Vote For Kerry

[Colleen]

[quote name='Iacobus' date='Mar 28 2004, 12:20 PM'] LOL! XIX polluntion went down under Bush by 25%. Never mind the fact that we used to count 4 gases and now count 3. And than compere them. LOL! [/quote]
I didn't know that. LOL!

[Iacobus]

I love stats. You can twist and distort them to mean anything.

[Colleen]

[quote name='Iacobus' date='Mar 28 2004, 12:52 PM'] I love stats. You can twist and distort them to mean anything. [/quote]
I know. That's why the media has so much power.

[PhatPhred]

[quote name='peach_cube' date='Mar 28 2004, 11:41 AM']If I want true representation then I will not accept partial representation.[/quote]
Way to go, peach_cube!!! :clap::clap: I think I'm going to do the same.

Others may say that Bush is clearly the lesser of two evils, but I think that decision is a close call. One I'm not going to try to make.

It's no fun having to hold your nose while you're casting your vote.

[Iacobus]

Okay this is a side note but I just relized it. Has anyone here seen "Master and Commander?" LOL it has this thing about choosing the lesser of two wevils. LOL, I am sorry for that it was kind of off topic.

[littleflower+JMJ]

all we have to do to help out evil is to do nothing.............


our job is to limit it, if not end it.


and if evil grows because we did not try to limit/end it ourselves, then we need not look far to find out how it got there........


just a thought.

God bless.
+JMJ+

[Colleen]

[quote name='littleflower' date='JMJ+Mar 28 2004, 04:32 PM'] all we have to do to help out evil is to do nothing.............


our job is to limit it, if not end it.


and if evil grows because we did not try to limit/end it ourselves, then we need not look far to find out how it got there........


just a thought. [/quote]
Well put, flowery!

[Bruce S]

[quote]

Click Here


Click Here


Click Here

  Sunday, March 28, 2004 3:36 p.m. EST
Vatican Worries About Kerry

John Kerry's support for abortion and gay marriage, both condemned as mortal sins by the Roman Catholic Church, is raising serious concerns in the Vatican over the clear apostasy of a nominal American Catholic politician.

"People in Rome are becoming more and more aware that there's a problem with John Kerry, and a potential scandal with his apparent profession of his Catholic faith and some of his stances, particularly abortion," a Vatican official and an American told Time magazine.

Taking such positions at odds with Church teaching could subject Kerry to excommunication, but the Massachusetts senator says he's comfortable with his stands even when they conflict with the doctrines of the Church to which he claims allegiance.

"I don't think it complicates things at all," Kerry told Time Saturday, the first article in which he has discussed his faith extensively. "We have a separation of church and state in this country. As John Kennedy said very clearly, I will be a President who happens to be Catholic, not a Catholic President."

Time, however, noted that there are huge differences between the time in which Kennedy ran and today. When Kennedy ran for president in 1960, Time recalls, "a candidate could go through an entire campaign without ever having to declare his position on abortion – much less stem cells, cloning or gay marriage. It was before Roe v. Wade, bioethics, school vouchers, gay rights and a host of other social issues became the ideological fault lines that divide the two political parties and also divide some Catholics from their church."

Kerry, a former altar boy who Time says complains when his campaign staff does not leave time in his Sunday schedule for Mass and receives Communion, describes himself as a "believing and practicing Catholic, married to another believing and practicing Catholic."

In the face of that declaration, however, last week he went out of his way to show up on the Senate floor to vote against the Unborn Victims of Violence Act ("Laci and Connor's Law"), a bill that would make harming an unborn child during the commission of a crime a separate offense. The bill was named for Laci Peterson and her unborn son, Connor, who were murdered.

As Time observed, Kerry's vote put him squarely on the same side as abortion industry supporters in opposing specific legal rights for the unborn – and against nearly two-thirds of his fellow senators and the great majority of Americans.

Kerry told Time his Catholic faith was instilled in him in childhood. He even took the opportunity to raise the subject of his four months of service in Vietnam once again, claiming that he wore a rosary around his neck when involved in combat operations.

When Kerry got home, however, he admits to having gone through what he described to Time as a "period of a little bit of anger and agnosticism, but subsequently, I did a lot of reading and a lot of thinking and really came to understand how all those terrible things fit."

Kerry and other nominally Catholic politicians insist that their religious faith does not oblige them to follow the tenets of their Church when acting as elected representatives. As Time notes, politicians taking that position provoked New York's Archbishop John Cardinal O'Connor in 1984 to chastise then-New York Gov. Mario Cuomo and Democratic vice presidential nominee Geraldine Ferraro for being in favor of abortion.

Times have changed. In response to the demands of huge numbers of the Roman Catholic faithful that Catholic bishops in America clamp down on politicians thumbing their noses at Church doctrine in their public lives, the Church is, as Time notes, getting tougher.

Last year, for example the Vatican issued a "doctrinal note" warning Catholic lawmakers that they have a "grave and clear obligation to oppose any law that attacks human life. For them, as for every Catholic, it is impossible to promote such laws or to vote for them."

Moreover, when Kerry campaigned in Missouri in February, St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke publicly warned him "not to present himself for Communion" — an ostracism, Time explained, that Canon Law 915 reserves for "those who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin." A defiant Kerry told Time that regarding his planned trip to St. Louis last Sunday, "I certainly intend to take Communion and continue to go to Mass as a Catholic."

According to Time, most Catholic officials believe that the Church's response to Kerry's candidacy will vary from diocese to diocese. "You may not see many Catholic bishops appearing at Kerry photo ops this campaign season, and there's a possibility of some uncomfortable moments on the trail. All you need is a picture of Kerry going up to the Communion rail and being denied, and you've got a story that'll last for weeks," Father Thomas Reese, editor of the Jesuit magazine America, told Time.

Even in his own Boston archdiocese, Kerry will face his newly hard-nosed archbishop, Sean O'Malley, who, although he has given Kerry Communion in the past, now says that Catholic politicians who do not vote in line with Church teachings "shouldn't dare come to Communion."

Being banned from receiving the Eucharist is excommunication.

Said Kerry, "I don't tell church officials what to do, and church officials shouldn't tell American politicians what to do in the context of our public life."

As Crisis magazine noted last May, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in November 1998 released a pastoral letter, "Living the Gospel of Life: A Challenge to American Catholics," that castigated Catholic politicians for supporting abortion and euthanasia.

On Jan. 16, Bishop Wilton D. Gregory, president of the USCCB, issued a statement welcoming the doctrinal note issued by the Vatican that denounced Catholic politicians who favor abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage and human cloning. Said Bishop Gregory, "Catholic politicians cannot subscribe to any notion which equates freedom or democracy with a moral relativism that denies these moral principles.”

Both of these statements flow naturally from the seriousness the Catholic hierarchy attaches to abortion in particular. As early as 1975, the bishops described the right to life as "among basic human rights."

[/quote]

[CatholicAndFanatical]

[quote]
We cannot find any WMD's. And don't say they were destoryed. If an army was invading your country for having VERY powerful weapons what you you do?
1) Use them
2) Dismantle them
You would use them to stop the invasion. Why didn't SH uses the weapons that he "had?" And we were NOT hailed as liberaters. So many people over there are really mad at the CPA. They are very bad for ruling and very out of sync with the people. Most of the people of the world don't support this war. How, I ask, are we going to stop terriomism without help? It is a gobal war. Also if Iraq didn't have Al-Quida before the war they are present now. We manged to WEAKEN our Natl Sec. by going to war.
[/quote]

Ok, so let me get this straight, just because we didnt find and WMD's there means Bush was a liar on the subject and we shouldnt have went to war? NonSense
Was Clinton a liar as well, on this subject I mean? Because he knew there were WMD's there as well and made a point to get rid of them when he ordered 'Desert Storm'. You cannot call Bush a liar and say this war was unjust just because we didnt find any WMD's. We knew he had them and was a threat. Saddam deserved what he got..I just cant wait to find Osama.

As far as voting for Kerry..I was watching him on foxnews the other day when he was talking on the east coast somewhere. He did make some good points: (quick note, im only playing devils advocate, I am not democrat)

1. He would make it harder for companies to pack up and move jobs overseas, leaving us without jobs. We've lost so many jobs here in indiana, just a few weeks ago a company about 30 mins from here packed up and went over seas, laying off 900 people. thats just one company, there were tons more.

2. He would lower tax's for the 98% of America, those that earn less than 200,000 a year. One thing I didnt like about Bush's plan was that as far as tax's, you got back what you put in..which sounds good really but if a lower class family was only to put in so much because of lower wages then they didnt get anything back, but the millionares was able to put tons in and got tons back. Thats called keeping the poor poor, and the rich rich. My personal belief is that the rich people in America should help out the little guys. Either by tax's or by raising hourly wages so that people can actually LIVE off minimum wage, which so many people have to do today.

3. im not sure I have a 3rd thing..just like doing things in 3's hehe

Ok, now for the WHY I WONT VOTE FOR KERRY reasons:

1. He is pro-choice
2. He CLAIMS to be Catholic, but still is pro-choice.
3. Based off 1 and 2, he is also a LIAR because you cant be 1 and 2 at the same time.
4. Seeing his voting record, if he would of had his way we wouldnt have any of the weapons that we do today because he voted against them. He was for weakening our Security of this country by doing this.

K, so far im done. I think I got it all out.

One other thing, I was also watching Bush's speech in New Mexico..one thing that got to me was when he said this:

"I am for giving illegal immigrants a workers permit to work in this country. If a company cant find an American to do the job they should be able to look to the hard working immigrants to pick this up"

Ok, dont get me wrong, this country was founded on immigrants. Not a problem. The problem is the unemployment rate is outrageous right now, I know im unemployed. If a company cant find an American to fill the job then they arent looking very well, what that company wants to do is find someone that will do it CHEAPER than he has to pay.
Also another thing, the words 'Illegal Immigrant' come to mind. If you are to come to this country, why do it illegally? Why not do what others before them did, file for citizenship? In California they are issuing drivers license to illegal people so they can vote, now he wants to give them our jobs. If you arent a citizen of the USA, then you have no rights to the freedoms that real Americans fought for.

ok, im done...let the flaming begin!!

[PedroX]

Catholic AF,

I'm in complete agreement with you on the immigration issue. I am all for immigration. Just please follow the law. I'm even for making it easier to immigrate. Just please follow the law.

peace...

[ironmonk]

[quote name='PhatPhred' date='Mar 28 2004, 01:09 AM'] Dave,

The U.S. Catholic Bishops have put out a voter's guide ([url="http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/bishopStatement.html"]http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/b...pStatement.html[/url]) that doesn't use the term "non-negotiable" anywhere, and includes the important issues of unjust war and social justice in its guidance.

Another web site ([url="http://www.catholic.com/library/voters_guide.asp"]http://www.catholic.com/library/voters_guide.asp[/url]) has put out a quite different voter's guide (without even an Imprimatur) claiming to reduce the complex issue of whom to vote for to which candidate has the better campaign plank on five "non-negotiable" issues, deeming all issues related to unjust war and social justice irrelevant.

Don't you think that a faithful Catholic should follow the authentic magisterium of the Church rather than taking a "you can't trust some of those liberal Bishops anyway" attitude? [/quote]
Maybe you should actually read it.

[url="http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/bishopStatement.html#7"]http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/b...tatement.html#7[/url]

Human Life is the first priority.

Moral Priorities for Public Life (in order):
[b]Protecting Human Life[/b]
"[u][b]Abortion and euthanasia have become [color=red]preeminent threats [/color]to human life [/b][/u]and dignity because they directly attack life itself, the most fundamental good and the condition for all others".28 Abortion, the deliberate killing of a human being before birth, is never morally acceptable

[b]Promoting Family Life[/b]
God established the family as[b] the basic cell of human society[/b]. Therefore, we must strive to make the needs and concerns of families a central national priority. [b]Marriage must be protected as a lifelong commitment between a man and a woman and our laws should reflect this principle[/b].


[b]Pursuing Social Justice[/b]

[b]Practicing Global Solidarity[/b]




---------
Today's democratic societies . . . call for new and fuller forms of participation in public life by Christian and non-Christian citizens alike. Indeed, all can contribute, by voting in elections for lawmakers and government officials, and in other ways as well, to the development of political solutions and legislative choices which, in their opinion, will benefit the common good.5 In the Catholic tradition, responsible citizenship is a virtue; participation in the political process is a moral obligation. All believers are called to faithful citizenship, to become informed, active, and responsible participants in the political process. As we have said, "We encourage all citizens, particularly Catholics, to embrace their citizenship [b]not merely as a duty and privilege, but as an opportunity meaningfully to participate [more fully] in [u]building the culture of life[/u].[/b] Every voice matters in the public forum. Every vote counts. Every act of responsible citizenship is an exercise of significant individual power."6 Even those who are not citizens are called to participate in the debates which shape our common life.


Life and Dignity of the Human Person
Every human person is created in the image and likeness of God. Therefore, each person's life and dignity must be respected, whether that person is an innocent unborn child in a mother's womb, whether that person worked in the World Trade Center or a market in Baghdad, or even whether that person is a convicted criminal on death row. We believe that every human life is sacred from conception to natural death, that people are more important than things, and that the measure of every institution is whether it protects and respects the life and dignity of the human person. As the recent Vatican statement points out, "The Church recognizes that while democracy is the best expression of the direct participation of citizens in political choices, it succeeds only to the extent that it is based on a correct understanding of the human person. Catholic involvement in political life cannot compromise on this principle."17




--------------------------

The bottom line is a vote for kerry goes against life and family.

Right now in time, the Republican party is more Catholic than the democrat... It has not always been that way, but today it is. I'm sure it might flip flop again as it has done about every 30 years or so.... but with the way things are going, I will be supprised if there is another 30 years.

God Bless,
ironmonk

[Iacobus]

The last major flop of the partys was in 1932. The year FDR was elected the 1st time. From 1865-1932 the majority of the black vote went to the GOP. However, starting in 1932 the black vote changed parties and went to the Dems. So they do flip a bit.

LOL, you know what I love. The other day I was watching the history channel and some KKK guy called Lincoln a "liberal." LOL sorry that is just kind of funny.

I will say Reps have a better track record than Dems on the issues that the Church holds close. However, Dems, as a whole, are not bad. FDR and his "liberal" new deal. JFK and Cuba. Carter (with help from Regan, at least in my view, Carter put down the embargos on USSR by the Russians would have started a war to get more food if Regan wasn't in the WH. They thought he was crazy, and may have been right , to the point that he would push the button) and ended the Cold War. Dems and Reps (TR!!!!!!!!) have done a lot for this nation in many areas. But Reps more so in morality. However, some take it too far, like John Ashcoft paying close to $9,000 of DoJ money to drap the Spirit of Justice statues because they in they're nudity, offended him. If anyone has seen the statues, saying they are offending is like saying "David" is offending. It is every minor and tastful art, not something Playboy would run.

And last Saturday at the homelss shleter where my parish volenters every other month I was a ton of people who don't look like they have been totaly messed up with drugs and stuff but look more like people who used to work in the facotries in Rockford. Many had Union shirts and stuff. Rockford has been really hard hit. The city is big on manuel labor making things like sheet metal, screws, clip borad holders, etc. And the sluggish econmy has really hurt it. So I really don't like Bush's new imgration plan, though I do love LEGAL immagration, or his econ policies.

[ironmonk]

We can't really blame the pres. for the economy when it was going downhill when clinton was on his way out.

The pres. has been doing his best to get the econ around. I think he needs to lay the smack down on trade with china, but that's another issue.

Most of democrats that I know and most of those in the senate are not good. I do know some good democrats. When I say good I mean - Pro-life, family, morals. How to fix and help people best are opinions... Pro-life, family, and morals are facts set forth by God through His Church.

The abortion issue needs to come first, if it wasn't for abortion, this country would be so much better off right now. The democrat senators that have been in office have repeatedly kept good people off of the supreme court because of abortion. Abortion was not legalized per say, but "right to privacy" is why it was deemed "ok". Abortion was never justified. 45,000,000 babies dead. Imagine if there were 45,000,000 million plus workers and consumers in America... Social Security would not be in the mess it's in. Social Security is built on the concept that the country will grow, not shrink.



God Bless,
ironmonk

[Iacobus]

I am not blaming the ression on Bush 100% all I am saying is that his econ policies havn't done much to help get out of it and he has been resiting change to them. I hope that makes sneice.

Sorry, I can't spell today. About China, as a dem with rep traits, lol, I want to see China get smacked. I am anti-free trade I think it hurts the nations involed.

Many of my friends are dems. Some are pro death but the majority are pro life and pro fam and pro morals, like me. Saddly I think on a national scale dems aren't so good.

About the judges. I havn't supported most of them. I want pro life judges but these guys are on there for life and some of them are a little to partial. Like A. Scailia. So yeah, I want Bush to nome some more judges that are pro life but a little closer to the center of the room. There has to be some out there!

[Norseman82]

[quote name='CatholicAndFanatical' date='Mar 29 2004, 11:05 AM']
Was Clinton a liar as well, on this subject I mean? Because he knew there were WMD's there as well and made a point to get rid of them when he ordered 'Desert Storm'. [/quote]
Uh.......that was George HW Bush that ordered Desert Storm