Bush Is Not Pro-life...

[Joseph]

OK.....I don't want Kerry to win whatsoever, but I wish there was someone else running besides Bush who was pro-life. But if Bush is our only choice, then so be it.

[angelica]

[url="http://www.priestsforlife.org/elections/electiondaytraps.htm"]Please read this this "Election Day Traps"[/url]

Famous pro-lifer and devout priest Fr. Frank Pavone points out important things to remember when voting. One of them is not to fall into the trap of looking for the perfect candidate and what to do instead. Read the link above for details.

We have to do everything we can to protect the children being killed by abortion and if that means voting for Bush, then we have to. Its like saying " Candidate X will allow 100 babies to be killed. Candidate Y will allow 10,000 children to be killed. Well, I can't vote for either candidate then because there is nothing I can do." Of course there is something HUGE to be done--save 9,900 children by voting for Candidate X. This is just an example. God gives us the means in our hands to do something to save lives and he expects us to use it. Every single child's life is precious to him and if we can help save more with a certain candidate, then we must do so. Voting for Bush will ensure that many, many more children will be save than if we voted for someone else. It has been established that voting for someone who has little chance to win is a throwaway vote and lessens the chance of saving more children's lives from being taken.

Edited August 5, 2004 by angelica

[ironmonk]

[quote name='amarkich' date='Aug 4 2004, 07:19 PM'] AnomilE, I would like to apologize on behalf of everyone who posted a reply to your question without addressing the point in question or bothering to attempt to disprove it, i.e., those people who did not debate the issue of cooperating with evil in order to select the lesser of the two evils. I agree with your position on the issue, and I say to those who are stuck on Bush: The best that you can ever claim is that if you are in a swing state (or maybe a blue state) then you could vote for Bush in order to combat Kerry's possible (or probably victory), but for those of you in a state that will surely be won by Bush, it is your obligation as Catholics to support the candidate who best reflects the Church's position on all issues (regardless of whether or not he is a part of one of the two major parties). I agree with you, AnomilE, that Michael Peroutka is the best representative of Church teaching. This would be my vote (in the state of Georgia) if I were old enough (I am about six months too young). God bless. [/quote]
Simply wrong. A vote for anything outside of the two parties is a wasted vote. It is the ONLY reason why Clinton ever got into office because of Perot... I wouldn't doubt that Clinton had some deal with Perot.

Bush is not an evil. Bush is good.

-ironmonk

[MorphRC]

I wouldnt Vote For Bush or Kerry. Both Murderers When It Comes Down To It.

Edited August 5, 2004 by MorphRC

[Kilroy the Ninja]

Gee, I wonder if Kerry's camp is savvy enough to have people start showing up at Catholic websites encouraging people to not vote for Bush because he's just as "bad" as Kerry, because a non-vote for Bush is almost as good as a vote for Kerry. I wonder if Kerry would do such a thing. (Or the people who work for him....) Hmmmmmmmm............. I wonder.............

[ironmonk]

[quote name='MorphRC' date='Aug 5 2004, 10:07 AM'] I wouldnt Vote For Bush or Kerry. Both Murderers When It Comes Down To It. [/quote]
Facts of life...

Bush is not a murderer.

The meida lies.

The Catholic Church is the Church built by Christ.

Kerry is not Catholic, nor or most of the democrat senators that claim to be.

Bush is the only real choice for anyone who claims to be Christian to vote for.


God Bless,
ironmonk

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='MorphRC' date='Aug 5 2004, 10:07 AM'] I wouldnt Vote For Bush or Kerry. Both Murderers When It Comes Down To It. [/quote]
Nope.
Bush does not vote to slice and dice children. Kerry does.

[Joseph]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='Aug 5 2004, 07:54 AM'] Simply wrong. A vote for anything outside of the two parties is a wasted vote. It is the ONLY reason why Clinton ever got into office because of Perot... I wouldn't doubt that Clinton had some deal with Perot.

[/quote]
Can't that work both ways though? Like in the 2000 election, didn't Gore lose Florida because of the votes for Nader? In certain situations, a third-party could help either candidate, by taking votes away from the other. Of course, this wouldn't be the case in this coming election.

[AnomilE]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Aug 4 2004, 04:13 PM'] Kerry is the worst person for us to have in office.

Therefore we have three choices:[list]
[*]To be for him.
[*]To be neutral.
[*]To be against him
[/list]Well, to be for him is to vote for him or to allow him into office. This is a sin because we are not allowed to support pro-abortion candidates unless we have to. I think we would agree that this choice is not allowed by the Church.

Well, we're not allowed to stand by neutral either, because that itself would be a sin.

Therefore we must be against him. Now to vote against him is to vote either for Bush or another candidate. I'll take the other candidate first. I have very many doubts that another candidate outside of the Republican or Democratic parties could win. In fact, I'm almost positive of it. Therefore, why should we vote for them in this case? I do understand that there are some certain cases where this would be necessary. However, I believe that if we all vote for a third-party candidate, we'll really be helping out Kerry. I think in that case he'll win the election. Now, we know that that's a bad thing, and something we really want to avoid.

That leaves us with the last option, to vote for Bush. Bush has not done any of the no-vote actions, as has Kerry (these include Abortion, etc.). Many people disagree with the war, but we're allowed to as Catholics (as stated by Ratzinger). Others have mentioned his view on embryonic stem cell research. He has stopped all funding for it beyond 2001, which is what he is limited to do. He is against abortion (except maybe in some cases, but I'm not so sure), but can't do anything about it. He's against the pill, but once again, can't do anything about it. I have a hard time seeing that not voting for him is better than keeping Kerry out of office.

Well, now I come to my point. God would not allow us to be in a positition where we must choose an evil. In my opinion, we can either vote Bush or allow Kerry into office. Neither seem to be good choices for many, but one must be right. (If someone can see another option, please mention it.) Therefore voting for Bush cannot be an evil because voting for Kerry is, and it seems hard to believe that we would ever be in an instance where we could only choose evil.

But then again, maybe there's a better option. I just don't see it.

My .02. [/quote]
We can be against Kerry without being for Bush and that's my whole point.

[AnomilE]

[quote name='amarkich' date='Aug 4 2004, 05:19 PM'] AnomilE, I would like to apologize on behalf of everyone who posted a reply to your question without addressing the point in question or bothering to attempt to disprove it, i.e., those people who did not debate the issue of cooperating with evil in order to select the lesser of the two evils. I agree with your position on the issue, and I say to those who are stuck on Bush: The best that you can ever claim is that if you are in a swing state (or maybe a blue state) then you could vote for Bush in order to combat Kerry's possible (or probably victory), but for those of you in a state that will surely be won by Bush, it is your obligation as Catholics to support the candidate who best reflects the Church's position on all issues (regardless of whether or not he is a part of one of the two major parties). I agree with you, AnomilE, that Michael Peroutka is the best representative of Church teaching. This would be my vote (in the state of Georgia) if I were old enough (I am about six months too young). God bless. [/quote]
Thank you for addressing the issue at hand- I appreciate that.

[AnomilE]

[quote name='dUSt' date='Aug 4 2004, 05:27 PM'] Also, I'd like to run for president. In fact, I'm declaring that right now. I am running for president of the United States. I will [b]guarantee[/b] you that I will make decisions 100% on Church teaching. Has Michael Peroutka made this promise?

So, therefore, according to your criteria, I expect you to write-in my name on your voting ballot.

God bless. [/quote]
Peroutka does not need to be Catholic or claim to uphold Catholic teaching- His moral stance however does fall in line iwht our moral teaching on ALL levels.

[AnomilE]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Aug 4 2004, 05:29 PM'] i contest the idea that bush is an evil. as a president: his policies on abortion are in line with Church Teaching. comments that the country isn't ready for Roe v Wade to be overturned do not affect the fact that all his actions in regards to the abortion issue are pro-life. he appoints pro-life judges and cuts US funding for abortion. name one action of Bush that supports abortion, and I might consider calling him the lesser of two evils. until then, i consider him an imperfect good. [/quote]
Bush funding Arlen Specter

Thats one.

[AnomilE]

[quote name='White Knight' date='Aug 4 2004, 06:56 PM'] Bush is Pro-life to a certian degree and his actions have been pretty well considered as "Justice" he past a bill not to long ago, I think back in in the timline of November 2003 - Febuary 2004, he past a bill forbiddening 3 Trimester Abortions. meaning they've become illegal, so if your saying Bush is doing his best.

Give him more creditablity, Sure hes not completely for Pro-life, it depends on the outcome.


He would only support abortion if the Woman would surely die if she had the child, thats the only time, I think Bush acually supports Abortion, the rest of the time hes Anti-Abortion, and Pro-Life. Hes doing his hardest to try to change things for the better, reguardless of what Anti- Bush people think. [/quote]
Right,

So my point is that the Catholic Church supports abortion....never.

We are Catholic and cannot cooperate with this.

[AnomilE]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Aug 4 2004, 09:35 PM'] i still challenge anyone to cite one thing Bush has done contrary to the ProLife cause as it is defined by the Catholic Church. [/quote]
Dude,

I take it you have not read the letter I posted at the beginning of this thread because I did just that- go back and read it.

Edited August 5, 2004 by AnomilE

[AnomilE]

[quote name='Joseph' date='Aug 5 2004, 02:25 AM'] OK.....I don't want Kerry to win whatsoever, but I wish there was someone else running besides Bush who was pro-life. But if Bush is our only choice, then so be it. [/quote]
There is- Michael Peroutka

www.constitutionparty.com