Who will you be supporting in the U.S. presidential election with our Catholic values in mind?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I certainly wouldn’t discuss my politics in this forum. Cheers to all you who want to dive into this piranha pool. God bless all.
 
It does follow. These bishops are supposed to follow Christ. But these bishops are human after all. If they did, they wouldn’t have been covering for an abuser like McCarrick.

www.ncregister.com

USCCB Votes Down Resolution Encouraging Holy See to Release McCarrick Files

Objections that the resolution was redundant and ambiguous won out, and it was voted down by a clicker vote of 83-137, with three abstaining.
www.ncregister.com www.ncregister.com

They wouldn’t have been destroying evidence in regards to the sex abuse scandals:

www.nytimes.com

Federal Government Tells Catholic Bishops Not to Destroy Sex Abuse Documents (Published 2018)

The Justice Department has told Catholic dioceses to preserve documents related to its handling of child sexual abuse, a sign that the federal inquiry is more extensive than previously known.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

These bishops are humans, just like the clergy of Israel during the times of Ezekiel and Jeremiah. They are not immune from error. To say that the clergy can never error is clericalism. The sad reality of it all, is the USCCB takes money from Uncle Sam and their objectivity on the matters which the receive money from are to be held in suspect.

Im sorry you disagree.
 
What I said is not uncharitable. I didn’t say anything about “anyone” in a third marriage and I never have. His wife is Catholic. So as I said, it’s an objectively invalid marriage from a Catholic perspective. I’m also thinking of Trump’s history… the affairs hush money… the women private parts grabbing comment…the boasts that he would burst into the girls’ change rooms at the pageants he would run.
I’ve only ever commented on Trump, not third marriages in general. You only take issue with my comments because of your admiration and support for the man… but like it or not, from a Catholic perspective, his third marriage to a Catholic woman in a non-Catholic ceremony is invalid.
 
Last edited:
FrancisFan43 said:
These bishops are humans, just like the clergy of Israel during the times of Ezekiel and Jeremiah. They are not immune from error. To say that the clergy can never error is clericalism.
Click to expand...
But that is not what I am saying. I did not say it was impossible for the clergy to fall into sin. But until there is evidence that they have sinned, it is libelous to assume that they have. To use the McCarrick example, it would be like assuming that of course priests are prone to corruption. They don’t have a wife for sexual outlet, so of course their actions with minors are suspect - even without evidence. And of course bishops always cover for each other, so we may as well assume that bishops are covering up predatory behavior - even without evidence that they are doing so. The difference is that in the McCarrick case there was evidence. There is zero evidence that the bishops (not just one of them either, but most of them, apparently) have been corrupted by administering funds from the US government. So until such evidence surfaces, the default respectful assumption should be that they are not corrupt.
 
I didn’t read all the other responses or the reasoning behind them, but I will be voting for Trump again. Despite his many apparent personal faults (which of course all of us have), he has been consistent in his pro-life measures and his appointment of conservative, pro-life judges. The next presidential term will almost certainly see another Supreme Court vacancy. While there are some third-party candidates who more closely align with my values, in this political climate none of them has a shot and a vote cast in their name would be recklessly risking leaving the SC nomination in the hands of the Democrats. Not to mention, despite what CNN says, Trump has improved the economy and is more or less following through on his promises.

Then again, since I live in NY, my vote doesn’t matter, and our governor has made clear that my kind is not welcome in the state. I probably could morally vote third party without even minimally impacting the election. I guess we’ll see.
 
Last edited:
They will pick a moderate like either of those two, who will win the rust belt.
 
To me, a moderate Democrat would be someone like JFK or Adlai Stevenson. But I’m not hopeful for getting anyone like that.
 
If I write in a candidate, I am not disobeying the Church with regards to that teaching. In 2016 I voted neither Democratic or Republican, at this point I fully expect to do the same in 2020.
 
Last edited:
Aquinas11 said:
Not an argument
Click to expand...
Your citation from that awful source is not an argument either. I don’t question that the Church received funds to administer a program. What I question is the opinion that those funds must have corrupted our bishops. And when that opinion comes from a cite known for constant clergy-bashing, that is all the more telling.

Also, you should review the FAQs for this forum where Rule 4 under “conduct” is:
CAF Rules of Conduct rule 4:
Do not incite animosity towards anyone, especially the clergy.
Click to expand...
Your clergy-bashing is dangerously close to inciting animosity towards clergy.
 
Last edited:
This will be my first time voting in an election and I am voting for Trump, In california my vote is practically useless, but he has delivered in his promises and has done more than any of the previous administrations combined in just a span of a couple years.

Can we get out of the way that he is flawed? Typology is an eye opener with this president. He has been doing more for all our values than any of the politicians with silver toungues tell us. But everyone wants to call him corrupt? God sent Trump to clean house and if we are just gonna try to contemplate why God would send a flawed playboy in these moments in time, then we really got to look in the mirror.
 
Aquinas11 said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
CAF Rules of Conduct rule 4
Do not incite animosity towards anyone,
Click to expand...
If accusing multiple people who simply disagree with you of libel isn’t inciting animosity, I don’t know what is…
Click to expand...
The full rule #4, including the part you chose to omit (in bold):
Do not incite animosity towards anyone, especially the clergy.
Click to expand...
Implying the entire conference of US catholic bishops corrupt in their motivations is arguably a violation of rule #4.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Whoever is pro-life. Extra points if they are not politically correct.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
anyone
Click to expand...
Anyone means anyone
LeafByNiggle said:
Calling the entire conference of US catholic bishops corrupt
Click to expand...
I could call that libel since I never said that but I won’t due to rule #4
LeafByNiggle said:
virulent clergy-bashing organization
Click to expand...
Again, could be libel. They published this yesterday praising Bishop

onepeterfive.com

Bishop Schneider Publishes Open Letter Condemning Pachamama Idolatry

In a new open letter published today, Bishop Athanasius Schneider of Astana, Kazakhstan, invoking his “ordination as a Catholic bishop and successor to the Apostles,” condemns the use of the pagan…
onepeterfive.com onepeterfive.com
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top