Who Will You Vote For in 2012?

[Scott_Lafrance]

Hey Ishii,

Going to respond to estesbob, Ridgerunner and yourself in one post. (Just got back from midterm)

We have seen social issues discussed, others bring up the wars prior to the last election, etc. etc. My problem last election was, I did not trust McCain, other than think he was going for a bloc of voters. I was, and am, a Ron Paul fan. I believe he best represents the majority of Church teachings. If others call him ‘unelectable’, it’s suspect. What I mean is, he maybe unelectable because of secondary issues. If people say he’s unelectable, then they themselves are not planning on supporting him. If enough people take that route he will be unelectable.

Going back to McCain, it amazed me so many supported him as ‘honest’ when in fact he cheated on his wife. That is something you cannot do without ‘lying’. If you can lie to your wife, and eventually leave her and your children for the woman you cheated with, you could certainly lie to anyone else. At least that was my thoughts.

Now, for proportionate reasons. Cardinal Ratzinger did not define proportionate reasons. Someone mentioned a specific bishop, but he has a view that they happen to agree with. Those bishops that did not agree with them or the specific bishop were spoken very ill of. None of it matters if we truly follow the Church of Rome and submit to the Papacy. The Pope can end all debate on the subject, the voice of the successor to Peter. Again, why has nothing been said by the Pope, if over half the Church indeed did do wrong?

Proportionate reasons are, apparently, different between Christians, and I do not doubt anyone’s faith. Otherwise I would be judging them. I cannot say they are wrong for weighing the election through a spiritual eye, even if I don’t agree with them. I can see how people did not believe one candidate and chose another using what they viewed as proportionate reasons. We will never know now, but there is no way to know if McCain was sincere or not. If one does not believe a candidate, they are not bound to vote for them. Also, I, and others, do not buy into the lesser of two evils. Evil is evil, plain and simple.

Look at how these discussions run and see how some posts lack charitability, required of all Christians. To someone who are sincerely seeking Him, it causes more doubt about taking advice from someone who appears to be demeaning, makes false accusations, and basically lack the charitability required of Christians. This is just food for thought. If you want to convince someone of a wrong, you can’t present wrongs to convince them.

For the upcoming election, I support Ron Paul. If he is not nominated, I will not vote for Romney or Bachmann. I worry about their views of the Catholic Church and will not risk it, myself. Depending on who does get nominated, I may not vote at all in the main election. Last election I spoke about not voting. On these very forums I was condemned for saying that. I found neither candidate qualified. There is no Church teaching that says a Catholic must vote, even if they find both candidates unqualified, for whatever reasons. Again, I see it as avoiding, what I believe is, evil.

I’m tired, and I have a 24 hour shift starting in the morning. I may respond, but it might be tomorrow.

I have to admit, seeing you post that you support Ron Paul was unexpected. Now that we have something in common…

 

[bbarrick8383]

I have to admit, seeing you post that you support Ron Paul was unexpected. Now that we have something in common…

Yeah, that left me scratching my head.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Yeah, that left me scratching my head.

I think I’ve said that several times.

What you’ll see, as the election draws near, is there are some who will find fault if you don’t support a particular pro-life candidate,

 

[Raskolnikov]

Ridgerunner:

But I think some will, indeed, fail to oppose evil because their particular candidate isn’t the one chosen to run against it. I get that.

Personally, I see voting as a pretty meager way to oppose evil. A mere 1/110,000,000 influence is so pitifully insignificant that I cannot bring myself to see abstaining from voting in the general election is sinful any more easily than I could bring myself to believe that Ihave a moral obligation to accuse every person I walk by on the street wearing Nike shoes of enslaving African children. I suspect there are many people who vote and “I did what I could do” but then fail to do what they can do to combat evil in other areas of their life…

Also, while one evil may be lesser than the other, I can’t shake the feeling that accepting the lesser evil is in itself a form of appeasement, as I think the ultimate solution to the problem of abortion lay elsewhere. To use a rather esoteric an analogy, it’s like supporting Franz von Papen against Naziism. If Papen was the only hope to save the republic, then there probably wasn’t any hope at all.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

I think I’ve said that several times.

What you’ll see, as the election draws near, is there are some who will find fault if you don’t support a particular pro-life candidate,

Right. If you don’t pledge your undying loyalty to whichever dyed in the wool, rubber-stamped, pre-approved, neo-con GOP candidate is proffered up for your entertainment, you are an infidel.

 

[estesbob]

Right. If you don’t pledge your undying loyalty to whichever dyed in the wool, rubber-stamped, pre-approved, neo-con GOP candidate is proffered up for your entertainment, you are an infidel.

You can mock us all you want but it really does come down to either you follow the teachings of the church in all aspects of your life, including when you vote you , or you don’t. I cannot understand how any Catholic could justify supporting a pro-abortion candidate or sitting on the sidelines while pro-abortion candidate wins. You can mock people with that attitude as neocons ,rubberstampedrs ,dyed in the wool GOP or whatever ever ever derogatory terms you can come up with-I prefer to just call them faithful Catholics.

 

[estesbob]

Personally, I see voting as a pretty meager way to oppose evil. A mere 1/110,000,000 influence is so pitifully insignificant that I cannot bring myself to see abstaining from voting in the general election is sinful any more easily than I could bring myself to believe that Ihave a moral obligation to accuse every person I walk by on the street wearing Nike shoes of enslaving African children. I suspect there are many people who vote and “I did what I could do” but then fail to do what they can do to combat evil in other areas of their life…

Also, while one evil may be lesser than the other, I can’t shake the feeling that accepting the lesser evil is in itself a form of appeasement, as I think the ultimate solution to the problem of abortion lay elsewhere. To use a rather esoteric an analogy, it’s like supporting Franz von Papen against Naziism. If Papen was the only hope to save the republic, then there probably wasn’t any hope at all.

So we are not required to oppose evil. If we believe our opposing evil is insignificant. ?It is amazing how twisted Catholic theology gets when people try to twist it to support their political leanings.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

You can mock people with that attitude as neocons ,rubberstampedrs ,dyed in the wool GOP or whatever ever ever derogatory terms you can come up with-I prefer to just call them faithful Catholics.

Faithful Catholic = faithful Republican, eh? Your total devotion to the Republican Party is amazing.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

I cannot understand how any Catholic could justify ~~~sitting on the sidelines while pro-abortion candidate wins.

Bob, it’s not up to you to tell anyone how to vote. If you don’t understand why one would vote Constitution Party or other party that has anti-abortion as part of its platform, that’s unfortunate. There are good people who vote that way, sorry.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Right. If you don’t pledge your undying loyalty to whichever dyed in the wool, rubber-stamped, pre-approved, neo-con GOP candidate is proffered up for your entertainment, you are an infidel.

I don’t see all GOP candidates that way, obviously not Ron/Rand Paul. I haven’t been following politics long enough to know whether or not Inhofe or Coburn are, but Inhofe doesn’t seem to be. It sucks for those who live in areas where there isn’t much difference between the Democrat and the Republican other than being pro-life.

For POTUS though, we gotta work with what we got. If it doesn’t look like Ron can get the votes(I’d love for him to), I’m going for whichever Republican can. I’ll be shot before I vote for a Democrat, mainly because of abortion.

The only way I’d ever support a Democrat, nationally, is if they were the pro-life party. I’d hate to do it, but I’d put my ideology aside and do my part to protect the unborn.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Bob, it’s not up to you to tell anyone how to vote. If you don’t understand why one would vote Constitution Party or other party that has anti-abortion as part of its platform, that’s unfortunate. There are good people who vote that way, sorry.

He’s telling them how they should vote as faithful Catholics. I don’t see anything wrong with it. It is what it is. It’s not up to you to tell him what he can and can not do.

You may see folks like Joe Biden and Pelosi as good people/faithful Catholics…but as a non-Catholic I couldn’t even see them as faithful Christians. It’s sickening to see people who would defend abortion the way Democrats do.

 

[Raskolnikov]

So we are not required to oppose evil. If we believe our opposing evil is insignificant. ?It is amazing how twisted Catholic theology gets when people try to twist it to support their political leanings.

What’s amazing is that some Catholics will badger and insult fellow Catholics because they don’t contribute their 1/110,000,000 say to the GOP (which, it is take for granted, is always and everywhere wholeheartedly committed to ending abortion in spite of 30 years historical evidence [thanks to Ronald Reagan we’ve had such champions as Justice O’Connor and Kennedy; o well, at least now corporations have rights]) and yet billionaires who live luxurious lives while people starve to death en masse in third-world coutries or public officials who lie about wars that leave countless thousands dead get a solid defense on these forums because they’re “on the right side.”

I beginning to suspect that if I were philandering, wife-beating, sociopath who murdered hobos on the weekends but voted a straight GOP ticket in every elecdtion I’dd get a better reception here than a good Catholic who works at the homeless shelter and teaches Sunday school but votes for the Constitution Party.

I mean, is that the apotheosis of you Catholic faith? Why go to church, why say grace before meals, why be chaste, if come November 2, you vote GOP for president? Then you’re still a good Catholic, of course.

 

[Raskolnikov]

Bob, it’s not up to you to tell anyone how to vote. If you don’t understand why one would vote Constitution Party or other party that has anti-abortion as part of its platform, that’s unfortunate. There are good people who vote that way, sorry.

You just don’t understand Rich. None of those parties have chance. Whereas we know that the GOP can win, and after the lucky marienette surrounds himself with degenerates like Paul Wolfowitz, Gouglas Feith, Don Rumsfeld, or Charles Krauthammer (all just fine with abortion, btw) then we’ll make great strides forward. Oh, only the GOP has the capability of getting just one more conservative judge in the Supreme Court who will then end abortion, just like those appoinments by Reagan really came through… No, I’m sure they’ll get around to it eventuallly…

 

[ishii]

Hey Ishii,

We have seen social issues discussed, others bring up the wars prior to the last election, etc. etc. My problem last election was, I did not trust McCain, other than think he was going for a bloc of voters. I was, and am, a Ron Paul fan. I believe he best represents the majority of Church teachings. If others call him ‘unelectable’, it’s suspect. What I mean is, he maybe unelectable because of secondary issues. If people say he’s unelectable, then they themselves are not planning on supporting him. If enough people take that route he will be unelectable.

McCain indeed was going for a block of voters as any nominee has to do in order to win the general election. As for Ron Paul, I respect that he holds true to his principles and doesn’t calculate his stands on the issues to get the most votes. However, I think he would be a weak candidate for a number of reasons, not because he doesn’t have the support of those who think he’s unelectable, but for other reasons, including his age - at age 77 he’d be the oldest president elected. Also, his positions, however much you may agree with them, are generally outside the mainstream of the overall electorate. I believe that Obama would win in a landslide if Ron Paul were the Republican nominee.

Going back to McCain, it amazed me so many supported him as ‘honest’ when in fact he cheated on his wife. That is something you cannot do without ‘lying’. If you can lie to your wife, and eventually leave her and your children for the woman you cheated with, you could certainly lie to anyone else. At least that was my thoughts.

Prodigal Son, I see your point. I don’t really know the details of the circumstances of his divorce but I can understand your concern that someone who would cheat on his wife might be of questionable integrity. Here is what McCain said about the subject:

" my marriage’s collapse was attributable to my own selfishness and immaturity more than it was to Vietnam, and I cannot escape blame by pointing a finger at the war. The blame was entirely mine."

So I don’t know the details of his divorce but I do know the details of his service to his country - his five and a half years of torture in a POW camp at the hands of the North Vietnamese. His refusal to receive preferential treatment due to his status of being the son of the commander of U.S. forces in Vietnam. I have a great respect and admiration of McCain for that reason and proudly voted for him in 2008.

Now, for proportionate reasons. Cardinal Ratzinger did not define proportionate reasons. Someone mentioned a specific bishop, but he has a view that they happen to agree with. Those bishops that did not agree with them or the specific bishop were spoken very ill of.

I have asked those who gave reasons to support Ron Paul why those reasons are proportionate to the evil of abortion. I have not yet been given a sufficient answer. Why is funding for the Dept. of Education more important than stopping abortion? Why is closing a few military bases more important than stopping abortion? Why is bringing troops home from Iraq or Afghanistan more important than stopping abortion? Why is increased funding for food stampt or school lunches or any of the other myriad liberal domestic programs more important than stopping abortion? I don’t think the proper answer is : " the Church does not define proportionate reasons, therefore I am free to not vote for the most effective viable pro-life candidate possible for any reasons as long as I believe that my conscience is correct." Explain to me how any of those reasons outweighs 1.3 million abortions.

Proportionate reasons are, apparently, different between Christians, and I do not doubt anyone’s faith. Otherwise I would be judging them. I cannot say they are wrong for weighing the election through a spiritual eye, even if I don’t agree with them. I can see how people did not believe one candidate and chose another using what they viewed as proportionate reasons.

I agree, if one does not believe a candidate to be sincere, then one isn’t obligated to vote for them.

Look at how these discussions run and see how some posts lack charitability, required of all Christians.

I try to be charitable, but I also admit that I can get frustrated at times and that the frustration can sometimes get the best of me. Both sides could do a better job of being charitable.

For the upcoming election, I support Ron Paul. If he is not nominated, I will not vote for Romney or Bachmann. I worry about their views of the Catholic Church and will not risk it, myself.

I can understand you suspicions of both Romney and Bachmann. However, I honestly don’t think that Romney is bent on getting elected president in order to somehow push Mormonism on the country or persecute Catholics. As president he would have to swear to uphold the constitution and I’d bet he would do better at that than the current occupant of the White house. I am not sold on Bachmann either - for some of the same reasons that I’m not sold on Ron Paul. I hope that the GOP nominates a good, pro-life candidate that Catholics can, in good conscience support. I don’t believe that Romney (or Bachmann) is necessarily evil. Neither are my first choice, but I would vote for them over Obama.

I’m tired, and I have a 24 hour shift starting in the morning. I may respond, but it might be tomorrow.

I don’t blame you for being tired - what with midterms and 24 shifts and all. Thank you for your substantive post.

Ishii

 

[ishii]

Personally, I see voting as a pretty meager way to oppose evil. A mere 1/110,000,000 influence is so pitifully insignificant that I cannot bring myself to see abstaining from voting in the general election is sinful any more easily than I could bring myself to believe that Ihave a moral obligation to accuse every person I walk by on the street wearing Nike shoes of enslaving African children. I suspect there are many people who vote and “I did what I could do” but then fail to do what they can do to combat evil in other areas of their life…

Also, while one evil may be lesser than the other, I can’t shake the feeling that accepting the lesser evil is in itself a form of appeasement, as I think the ultimate solution to the problem of abortion lay elsewhere. To use a rather esoteric an analogy, it’s like supporting Franz von Papen against Naziism. If Papen was the only hope to save the republic, then there probably wasn’t any hope at all.

If you don’t think your vote counts then you should look at the 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington state. If just a few more people had voted for Rossi then he’d have won.

What do you think the “ultimate solution to the problem of abortion” is?

Ishii

 

[ishii]

Faithful Catholic = faithful Republican, eh? Your total devotion to the Republican Party is amazing.

I think Estesbob is devoted to the idea that Catholics should vote for the pro-life candidate. Your continued twisting of what he says speaks volumes about the moral bankrupcy of your position.

Ishii

 

[ishii]

You just don’t understand Rich. None of those parties have chance. Whereas we know that the GOP can win, and after the lucky marienette surrounds himself with degenerates like Paul Wolfowitz, Gouglas Feith, Don Rumsfeld, or Charles Krauthammer (all just fine with abortion, btw) then we’ll make great strides forward. Oh, only the GOP has the capability of getting just one more conservative judge in the Supreme Court who will then end abortion, just like those appoinments by Reagan really came through… No, I’m sure they’ll get around to it eventuallly…

I offered you an analysis of the court appointments in a previous thread. You refused to address any of my posts on that. I can only assume you’re not interested in any kind of dialogue whatsoever, but rather intent on sarcastic insults. Is this what you’re learning in school?

Ishii

 

[ishii]

Right. If you don’t pledge your undying loyalty to whichever dyed in the wool, rubber-stamped, pre-approved, neo-con GOP candidate is proffered up for your entertainment, you are an infidel.

Or to put it another way: if you pledge your undying loyalty to Ron Paul you are an anti-semitic, conspiracy nut. See how your logic works?

Ishii

 

[ishii]

Exactly! Emphasis should be on “deliberately” and “precisely.”

Hooray! An excuse to vote for the abortion righs Democrats! Yea!

 

[ishii]

What’s amazing is that some Catholics will badger and insult fellow Catholics because they don’t contribute their 1/110,000,000 say to the GOP (which, it is take for granted, is always and everywhere wholeheartedly committed to ending abortion in spite of 30 years historical evidence [thanks to Ronald Reagan we’ve had such champions as Justice O’Connor and Kennedy; o well, at least now corporations have rights]) and yet billionaires who live luxurious lives while people starve to death en masse in third-world coutries or public officials who lie about wars that leave countless thousands dead get a solid defense on these forums because they’re “on the right side.”

I beginning to suspect that if I were philandering, wife-beating, sociopath who murdered hobos on the weekends but voted a straight GOP ticket in every elecdtion I’dd get a better reception here than a good Catholic who works at the homeless shelter and teaches Sunday school but votes for the Constitution Party.

I mean, is that the apotheosis of you Catholic faith? Why go to church, why say grace before meals, why be chaste, if come November 2, you vote GOP for president? Then you’re still a good Catholic, of course.

Abortion will remain legal in this country until Catholic Democrats come to love the unborn more than they hate the GOP.