Bush Is Not Pro-life...

[AnomilE]

[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.

Bush is not an evil. Bush is good.

-ironmonk [/quote]
And we survived Clintion- did we not?

Was God completely void from this country because of Him?

How can we ever know what God can do- in any circumstance- unless we COMPLETELY cooperate with HIM, not a party or a political move.

Edited August 5, 2004 by AnomilE

[AnomilE]

[quote name='Kilroy the Ninja' date='Aug 5 2004, 10:17 AM'] 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............. [/quote]
If you are alluding to the fact that I might be in the Kerry camp fostering support for him, then I'm offended by you.

[Kilroy the Ninja]

No offense meant. Just posting my opinion.

But at least in this race, a vote for anyone other than Bush is a vote for Kerry, and a vote for unnatural evil.

Have a nice day.

[AnomilE]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='Aug 5 2004, 10:24 AM'] 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 [/quote]
If the media is lying, then go back to the letter I posted at the beginning of this thread and debunk the 5 or 6 evidences I have given for why Bush is not truly Pro-Life in every way. Do that and it will prove that the media lies.

[AnomilE]

[quote name='Kilroy the Ninja' date='Aug 5 2004, 11:01 AM'] No offense meant. Just posting my opinion.

But at least in this race, a vote for anyone other than Bush is a vote for Kerry, and a vote for unnatural evil.

Have a nice day. [/quote]
How so?

[AnomilE]

Okay everyone- answer me this-

1. Can you ever cooperate with evil- lesser or greater- to bring about a good end?

If you correctly follow the constant teaching of the Church, the answer is no.

I cannot and will not even attempt to understand why faithful Catholics insist on crumbling into the Republican Party.

It is a superpower that has whetted all of your pallets by throwing you some bones to make you ahppy and go "well, at least they're doing something.

What if we as Catholics stood ground for once and said- "No that's not good enough"

When will that day come. We are Catholic before American- remember that always.

[AnomilE]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='Aug 5 2004, 10:24 AM'] 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 [/quote]
I can make the same statement about many Republican senators and leaders- they too are not pro-life.

Sy why ascribe to any party- stay objective and keep your conscience sharp. Look through the smokescreen of a few backscratches of a party who is not as conservative as they claim to be.

[Kilroy the Ninja]

[quote name='AnomilE' date='Aug 5 2004, 11:03 AM'] How so? [/quote]
I don't actually have time to go into this one in detail, and frankly it goes under the "duh" catagory. I'm sure the constitution party is a fine upstanding choice, however, they have a snowball's chance in hades for winning anything in this election. Perhaps with time and media coverage they will someday be a presence in American politics. If I agree with their platform, I'll be happy to support their man (or woman) in future elections. However, for [i]this[/i] election year it's too late! There is simply not enough time, money or media coverage between now and election day to change enough people's minds about how they're going to vote - one way or the other. So the logical thing to do is vote for the lesser of the two evils and soldier on for Christ by supporting who best represents Him.

Of course there's is no perfect action here. We are imperfect beings.

[AnomilE]

[quote name='Kilroy the Ninja' date='Aug 5 2004, 11:13 AM'] I don't actually have time to go into this one in detail, and frankly it goes under the "duh" catagory. I'm sure the constitution party is a fine upstanding choice, however, they have a snowball's chance in hades for winning anything in this election. Perhaps with time and media coverage they will someday be a presence in American politics. If I agree with their platform, I'll be happy to support their man (or woman) in future elections. However, for [i]this[/i] election year it's too late! There is simply not enough time, money or media coverage between now and election day to change enough people's minds about how they're going to vote - one way or the other. So the logical thing to do is vote for the lesser of the two evils and soldier on for Christ by supporting who best represents Him.

Of course there's is no perfect action here. We are imperfect beings. [/quote]
Kilroy-

It would only seem that way, but that's a political move and you're not called to politics, but to faithfulness in Christ.

Read the section on making a moral decision in the CCC.

It clearly states you can never employ an evil to bring about good- even if it is lesser and this is at the heart of what I'm getting at here.

It's not about politics- it's about how we embrace the teaching of our Chruch as hard as it may be and trus that God can only bring about true goodness if we do so.

[CatholicAndFanatical]

[quote name='AnomilE' date='Aug 5 2004, 11:51 AM'] 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. [/quote]
Ok, so you expect us to go 100% with Catholic Teachings when choosing a President but yet the person you suggest isnt even Catholic??





Get Real

[CatholicAndFanatical]

DUST FOR PRESIDENT!!!!

VOTE VATICAN!!

DUST 4 LIFE!!!

[Aloysius]

please, AnomilE, give me ONE ACTION of bush that is contrary to the pro-life cause. ONE. I see the statements you showed, but frankly: even if bush believed it was time to overturn Roe v Wade, that wouldn't make any difference for him as a president. He believes in furthering the protection of the unborn as far as the balences will allow his checks to go, there is nothing more we can ask of a president unless we want him to seize all the power and force the laws to change (which would actually be really SWEET! lol). The power the president has to affect the pro-life cause is soley dependent on whether he will sign or veto laws like the unborn victems of violence act and the partial birth abortion ban, and to appoint justices to the supreme court. President Bush does that, Senator Kerry would not. President Bush has many pro-life actions to his credit, and no pro-death actions to his credit (unless you've neglected to mention something....?)

[Aloysius]

well I'd say that just about does it... ACTION speaks louder than words.

[AnomilE]

[quote name='CatholicAndFanatical' date='Aug 5 2004, 11:40 AM'] Ok, so you expect us to go 100% with Catholic Teachings when choosing a President but yet the person you suggest isnt even Catholic??





Get Real [/quote]
I'm being completely real.

The fact I think everyone is missing (and noone has answered this point for me yet) is that since when can you ever cooperate with evil to bring about a good end?

[AnomilE]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Aug 5 2004, 11:47 AM'] please, AnomilE, give me ONE ACTION of bush that is contrary to the pro-life cause. ONE. I see the statements you showed, but frankly: even if bush believed it was time to overturn Roe v Wade, that wouldn't make any difference for him as a president. He believes in furthering the protection of the unborn as far as the balences will allow his checks to go, there is nothing more we can ask of a president unless we want him to seize all the power and force the laws to change (which would actually be really SWEET! lol). The power the president has to affect the pro-life cause is soley dependent on whether he will sign or veto laws like the unborn victems of violence act and the partial birth abortion ban, and to appoint justices to the supreme court. President Bush does that, Senator Kerry would not. President Bush has many pro-life actions to his credit, and no pro-death actions to his credit (unless you've neglected to mention something....?) [/quote]
I growing very weary of people asking me to do this when I have already done it in my opening attachment.

If you insist, I will list them again.

1. According to an article published in the National Catholic Register, on June 23rd of this year, President Bush gave an address at the Greater Exodus Baptist Church in Philadelphia speaking about the plans the U.S. is making to fight the spread of Aids in Africa by promoting the use of condoms. He was quoted as saying that we should "learn from the experience" of countries such as Uganda, which have adopted what's called the "ABC" program in their country- Abstinence first, Being faithful in marriage second, and Condom usage when needed third. President Bush then said "I like to call it practical, balanced, and a moral message...I say it's working because Uganda has cut its AIDS infection rate to 5% over 10 years." It was then mentioned that within the Bush administration, we will be allocating 2.8 billion dollars to this cause to be used in Africa.

2. As reported by several news sources, on April 27th, 2004, senator Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania) defeated US Representative Pat Toomey (R-Pennsylvania) in a Republican Party primary in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Specter, who is known for his outspoken pro-abortion stances, was funded and supported by two individuals- President George W. Bush, and senator Rick Santorum (R-Pennsylvania)

3. The New York Times reported that while on the campaign trail, he tempered his staunch pro-life stance by saying that the only time he felt abortion may be necessary is in the case of rape and incest. Again I point to the teachings of our Church. (“Bush Tempers Abortion Remarks,” New York Times, 10-1-00)

4. In 2003, USA Today printed an article quoting both President Bush and his wife both agreeing to this sentiment made by the President Himself- “I don’t think the culture has changed to the extent that the American people or the Congress would totally ban abortions,”- he then went on to say that he did not feel that Roe v. Wade should be overturned. (Judy Keen et al, “Bush: USA Isn’t Ready for Total Abortion Ban,” USA Today, 10-28-03, [url="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-10-28-bush-abortion_x.htm)"]http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...abortion_x.htm)[/url]

5. According to the Republican National Party, the keynote address at the Republican National convention this September will be given by pro-abortion Republican, Rudolph Guiliani.

There, I will not list these again- take note.