Who Will You Vote For in 2012?

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Gift_from_God said:
Guantanamo Bay and waterboarding

Apart from maybe Ron Paul and McCain, I don’t recall there being strong GOP opposition to Bush’s torture policy
Click to expand...
Waterboarding did not occur at Guantanamo

And people didn’t die from waterboarding. When we are talking about abortions we are talking about the deliberate mass murder of thousands of babies. Many by being torn literally limb from limb. There is absolutely no comparison.
 
ishii said:
What part of the Republican party platform is inconsistent with Catholic moral teaching? Give examples, please.

Ishii
Click to expand...
Still waiting for an example. Anybody? What part of the ***Republican party platform ***is inconsistent with Catholic moral teaching?

Ishii
 
addictedkoala said:
They may hold heretical positions and be poor Catholics, but you don’t incur automatic excommunication from holding any particular incorrect belief.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t holding heretical positions make you a heretic? Which incurs latentiae setentiae?

Can. 1364 §1. Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 194, §1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; in addition, a cleric can be punished with the penalties mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336, §1, nn. 1, 2, and 3.

Am I not correct?

EDIT:
And I don’t want anyone to overlook ishii’s double post bc of this one… I’d be highly interested if someone could prove how the Republicans aren’t up to snuff on keeping with Catholic beliefs too. :tiphat:
 
Monte_RCMS said:
Senator Ted Kennedy led the fight, successfully, to prevent the worker from owning his or her own medical insurance policy. HSAs are SEVERELY restricted because of him … he did it personally. [HSA + catastrophic + high risk pool + full tax deductions + full tax credits … all forbidden by the Feds and some states.]

Abortion for Republicans is a REAL issue, not a campaignissueonly:

PRO-LIFE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION
  1. Appointed Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. The appointments resulted in the upholding of the federal partial-birth abortion ban by a 5-4 decision.
  2. Reinstituted the Mexico City Policy, begun by the Reagan Administration and reversed by the Clinton Administration (when Congress tried to reinstitute the policy, Clinton vetoed the bill), that bars foreign aid funding to groups that perform or advocate for abortions. In 2003, the Bush Administration expanded the Mexico City Policy to include not just funds dispensed by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), but also the State Department.
  3. Discouraged advancement of pro-abortion legislation by announcing early in his administration that he would veto legislation that threatened pro-life policy.
  4. Signed the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act, which made it a federal crime not to treat babies who survive abortion.
  5. Signed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban of 2003.
  6. Signed Unborn Victims of Violence Act, recognizing the unborn child as a separate crime victim if injured or killed during an assault.
  7. Cut off all federal funds to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) for its involvement in China’s one-child policy which includes forced abortion and sterilization. President Bush sent a fact-finding mission to China which found that the nation’s one-child policy was indeed coercive in nature and that the UNFPA was an integral part of implementing that policy, placing the UNFPA in clear violation of the Kemp-Kasten Amendment that prohibits any aid to any program that involves forced abortion or forced sterilization. Tens of millions of dollars that otherwise would have gone to the UNFPA were redirected to maternal and child health programs.
  8. Thwarted efforts at the United Nations to promote abortion by instructing U.S. delegates to state at every appropriate opportunity that America does not regard anything in any document before the U.N. to establish any international right to abortion.
  9. Issued Executive Order banning the use of new lines of embryonic stem cells in federally funded experiments. Later vetoed legislation passed by Congress to permit federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.
  10. Signed the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005, which will fund research using umbilical cord and adult stem cells. The measure provides funding to increase the inventory of cord blood units available to match and treat patients and to link cord blood banks so that doctors have a single source to search for cord blood and bone marrow matches. It also reauthorizes the National Bone Marrow Registry.
  11. Launched public awareness of adoption campaign, working with the National Council for Adoption and pregnancy help centers across the country. The campaign sponsored conferences encouraging faith based communities to promote adoption and produced public service announcements featuring the First Lady urging the adoption of foster children.
  12. Established the first federal government and national website listing and showing children available for adoption across the country (www.AdoptUSKids.org).
  13. Increased the tax credit for adoption related expenses from $5,000 to $10,000; for special needs children, the credit was raised from $5,000 for qualified adoption related expenses to $10,000 for any adoption related expenses. This was done as part of the President’s tax relief bill.
  14. Annually declared Sanctity of Human Life Day.
  15. Issued a federal regulation allowing states to include unborn children in the federal/state S-CHIP program, which provides health insurance for children in poor families. This allowed states to include pre-natal care in the health insurance they offer to poor children under the program.
  16. The Bush Administration did what it could to stop assisted suicide from taking further hold in Oregon. The state of Oregon passed an assisted suicide law that allows doctors to prescribe federally controlled drugs in lethal amounts to certain of their patients who say they want to die. Federal law holds that federally controlled drugs may only be prescribed for legitimate medical purposes. During the Clinton Administration, Attorney General Janet Reno decreed that assisted suicide was a legitimate medical purpose in those states that permit it.
During the Bush Administration, Attorney General John Ashcroft changed that ruling, saying that assisted suicide was not a legitimate medical purpose, thereby barring doctors from prescribing lethal drugs. A lawsuit was filed and ultimately, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of allowing the drugs to be used for assisted suicide.
  1. Signed legislation making it possible for a federal court to hear whether Terri Schiavo’s constitutional rights had been violated by being denied hydration and nutrition.
  2. Dramatically increased funding for abstinence education through the Department of Health and Human Services, although Congress did not approve the full amount the Bush Administration requested.
Click to expand...
Monte, you’re an optimist to think that the pro-abortion rights Democrat catholics will read the above and actually have a change of heart as to whether the GOP has an effect on abortion in this country. They are set in their minds.

Ishii
 
Gift_from_God said:
Guantanamo Bay and waterboarding

Apart from maybe Ron Paul and McCain, I don’t recall there being strong GOP opposition to Bush’s torture policy
Click to expand...
Bush had a torture policy?

I never heard of them using the iron maiden like Hussein did.
 
ishii said:
Still waiting for an example. Anybody? What part of the ***Republican party platform ***is inconsistent with Catholic moral teaching?

Ishii
Click to expand...
“Courts must have the option of imposing the death penalty in capital murder cases and other instances of heinous crime”

gop.com/2008Platform/Crime.htm#4

“Death penalty is an effective deterrent
Within proper federal jurisdiction, the Republican Congress has enacted legislation for an effective deterrent death penalty”

ontheissues.org/celeb/Republican_Party_Crime.htm

CCC 2267 “The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.Today, in fact, given the means at the State’s disposal to effectively repress crime by rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself, cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender 'today … are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”

Here the Church teaching is a death penalty only in rare cases when it is the only way to defend lives against the aggressor.

Yet Republicans have previously spoken in their platforms about a death penalty being needed for a deterrent and as an option in capital murder and other crimes.

Hardly does that sound in only very rare if not practically non- existent cases. 🤷

Peace
 
CMatt25 said:
“Courts must have the option of imposing the death penalty in capital murder cases and other instances of heinous crime”

gop.com/2008Platform/Crime.htm#4

“Death penalty is an effective deterrent
Within proper federal jurisdiction, the Republican Congress has enacted legislation for an effective deterrent death penalty”

ontheissues.org/celeb/Republican_Party_Crime.htm

CCC 2267 “The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.Today, in fact, given the means at the State’s disposal to effectively repress crime by rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself, cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender 'today … are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”

Here the Church teaching is a death penalty only in rare cases when it is the only way to defend lives against the aggressor.

Yet Republicans have previously spoken in their platforms about a death penalty being needed for a deterrent and as an option in capital murder and other crimes.

Hardly does that sound in only very rare if not practically non- existent cases. 🤷

Peace
Click to expand...
GOP platform: “courts must have the option of imposing the death penalty in capital murder cases, etc.”

CCC 2267: “The Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty”

Now contrast the Catholic Church and the Democrat party on abortion rights:

“Democrats stand behind the right of every woman to choose”
ontheissues.org/celeb/Democratic_Party_Abortion.htm

CC 2270: “Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.”

So I ask you Cmatt, which platform is more in opposition to Catholic moral teaching on the sanctity of life - the GOP or the Democrat party?

Ishii
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
You are preaching to a choir, Kimmie. Those who would vote Republican shall do so regardless of Democratic arguments, and vice-versa. I expect no one to have a sudden epiphany and change sides.
Click to expand...
A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.
 
ishii said:
Monte, you’re an optimist to think that the pro-abortion rights Democrat catholics will read the above and actually have a change of heart as to whether the GOP has an effect on abortion in this country. They are set in their minds.

Ishii
Click to expand...
A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. Now I remember why I walked away from CAF for almost 2 years. There really isn’t any discussion going on here, just a bunch of people thumping their chests and declaring how right they are. 😃
 
ishii said:
Monte, you’re an optimist to think that the pro-abortion rights Democrat catholics will read the above and actually have a change of heart as to whether the GOP has an effect on abortion in this country. They are set in their minds.

Ishii
Click to expand...
I know.

But, here it is.

They can deny it all day and all night, but here it is.

Maybe arguing never convinces anyone, but I am figuring that there are a lot of lurkers out there who have NO IDEA one way or the other.

I was sort of a “cafeteria Catholic lurker” for many years.

And one day, I was traveling on business and happened to be in a city where an old friend from decades ago lived … he is an evangelical Protestant … has a classroom building that he added on to his house to conduct Bible study … serious Christian … anyway we got together for a reunion and he brought me a gift … a half-dozen books … including some C.S. Lewis and a bunch of others and HE got me from being a Sunday Catholic to having at least a clue as to what is going on.

So, maybe some other lurker will see the list on post 822 and maybe a little light will click on.

Here is the link to the actual original source, by the way:

priestsforlife.org/elections/consequences.htm

Very reputable group. Run by a very reputable priest.

priestsforlife.org/intro/introbrochure.html
 
Like I said, I was a “lurker” for many years.

Then I got “involved”.

And then some pastor from another parish called and asked me to address his parish council.

So I showed up.

And basically what I said was “I was a lurker for years, and now here I am giving a talk.”
 
Semper_Zelare said:
Doesn’t holding heretical positions make you a heretic? Which incurs latentiae setentiae?

Can. 1364 §1. Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 194, §1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; in addition, a cleric can be punished with the penalties mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336, §1, nn. 1, 2, and 3.

Am I not correct?
Click to expand...
No, it does not. Here is the definition of heresy.

"Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same;

ewtn.com/expert/answers/heresy_schism_apostasy.htm

Also, we read:
*
  1. No one is punished unless the external violation of a law or a precept committed by the person is ** seriously imputable** to that person by reason of **** malice or culpabilit*y**.
We lay people have not authority to declare heresy and must be careful when we accuse others of latae sententia excommunication. It is one thing to have an abortion or perform abortion. It is quite a different matter to vote for someone who in turn votes for a judge who in turn votes to make it legal for this sin to occur. It is not right, but neither does it incur excommunication. It might even be mortally sinful if the intent is to spread abortion, but I do not think that applies to anyone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top