Why Do Faithful Catholics Vote Liberal?

[Chrysologus]

There are plenty of reasons for a Catholic to vote for Democrats. Opposition to capital punishment, universal health care, support for the poor, and fighting to end racism and other forms of discrimination are all good, Christian principles of social justice which align well with the Democratic party. There are also some very good reasons to vote Republican, most especially their (albeit imperfect) pro-life stance and opposition to so-called gay "marriage."

WARNING: Rant ahead.

The Catholic Answers and EWTN voter guides are hardly the last word in moral theology. If voting for a candidate who supports abortion is a mortal sin, then so must be voting for any candidate who supports anything you believe to be sinful. Most Catholics believe that the death penalty and the war on Iraq are sinful, yet George W. Bush supports these things. If we go by these so-called voter guides, then there probably aren't very many candidates we can vote for. Now, don't get me wrong, voting for only pro-life candidates is admirable (I myself follow this rule), but it's not a moral absolute that we can impose on everyone. The problem with their thinking, as I see it, is that voting for a certain political candidate has never meant that you agree with everything he or she proposes, and most certainly does _not_ constitute formal cooperation with all of his or her endeavors.

[ilovechrist]

[quote name='BurkeFan' date='Jun 29 2004, 09:38 PM'] However, the parties of her day weren't what they are today. [/quote]
thank you for reminding everybody of that.

personally, *though i still can't vote yet*, the Republicans look like the good guys to me. they seem to be the lesser evil..

[crusader1234]

[quote]Read the Voter's guide more carefully, it says you can vote for the one who violates less of the non-negotiables.

besides, Bush is pro-life. [/quote]

Bush isn't pro life... unless you consider the morning after pill or the DP in cases where they could contain a criminal pro-life. And you know what, Bush isn't as good as a lot of 3rd party candidates. And you know what? The voters guide isnt ex-cathedra and it isnt from the Pope - I'll vote for whomever I think best exemplifies Catholic morals. The guide may or may not agree with me.

[jmjtina]

unfaithful catholics vote liberal.....(i.e., abortion, homosexual marriages, etc)

[Aloysius]

imperfect legislation IS pro-life.

[Paladin D]

[quote name='Chrysologus' date='Jun 29 2004, 10:29 PM'] There are plenty of reasons for a Catholic to vote for Democrats. Opposition to capital punishment, universal health care, support for the poor, and fighting to end racism and other forms of discrimination are all good, Christian principles of social justice which align well with the Democratic party. There are also some very good reasons to vote Republican, most especially their (albeit imperfect) pro-life stance and opposition to so-called gay "marriage."

WARNING: Rant ahead.

The Catholic Answers and EWTN voter guides are hardly the last word in moral theology. If voting for a candidate who supports abortion is a mortal sin, then so must be voting for any candidate who supports anything you believe to be sinful. Most Catholics believe that the death penalty and the war on Iraq are sinful, yet George W. Bush supports these things. If we go by these so-called voter guides, then there probably aren't very many candidates we can vote for. Now, don't get me wrong, voting for only pro-life candidates is admirable (I myself follow this rule), but it's not a moral absolute that we can impose on everyone. The problem with their thinking, as I see it, is that voting for a certain political candidate has never meant that you agree with everything he or she proposes, and most certainly does _not_ constitute formal cooperation with all of his or her endeavors. [/quote]
Universal healthcare is NOT the answer. I'm not very knowledable on the issue, but I've heard many stories where Canadians just get their prescribtion drugs and mediocure doctor visits, and out the door.

[crusader1234]

As a Canadian, I can tell you thats not the case - as well, I can tell you that we are currently overhauling the whole system. Heresay annoys me.

[Iacobus]

I have family in Canada. I know doctors in the states. I know family who are doctors in the states. All the family in Canada love the health system. The doctors here aren't 100% gung ho because they would lose some profit (I say give them tort reform *reduces insurance* and offsets lost prohit and trust me those guys and gals could afford a small cut).

And I agree with Chrysologus about the Voter Guides. I am not a big fan of the non-negs or the EWTN one. I liked it when I 1st read them. Than I talked with my priest about it and read the one put out by the USCCB and well EWTN and CA tried to take Calc and give it to you in a form understandable by 1st graders. Moral voting is much more involed than 5 points. Read the Faithful Citizenship Bishops Statement on the USCCB site. Rember the USCCB has teaching authoirty that CA and EWTN don't have and can never have.

[Hananiah]

[quote name='Chrysologus' date='Jun 29 2004, 09:29 PM'] The Catholic Answers and EWTN voter guides are hardly the last word in moral theology. If voting for a candidate who supports abortion is a mortal sin, then so must be voting for any candidate who supports anything you believe to be sinful. Most Catholics believe that the death penalty and the war on Iraq are sinful, yet George W. Bush supports these things. If we go by these so-called voter guides, then there probably aren't very many candidates we can vote for. Now, don't get me wrong, voting for only pro-life candidates is admirable (I myself follow this rule), but it's not a moral absolute that we can impose on everyone. The problem with their thinking, as I see it, is that voting for a certain political candidate has never meant that you agree with everything he or she proposes, and most certainly does _not_ constitute formal cooperation with all of his or her endeavors. [/quote]
The Catholic Church teaches that abortion is an intrinsically evil act; it has never said the same regarding either the death penalty or war. With respect to the death penalty, the Catechism of the Council of Trent actually called the execution of murderers an act of supreme obedience to the fifth commandment (you shall not kill). Granted, John Paul II has suggested that society has progressed to the point where capital punishment is no longer necessary, however he has left the decision of when and where to apply it to the relevant civil authorities (Evangelium Vitae 56). And by the way, 74% of Catholic favor the death penalty.

The issue of the Iraq war is similar. Whether the war against Iraq is unjust is a prudential judgment which Catholics are free to make for themselves, until such time as the Pope makes it for them. So far, all John Paul II has done is advise against the war. He could, if he so desired, issue a formal decree condemning it as unjust and forbidding all Catholics from participation. But he has chosen not to do so. At least for now, Catholics may take opposite sides on this issue yet remain in good standing within the Church.

[Hananiah]

That having been said, my support is 100% behind Michael Peroutka of the Constitution Party. He's 100% pro-life, 100% anti-war, and 100% anti-sodomy.

www.peroutka2004.com

[Sammy Blaze]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Jun 29 2004, 04:55 PM'] In the United States of America the Republican Party is against abortion and same-sex marriage, the Democratic Party is for those.

not to mention, again, that I believe the Democratic Party's economic policies are doomed to fail and social justice can best be acheived by small government and big charity, the little guy that makes the most out of his future and helps those in need. don't forget Ironmonk's favorite scripture: 2 Thess 3:10 "if any man will not work, neither let him eat." [/quote]
ouch, I hope you're not making a generalized right wing stereotype of the welfare system and things similar to.

Warning Ranting ahead lol:
President Bush helped the working class so much with his tax breaks, well I think he did, I sure didn't see any tax break, because we didn't make enough money. Maybe my parents are lazy and need to work more and could make more if they wanted to. I mean my mom works 12 hr shifts at a hospital, and my dad a retired Vietnam vet (He knows what its like to be in a war that is fought more politically than strategically) who is now on disability since he was diagnosed with cancer. would like to work but he can't, and since his company "let him go" for missing so much work, (since our local unions were busted in the First Bush era).
I was for the DP when someone once told me, "You know, God loves you just as much as he loves Saddam Hussein..." made me think a little.

Not to mention the young girl i knew my freshman year in college, she had a kid and was on welfare. Her baby's father had died, and she worked, and she went to college to give her daughter the chance to have a better life.

I know alot of people who are poor and barely making it, and they are/were makin' it because of gov't funded programs. The GOP does not do enough to help the lower/middle class of America, the poor and afflicted of our times.
The Dems do not do enough to protect the unborn, so I don't allign myself with them either.
I'm a faithful Catholic so I'll probably vote for neither candidates...

I will say, I'd rather have some of the lower class of America ripping off the system, than some Big business special interests groups like Haliburton fleecing America.


sorry pham, just ventin' a little

Yours in Christ,
~S.

[crusader1234]

I totally agree.

[Chrysologus]

Hananiah, I know that it is not Catholic dogma that the war on Iraq and capital punishment are immoral, but [i]I[/i], along with John Paul II, believe they are! Therefore, if it's true that voting for a candidate means [i]formally cooperating [/i] in all his or her endeavors, then I would be sinning against my conscience by voting for George W. Bush! I frequently hear conservative groups like EWTN and Catholic Answers repeating the fact that the Church's pro-life stance is non-negotiable, as compared to that on capital punishment and war, but that misses the point entirely. If their logic that "voting for a candidate who supports sin = formal cooperation in sin" is true, [i]no one [/i]can morally vote for [i]any [/i]candidate who supports [i]anything [/i]that he or she belives is immoral! If this is the case, then I would say that the system of voting is far too near an occasion of sin to justify participating in at all!

[qfnol31]

[quote name='Iacobus' date='Jun 29 2004, 09:16 PM'] Yes but he has failed to be pro life. He stated that he would not seek to overturn apporaval of RU 486 (sp?). Therefore he is not pro life. Is he pro abort? No. Pro life? No. [/quote]
He can't.

[Iacobus]

You said murder is evil per se. That is the reason for abortion being evil. Yes? What is the DP if the system is flawed? I live in IL. In the past few years we found that around 13 men on death row awaiting excution at the hands of the state were NOT GUILTY of any crime. The police and DA withheld evidince, esp DNA, which lead to them being senticned. So using a flawed system to order people to death will commit acts of murder. Therefore supporting DP does to some extent support murder. And supporting leaders who support the DP is supporting those who condond killing.