Why Would A Catholic Vote For A ProChoice Canidate?

[dmelosi]

This is a common problem whenever someone starts talking about being “pro-life” but this is the first time I have seen it used for “pro-murder”. That is, the definition is stretched to include things the writer disapproves of that have only a faint connection to the term.

The death penalty does not belong here. Murder is defined by the Church as the deliberate taking of innocent life; since criminals are by definition not innocent, taking their lives is not murder. Nor does the execution of an innocent person constitute murder since the killing of the innocent in that case is not deliberate.

War does not belong here either. I think most of us can easily conclude that Germany initiated an unjust war (WWII) but I have never heard anyone in or out of the Church declare that all German soldiers were guilty of murder.

Abortion and euthanasia fit the definition; leave it at that.

Ender

That is why I did not say pro life…I agree with you on what pro life means. I was responding to the previous poster.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

This is a common problem whenever someone starts talking about being “pro-life” but this is the first time I have seen it used for “pro-murder”. That is, the definition is stretched to include things the writer disapproves of that have only a faint connection to the term.

The death penalty does not belong here. Murder is defined by the Church as the deliberate taking of innocent life; since criminals are by definition not innocent, taking their lives is not murder. Nor does the execution of an innocent person constitute murder since the killing of the innocent in that case is not deliberate.

War does not belong here either. I think most of us can easily conclude that Germany initiated an unjust war (WWII) but I have never heard anyone in or out of the Church declare that all German soldiers were guilty of murder.

Abortion and euthanasia fit the definition; leave it at that.

Ender

So, if the State takes executes an innocent: “Whoopsie daisy! Oh, well! My bad.” Is this what you’re saying?

So much for the sanctity of all human life.

I would think that there should be some sort of justice for the unjustified, cold-blooded taking of that innocent human life.

 

[dmelosi]

So, if the State takes executes an innocent: “Whoopsie daisy! Oh, well! My bad.” Is this what you’re saying?

So much for the sanctity of all human life.

I would think that there should be some sort of justice for the unjustified, cold-blooded taking of that innocent human life.

Don’t think I have ever heard you use the phrase “cold-blooded taking of that innocent human life” when you describe abortion.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Don’t think I have ever heard you use the phrase “cold-blooded taking of that innocent human life” when you describe abortion.

On a board full of people who never tire of saying that “abortion is the cold-bloded murder of innocent human life,” I don’t think adding my voice to the chorus will contribute anything…unless you need some sort of confirmation that I believe abortion is a great evil (which I do). Considering I want to contribute something unique to what everyone else is saying (within certain guidelines, of course).

So, who speaks for those who are executed wrongfully? I read posts from people who are enthusiastic about killing convicted criminals. I could speak to what I think about such enthusiasm for killing human beings, but I won’t. I would ask, who speaks for those who are innocent of any crime but are executed anyway?

 

[dmelosi]

On a board full of people who never tire of saying that “abortion is the cold-bloded murder of innocent human life,” I don’t think adding my voice to the chorus will contribute anything…unless you need some sort of confirmation that I believe abortion is a great evil (which I do). Considering I want to contribute something unique to what everyone else is saying (within certain guidelines, of course).

So, who speaks for those who are executed wrongfully? I read posts from people who are enthusiastic about killing convicted criminals. I could speak to what I think about such enthusiasm for killing human beings, but I won’t. I would ask, who speaks for those who are innocent of any crime but are executed anyway?

I don’t think that I have ever seen a post here where anyone has shown enthusiasm about killing a convicted criminal. You stretch this a bunch.

It struck me as odd on how much more “enthusiastic” about your defense of capital punishment compared to your defense of abortion, very odd.

In your mind, which is abortion, “a great evil” or “cold blooded murder” (cold blooded murder would be both)

 

[Pong]

I don’t think that I have ever seen a post here where anyone has shown enthusiasm about killing a convicted criminal. You stretch this a bunch.

Wish granted.

I agree. The death penalty is true justice and I can honestly say that if someone harmed my family than I would absolutely demand that the criminal to be executed.

 

[seekerz]

War does not belong here either. I think most of us can easily conclude that Germany initiated an unjust war (WWII) but I have never heard anyone in or out of the Church declare that all German soldiers were guilty of murder.

Abortion and euthanasia fit the definition; leave it at that.

Ender

And why, pray, does war not belong? What about the killing of noncombatants through callousness or carelessness?

Does the Church really not consider deaths caused in an unjust war to be murder? I see no reason not to refer to the Germans as murderers. In my mind, the aggressor/offending nation, even in a just war, is guilty of the blood of those who die: on both sides. What about the children and unborn who count as “collateral damage” in such a war? Does their blood not cry up to God for vengeance as much as any aborted child’s?

Sorry for being off-topic, but I couldn’t let this one slide. Life=life=life=life, everywhere, all the time, for all God’s creatures.

 

[dmelosi]

Wish granted.

That is the first one I have seen

Here is what i responded to which was plural, maybe there are more, but this is the first one I have seen.

---

So, who speaks for those who are executed wrongfully? I read posts from people who are enthusiastic about killing convicted criminals. I could speak to what I think about such enthusiasm for killing human beings, but I won’t. I would ask, who speaks for those who are innocent of any crime but are executed anyway?

 

[ProVobis]

So then, what kind of punishment should a pro-life candidate propose or legislate against the abortionist? Should the abortionist be classified as a murderer and be executed as well, or else the candidate loses his “pro-life” label?

One other question: if a candidate votes against public funding for abortion, is that enough to put him/her in the “pro-life” camp?

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I don’t think that I have ever seen a post here where anyone has shown enthusiasm about killing a convicted criminal. You stretch this a bunch.

It struck me as odd on how much more “enthusiastic” about your defense of capital punishment compared to your defense of abortion, very odd.

In your mind, which is abortion, “a great evil” or “cold blooded murder” (cold blooded murder would be both)

Well, since I don’t use PROTESTANT either/or style thinking, I would say that abortion is both a great evil and cold blooded murder.

 

[vern_humphrey]

So then, what kind of punishment should a pro-life candidate propose or legislate against the abortionist? Should the abortionist be classified as a murderer and be executed as well,

An abortionist** is **a serial killer, is he not?

or else the candidate loses his “pro-life” label?

One other question: if a candidate votes against public funding for abortion, is that enough to put him/her in the “pro-life” camp?

Given where we are now, any movement toward restricting abortion is a victory – and we should take it.

 

[Ender]

Does the Church really not consider deaths caused in an unjust war to be murder?

I have never seen any document that implies this. If you can point to one I am prepared to change my position.

LCMS_NO_MORE:

So, if the State takes executes an innocent: “Whoopsie daisy! Oh, well! My bad.” Is this what you’re saying?

No. I said that it wasn’t murder.

I would think that there should be some sort of justice for the unjustified, cold-blooded taking of that innocent human life.

You forgot to include “accidental”. Do you not understand the significance of intent in determining the morality of an action?

Ender

 

[mikew262]

An abortionist** is **a serial killer, is he not?

Legally? No. Morally? Perhaps, depending upon your perspective.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Legally? No. Morally? Perhaps, depending upon your perspective.

What perspective would not consider a man who kills innocent human beings day after day to be a serial killer?

 

[BamaRider]

Because I’m retired I have the benefit of time. So I went back and read hundreds of posts in the many, many threads on this subject. After hours of reading posts, many of them quite lengthy, I came to the conclusion pro choice Catholics will go to great lengths to defend their pro choice candidate/party. And when called out it, get very defensive.

Their reasoning can be summarized as follows:

Lump several issues counter with the abortion issue and then say you vote the lesser of evils.

Pro life guys don’t really vote pro life, just say it to get votes

Basically the social agenda of the left is more important then how they vote on abortion issues (the related posts usually give a long desposition explaining but that is the short version) so thats why I vote pro choice candidates

and last but least, do nothing and sit home election day.

So there, see how much time I saved everyone?

I pretty much concluded some folks are just bound and determined to vote for a pro choice guy, because they hate the agenda of conservatives that much, and nothing I say here is gonna take them off that road.

It is a real possiblity the next president will have 3 picks for the court (8 year term) and impale us with abortion on demand anywhere, anyhow for the next 50 years.

And that would be really sad. Other issues come and go, and long after the 8 years of that guy is in the books, that legacy will be out there.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I pretty much concluded some folks are just bound and determined to vote for a pro choice guy, because they hate the agenda of conservatives that much, and nothing I say here is gonna take them off that road.

It must burn people up inside to hate other people so much that they’re willing to kill the unborn to show their hatred.

 

[Aramis]

It must burn people up inside to hate other people so much that they’re willing to kill the unborn to show their hatred.

Hardly. In my case, I realize that voting solely on the basis of professed anti-abortion basis results in no net gains against abortion.

The other social issues thus become far mor important, since on those issues the court is not going to toss out every restriction passed by a legislator.

And from where I sit, abortion has become MORE available during the Bush administration… over the counter pill, local pharmacist being fired for refusing to dispense it. So either Bush’s not a conservative, not pro-life, or is ineffectual or inept, or some combination of the above.

 

[Nino]

Be careful you don’t bump your head when you fall off your high horse.

Twelve million people died in the Holocaust, including six million Jews and three million Polish Catholics. So don’t tell Catholics we have no right to talk about the Holocaust.

THIS IS WHAT IS CALLED A NO WIN FIGHT…ON PURPOSE ITS WORDED SO AL L PUT THEIR HEADS DOWN AND THE ESTABLISHMENT GRINS AND WINS! BIG DEAL…BORING!!! FDR WAS SILENT ABOUT THE HOLOCAUST AS WAS HIS LOVELY WIFE ELANORE…ONLY PIUSX11 AND THE VATICAN SPOKE OUT…I SPENT ALL DAY IN A NEW YORK CITY LIBRARY GOING OVER MICRO FILM…AND FROM 1939 TO 1945 I FOUND 38 ARTICLES IN THE NEW YORK TIMES.(GENUFLECT) WHERE IT WAS STATED,MOST ON THE FRONT PAGE,THE POPE CONDEMNING WHAT WAS HAPPENING TO OUR BLESSED JEWIISH SONS AND DAUGHTERS IN GERMANY!!! THE LEFT WING NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY OF GERMANY MURDERED SOME 22 MILLION INNOCENT PEOPLE IN 12 YEARS…THEIR BUDDIES IN SIN THE COMMUNISTS MURDERED SOME 100 MILLION IN SOME 60 YEARS…BUT WHO IS COUNTING…JUST ONE IS TOO MUCH…NOW AMERICA IS GOING DOWN THE TUBES ,NOT ONE CANDIDATE…RON PAUL FOR A WHILE BUT HE IS TOO WIMPY TO STAY IN THE FIGHT…STANDS FOR WE …THE PEOPLE…MAY GOD HELP US …AMERICA IS GOING DOWN THE TUBES…

 

[ribozyme]

Hardly. In my case, I realize that voting solely on the basis of professed anti-abortion basis results in no net gains against abortion.

The other social issues thus become far mor important, since on those issues the court is not going to toss out every restriction passed by a legislator.

And from where I sit, abortion has become MORE available during the Bush administration… over the counter pill, local pharmacist being fired for refusing to dispense it. So either Bush’s not a conservative, not pro-life, or is ineffectual or inept, or some combination of the above.

Uh… the people who are calling the shots for the conservative agenda are not really pro-life.

Scaife’s money was probably most important to the cause in the '70s and '80s, when conservatives enjoyed the exhilarating reversal of what they had seen as their traditional, inconsequential status in American life. Scaife gave about $200 million to conservative causes from 1974 (his first gift to the Heritage Foundation) through the end of the Bush administration in 1992.

There are disagreements, of course, particularly on emotional issues such as abortion, free trade and immigration. Scaife has long favored abortion rights, to the chagrin of many of those he has supported. In the first years of his philanthropy he stuck to a pattern set by his mother and sister and gave millions to Planned Parenthood and other population control groups, though most such giving stopped in the 1970s. He also has favored stricter controls on immigration and trade, though many Scaife-supported groups do not.

washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/scaifemain050299b.htm

 

[mary_bobo]

Because I’m retired I have the benefit of time. So I went back and read hundreds of posts in the many, many threads on this subject. After hours of reading posts, many of them quite lengthy, I came to the conclusion pro choice Catholics will go to great lengths to defend their pro choice candidate/party. And when called out it, get very defensive.

Their reasoning can be summarized as follows:

Lump several issues counter with the abortion issue and then say you vote the lesser of evils.

Pro life guys don’t really vote pro life, just say it to get votes

Basically the social agenda of the left is more important then how they vote on abortion issues (the related posts usually give a long desposition explaining but that is the short version) so thats why I vote pro choice candidates

and last but least, do nothing and sit home election day.

So there, see how much time I saved everyone?

I pretty much concluded some folks are just bound and determined to vote for a pro choice guy, because they hate the agenda of conservatives that much, and nothing I say here is gonna take them off that road.

It is a real possiblity the next president will have 3 picks for the court (8 year term) and impale us with abortion on demand anywhere, anyhow for the next 50 years.

And that would be really sad. Other issues come and go, and long after the 8 years of that guy is in the books, that legacy will be out there.

Excellent post and good ideas. We have had many years of our liberal friends pushing “The Great Society” programs and FDR programs and I don’t think we have made much progress. What we have accomplished is a society more and more dependent on government to run their lives. Now before you jump on President Bush, I don’t agree with much of what he has done. But he has helped the pro-life movement whether you want to give him credit for it or not. You can sit and say that Republicans only SAY they are pro-life to get votes, but when did the last Dem do anything at all to help the pro-life movement. I just wish some of our posters who try to equalize issues could see an aborted fetus, or an early spontaneously aborted fetus and then be able to say that this is not murder. I really can’t think of anything else that bad.