Why Would A Catholic Vote For A ProChoice Canidate?

[seekerz]

If we Christians would all do what we are supposed to do, help those in need, poverty…homeless…etc that travesty would be eliminated. Abortion gives the baby none, zero, zippo chance. So let me understand you…you are saying that it is worse to live what we perceive as a hard life than to have the chance to live at all?

I’m saying nothing of the kind. Simply put, if you’re going to tackle cause of children’s deaths simply by body count, the foremost among this (worldwide) is poverty. I’m not suggesting that this is the path to take. It wouldn’t make any difference to my opposition to abortion, if only 10 abortions were being performed each year. This is not about numbers, it’s about right and wrong.

What I am also saying is that in looking at any candidate for office, I will not look only at abortion because supporting abortion is not the only way a candidate can promote death. All life is equally precious: life in the womb, life on death row, life in a nursing home, life in a enemy non-aggressor’s nation. Within each of the above categories, that life either is, or has the possibility of being, innocent life and regardless of guilt or innocence, it is life created by God.

 

[dmelosi]

I’m saying nothing of the kind. Simply put, if you’re going to tackle cause of children’s deaths simply by body count, the foremost among this (worldwide) is poverty. I’m not suggesting that this is the path to take. It wouldn’t make any difference to my opposition to abortion, if only 10 abortions were being performed each year. This is not about numbers, it’s about right and wrong.

What I am also saying is that in looking at any candidate for office, I will not look only at abortion because supporting abortion is not the only way a candidate can promote death. All life is equally precious: life in the womb, life on death row, life in a nursing home, life in a enemy non-aggressor’s nation. Within each of the above categories, that life either is, or has the possibility of being, innocent life and regardless of guilt or innocence, it is life created by God.

Abortion takes a life in every case. Republicans as a party oppose abortion. Democrats as a party promote abortion.

Please tell me how your side promotes life any better than the republicans in the other above examples. And I say your side, because it sure appears to me that with your arguments, you are defending their stance.

 

[wow]

We had a couple of dozen pro-life politicians at the March for Life in Little Rock. I spoke to several of them.

And I always see a healthy turnout at the Rose Dinner – the annual fundraising gala for Right to Life.

I apologize. I thought the majority of the discussion referred to the presidential election. With all the presidential canidates who profess pro-life, only one showed up to the March for Life and he’s getting my vote.

 

[seekerz]

Abortion takes a life in every case. Republicans as a party oppose abortion. Democrats as a party promote abortion.

Please tell me how your side promotes life any better than the republicans in the other above examples. And I say your side, because it sure appears to me that with your arguments, you are defending their stance.

Why resort to categorizing me? Do you really want to know how I feel? I feel that as a Catholic, that voting is something I do only because it is a duty. Were it not for that single fact, I would happily abstain.

However, though I might participate reluctantly, I simply will not be persuaded to do so by reflex. In my view of life, there is only one side - Christ’s side - and I have yet to meet a candidate who embodies Him to a degree acceptable to me.

If necessary, I will write down the names of all the candidates, list their good and bad attributes in columns and let the Holy Spirit do the rest.

So no, there will be no automatic choices for me. If that somehow puts me on a ‘side’ in your eyes - so be it. I follow the One who was constantly being accused of siding with sinners.

 

[dmelosi]

Why resort to categorizing me? Do you really want to know how I feel? I feel that as a Catholic, that voting is something I do only because it is a duty. Were it not for that single fact, I would happily abstain.

However, though I might participate reluctantly, I simply will not be persuaded to do so by reflex. In my view of life, there is only one side - Christ’s side - and I have yet to meet a candidate who embodies Him to a degree acceptable to me.

If necessary, I will write down the names of all the candidates, list their good and bad attributes in columns and let the Holy Spirit do the rest.

So no, there will be no automatic choices for me. If that somehow puts me on a ‘side’ in your eyes - so be it. I follow the One who was constantly being accused of siding with sinners.

I apologize, maybe I should rephrase the question. How does the democratic party do more to promote life than the republican party?

 

[seekerz]

I apologize, maybe I should rephrase the question. How does the democratic party do more to promote life than the republican party?

Perhaps you would do better to ask someone who belongs to one or the other party. I pay allegiance to neither. For election purposes I do consider the individual attributes of various candidates in the general manner described previously.

My purpose in posting was to point out what I feel are important considerations for a Catholic in selecting someone to vote for, with regard to their stance on “life” issues. (I believe that was what the OP sought to elicit). If I err in my reasoning, then please show me how.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The likely abortion party presidential candidate will go forward with the war without question. The abortion party has done nothing to alleviate poverty for decades, and isn’t likely to do it now…

So, for a long time I have been baffled by those who, purporting to be “prolife”, nevertheless plan to vote for the abortion candidate, based on the war or poverty, notwithstanding that clearly the only thing their vote will really affect is abortion.

And I am put to wonder, then, whether that preference for the abortion candidate is a matter of wanting to believe in rhetoric that has no foundation in reality, or whether, indeed, those objectives are simply a way to rationalize wanting to vote for abortion.

I realize that sounds harsh, but a “prolife” person voting for an abortion party candidate now, makes no sense any other way.

 

[BamaRider]

:coffeeread:

 

[PLAL]

Vern,

Although I agree with many of your posts on the forums, I have to disagree with you this time.

Voting for the “lessor of two evils” has put us in a mess. Look at the two front runners now in each party. On one side one of the candidates is as Pro-Abortion as you can get. The other candidate voted against the “Born Alive Infants Protection Act”. This Act was to prevent born babies from purposely being starved to death. Therefore the other candidate is not only Pro-Abortion but also Pro-Infanticide.

In the other party one of the leading candidates was governor of a state which legalized sodomy and government funded abortions. The other candidate in the party believes its fine to kill human embryo’s for the sake of science (whatever this is supposed to mean).

We are in a real mess in the U.S.! It’s all because everyone keeps voting “the lessor of two evils” all the time.

Let’s wait to find out if anyone runs as a Independent Candidate. This candidate may have no chance of winning but by getting a certain percentage of the vote, it will send a strong message to both parties which type of candidates we want in the future.

I believe there will be a Independent Candidate running for President who will be 100% Pro-Life across the board. I believe this would be the candidate Christ would vote for.

Let’s vote as “True Catholics” and vote our faith for a change and put our trust in God and pray God will take care of the rest.

 

[PLAL]

Vern,

I just wanted to make one more point. Don’t underestimate the power of a vote for a Independent Candidate especially in the '08 Presidential Election. There are many variables which are interesting in the coming up election.

For instance, in one party there have been polls taken indicating 50% of Americans would never vote for the now leading candidate in this party. Isn’t this very interesting.

In the other party, many conservatives are at odds with the leading candidate in this party on 5-6 big issues. This leading candidate has also stated they are for killing human embryo’s for the sake of science and there’s no way they would elect a Supreme Court Justice like Samual Alito (Pro-Life) to the Supreme Court because they will not nominate anyone who wears his conservatism on his sleeve. Isn’t this very interesting.

Therefore the stage is set. If we can get a strong Pro-Life Independent Candidate to run our voices will be heard!

 

[GrammyX4]

This whole discussion brings up a memory of something that happened to me 35 years ago. For those of you who may have forgotten, January 2008 is the 35th anniversary of the Roe Vs. Wade decision by the Supreme Court. Well, 35 year ago, in January of 1973, I conceived my first baby. I was a very young, newly married woman (only 18) and, while I did hear about the ruling on the news, I did not really pay much attention to it at the time and certainly did not realize the huge impact this would have on society.

In March of 1973 I had my 1st OB/Gyn appointment. I went in that morning to drop off the requisite “sample” and was told to return that afternoon to see the doctor and get the results (of course, this was way before the day of home pregnancy tests). I was on pins and needles all day long waiting for my appointment time to arrive.

I went back to the doctor’s office in the afternoon and reported to the nurse. She gave me a pack of papers to fill out. I sat down and completed them and then returned them to her. Of course two of the questions on there was my age and marital status. Actually, I guess I was still one month shy of my 18th B-day at this point. After a few minutes she called me up to the more private counter inside the office (as opposed to the counter in the waiting room). She very matter of factly told me that my pregnancy test was positive and proceeded to ask me if I was there for prenatal care of if I was requesting an abortion!

No one had set up abortion “clinics” yet and it appears that this doctor jumped right on the band wagon of offering this new “legal” procedure to his patients. I was so appalled! I could not believe that anyone would even ask me such a question. I looked at her and said that I was looking for prenatal care. I was too young and inexperienced to realize that I should leave that doctor’s office and find a new one. At that time, he was the only doctor in our area (that I knew of) who was offering the option of natural childbirth and allowing husbands in the delivery room. I just felt sort of “stuck”.

Needless to say, I spent the rest of that pregnancy not really trusting my physician. I may have been young, but I had enough sense to understand that, if he could so easily end prenatal life, how hard would he fight to preserve the life of my pre-born child if any difficulties came up. Fortunately, I had an uncomplicated pregnancy and easy delivery. By the time I was expecting again (2 years later) I was aware of many more options available to me in the way of obstretical care and chose a different provider.

Anyway, over the years, I have always remembered this time in my life whenever I hear a politician supporting “choice”. I always wonder how we can trust them to protect the lives of our babies, children, elderly, disabled… if they can so easily support the decision to murder a pre-born infant. Many times I have had to sacrifice other issues that I support to find a candidate who was pro-life. However, no other issue could ever take precedence over this one in my heart.

By the way, that baby of mine is now a 35 year old. He is a wonderful home schooling, Christian father and husband. I cannot imagine my life without him!

 

[BamaRider]

Nice story GrammyX, and welcome to the forum.

 

[Hastrman]

Um…because the other candidate is more pro-choice, and also a traitorous liar who will cheerfully plunge the nation into a depression to make his (or her…) backers feel “compassionate”?

If I can prevent a few evils, but not having a pro-abortion candidate, than I will. Do you stop telling people to buckle their seatbelts because it won’t matter if a trucker falls asleep and flattens the car? No. Then why do you decide to abandon having a say merely because you can’t prevent the worst evil you’re concerned about? “I can’t prevent both candidates from supporting one evil, therefore I don’t care whether the country is also impoverished and our nearly-defenseless allies betrayed, while our national honor is tracked through the mud.”

Quitters.

 

[SoCalRC]

With all the Republican canidates that profess pro-life, only one showed up to the March for Life…he’s getting my vote!

Actually, phoning it in or writing has been the norm since Reagan. I’ve always thought this odd. If the principles are truly and proudly held, why have the GOP pols always been so reluctant to have their pictures taken at big pro-life events?

I think it plays into PLAL’s observation. Once you compromise your faith, it is a slippery slope. You are tacidly acknowledging that you don’t really share values, so it is natural for the politicians to simply take advantage of you.

I try to wholly vote my faith. Granted, I don’t get to mark many winners on my ballots right now, but I am hopeful that eventually more Catholics will join me and the major parties will have to start offering more than rhetoric. And, if anyone doubts that there is a lot of rhetoric, check out some of the emails entered into evidence in some of the Abromof related prosecutions. Inside the RNC it is described as “giving red meat to the mouth breathers”.

 

[Pong]

Ah good, someone started a new thread. I don’t remember who stated a few pages ago that some of us on the other thread were acting like our prospective candidates by crying “foul” when someone went off topic, but whoever it was would be wise to remember that such a tactic is called red-herring, and crying foul was appropriate.

Now, for the actual issue. I vote for the candidate that I feel is best suited for the job. In doing so I look at everything, not just abortion. Some of you feel that abortion has been a holocaust, even comparing it to the Jewish holocaust. You have that right here in the States to hold that opinion- be grateful. I don’t feel that way. I think abortion is morally wrong, but I don’t for one minute think that it has been a holocaust. Yes, I know the definition of the word. And I know the numbers, and have seen the graphic pictures, etc. Abortion is bad- point taken. Guess what? War is bad, starvation is bad, STD’s are bad, poverty is bad. These are all factors.

You can call me whatever sort of “typical liberal”, “cafteria Catholic”. or whatever other label makes you feel better, but in the end we all vote according to our conscience. And quite frankly I’d rather be comfortable with my own conscience than with a bunch of annonymous people on a message board.

 

[deb1]

Now, for the actual issue. I vote for the candidate that I feel is best suited for the job. In doing so I look at everything, not just abortion. Some of you feel that abortion has been a holocaust, even comparing it to the Jewish holocaust. You have that right here in the States to hold that opinion- be grateful. I don’t feel that way. I think abortion is morally wrong, but I don’t for one minute think that it has been a holocaust. Yes, I know the definition of the word. And I know the numbers, and have seen the graphic pictures, etc. Abortion is bad- point taken. Guess what? War is bad, starvation is bad, STD’s are bad, poverty is bad. These are all factors.
.

So, because there are many injustices in the world we should stop fighting to end ANY of them? That type of thinking would have made it impossible to end slavery in America.

 

[deb1]

I’m also not in the baby-killer camp. I’m only saying that criminalizing women who are already in a bad way is not the right approach – in my opinion.

.

Even when abortion was illegal, I am pretty certain that there weren’t any cases of the women themselves going to jail. It was the doctors who got in trouble. I think that the same would be true today.

Forget the unwed aborting mother for a moment. The question is how do WE react? What do WE do when confronted with her pain, shame, selfishness, or confusion?

We help those women seeking an abortion to find places where they can get medical care, financial assistance, information on adoption etc. I have known of many women who raised children, worked and went to school. So, if they choose to raise their child, it isn’t impossible to do so.

Compassion though doesn’t mean supporting someone in doing something immoral.

Do we invite the women into our home? Do we offer to care for both her and her child? Or do we stay safe in our homes, or safe inside our self-righteous “action groups”, agitating for legislation from a distance… but never opening up *our own lives *to confused, hurting people?

I know of many people who have adopted babies. My hubby and I have talked about adopting a special needs child if he gets a decent job when he retires from the military.

There is a local charity in my town in which a woman helps care for other poor women in her own home. My church’s Columbiettes is active in assisting her, we also give items to food banks and help provide things like baby clothing, cribs etc for unwed mothers.

 

[mikew262]

Some vote their conscience as they truly want to vote for the lesser of two evils in these times.

No matter who you choose, a vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.

I have decided not to vote for either evil and put it in the hands of our Lord and pray for whoever is chosen.

There is certainly nothing wrong with praying on it, but don’t complain with who is elected, if you don’t vote.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Voting for the “lessor of two evils” has put us in a mess. Look at the two front runners now in each party. On one side one of the candidates is as Pro-Abortion as you can get. The other candidate voted against the “Born Alive Infants Protection Act”. This Act was to prevent born babies from purposely being starved to death. Therefore the other candidate is not only Pro-Abortion but also Pro-Infanticide.

Several things have put us in a mess:

1. Supporting candidates and parties which advocate such things as you mention above. Many Catholics will tie themselves in knots to vote for people whom they know are pro-abortion – if we steadfastly opposed such candidates, there would be no such candidates.
2. Failure to work on our part. Let me give you an example: Whom do you support for 2016? What candiate are you grooming? If you say, “No one” then you are allowing someone else to make the selection for you.
3. Failure to work for the candidates of our choice.
4. Failure to vote for the lesser of two evils. Because there are only two viable choices. One of them will win. Those who did not vote against the greater of the two evils had a chance to stop him, and failed to do their duty.

 

[wow]

There is certainly nothing wrong with praying on it, but don’t complain with who is elected, if you don’t vote.

I have decided and posted that I am going to vote for a pro-life canidate. I am afraid it will have to be a write in vote though as he is not doing that well in the primarys. He does however seem to best represent the Church’s teachings concerning the intrinsically evil issues as well as other important issues and he was the only presidential canidate to go to the March of Life rally in Washington DC on January 22, 2008.