Why Would A Catholic Vote For A ProChoice Canidate?

[SoCalRC]

Because He gave us dominion over the earth to live His way.

By your example one could construe that it was perfectly acceptable to pray for someone in danger but make no move to physically help that person. I don’t think God appreciates ‘inaction’.

I think you are confused. I am advocating living “His way”, fully. It is you who are arguing that “His way” is impractical, so much so that following it completely is equivelent to ‘inaction’.

Using your logic early Christians should have been a lot more practical and spared themselves considerable persecution. However, I see it differently. Early Christians committed themselves wholly into God’s hands against seemingly insurmountable odds and violent oppression. A few centuries later they had utterly won their battle against Rome without lifting a sword or compromising.

Conversely, a great deal of ‘compromsing’ in voting has actually been measurably counter productive over the last few decades with regards to a number of issue the Church has identified as being “moral principles that do not admit of exception, compromise or derogation”.

I understand your sentiments, it is in our nature to want to ‘win’, and we are tremendous at self rationalization. But refusing to even accept one’s compromises and lack of trust in God for what they are, or even going so far as to assert that the compromises themselves are “His way”, would seem to be potentially an even worse offense than the compromises themselves.

 

[SoCalRC]

We have cars in the parking lot with pro abortion candidates names on it. Last weekend an older lady came into mass with a pro abortion candidates sticker on her lapel …

I would contend that not a single candidate for President from either major political party is “pro life” in the Catholic sense. Even if we use a narrower definition, say three of the 9 non negotiables proposed by Rome - Abortion, Euthanasia, and Respect for Fetal Life (stem cell research, fetal tissue in vaccine development, etc.) not one of the three current front runners in either major party comes close.

So, if someone is supporting a major party candidate, I would be careful about lamenting the moral lapses of a fellow Catholic who does the same. Consider Luke 18:9-31. If we were to update the passages to use modern terms equivelent to what Jesus’ listeners first heard, it might well be called 'The Devout Catholic and the Rapist".

 

[iamrefreshed]

I understand your sentiments, it is in our nature to want to ‘win’, and we are tremendous at self rationalization.

I think you prove this in post after post.

Like I told you once, it’s not that complicated, stop making it so. That’s why Jesus told us to be childlike.

What I can convey in a short sentence takes you volumes. Get your brain out of your way.

 

[SoCalRC]

I think you prove this in post after post.

Like I told you once, it’s not that complicated, stop making it so. That’s why Jesus told us to be childlike.

What I can convey in a short sentence takes you volumes. Get your brain out of your way.

And again, it is you who makes it complicated. I try to vote as the Church instructs. It is you who needs to compromise, which of us is doing too much thinking?

 

[iamrefreshed]

And again, it is you who makes it complicated. I try to vote as the Church instructs. It is you who needs to compromise, which of us is doing too much thinking?

I don’t compromise. You wear out your keyboad trying to tell the world it’s impossible to vote as a catholic.

Some do. Others think about doing.

Stop thinking.

 

[iamrefreshed]

I would contend that not a single candidate for President from either major political party is “pro life” in the Catholic sense. Even if we use a narrower definition, say three of the 9 non negotiables proposed by Rome - Abortion, Euthanasia, and Respect for Fetal Life (stem cell research, fetal tissue in vaccine development, etc.) not one of the three current front runners in either major party comes close.

So, if someone is supporting a major party candidate, I would be careful about lamenting the moral lapses of a fellow Catholic who does the same. Consider Luke 18:9-31. If we were to update the passages to use modern terms equivelent to what Jesus’ listeners first heard, it might well be called 'The Devout Catholic and the Rapist".

Maybe you can vote when the Pope runs against Jesus?

 

[Rand_Al_Thor]

The reason why some people can vote pro choice is becuase they do not see an unborn infant as “fully” human.

I have a sister who votes for pro-choice candidates almost always. She also says abortion is wrong. She insists that abortion should be the deciding issue. I asked her, " what if aldoph Hitler was against the death penalty for criminals and passionate about feeding the poor and meek. What if he still gassed the jews but otherwise had an unbelievable desire for free healthcare and an effective plan at stomping out poverty? what if he was compassionate about human rights? (except for the jews)

Of course she said that the gassing of the Jews was a horrible deed and no way could she vote for him etc. etc. I said but that is only one issue.

What do people think? Hitlers absolute atrocity resulted in the extermination of millions. Abortion rights has resulted in the exterminations of tens of millions.

I am not calling presidential candidates Hitler but it is clear to me that the unborn are not viewed to some as “wholly” human.

Janet Folger used that same thing as an example in one of her talks. She said, about people that accuse of being one issue voters, something like, “There was a political candidate a while back that turned his country’s economy around and got them out of a depression, had a good educational system and a lot of support from the people, fixed up roads. There was just one issue, one single issue, that I disagree with Mr. Hitler about, and that is the issue of life.”

In Christ,
Rand

 

[teadough]

Once again, who will not vote for the lesser of two evils automatically votes for the greater of those evils…

I don’t agree with that statement no matter how you try and twist the logic behind it. It is like saying " abortion is wrong except…(fill in the blank)". Evil is evil.There are no “lesser of two”. This isn’t like Mortal sin vs venial.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Remember, those who will not vote for the lesser of two evils are automatically voting for the greater of those two evils.

Translation: Vote Republican ONLY or you are a baby-killing ghoul with blood on your hands.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I can respect those who decline to vote in cases like that or write in a name, but I do not think it is fair to call voting to limit evil an evil. Limiting evil is good.

For the first time, fix, I think you and I are in agreement.

 

[AngelRose81]

The only reason I can think of is if you have to vote for the lesser of two evils and one candidate happens to not be completely pro-life (i.e. against abortion but for embryonic stem cell) but the other is “pro-choice”

 

[LCMS_No_More]

The topic for this thread was born out of the another thread, where the discussion was the State of the Union Address. Several folks lambasted the President, and announced they proudly casted votes for a known pro choice candidate.

After those individuals, announced on a public forum they voted for the candidate in the primary, and planned to again, it was assumed they didnt’t mind discussing how they came to that decesion. Wrong, when called out, it was demanded the thread be shut down, because it was off topic.

A tactic used by the very candidate these people voted for. They don’t answer tough questions, and if you do get one in, they jump up and down saying you shouldn’t be asking it, and demand the forum be shut down.

I’ve not been on this forum very long, but it has been my experience the moderators give us a pretty long leash.

It is obvious many Catholics vote pro choice, and I think the biggest reason driving that is their dislike of the President and the Repubs.

Some of the reasons I hear for the pro choice voice have been:

“the repubs are not really pro life, they just say that for votes”

“I’m not a one issue voter”

“Its complicated”

I’m lucky in that my candidates views on abortion, social issues, terrorism, and borders, all line up. But if I have to vote liberal on a issue to vote pro life, I’ll do it. If that is my choice, the abortion issue is going to trump the other things. I’ll put the guy in office, figuring whatever damage he does we can deal with it, because appointing a LIFETIME pro choice judge to the court, is hard to overcome.

Any time you say you hold your nose and vote pro choice, you risk that probablility. I can assure you, the 2 pro choice candidates in this current field, if given the oppurtunity, will put a judge in place to shoulder up Roe V Wade. I’d expect nothing less. When they say they’re pro choice I’m gonna take em at their word.

If you wanna stay home on this election, so be it, at least that way I know one of my fellow Catholics is not gonna cancel out MY pro life vote, which I can assure y’all is gonna be EVERYTIME.

Excuse you, but I am the one who usually says that the Republicans aren’t really pro-life except for the votes. Guess what? I don’t vote pro-choice-on-abortion based on that. If it’s a pro-choice-on-abortion vs. Republican I simply don’t vote on that office and move on to the next one.

And considering that it appears that the greatest possible evil to a Republican or other right-winger is a tax, I seriously doubt that any true believer in Republicanism would abandon their party if it became pro-choice-on-abortion.

 

[deb1]

Excuse you, but I am the one who usually says that the Republicans aren’t really pro-life except for the votes. Guess what? I don’t vote pro-choice-on-abortion based on that. If it’s a pro-choice-on-abortion vs. Republican I simply don’t vote on that office and move on to the next one.

And considering that it appears that the greatest possible evil to a Republican or other right-winger is a tax, I seriously doubt that any true believer in Republicanism would abandon their party if it became pro-choice-on-abortion.

I normally vote Republican. If I had to vote for a tax increasing, die hard liberal who I sincerely believed would work to end abortion, I would do so.

 

[JRKH]

I am curious, why would a Catholic vote for a prochoice canidate? Do they not see abortion as evil?

Of course abortion is evil, but how does being pro-choice make a candidate evil? Being prochoice politically is not the same thing as being Pro-abortion which is a personal thing.
It is remarkable to me that otherwise intelligent people see the term Pro-choice as synonamus with Pro-abortion. God gave us free will and the freedom to select good from evil, therefore God must be, by definition, Pro-choice. Of course God is also Anti-abortion. The two terms are simply not interchangable.

Abortion is a type of genocide, so isn’t voting prochoice a method of giving approval to genocide of the most innocent, helpless of victims?

It could be looked at in that light. However the issue cannot be truly decided in the law, but must be addressed in the hearts of the people. The more people who instinctively feel that abortion is wrong and refuse to do it, the fewer abortions will be performed. The fewer abortions performed the less of an issue the legality becomes. In addition, the greater the majority who abhore abortion the easier it will be to change the laws.

Some on this forum have said that they don’t want to use only one issue to vote for a candidate. But would you think the same if instead of killing unborn babies, we were talking about the killing of minority adults?

Using a single issue to make up your mind, no matter what it is, is foolish. The person being elected is but one voice in many. You want to elect someone you feel will best represent all of your interests.
As for your second point, let me ask you a question. Is the killing of minority adults a fact of law in your scenerio? Is it something that has been legal for more than thirty years? If so then we are obviously talking about an entirely different socio/political situation than the one we are currently living in and I’m glad I don’t live there.

Imagine this: two candidates are up for office, one is a worthless human being but against killing the members of a minority group. The second candidate stands for everything that the voter believes in but thinks that killing adult minorities should be allowed, would you still vote for the second candidate?

If the second candidate believes in everything the voter does, he won’t believe in killing minority adults.

I don’t see how killing unborn babies is different then killing adult minorities of any race or religion.

Let try to explain. (and this has nothing to do with my personal, moral beliefs)
In the legal world the difference is this. Legally a human is protected by law at the time of birth. Before that it is not Legally defined as a person and is not protected under law.
Adult citizens have been defined legally as persons and therefore are protected under the law.
That is how it is viewed LEGALLY.

Peace
James

 

[iamrefreshed]

I normally vote Republican. If I had to vote for a tax increasing, die hard liberal who I sincerely believed would work to end abortion, I would do so.

Sorry, you can’t do that because all us Republican’s are right wing, neo-conservative, bible thumping, liberal hating, corporate loving, starve the poor, war-mongering, immigration hating religious nuts!

The Dems don’t want your vote.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Of course abortion is evil, but how does being pro-choice make a candidate evil?

The same way being pro-put-the-Jews-in-the-gas-chamber was evil – except that this evil has gone on far longer than the Holocaust and has killed – in this country alone – about four times as many innocent victims.

Being prochoice politically is not the same thing as being Pro-abortion which is a personal thing.

That is incorrect – being pro-choice is the same thing as being pro-abortion. A good example of that is the party platform plank that supports taxpayer-paid abortions.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Let try to explain. (and this has nothing to do with my personal, moral beliefs)
In the legal world the difference is this. Legally a human is protected by law at the time of birth. Before that it is not Legally defined as a person and is not protected under law.
Adult citizens have been defined legally as persons and therefore are protected under the law.
That is how it is viewed LEGALLY.

Peace
James

Legally, Jews were defined as “untermenschen” (sub-humans.)

And that was how it was viewed.

 

[SoCalRC]

I don’t compromise. You wear out your keyboad trying to tell the world it’s impossible to vote as a catholic.

Not so. It is not easy, but it is possible to vote as the Church instructs. It just is not possible to demonstrate that the major political parties are a good reflection of the Catholic faith.

You have already noted in your other posts that you compromise on abortion, euthanasia, and fetal tissue research. Other non negotiables from the Church you dismiss outright as unimportant.

I have no doubt that you vote what you believe, but what we individually believe and what the Church teaches are often two different things.

It is not my place to judge you on your compromises, since I have my own. But I do think it is telling that you, not I, feel compelled to assign special status to yourself in terms of being Catholic (ie, “Serious”).

Some do. Others think about doing.

And still others rationalize not even trying.

Stop thinking.

It is a large Church, there is room for both the sorts of people who are inspired by ideas, and those who are looking to be lead.

The key is following the right ideas and the right leaders. In this, I am quite conservative. The Church is the source of the right ideas about our Faith, and the Pope is our undisputed moral leader.

So, if you prefer not to think, fine. But a sheep is still responsible when it comes to rather or not the shepard is the Vicar of Christ or, say, an obese drug felon with an eractile disfunction problem and an inability to honor even a simulation of the Sacrament of Marriage…

Likewise, the Church supports theological thought, provided that a proper understanding of our obligation to obey is included:

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19900524_theologian-vocation_en.html

If you really want to keep it simple, start with this:

What distinguishes the Catholic church from other Christian faiths?

Now, ask youself, if you are going to dismiss that distinction as too much trouble, impractical, or too much thinking, why claim to be Catholic? There is already a name for such thinking, it is callled ‘Protestant’…

 

[fix]

I don’t agree with that statement no matter how you try and twist the logic behind it. It is like saying " abortion is wrong except…(fill in the blank)". Evil is evil.There are no “lesser of two”. This isn’t like Mortal sin vs venial.

Limiting evil is not evil. Limiting evil is good.

 

[ChrisWRIT]

Let try to explain. (and this has nothing to do with my personal, moral beliefs)
In the legal world the difference is this. Legally a human is protected by law at the time of birth. Before that it is not Legally defined as a person and is not protected under law.
Adult citizens have been defined legally as persons and therefore are protected under the law.
That is how it is viewed LEGALLY.

Several bills have been introduced in the last 3 or 4 years to LEGALLY define human life as beginning at conception, & also to remove the ability federal courts to adjudicate the matter, which would let individual states start doing what they can to begin fighting abortion again; without the SC’s interference.

Unfortunately, the federal government has repeatedly shelved the bill to try and make it go away. If a real pro-life president were elected, he might be able to get congress to stop pretending it didn’t exist.

Chris