A Catholic Agenda For The Next 4 Years

[Lil Red]

http://catholicism.about.com/b/2012/11/09/a-catholic-agenda-for-the-next-four-years.htm

really great article, here is but a snippet:
[quote]
Those who are dismayed by the results of this election and by the cultural shift that it reflects can do one of two things: They can spend their time complaining about other people who have undermined traditional culture, or they can do something about it, starting in their own homes and neighborhoods and parishes. They can wait for the 2016 election, and continue to put their trust in Republican politicians to save the country, or they can follow the words of the Psalmist (Psalm 146:3): "Put not your trust in princes: in the children of men, in whom there is no salvation."

In the wake of the 2008 election, I wrote extensively about the changes that could be wrought in the American political landscape if faithful Catholics were to vote only for candidates who broadly reflect Catholic social and moral teaching. (You can find links to those pieces at the end of this post.) I still believe that the only way to change the political landscape in the long term is to break out of the mindset that we must vote for the lesser of two evils, and only cast our votes for candidates whom we can positively support. Imagine if 25 percent of the population (all Catholics who voted) or even just 11 percent of the population (all weekly Mass-going Catholics who voted) had abstained from voting for either of the major-party candidates this year, because neither reflected (albeit in different ways) Catholic social and moral teaching. Had that happened, Catholics would have been the group of voters most sought after four years from now, and potential presidential candidates would have had to bring their own positions more closely in line with Catholic social and moral teaching.

But our efforts need to go beyond the voting booth. We cannot expect to judge political candidates by how closely they reflect Catholic social and moral teaching if we don't understand that teaching ourselves. If we reduce that teaching simply to opposition to abortion (because it is the most important moral issue of our time) and, for instance, dismiss the prosecution of unjust wars as merely a "prudential judgment" (without understanding [url="http://catholicism.about.com/b/2011/09/16/what-is-a-prudential-judgment.htm"]what a prudential judgment entails[/url]), then both major parties can continue to take the Catholic vote for granted. The Republicans can continue to count on the votes of pro-life Catholics, without actually doing anything about abortion when they are in office; and the Democrats can continue to count on the votes of all other Catholics, while increasingly spitting in the face of the Catholic Church.[/quote]

go read it all.

[eagle_eye222001]

Right on.

[PhuturePriest]

I swear this person stole half of what I said in that one post I made last week.

Edited November 10, 2012 by FuturePriest387

[Apotheoun]

I found the article nominally interesting, although I think some parts of it are morally muddled. As far as the exit poll data is concerned, I saw a survey that said that 52%, and not merely 50%, of Catholics voted for Obama, but I suppose the exit poll data will vary from polling company to polling company.

Be that as it may, one thing is clear about the election results this year, and that is that the Catholic Church in American society has lost on the question of abortion. Now by this statement I am not saying that the Church is going to eventually change her doctrine on the sanctity of innocent human life from the moment of conception to natural death; instead, I am simply pointing out that the Church has lost the battle on the issue of abortion even among her own [i]membership[/i] (and I am using that term broadly in this context), and that Catholicism is clearly in decline in the United States, both culturally and politically. I hate to say it, but when a majority of Catholics who participate in an election vote for a candidate who is for legally forcing the Church to violate her own doctrine, it is clear that the Church has gone beyond the point of simply being in trouble, and has moved closer to a time when she, and her Orthodox members, by remaining faithful to Catholic moral doctrine, will face open economic, political, and perhaps even physical persecution.

[Winchester]

Catholic agorism. The US is not a justly constituted government and therefore lacks the right to rule.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1352560240' post='2507740']
Catholic agorism. The US is not a justly constituted government and therefore lacks the right to rule.
[/quote]Spooner and you are both ridiculous to think a government needs the signature from every citizen in order to be legitimate. How is that possible or practical? A new contract will be written for each citizen when the reach an age iof reason? Please stop stop breathing only anarchist's anal emissions and partake of some fresh air.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1352561535' post='2507750']
Spooner and you are both ridiculous to think a government needs the signature from every citizen in order to be legitimate. How is that possible or practical? A new contract will be written for each citizen when the reach an age iof reason? Please stop stop breathing only anarchist's anal emissions and partake of some fresh air.
[/quote]
Solid refutation, there.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='Apotheoun' timestamp='1352541866' post='2507654']
I found the article nominally interesting, although I think some parts of it are morally muddled. As far as the exit poll data is concerned, I saw a survey that said that 52%, and not merely 50%, of Catholics voted for Obama, but I suppose the exit poll data will vary from polling company to polling company.

Be that as it may, one thing is clear about the election results this year, and that is that the Catholic Church in American society has lost on the question of abortion. Now by this statement I am not saying that the Church is going to eventually change her doctrine on the sanctity of innocent human life from the moment of conception to natural death; instead, I am simply pointing out that the Church has lost the battle on the issue of abortion even among her own [i]membership[/i] (and I am using that term broadly in this context), and that Catholicism is clearly in decline in the United States, both culturally and politically. I hate to say it, but when a majority of Catholics who participate in an election vote for a candidate who is for legally forcing the Church to violate her own doctrine, it is clear that the Church has gone beyond the point of simply being in trouble, and has moved closer to a time when she, and her Orthodox members, by remaining faithful to Catholic moral doctrine, will face open economic, political, and perhaps even physical persecution.
[/quote]

I wonder how much of this has been due to the "seamless garment" argument that basically watered down Catholic support for the anti-abortion movement by adding other issues to distract people with. How many Catholics justify voting for a pro-abortion/pro-sodomy candidate because he/she (no pun intended) is opposed to capital punishment and in favor of amnesty (or whatever is the new term) for illegal aliens and government health care for all?

Edited November 10, 2012 by Norseman82

[Basilisa Marie]

Sometimes I think it's very easy to forget how truly different practicing Catholics are from the rest of the population. Truly, radically different. To us, marriage isn't about long-term sexual pleasure with tax benefits. Sex is something married couples do that renews their marriage vows, and sometimes results in the wonderful gift of a child. Abortion is never the answer - unconditional support for mothers and babies is. War is a grave evil and should only be pursued as a last resort. Serving the needs of the poor is to serve Christ. We need to honor our elders, and care for them with love - not encourage them to pursue assisted suicide and not be a "burden." The list goes on and on.

It seems that the popular positions in American culture make sense only as short-term solutions to institutional problems, and only the Church's teachings provide real solutions for ridding society of those institutional problems. Take the example of abortion - it seems that women need abortion rights because society doesn't lift a single finger to support pregnant women, no matter the circumstances of her pregnancy. A young woman who finds her self pregnant gets scorn from her family and friends, loses options for college or a career, faces exorbitant medical bills... so it seems that abortion gives women an "out" of that impossible situation society throws single pregnant women into. But abortion only enables the rest of society to ignore the needs of women. The Church's position enables us to attack society's misogyny, to treat women like human beings and give them the love and support they (and their children) need.

So it seems to me that this election was a wakeup call for a lot of people. I mean this in a good way. I think it's forcing people to realize that we are not the loudest voice in the room, that we have to rethink our tactics. The Church has never lived in a truly post-Christian society before, and that's what we're seeing today. We've got to adjust our tactics accordingly.

TLDR: Good article.

[StMichael]

White Catholics voted 70-30 for Romney, Hispanic Catholics voted in the reverse. It was a vote for big government, not their faith.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='StMichael' timestamp='1352944630' post='2510194']
White Catholics voted 70-30 for Romney, Hispanic Catholics voted in the reverse. It was a vote for big government, not their faith.
[/quote]
What about non-white non-hispanic Catholics? And why does ethnicity matter?

[Winchester]

What's sad is that people who imagine themselves to favor small government saw Romney as the man representing small government.

[Ed Normile]

@-Winchy, did you see Obama as the " man representing small government " ? Do you have any substantive facts showing Romney as a big government man that would contradict his promise of reducing government programs and eliminating others ? Just his promised repeal of Obamacare would have eliminated many thousands of bureaucrats and federal employees and the need for Obama's 16,000 new IRS agents to regulate the tax saving us billions of dollars. As Governor he balanced the budget by cutting government, laying off state employees, cutting the number of state lawyers, eliminating positions and removing monies from fluff projects to local communities. Obama has never had an actual budget.

As for the premise of this post , this guy is a dreamer. His statement that Obama lost 4% of the catholic vote this time is ludicrous, Obama actually gained 2% of the catholic vote this election with 54% of the catholics voting for him compared to 52% last go around. In reality four years from now the catholic vote will matter no more than it did this time. There are far too many catholics who are actually relativists in their thinking, I oppose abortion but if its ok for them what does it matter to me, I oppose homosexual marriage but its ok for them, I oppose mandated health care providing abortion and trampling my religious freedoms... etc.

You guys may not realize it but THIS was the election ! There will never be no reversal of Obamacare, there will be no stopping homosexual marriage and special rights, there will be no end to religious persecution. We had a chance and its now past, now we reap what has been sowed. Do you really believe a magical candidate will come along that will run on any of these issues and not be assassinated in the media. Look at Herman Cain, a good catholic, a constitutional conservative who believed in the pro-life cause who was ruined by baseless allegations and had to step down as it affected his family life. Take for an example Obama's nominee for Secretary of State Susan Rice, a woman who repeatedly lied about the Libya attack which took the life of four U.S. citizens by calling it a spontaneous protest gone awry, these lies prove her unqualified to hold that position, yet the media, and the President stand behind her and many Democrat female Senators have came out in her defense saying the Republican males who are trying to block her nomination are bullies picking on a woman. This machine is too well oiled, the American people are too gullible and too willing to give away their freedoms for a handout, and the catholics are too spineless to be an effective voting block. Despite the guidance of the Bishops on non negotiable issues such as abortion U.S. catholics hoping for Jesus to come along and run for office either sat out or voted for Obama. Shame on the American catholic Church, which is a far cry from the Roman catholic Church.

My prediction, four years from now the wimp catholic voters will still not have a man or woman left after media selection of candidates has been established who is pro-life enough or small government enough, or who is government charity enough for them. So they will probably vote for Biden hoping that four more years their messiah will run for office.

ed

[Winchester]

[quote name='Ed Normile' timestamp='1353121119' post='2511583']
@-Winchy, did you see Obama as the " man representing small government " ? Do you have any substantive facts showing Romney as a big government man that would contradict his promise of reducing government programs and eliminating others ? Just his promised repeal of Obamacare would have eliminated many thousands of bureaucrats and federal employees and the need for Obama's 16,000 new IRS agents to regulate the tax saving us billions of dollars. As Governor he balanced the budget by cutting government, laying off state employees, cutting the number of state lawyers, eliminating positions and removing monies from fluff projects to local communities. Obama has never had an actual budget.

[/quote]
Why would I have to think that?

The choice between Romney and Obama was the choice between two big government nationalists.


Romney already voiced support of "parts" of Obamacare, namely forcing insurance companies to accept people with pre-existing conditions. The mandate to purchase healthcare insurance or be penalized was born in the minds of pragmatic "conservatives". It's necessary to fund the program. You must have an individual mandate to even make the attempt to cover the expense of "insuring" people with pre-existing conditions.

Having not read a lot on his governorship regarding the budget, I will present the biggest difference between Massachusetts and the Federal government: Access to the printing press. Deficit spending in states and cities is a bit restrained by their means of obtaining more money. Considering the number of adults who will happily repeat the Clinton surplus myth, I am skeptical of claims that this or that politician balanced the budget. Accounting tricks abound. I seriously doubt Romneycare is actually paying for itself (regardless, it is an unacceptable violation of property rights, and no, he did not have to sign it into law--representatives are under no obligation to violate morality, even if the mob wants them to. And Romneycare pays for abortions).

Add to this his support for a permanent "assault weapons" (a deceptive term. As in a lie. As in an intrinsically disordered act) in his state, and we have a strong case for a big government (in practice, not in pillow talk) shill.

Of course, he supports presidential war powers (cue "everybody else is doing it" defense), the (unconstitutional) drug war, the NDAA, and Patriot Act. He is a nationalist, a position untenable for one adhering to the Constitution or small government.


None of this is a defense of Obama, and your reading into that shows how poisoned your mind is by the political theater.


By "pillow talk", I mean to imply everyone believing Romney's claims is the toy of an abusive, cheating boyfriend.

In what should be an unnecessary addendum: I did not vote for Obama. Either time. Nor did I vote for Romney.

Edited November 17, 2012 by Winchester

[add]

The Catholic Church in America is in a steep decline, it has been this since the 60's.
Faith and devotion has been replaced by rage, self-indulgence, laziness, arrogance, envy, jealousy, and greediness.
One only has to look to how this lack of faith or decline has affected the sanctity of Matrimony and the quality of life, itself
The leadership of Clinton, Bush, Romney or Obama is not really the problem…

It is almost preordain that over the next four years catholic community will follow the same path they have been on and delve deeper into the abyss



We are all sinners

LORD HAVE MERCY ON US (United States)