Vote Kerry

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote]I'm sure it's been said, but Kerry's position regarding abortion: Personally opposed, but unable to dictate such morality is untenable for a Catholic. Moreover, it is patently absurd. It's pandering, and I don't think Mister Kerry is stupid enough to believe what he says, I believe it's merely politics.[/quote]

Who knows what he's thinking. But I will argue how it could be objectively possible to do that if you want to start a new thread.


[quote]Based on my observations they seem willing to say no partial births and do the mothers health thing. If thta's not the case and if you can show this I might reconsider.[/quote]

I want to expand on my quote. It seems that if the demos are willing to ban partial birth (which makes sense if the public wants it since they do what the public wants a lot) then the repubs are the ones causing the probs. As I've established you know they're being political: they're banning all abortions and not considering mother's health when that's what the population wants. A lot of prolife people make that distinction too. Therefore, they are doing something they know will not pass muster just to say they've banned partial birth which everyone doesn't like when it's abused. They are the ones being political. They need to make specific laws but that's hard to do. so maybe they can do something else (regulations, votes etc) but something other than being political.

[quote]
If thta's not the case and if you can show this I might reconsider.[/quote]

this is from me. make that will reconsider.

Edited October 22, 2004 by dairygirl4u2c

[Anna]

Well, dairygirl, you are entitled to your opinions. Your opinions, however, do not refect the Teachings of the Catholic faith.

Here is what one bishop sent out to his flock just two days ago:

[quote]
NEWS

News Release
For Immediate Release
October 20, 2004

Bishop Calls Abortion 'Greatest Evil of Our Age'

WHEELING, W.Va.—

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:

What is perhaps the saddest exchange between God and man occurred very early in Salvation History: “The LORD asked Cain, ‘Where is your brother Abel?’ He answered, ‘I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?’ The LORD then said, ‘What have you done! Listen: your brother’s blood calls out to me from the soil!’” (Gen 4: 9-10). Cain’s response to God is certainly meant to cover up his murderous action. But, Cain serves as a spokesman for much of humanity when he asks, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” From our earliest days, we are taught to take care of ourselves, to rely on ourselves first, and to not worry about what other people are doing. We learn, far too well, that each of us is his own keeper first and foremost. And so, Cain’s question becomes almost natural, especially in a society which teaches tolerance as its greatest virtue: “Am I my brother’s keeper?” The answer is very simple: “yes, every man is his ‘brother’s keeper,’ because God entrusts us to one another” (Evangelium vitae, 19).

As a brother among you and a Bishop for you, I have been made the keeper of you, my brothers and sisters in Christ, in a very special way. It is my sacred duty to celebrate for you the Sacraments of Salvation and teach you the Truth of faith and morals. Where I fail to do these, I have failed to fulfill my God-given responsibility to you and to all those in the world who are searching for the Truth.

These thoughts have been on my mind since I read data that indicate that Catholics are no different than the general population in their opinion on abortion or in their voting behavior. At the same time, I discovered that most Catholic legislators are no different from others in their lack of support for Pro-Life legislation; in fact, some Catholic legislators vote against any attempt to limit abortion on demand, and the culture of death it has created, with such regularity as to have a perfect record of opposition to this most innocent of all human life. I began informally asking members of the laity whether their pastors regularly preach the Gospel of Life and the Church’s opposition to abortion. Many told me that even on Respect Life Sunday this year (October 3, 2004), they had not heard a single word from the pulpit.

As my brother’s keeper, I feel guilty that I have said nothing to the priests of our Diocese to encourage them to preach the Gospel of Life each Sunday and to make the defense of innocent human life a pastoral priority. I would hate to come before the Lord our God and say that I was a Shepherd but that I did nothing to teach the people about the evils of abortion. Because I am my brother’s keeper, I never want it to be said that I was willing to tolerate evil or any cooperation in it.

[b]Therefore, I want to say, clearly and distinctly, as your brother and your Bishop, that abortion is the greatest moral evil of our age. As the deliberate killing of an innocent human being, there is “no circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever” that can justify or excuse abortion. “It is contrary to the Law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church”[/b] (Evangelium vitae, 62).

It is true that there are other evils which occupy our attention as a society, especially during an election. Euthanasia, the death penalty, war, genocide, hunger, abject poverty, discrimination, and unjust labor practices are all attacks on human dignity and the value of human life. As Christians, we must be committed to preaching the whole Gospel of Life and to being consistent in our defense of the inherent dignity and value of human life.

[b]All evils are not equal. Abortion, representing as it does an attack on the most innocent of all human life and the most sacred of all human relationships, is so grave and profound an evil that it calls all men and women of good will to action. Abortion is an evil we can do something about, not only by prohibiting this cruel practice once and for all but by assuring that each and every child is welcomed in life, protected in law, and cared for in society.[/b] As a nation, we are wealthy enough, blessed enough, and compassionate enough to achieve this goal and to achieve it right now. If, however, we choose to stand idly by while abortion continues, we risk the fate of the rich man who refused to lift a single finger to help the starving Lazarus.

[b]And so, I want to reiterate what I have said: abortion is the greatest moral evil of our age.[/b] In light of that truth, a Catholic who deliberately votes for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion is guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favor of abortion, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, such an action can only be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons. I cannot think of a value to put on innocent human life and the right to life; others, in conscience, may be able to. However, I ask each of you to give serious consideration to the Truth that is Gospel of Life as you prepare to vote and I ask each of you to remember that we are, all of us, our brothers’ keepers.

With personal regards and prayerful best wishes, I am,

Sincerely in Christ,

Most Reverend Bernard W. Schmitt
Bishop of Wheeling-Charleston[/quote]

Health of the mother, btw, is a very vague term used precisely by the supporters of abortion to further their cause. Look for a definition of "health of the mother," and you'll see that they mean physical, emotional, or psychological health.

So, if a woman feels she may become depressed or experience post-partum depression, she can kill her baby. If she is going to be nauseaus during her first trimester, she can kill her baby. If she is going to get varicose veins, stretch marks, and other 'disfiguring' body changes, she can kill her baby.

Until you've been in the trenches fighting the baby killers, you have no idea how crafty they are in framing their arguments to keep all abortion legal and available!

[dairygirl4u2c]

I'm not even saying that the mother's health should be considered. I will even say for the sake of argument that the mother's health should not be considered as far as I'm concerned. The fact of the matter is that they're still doing something that won't pass and they don't believe in.


I've known that all along that the Catholic Church teaches that. I didn't make it clear in my last post that the repubs that are passing "no mother health" I'm sure think they should be doing it for the mother's health. Doesn't that seem like a political thing to do if you're not really even for it and if it's going to be vetoed anyway?

Are you sure that they're fighting the good fight or just being political? Either way, is anything happening?


So now let's actually address the point of the thread that a good catholic can vote for a pro-choice candidate given all that stuff in my last posts.

Edited October 22, 2004 by dairygirl4u2c

[toledo_jesus]

A good Catholic can only vote for an anti-life candidate with proportionate reason. The other candidate must exhibit a greater evil than abortion. There is currently no candidate who supports a greater evil than abortion. Guess which candidate supports abortion in all circumstances?

His name starts with a K.

There is simply no getting around this issue. Catholics who vote for Kerry are complicit in grave sin. In fact, anyone who does so is complicit in murder because it is common knowledge that Kerry is a supporter of abortion. There is no ambiguity here.

[dairygirl4u2c]

Thanks Toldedo.


Now would anyone like to addess my thread?

[yiannii]

If I was American I would vote for Bush.

I really can't stand the pollies getting actors and actresses involved - I mean this is politics we are talking about!

"Oh I'm going to vote for Kerry because ‘starsnamehere’ supports them"

Talk about lowest common denominator....

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Oct 20 2004, 10:58 PM'] Moreover noone's saying that any issue is above abortion, they're just saying that the it's very unlikely to change makes it a null issue.
[/quote]
Hi dairygirl4u2c,

What makes you think it's unlikely to change? Where is your evidence for that? As a matter of fact, groups like Planned Parenthood find that Bush is a huge threat to the pro-abortion movement. I wrote about this a few months back on my blog. You can check out what I wrote [url="http://www.xanga.com/item.aspx?user=DaBeenaBobba&tab=weblogs&uid=110466952"]here[/url]. You might want to check out
[url="http://www.ppaction.org/ppvotes/choice_chick.html"]this cartoon[/url] Planned Parenthood has put out as well. If Bush wasn't and isn't a threat to the pro-"choice" movement, then why do you think these groups are making such a big deal about Bush's anti-"choice" actions? NARAL even[url="http://www.freep.com/news/latestnews/pm14788_20030607.htm"] thinks Roe v. Wade could be overturned[/url] under Bush! What would it take to overturn Roe v. Wade? A pro-life majority in Congress, a pro-life president who wouldn't veto every pro-life bill that comes his way, and pro-life judges. You see, there could very possibly be openings in the Supreme Court (I've read that there could be anywhere from 2-9 openings) in a few years. It'll be up to whoever's in office to appoint new judges. Kerry has said that he's unwiling to appoint any judges who'd consider overturning Roe v. Wade. Bush, on the other hand, is open to appointing pro-life judges. This is a huge deal for the pro-life movement! In all due respect, if people like you say, "Well, abortion is never going to get overturned, so it's not really an issue with me, politically speaking," then of course abortion is never going to get overturned! If people don't do all in their power to end abortion (e.g., [b]by voting for pro-life candidates at every political level[/b]), then of course abortion will never be made illegal again. The bottom line is that we have no excuse to abdicate our moral and civic responsibilities. Besides, can we really know the future? How would you know that abortion will never be made illegal? You're not God, so I don't think that's something you could know.

God bless,

Jennifer

[Guest Aluigi]

The other law I was refering to was the Lacy Peterson Law, which would charge a person for double murder if they killed a pregnant woman (those who voted against it <like Kerry and Edwards> really show their non-pro-choice colors because it wouldn't even be the woman's choice in this case).

anyway, i'm just gonna reitirate that this election WILL effect abortion, everyone should be able to see that. Laws that show more and more respect for human life

as far as judges overturning the partial birth abortion ban and such, they are legislating from the bench! this law was passed by congress and these judges are disobeying it. They have no right. Wasn't it Thomas Jefferson who said the legislative branch would be the one to destroy the republic? Well I think he was right. In any case, refer to Beenabobba's post for the proof that this election [b]will[/b] affect the pro-life cause. not might, not probably, [B]will.[/]

When laws are made that 'don't allow for the health of the mother' that means nothing. they are not banning the OTHER PROCEDURES that will save the mother's life, endangering the baby but still giving it a slim possibility for life. DIRECT PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION is always and everywhere evil. When the mother's life is in danger, emergency early c-sections could be performed and stuff, but there is absolutely no reason to turn to the barbaric practice of partial birth abortion.