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.
KathleenElsie said:
Sadly I must agree. This has been for as long as I have noticed. 1968 till now.🤷
Click to expand...
Yep… 1968 the year all ----broke loose. Was amazed when I read it… at the lack of clarity. Almost like giving permission to consider other issues depending on the value each individual gives to each issue. Or was I missing something?
 
JimG said:
OK, we’ve seen the news from New Jersey. The bishops of Kansas have also made a statement about voting. You can read it here. It’s short. Pay close attention to the paragraph entitled “Judgments Concerning Moral Evils.”
Click to expand...
Thanks. I liked this part:
We would not be acting immorally therefore if we were to vote for a candidate who is not totally acceptable in order to defeat one who poses an even greater threat to human life and dignity.
Click to expand...
That is what I founding missing from the NJ piece.
 
Teelynn said:
On that issue alone? Or on that issue combined with other issues? My mind has been made up for a long time on who to vote for, it sounds to me as though they are trying to give people the go ahead if they feel other issues trump the abortion issue.🤷
Click to expand...
Exactly! And why do you think that is? I think it is politics plain and simple. Catholic bishops in general don’t like to make waves. Just look at the great job they’ve done in addressing and covering up in the sex abuse scandals. There have been a few good bishops willing to stand up for the truth.

In another post I was told Catholics, unlike Protestants, need to not criticize their Bishops and the Magisterium, since they are our leaders in the one true faith. I don’t buy it. In other words, pay and obey. Had it not been for the laity and the media, we would still be waiting for apologies from Rome and the episcopacy on the harm inflicted on so many with the sexual abuse.
 
elgar said:
Exactly! And why do you think that is? I think it is politics plain and simple. Catholic bishops in general don’t like to make waves. Just look at the great job they’ve done in addressing and covering up in the sex abuse scandals. There have been a few good bishops willing to stand up for the truth.

In another post I was told Catholics, unlike Protestants, need to not criticize their Bishops and the Magisterium, since they are our leaders in the one true faith. I don’t buy it. In other words, pay and obey. Had it not been for the laity and the media, we would still be waiting for apologies from Rome and the episcopacy on the harm inflicted on so many with the sexual abuse.
Click to expand...
The laity has and should take part in holding our leaders accountable…in ALL MATTERS OF TRUTH. An obligation not a choice, as evident in scripture. We also need to obey them in all matters of truth. Long gone are the days, however, that Catholics can just sit back and soak up everything that is promoted from the pulpit and trust that what they are hearing is truth, just because those that are promoting are clergy. That’s the way it used to be…I KNOW…I lived it. Now we have to inform ourselves on the TRUTH OF THE CHURCH, and hold those that are promoting dissent accountable…just the way it is in 2008.
 
:gopray2: I ask to please vote life. And be very careful about government health care for that too is about life. My friend in Australia as denied treatment (a way to be fed-tube feeding TPN) and died because too costly can do several gall bladder, MRI if we don’t feed you. I am fed the same and live an semi-active life, a life that has given me time with God and His church. I am one that would not be if we go the way of socialized medicine,too expensive. Please vote carefully. Save the babies and the ill and elderly (you know there are alot of folks coming up for s.s. and medicare) Pray and support life from the moment God chooses to when He chooses to end. Amen:signofcross:
 
I agree with stinkyweed and others. It all begins with life and being given the opportunity to live. I will defend life at all stages and chose candidates that will help in that fight. Everything else is simply not as important.
 
Philothea53 said:
What is that supposed to mean?
Click to expand...
I believe he is referring to those that refuse to believe certain elements in the government are content to keep abortion around for the sole purpose of running against it.

I had that discussion with a friend of mine recently. It was abortion is bad we can’t vote for ‘A’ because ‘A’ is pro-abortion.

I point out that ‘B’ had every chance to stop abortion in the area we lived in yet didn’t.

My friend simple repeated her line over and over like a broken record and any evidence I used to back this up was dismissed as bias.
 
cyberwolf001 said:
I point out that ‘B’ had every chance to stop abortion in the area we lived in yet didn’t.
Click to expand...
This disturbs me too.
In choosing a candidate to support, I try to look at past actions and not just current words. In my book, a candidate is anti-life if he/she fails to oppose abortion in pass voting on bills…no matter what he/she says now. Thus, I’m often faced with the choice of two candidates or more that do not really oppose abortion (rhetoric aside). I then turn to the other 4 issues I listed previously. See how they way on those. Often, they balance out equally on those too. I then turn to the other issues that are lesser in importance.
 
JB2VI said:
This disturbs me too.
In choosing a candidate to support, I try to look at past actions and not just current words. In my book, a candidate is anti-life if he/she fails to oppose abortion in pass voting on bills…no matter what he/she says now. Thus, I’m often faced with the choice of two candidates or more that do not really oppose abortion (rhetoric aside). I then turn to the other 4 issues I listed previously. See how they way on those. Often, they balance out equally on those too. I then turn to the other issues that are lesser in importance.
Click to expand...
In the case of A (pro-choice) & B (pro-life).

If B is vocal in his/her support of life and this view is made public and the news media makes it news then some good is coming from it no matter what. For others can then feel free to speak out also. So some good comes from their words if not from their deeds.

If on the other hand A is vocal in their support of “choice” and the media supports this then evil wins. If A is Catholic other Catholic’s will point to this person and think it is ok to be pro-choice. If A gets lots of media coverage then more babies will dies and other “choice” issues will be promoted.

So in this case choice B is at least bringing the issue of life to the forefront. Do I like to make this sort of choice? NO.

But when A will actively promote death and win if we do not vote for B. Then I will hold my nose and vote for B.
 
I rather liked the way Fr. Provone put it. “Why don’t we just substitute something like terrorism in for abortion for a minute.” Say the candidate said he was in favor of terrorism. Would you then turn around and ask him, “Well what are your plans for health care?” Oh or then maybe you could ask him about the death penalty or the war. Really, if you never get to live from the beginning does the death penalty really apply or can you be sent into a war? If your dead from abortion I don’t think any of the other issues apply. When following the faith I tend to skip the USCCB and follow the Pope. We can receive communion and disagree about the war or the death penalty, but if you are a Catholic a publicly declare yourself proabortion, DON"T RECEIVE COMMUNION! If it keeps me from Jesus, I had better work to prevent it!
 
dkoinzan said:
I rather liked the way Fr. Provone put it. “Why don’t we just substitute something like terrorism in for abortion for a minute.” Say the candidate said he was in favor of terrorism. Would you then turn around and ask him, “Well what are your plans for health care?”
Click to expand...
This is a very good point. If a candidate says he or she is against abortion we should ask exactly what he or she plans to do to restrict it. Candidates shouldn’t get a free pass simply because they say they are against abortion.
 
i have a different view of this. I am not sure if I agree with the approach of placing all of the responsibility for the increase in abortions and contraceptive use on elected politicians. Catholics have to take some responsibility for their actions. I read that Catholics make up about 24% of the population of the USA. But of all the women who have abortions in the USA, 27% of them are Catholics. Why then do Catholics have abortions at a greater rate than do women in the population at large? Is it because some politician is pro-choice? Is that the reason why Catholic women are having so many abortions? And similarly, the percentage of Catholic women using ABC is larger than the percentage of women in the population at large using ABC (in the USA).
 
You know I give up. You tell us we have to vote and then tell us we have to be a single issue voter. I’m leaving.
 
Dale_M said:
:confused:
The USCCB specifically says Catholics are not single-issue voters.
Click to expand...
That quote is taken out of context as are many of the quotes in the slanted article posted by the OP. Please take a few minutes to read the document by the USCCB…

usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/FCStatement.pdf

“42. As Catholics we are not single-issue voters. A candidate’s position on a single
issue is not sufficient to guarantee a voter’s support. Yet a candidate’s position on a
single issue that involves an intrinsic evil, such as support for legal abortion or the
promotion of racism, may legitimately lead a voter to disqualify a candidate from
receiving support.”
 
Personally, I have voted pro-life forever. And I will continue to vote prolife. Whenever there is a no direct choice for a prolife candidate,rather than not vote, I write a candidate in…I do this to send the local politicians a message, that I will only support a prolife candidate. Many people will say that my write-in is a waste of my vote…but I know that the candidates have pollsters who look at these results…and if makes any impact, so be it.

But I just don’t wait for election time to voice my concerns about voting prolife…I write the current leaders and I write the candidates too expressing my dislike or like of their political stand. Just don’t be apathetic about it…get active.

I hope everyone will be voting. The next president also will be making selections of justices of the supreme court, and I want the new justices to turn the tide and overturn Roe v.Wade. It can happen!
 
church_mouse said:
That quote is taken out of context as are many of the quotes in the slanted article posted by the OP. Please take a few minutes to read the document by the USCCB…
Click to expand...
I have read it, and not only posted a link to the document (post #15) but also posted the same paragraph that you did (post #20).

The document says the abortion and euthanasia are the preeminent issues. But the bishops also take great care to say that they are not the only issues. That said, I can’t in good conscience say that the other issues outweigh that of abortion and euthanasia.
 
Adonis33 said:
Nobody HAS to vote - though everybody should vote.

I think anybody has a right not to vote if that is how they feel.
Click to expand...
Then they shouldn’t complain if they don’t like the direction the country is going. They had their chance.

:twocents:
 
James 4:17 says it and the HOLY SEE has taught and still teaches it.

SO FOR ONE WHO KNOWS THE RIGHT THING TO DO AND DOES NOT DO IT, IT IS A SIN.

If you know that abortion is wrong and do nothing to stop it then you are sinning. This means that you are to go to confession as murder is a MORTAL SIN and if you vote for those that support it you are also responsible for spilling the blood of the innocent.
 
They discussed this on EWTN it is the greatest sin NOT to vote. If we have two bad choices we pick the lesser NOT to choose the lesser evil but choosing the greatest restriction on evil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top