If one faith ful Bishop like the Kansas Bishop comes out with a statement in regards to voting for a pro-choice candidate being sinful, then I have to take that as an infallible teaching on the faith and chosse the most pro-life candidate (most anti-abortion) for each of the offices.

Also the party platform represents the view of the party members and the candidates of that party. If the party platform has a pro-abortion plank it taints all the candidates in that party from my point of view. I would say the same thing if the party was pro-slavery and had a plank supporting slavery, it would taint everyone running under the banner of that party.

In Christ,
maryJohnZ
Click to expand...
Well said. Thank you.
 
I haven’t considered who i might vote for in any races I’ll vote in this November. My life is full enough and my mind doesn’t work that way in any event.

I’ll study “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” from the US Catholic Bishops, pray about it a lot, look for anything my Bishop may have said, pray some more, then make my choices.
 
👍
DavidSacramento said:
I haven’t considered who i might vote for in any races I’ll vote in this November. My life is full enough and my mind doesn’t work that way in any event.

I’ll study “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” from the US Catholic Bishops, pray about it a lot, look for anything my Bishop may have said, pray some more, then make my choices.
Click to expand...
Well if you get stuck PM me and I can tell you who you should vote for…🙂
 
buffalo said:
All social justice finds its roots in one thing - life.
Click to expand...
No, that is not correct.

Life issues are separate and apart from Social Justice issues.

Life issues are related to life and death.

Social Justice issues are related to all the time between the start of life and our death.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top