dairygirl4u2c Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 ty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 In all circumstances, it is wrong to support abortion, and any such support would laete sententiae excommunicate you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groo the Wanderer Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Even if THIS candidate cannot get the murder-spree stopped, NOW, they can at least contribute to the growing opposition. At some point, we WILL gain critical mass and bring the bloodshed to an end. How do you get 3/4 of both houses of Congress to vote pro-life? Elect 'em one at a time.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birgitta Noel Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Seems a bad question to me as I believe incrementalism justifies voting for greater restrictions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelFilo Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Having no hope is not Catholic. Period. Catholicism is a religion of high idealism, and that idealism thrives on hope. So no, not at all. However, if the voter thinks one is of a less evil than another, but the lesser evils till supports abortion, then possibly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
got2luvjc Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 i voted yes, it is wrong. I will always support people who are pro-life. just because nothing's changing doesn't mean the cause is dead yayyyyy pro-life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickens4life Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Just because victory is not visble with in the term of said politicians term, doesn't mean we should give up. There are small battles that we must win now, so that we may later win the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exquisitebones Posted December 12, 2006 Share Posted December 12, 2006 this is such a tricky situation. like me for expample, I almost always vote democrat, because i just like what they get done.... except when it comes to abortion/teen sex laws. I HATE what they do there. so what do you do. vote for a party you dont like to get something accomplished? or vote for a party you do like and protest? arghh.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkwright Posted December 12, 2006 Share Posted December 12, 2006 [quote name='StThomasMore' post='1135957' date='Dec 5 2006, 09:06 PM'] In all circumstances, it is wrong to support abortion, and any such support would laete sententiae excommunicate you. [/quote] Can you provide the canon law or CCC cite for this? I'm aware that the one 'who actually procures an abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication' (can 1398) but I do not know of one that says supporting abortion has the same effect? The CCC states that formal support is gravely sinful, but I don't see an excommunication attached to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted December 22, 2006 Author Share Posted December 22, 2006 I remember the excommunication thing being automatic if you had, were the doctor, or directly assisted in teh abortion. Voting for a prochoice candidate is not included in teh actual guidlines. And bishops aren't just saying you have choices simply to be PC. It's not as black and white as some would have you believe that abortion's going to be overruled. The issue with voters has not been addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsFrozen Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 [quote name='Groo the Wanderer' post='1136066' date='Dec 6 2006, 12:49 AM'] Even if THIS candidate cannot get the murder-spree stopped, NOW, they can at least contribute to the growing opposition. At some point, we WILL gain critical mass and bring the bloodshed to an end. How do you get 3/4 of both houses of Congress to vote pro-life? Elect 'em one at a time.... [/quote] I agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littleflower+JMJ Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 [quote name='exquisitebones' post='1140446' date='Dec 12 2006, 12:47 PM'] this is such a tricky situation. like me for expample, I almost always vote democrat, because i just like what they get done.... except when it comes to abortion/teen sex laws. I HATE what they do there. so what do you do. vote for a party you dont like to get something accomplished? or vote for a party you do like and protest? arghh.... [/quote] As people of faith, we must stand up for what we know as truth. The Church teaches us that it is our duty and responsiblity to uphold what we know as truth. While there are so many various subjects, issues and debates when it comes to voting, some are greater of importance than others and we must guide our votes to what we know is more critical to us. We usually can catagorize the most important ones that must NOT be overlooked in voting for a candidate when it concerns the Non-negotiables....meaning if we vote for a candidate that supports any of the main issues that go against truth or life, we are in a way aiding and supporting this great sin. Visit here for [url="http://www.priestsforlife.org/elections/voterguide.htm"]Voter's Guide [/url] that will help out. Its hard concerning these politicians and making sure your vote supports and upholds truth and life, but if we pray and follow closely what is truly important we can help fight evil from prevailing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmjtina Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 (edited) the foundation for ANY candidate should be upholding the dignity of LIFE. If they are for abortion, how can we expect them to do anything else if they can't defend the defenseless in the womb, a place that should be the safest for any child? If your thing is about education, economics, the enviroment and the saving of whales, great. But before you can take care of any of those things, there should be priorities, starting with the very lives those officials are pledging to serve. And the foundation of a good government is protecting and upholding the dignity of life. If not, we are, as the late pontiff has called us, a "culture of death." [quote]Can you provide the canon law or CCC cite for this? I'm aware that the one 'who actually procures an abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication' (can 1398) but I do not know of one that says supporting abortion has the same effect? The CCC states that formal support is gravely sinful, but I don't see an excommunication attached to it.[/quote] bold is done by me to answer the above. [quote]Abortion - Excommunication -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The way the excommunication for abortion works is this. Canon 1398 provides that, "a person who procures a successful abortion incurs an automatic (latae sententiae) excommunication." This means that at the very moment that the abortion is successfully accomplished, the woman and all formal conspirators are excommunicated. An abortion is defined as "the killing of the foetus, in whatever way or at whatever time from the moment of conception" (Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts, published in the "Acts of the Apostolic See" vol. 80 (1988), 1818). This definition applies to any means, including drugs, by which a human being present in the woman is killed. Thus, once a woman knows she is pregnant the intentional killing of the new life within her is not only murder but an excommunicable offense. A woman who only thinks she might be pregnant has a grave responsibility to find out and to protect the possible life within. Any action to end a "possible" pregnancy while probably not an excommunicable offense would be callous disregard for life and gravely sinful. [b]Conspirators who incur the excommunication can be defined as those who make access to the abortion possible. This certainly includes doctors and nurses who actually do it, husbands, family and others whose counsel and encouragement made it morally possible for the woman, and those whose direct practical support made it possible (financially, driving to the clinic etc.).[/b] Clearly those who think the availability of chemical abortions will settle the abortion issue are deluded. It will only widen to drug manufacturers, pharmacists and family physicians those guilty of grave sin and subject to excommunication. [It should also be noted that many contraceptive pills are already abortifacient in operation. Theoretically, the knowing use of such a pill for its abortafacient purpose could also subject one to excommunication. Pill manufacturers have recently been touting this capability of their deadly wares.] [color="#CC0000"][b]NOTE WELL To actually incur the excommunication one must know that it is an excommunicable offense at the time of the abortion. Canon 1323 provides that the following do not incur a sanction, those who are not yet 16, are unaware of a law, do not advert to it or are in error about its scope, were forced or had an unforeseeable accident, acted out of grave fear, or who lacked the use of reason (except culpably, as by drunkenness). Thus a woman forced by an abusive husband to have an abortion would not incur an excommunication, for instance, whereas someone culpably under the influence of drugs or alcohol would (canon 1325).[/b][/color] In any case, whether one has been excommunicated or not, the sin of abortion must be confessed as the taking of innocent human life (5th Commandment). If the penitent did not know about this law at the time of the abortion then he or she was NOT excommunicated. If the person knew about the law but there were extenuating circumstances (such as mentioned above concerning c. 1323) then these factors should be mentioned to the confessor. He will say whether he has the faculty from the bishop to absolve from this excommunication or whether he even needs to. If he does not, he will privately and secretly obtain absolution from the bishop or send the person to a confessor who has that power. A person who believes they have been excommunicated must refrain from Holy Communion until both absolution for the sin and absolution for the excommunication has been given. One complicating factor for anyone in this situation is that intentionally withholding mortal sin (abortion) or knowledge of one's excommunication invalidates ALL the absolutions for other sins given since the time of the intentionally overlooked sin. Culpably withholding mortal sin or an excommunication means that even after the priest says the words of absolution because of dishonesty on the penitent's part, the sin has not been absolved. Absolution is not magic, it depends upon sincere repentance from all known mortal sins and a firm purpose of amendment. Such sins would need to be confessed again, as part of an integral (complete and honest) confession. This is not the case if the person did not know that what they did was sinful in the eyes of God and the Church, but only found out this out latter. Since they did not withhold from confession what they knew to be sinful their prior confessions are valid. The Church makes every effort to make Penance available and obliges priests to make anonymity possible as well (c. 964). There is really no valid excuse for delaying one's full return to the sacraments. All those who have had abortions should come home to Christ and the Church.[/quote] Edited December 28, 2006 by jmjtina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercy me Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 I think that it really depends on which office is being sought. A tax collector or supervisor of elections who is not pro-life would not cause me concern. Those jobs have no bearing on the abortion issue. An legislator is a different story. Senators have the duty to vet candidates for the judiciary and to vote on laws that hopefully will eliminate abortion, they would need to protect the life of the most innocent among us. Same goes for state attorneys, I would never vote for an individual who does not believe in God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Knight Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 Pretty much, its one of those 5 non compremizable issues that is in heavy belief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now