Why do some Catholics lean politically conservative?

[MonteRCMS]

But what if the lower tiers such as family, neighborhood, community, charity and local government end up failing? Would that be a good opportunity to warrant higher level intervention such as the national authorities?

FIRST:

Why the premature focus on failure?

SECOND:

Would you bring in the Secretary of HHS if some person falls asleep on a park bench and dies?

THE ANSWER is twofold:

Multiple multiple multiple local “layers”.

AND: MORE IMPORTANTLY >> you, personally.

It is up to you to become personally involved.

 

[vz71]

Knowledge can be your friend.

Indeed.
The official democratic platform specifically mentions their support for abortion.

 

[DENNYINMI]

The official democratic platform specifically mentions their support for abortion.

Yet it was a republican led United States Supreme Court Justices that gave us Roe v Wade. There were only 2 dissenters, and one was a democrat.

Knowledge is indeed your friend.

 

[Thom18]

vz71:

The official democratic platform specifically mentions their support for abortion.

Yet it was a republican led United States Supreme Court Justices that gave us Roe v Wade. There were only 2 dissenters, and one was a democrat.

Knowledge is indeed your friend.

That may be the case, but abortion on demand isn’t part of the Republican platform. The same can’t be said of the Democratic Party.

 

[DENNYINMI]

That may be the case, but abortion on demand isn’t part of the Republican platform. The same can’t be said of the Democratic Party.

What can be said is that not every republican that is in support of it’s “economic trickle down” less government ideal is pro-life, and not every democrat is pro-choice. You’re speaking to one. A platform consists of many ideals.

 

[vz71]

That may be the case, but abortion on demand isn’t part of the Republican platform. The same can’t be said of the Democratic Party.

Exactly.
Support for the democratic party is a support of their stated goals, including abortion.
Voting otherwise does not carry such.

 

[Thom18]

You can’t draw that conclusion from the number of replies.

 

[HarryStotle]

vz71:

The official democratic platform specifically mentions their support for abortion.

Yet it was a republican led United States Supreme Court Justices that gave us Roe v Wade. There were only 2 dissenters, and one was a democrat.

Knowledge is indeed your friend.

You keep pushing this point hard, but it isn’t as compelling as you think it is.

Care to explain why conservative or Republican presidents would consistently appoint liberal judges to the Supreme Court?

It could, perhaps, be a function of keeping favour with an increasingly liberal populous. Or it could be that the judges themselves act in ways inconsistent with the positions of those who appointed them in order to satisfy some deep seated political need or insecurity.

Fortunately, that is changing, since there are now more originalist, and truly conservative judges, than there have been on the Supreme Court since the early 1930s.

You may have to rethink your views on whether conservative appointees to the SCOTUS have any necessary affiliation to conservative principles, once you listen to Berkeley Prof. John Yoo explain the history and makeup of the Supreme Court.

Knowledge may be your friend, but understanding will bail you out when your friend leaves you bereft of any plausible explanation.

 

[MonteRCMS]

This gets us back to LIBERAL versus LEFTIST.

https://www.prageru.com/videos/left-or-liberal

click here google youtube liberal leftist

I am interested in rehashing the debate, and precisely because the video provides a good starting point FOR debate is the reason I will provide a summary.

It also provides a lens through which to see why the issue of this current thread has taken on a life of its own.

Prager makes the claim that liberalism and leftism are often confused and people mistake them for the same political position when, in fact, they are the opposite. He cites six areas as examples of where the two differ.

1. Racism
Liberals have always viewed the color of a person’s skin as insignificant and held that those who think skin colour is significant are the real racists. Liberals have been passionately committed to racial integration.
Leftists take the position that anyone who has the attitude that race is insignificant are racists. UofC, for example, claims that the statement, “There is only one race, the human race,” is a racist statement. The left supports racial segregation in all black dormitories and graduation ceremonies, for example.

2. Capitalism
Liberals have believed in free enterprise and have always been pro-capitalism because it best lifts people out of poverty by relying upon entrepreneurial activity. Although liberals have supported bigger government than conservatives or libertarians, they have never endorsed socialism.
Leftists are opposed to capitalism, and advocate for socialism, and for government control over all aspects of life.

3. Nationalism
Liberals believe in nation states and that every nation, including America, has a sovereign right to protect its borders and its own people.
Leftists divide people by class rather than by national identity, which they claim (falsely) is the road to fascism. They oppose nationalist sentiments and advocate for open borders and globalism

4. View of America
Liberals have been overtly patriotic and venerated America in virtually every movie and TV show produced between the 1930s and 1950s by producers, directors and actors, most of whom were liberals. They saw America as the last, best, hope for the world.
Leftists see themselves and their ideology as the last best hope of earth. America, they claim, is racist, homophobic, xenophobic, violent, and imperialistic.

 

[MonteRCMS]

1d

5. Free Speech
Liberals have always stood for the principle that each person has the right to their own ideas and they will defend to the death the right of each to speak their thoughts. Liberals have always been passionately committed to free speech. Protecting what you and I consider hate speech is the entire point of free speech, for a liberal.
Leftists have undertaken a campaign to restrict the speech of anyone they claim to be spouting “hate speech.” Universities, large social media companies, various left-leaning organizations, leftist politicians, and public sector unions have pushed for the suppression of speech. “Hate” speech, in the final analysis, is anything that differs from the leftist’s position.

6. Western Civilization
Liberals champion and seek to protect western civilization and its unique contributions to morality, philosophy, the arts, music and the literary fields. These were taught and promoted at every major liberal university and college in the United States.
Leftists are seeking to destroy the legacy of western civilization, claiming that it is no better than any other civilization. They also claim western civilization is just a euphemism for white supremacy and/or the patriarchy.

So if liberalism and leftism are so opposed to each other, why don’t liberals oppose the left?

Prager suggests that it is because liberals have been taught from very young to fear the right, which is why that bogeyman is brought up – far right, aka “fascism” – to paralyze any liberal who so much as hints at disagreements with current leftist ideology.

 

[DENNYINMI]

It could, perhaps, be a function of keeping favour with an increasingly liberal populous. Or it could be that the judges themselves act in ways inconsistent with the positions of those who appointed them in order to satisfy some deep seated political need or insecurity.

Fortunately, that is changing, since there are now more originalist, and truly conservative judges, than there have been on the Supreme Court since the early 1930s.

You may look towards political or judiciary to change the milieu of current abortion rights, I’ll continue to look to the hearts of women and men and when need be support physical, medical and social needs that “life” relies on for sustenance to see the pro-life goal through.

Trump realized he’d need to “change” his stance on abortion to run a republican ticket, his stance was never some deep seated reverence towards life in the mothers womb. As a leopard doesn’t change stripes one is left to ponder motives. The first time Trump mentioned his “evolvement” to pro-life was in a republican debate, prior to that he stated he was “pro-choice in every respect”…

Speaking of originalists, Kavanaugh has come under scrutiny that he wasn’t “strong enough” on his dissentions that dealt with abortion. In Garza vs Hargan which dealt with an undocumented immigrants rights for an abortion, conservatives were concerned because he didn’t “directly challenge” her rights to have an abortion under certain circumstances. Hence, many conservative far right wing feathers were ruffled, even though he dissented.

Speaking of Neil Gorsuch, he has outright stated had Trump asked him if he would overturn Roe v Wade his response was as follows:

“I would have walked out the door"

The point being for offering the fact that Roe v Wade became law and is credited to Republican appointed presidents is that a vote never guarantees us a Pro-life law.

You look to hearts and minds of individuals for that. Most especially those formed by conscience and moral guidance and supported by the same.

 

[MonteRCMS]

The Supreme Court cannot just rule.

Not supposed to reach down and touch us.

Read the Constitution.

 

[TheLittleLady]

I know exactly why I am a member of the American Solidarity Party. This party most closely aligns life issues to the teaching of the Catholic Church.

 

[whichwaytogo47]

This gets us back to LIBERAL versus LEFTIST. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlIjMJBSnRE

Well said. There’s a huge difference between classical liberalism which leans conservative and today’s “liberalism” that leans leftist. The intolerance of the left is breathtaking especially when there is the toxic belief that the little guy can’t get ahead and that the game is rigged.

If you are like any immigrant and you spend less than what you make, you have a high probability of never needing government assistance (welfare) or charity. The more amazing thing is when a person who has a below-average income actually reaches critical mass (sometimes referred to as being wealthy). Critical mass is the ability to live off your assets. As Chris Hogan states: retirement is not an age, it’s a financial condition.

 

[HarryStotle]

Trump realized he’d need to “change” his stance on abortion to run a republican ticket, his stance was never some deep seated reverence towards life in the mothers womb.

I’ll need to see your rental receipt signed by Trump himself before I accept this assertion, since you seem to be renting the space inside his head to know infallibly what his innermost thoughts have been.

As a leopard doesn’t change stripes one is left to ponder motives.
The first time Trump mentioned his “evolvement” to pro-life was in a republican debate, prior to that he stated he was “pro-choice in every respect”…

The manner that you judge, by that you will be judged.

Apparently, you have no belief in the power of grace to change a man. Not very Catholic of you.

Which means you, as a sinner, when you are brought before the Lord on judgement day, will still be guilty of all your sins, since you, by your own judgement, haven’t and could not change.

As Catholics we believe in the power of grace to redeem souls. We don’t like Martin Luther believe a sinner is still a pile of dung covered by a gleaming white blanket of innocence that hides sins.

True redemption implies God’s grace can change the spots of a leopard, or the sins of a cad, and even much worse. Kind of like the miracles in Scripture where the blind and paralytics are healed, and the dead are raised.

True, a leopard himself cannot change his spots, but neither can blind men make themselves see nor the dead raise themselves. Yet God does change spots.

Whether the “pro-choice” Trump was changed into the pro-life Trump by God’s grace remains to be seen. Unfortunately, your reasoning for why it couldn’t have occurred is faulty, at best.

 

[DENNYINMI]

The manner that you judge, by that you will be judged.

Apparently, you have no belief in the power of grace to change a man. Not very Catholic of you.

Which means you, as a sinner, when you are brought before the Lord on judgement day, will still be guilty of all your sins, since you, by your own judgement, haven’t and could not change.

It simply means that a vote does not constitute a guarantee of a right to life amendment or law.

Regarding Trump and voting, at some point we ALL had to come to some sort of conclusion. Call it judgment if you wish but don’t we all judge when deciding on what or whom we’ll vote for?

I consider myself the worst of sinners, but I believe in reconciliation and the mercy of Christ. But I also believe one must acknowledge it first vs denying ones indiscretions. I’ve done no one wrong in pointing out my argument, least of all D. Trump…haha

 

[Theo520]

I know exactly why I am a member of the American Solidarity Party. This party most closely aligns life issues to the teaching of the Catholic Church.

It looks like a soft sell of communism, the state will enforce egality and a guaranteed income, with citizens owning the resources.

https://solidarity-party.org/platform/

I also see a huge contradiction between the state mandating basic care, food, housing, and their below claim

• We believe that family, local communities, and voluntary associations are the first guarantors of human dignity, and cultivate mutual care. National institutions and policies should support, not supplant them.

 

[DENNYINMI]

Someone will surely see a socialist or communist in a closet, haha

 

[TheLittleLady]

I’m used to that

 

[DENNYINMI]

I was reading another thread on the topic of abortion in the social justice forum and I see an interesting pattern, namely the decry of “large government” and less intrusion of government as a battle cry theme. YET, when the issue of abortion is discussed it inevitably includes government involvement to the point of voting for a political candidate on this issue alone as evidenced by their voting for the lesser of 2 evils argument.

The most important factor within their lives determining their decision making and one of a deeply moral nature and it’s viewed in light of political and judicial association. Go figure. Murder is outlawed, i.e. there is a law in every state within the union that makes it a severe punishable crime. How has that worked out for us? Has it stopped it?

I don’t rely on our political representatives or judicial justices to make determinations about abortions for women. I put my faith in compassion and empathy that can be witnesses of concern for dire circumstances, and the love of Christ in action to make a real impact on this issue. I don’t put faith in political leaders to have a morally informed conscience while their actions suggest otherwise.