OrthodoxChristianity.net
April 23, 2014, 02:43:13 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The Rules page has been updated.  Please familiarize yourself with its contents!
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: No Communion for Arnold?  (Read 13542 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« on: May 01, 2004, 11:01:34 AM »

Like many (probably most) Republicans, he's pro-choice.  He's also a Catholic.  Will he be refused communion?  

BTW, if any of you live in CA and voted for him, I think you committed a major sin and go to confession ASAP.   Wink
Logged
Brendan03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 544



« Reply #1 on: May 01, 2004, 03:57:16 PM »

lol
Logged

B
Frobie
Quasi Vero Monaco
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 633


Rublev's Trinity


WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 01, 2004, 04:36:45 PM »

Arnold was raised Catholic in Austria, but I don't think he goes to church anymore. If he does go, then he should be refused like the rest of them. If you don't agree with that Jennifer, then you must think you're better than Cardinal Arinze.
Logged
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #3 on: May 01, 2004, 06:24:32 PM »

Arnold was raised Catholic in Austria, but I don't think he goes to church anymore. If he does go, then he should be refused like the rest of them. If you don't agree with that Jennifer, then you must think you're better than Cardinal Arinze.

He claims to be a Catholic but I don't know if he goes to Mass.  I notice it was never an issue on this board.  Why all the hysteria about pro-choice democrats but no uproar about pro-choice Republicans?  

Your statement about being "better" than Cardinal Arinze doesn't make much sense.  I'm a Roman Catholic and defer to the moral teachings of the Church.  Are you insinuating otherwise?  

I think the Church can refuse to give communion to Catholics.  They have the authority to say what are the essential teachings of Catholicism.  

Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,436


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 01, 2004, 06:49:45 PM »

I wouldn't have voted for Arnold probably given his sell-out of abortion.  He did donate 2 million dollars last year to his parish of St Monica's, though.

anastasios
Logged

Check out my personal website with 130+ articles: www.anastasioshudson.com

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,436


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #5 on: May 01, 2004, 06:50:50 PM »

lol

How is that funny? I don't think it's funny.  I agree with her, but I don't think it's pointing out any great hypocrisy.
Logged

Check out my personal website with 130+ articles: www.anastasioshudson.com

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Frobie
Quasi Vero Monaco
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 633


Rublev's Trinity


WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 01, 2004, 06:55:48 PM »

Good, I agree with you there.  The Church should certainly deny communion, but I was unclear how you were joking about going to confession for voting for Arnold.  I think it's a serious matter, Republicans, Democrats, or whatever.

I had the wrong impression from an interview he gave, so apparently he attends church with his family regularly.
Logged
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #7 on: May 01, 2004, 07:43:40 PM »

How is that funny? I don't think it's funny.  I agree with her, but I don't think it's pointing out any great hypocrisy.

Why isn't it hypocritical?  We see a lot of hysteria here about "evil dems."  I never see any posts about "evil reps" who support abortion.  Why only the hysteria about the "dems?"  

Most of the Republicans in the senate (including most of the female senators) are pro-choice.
Logged
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #8 on: May 01, 2004, 07:45:48 PM »

Good, I agree with you there.  The Church should certainly deny communion, but I was unclear how you were joking about going to confession for voting for Arnold.  I think it's a serious matter, Republicans, Democrats, or whatever.

I had the wrong impression from an interview he gave, so apparently he attends church with his family regularly.  

Some here have alleged that it's a very "serious sin" (meaning requires confession) to vote for a pro-choice candidate.  I disagree.  I think what matters is the person's intent in voting for that candidate.  But if we're going to scream about how catholics voting for Kerry need to go to confession then it seems to me that we should also scream about how catholics voting for Arnold should also go to confession.  

Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #9 on: May 01, 2004, 08:21:40 PM »

Oh Arnold is a republican?  That took my by surprise.....perhaps that is why there is no reaction.
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,436


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 01, 2004, 08:23:07 PM »

Jennifer,

Most of the Republican Senators are Pro-Choice?  Perhaps.  What about House Republicans?  Everyone in the senate is a millionaire the last time I checked, and rich politicians tend to become more liberal (a study I read suggested).

I think the issue of Kerry receiving communion has been talked about more is because he presents himself as a religious person.  Also, Arnold was a governor, not running for president.

Your whole post just seemed to mix lots of different issues up.

Of course, as I said, I agree with you that Arnold should be held to the same standards.

And I disagree with you, voting for pro-abortion candidates no matter what your reasoning is a sin.

anastasios
Logged

Check out my personal website with 130+ articles: www.anastasioshudson.com

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #11 on: May 01, 2004, 08:33:29 PM »

Where has Kerry "presented himself as a religious person?"  I don't think he's presented himself as a religious person at all.  I hardly ever hear him talking about religion.  He says he's a Catholic and talks a little bit about it but that's all.  

He says he's a practicing Catholic but that doesn't mean he's presenting himself as a religious person.  He's just a run of the mill catholic, I'd say.  Just as 'religious' as about 80-90% of us.  

I think he's allowed to say he's a Catholic and the Church is allowed to say his beliefs aren't Catholic and refuse him communion.  But he's a baptized member of the Church and allowed to say he's Catholic.  And he's also allowed to say his faith has influenced him.  He's allowed to show up at Mass and talk about religion.  

I'd rather someone a little bit catholic over someone not at all catholic.  I get the feeling that some of you would rather have a total atheist over an 'impure' catholic.  I think there's a kind of rigidness evidenced here.  

BTW, there are plenty of religious people who are pro-choice.  For example, I saw a car the other day with a bumper sticker that said "pro faith pro family pro choice."  The guy driving the car was wearing a yamulke.  Of course Judaism allows abortion.  

Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #12 on: May 01, 2004, 08:58:31 PM »

Quote
Of course Judaism allows abortion.  

And if you put on an Israeli uniform it's ok to murder too.
Logged
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #13 on: May 01, 2004, 09:26:50 PM »

And if you put on an Israeli uniform it's ok to murder too.  

Sorry but that doesn't follow.  The argument against Kerry is that he claims to be Catholic yet rejects a tenet of his religion.  A religious Jew (like the one in the example I gave) isn't rejecting a tenet of his/her religion by being pro-choice.  Which is why I qualified my statement.
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,436


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #14 on: May 01, 2004, 11:08:34 PM »

Jennifer,

OK with Kerry and how he presents himself it's a matter of perception and I can't prove my case so I concede it.

Just because someone has that bumper sticker (which I find to be very sad), doesn't mean that one can be religious and support pro-choice. To me it means someone is confused.

Could you please delve into Judaism being pro-choice?  I have heard that only the liberal Jews are pro-choice and that Orthodox jews are not.  In fact, I heard that some Jews issued a symbolic excommunication against Liberman last election.  I don't know much about Judaism and you do so perhaps you could explain this for me?

As for voting for Catholics, I would like to vote for Catholics and Orthodox over non-Catholics or non-Orthodox but feel that that is not rational because just because someone is Catholic or Orthodox doesn't make them good. The issue to me is not "ok Catholic" versus "pure Catholic" because abortion to me is a black or white issue.  However, if he were impure in the sense of not living an upright Catholic moral life I might have voted for him anyway becuase I know I am a sinner.  Clinton's sex scandals never really got to me for this reason--a great number of people live like this and I am not perfect so I don't want to judge.

Anyway, I'll leave it at that.

anastasios
Logged

Check out my personal website with 130+ articles: www.anastasioshudson.com

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #15 on: May 02, 2004, 12:27:42 AM »

What does "religious" mean?  Do you get to decide what "religious" means?  I've known quite a few people who considered themselves "religious" who were pro-choice.  

Abortion is allowed in Orthodox Judaism to save the life of the mother.  It is only allowed by mandatory because Judaism doesn't view the fetus as a living soul.  It's a potential life.  There are differences of opinions amongst Orthodox rabbis about what constitutes a threat to the mother's life.  Some rabbinic authorities would allow abortion if having the child would psychological suffering for the mother.  What got Lieberman in trouble is his stance that abortion on demand should be allowed.  

Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,347


« Reply #16 on: May 02, 2004, 01:36:34 AM »

It appears we have forgotten the name "Gray Davis" by now (even though he is on a Yahoo! commercial).  Since we're arguing and pointing fingers, anyone know the religous (or lack thereof) offiliation of Davis?  This would seem to be a major factor in this thread.
Logged
Brendan03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 544



« Reply #17 on: May 02, 2004, 08:52:15 AM »

I thought it was funny because the shrill voices in similar threads that attack democrats for being pro-death are absent from here, noticeably so, because it IS hypocritical. The silence is deafening.

It is one thing to say that you should not vote for any politician that is pro-choice.  I don't agree with that position, but it is a more defensible one than the partisan bias we have seen in other threads.  If those who are so vociferous in attacking Kerry on his abortion stance would be as comfortable attacking Arnold on his, then there would be no hypocrisy.  But the silence is deafening.  Therefore I thought Jennifer's bringing up the issue of Arnold's stance was a clever thing to do, and it made me laugh because it was such a clever riposte.

Brendan
Logged

B
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #18 on: May 02, 2004, 10:34:32 AM »

Regarding partisan politics, let's not forget that a certain poster has an "icon" of our current president.  Doesn't anyone else think that's a bit strange?  

Of course I have a picture of a cat.  Does that mean I worship my cat?  Actually he probably thinks so.  

Regardless, I would never dream of putting a picture of a candidate in the field where everyone else has an icon.
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,436


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #19 on: May 02, 2004, 02:51:05 PM »

What does "religious" mean?  Do you get to decide what "religious" means?  I've known quite a few people who considered themselves "religious" who were pro-choice.

Yes, I get to decide what it means.  And so do you.  And we can argue about it.  That's what makes this country great, we can all have opinions. In my opinion, one cannot be religious and pro-choice.  If one thinks s/he is, s/he is a hypocrite.

Quote
Abortion is allowed in Orthodox Judaism to save the life of the mother.  It is only allowed by mandatory because Judaism doesn't view the fetus as a living soul.  It's a potential life.  There are differences of opinions amongst Orthodox rabbis about what constitutes a threat to the mother's life.  Some rabbinic authorities would allow abortion if having the child would psychological suffering for the mother.  What got Lieberman in trouble is his stance that abortion on demand should be allowed.  

Thank you.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2004, 02:51:45 PM by anastasios » Logged

Check out my personal website with 130+ articles: www.anastasioshudson.com

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,436


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #20 on: May 02, 2004, 02:53:47 PM »

Regarding partisan politics, let's not forget that a certain poster has an "icon" of our current president.  Doesn't anyone else think that's a bit strange?  

Of course I have a picture of a cat.  Does that mean I worship my cat?  Actually he probably thinks so.  

Regardless, I would never dream of putting a picture of a candidate in the field where everyone else has an icon.  

I had a picture of Bush up for awhile, and I have also had a picture of an ocelot, Metropolitan Cyprian, myself, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, etc.  One poster has a picture of himself playing a guitar. You have a picture of a cat.  Who cares? Anyone can put up what he or she wants as long as it's not some type of explicit sexual thing or racist thing.  Why do you care, may I ask?
« Last Edit: May 02, 2004, 02:54:12 PM by anastasios » Logged

Check out my personal website with 130+ articles: www.anastasioshudson.com

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Bono Vox
The Orthodox Bagpiper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,620



« Reply #21 on: May 02, 2004, 06:05:15 PM »

Quote
He says he's a practicing Catholic but that doesn't mean he's presenting himself as a religious person.  He's just a run of the mill catholic, I'd say.  Just as 'religious' as about 80-90% of us.

If 80-90% of the Roman Catholics are as religious as john kerry, then the Roman Catholic church is sure in a dire situation. (this could explain why so many RC's vote for secularists)


Quote
I'd rather someone a little bit catholic over someone not at all catholic.  I get the feeling that some of you would rather have a total atheist over an 'impure' catholic.  I think there's a kind of rigidness evidenced here.

I'd rather have a protestant or an athiest who supports Christian values and promotes a culture of life than a "Catholic"  who advances the culture of death.

Bagpiper
Logged

Troparion - Tone 1:
O Sebastian, spurning the assemblies of the wicked,You gathered the wise martyrs Who with you cast down the enemy; And standing worthily before the throne of God, You gladden those who cry to you:Glory to him who has strengthened you! Glory to him who has granted you a crown!
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #22 on: May 02, 2004, 07:27:09 PM »

I thought it was funny because the shrill voices in similar threads that attack democrats for being pro-death are absent from here, noticeably so, because it IS hypocritical. The silence is deafening.

It is one thing to say that you should not vote for any politician that is pro-choice.  I don't agree with that position, but it is a more defensible one than the partisan bias we have seen in other threads.  If those who are so vociferous in attacking Kerry on his abortion stance would be as comfortable attacking Arnold on his, then there would be no hypocrisy.  But the silence is deafening.  Therefore I thought Jennifer's bringing up the issue of Arnold's stance was a clever thing to do, and it made me laugh because it was such a clever riposte.

Brendan

The reason the silence from me was "deafening" is because I haven't been on the Internet all weekend, until now.

Otherwise, I would have been glad to be the first one to say that Arnold is wrong.

As long as he advocates the so-called Pro-Choice position, he should not receive the Eucharist, nor can he be considered a Christian.

Had I been a California voter, I would not have voted for Arnold. I would have voted for the Pro-Life candidate, McClintock (hope I got that name right).

The main reason the focus of criticism has been on Kerry is because he is running for President of the United States.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2004, 07:32:28 PM by Linus7 » Logged

The first condition of salvation is to keep the norm of the true faith and in no way to deviate from the established doctrine of the Fathers.
- Pope St. Hormisdas
katherine 2001
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 868


Eastern Orthodox Church--Established in 33 A.D.


« Reply #23 on: May 02, 2004, 09:12:22 PM »

Personally, I wouldn't have voted for Arnold either.  I don't vote for someone just because they belong to a certain party or don't.
Logged
Nacho
Warned
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: EasternOrthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,482

The face of Corporate America


« Reply #24 on: May 03, 2004, 01:31:26 AM »

Quote
Like many (probably most) Republicans, he's pro-choice.  He's also a Catholic.  Will he be refused communion?  

Ahhh, Here we go again......Jennifer, what are you talking about?? Most republicans are pro choice??? Most, (like 90%) are Pro life.


Quote
He claims to be a Catholic but I don't know if he goes to Mass.  I notice it was never an issue on this board.  Why all the hysteria about pro-choice democrats but no uproar about pro-choice Republicans?

Wow!!! Why don't you try to give us alteast a few days to respond please before you make accusations. You posted this on a Saturday. Alot of people are busy over the weekend. I hate pro choice(abortion) republicans just about as much as I hate pro abortion democrats.  

Quote
Most of the Republicans in the senate (including most of the female senators) are pro-choice.

Balloney..... Cheesy Out of the 52 republicans in the Senate, only 3 at the very most are pro abortion. Lincoln Chafee, Arlene Spector & Olympia Snow........Wow, where are you getting your facts from??? Sounds very dubious to me.
Even when there are a few pro abortion republicans out there, you won't ever see them going out parading themselves in front of the worshippers of death abortion groups like the democrats do. The republicans who are also for abortion aren't for full blown abortion like the democrats who want no limitations on it.


Quote
Good, I agree with you there.  The Church should certainly deny communion, but I was unclear how you were joking about going to confession for voting for Arnold.  I think it's a serious matter, Republicans, Democrats, or whatever.

I agree, lets call evil evil no matter what political party it is that advocates death.


Quote
Some here have alleged that it's a very "serious sin" (meaning requires confession) to vote for a pro-choice candidate.  I disagree.  I think what matters is the person's intent in voting for that candidate.  But if we're going to scream about how catholics voting for Kerry need to go to confession then it seems to me that we should also scream about how catholics voting for Arnold should also go to confession.  

What do you mean "alleged". I have said many times & have simply stated what has been known for 2000 years that abortion is a grave sin. If the persons intent is to vote for evil, then they are depraved  and in grave sin for supporting such politicians that continue the genocide on the innocent. I don't care what political party it is.


Quote
I thought it was funny because the shrill voices in similar threads that attack democrats for being pro-death are absent from here, noticeably so, because it IS hypocritical. The silence is deafening.

Wow, this was just posted the other day & on the weekend. Lets give people a few days to respond before any knee jerk reactions. I know I'm being consistant in what I beleive, I hope others do the same...


Quote
Where has Kerry "presented himself as a religious person?"  I don't think he's presented himself as a religious person at all.  I hardly ever hear him talking about religion.  He says he's a Catholic and talks a little bit about it but that's all.

Hmmmm.........When John Kerry brings cameramen to mass with him as a political trick to get unsuspecting Catholics to vote for him.......then I would say he is presenting himself as a church going religious person who is parading it in front of the public eye.

Quote
Regarding partisan politics, let's not forget that a certain poster has an "icon" of our current president.  Doesn't anyone else think that's a bit strange?  

Hmmmm, I wonder who that could be?? Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
What I think is strange are people who vote for someone who is rabidly pro abortion & makes a point of it by parading himself in front of hundreds of thousands pro abortion groups. I don't know how someone who is "personally" against abortions as Kerry says he is could then go out & activley promote it. This sounds like another big lie of John Kerry. If he does win, we'll have to rename the white house the "Waffle House."  Wink



Quote
I'd rather have a protestant or an athiest who supports Christian values and promotes a culture of life than a "Catholic"  who advances the culture of death.

I would too, but that would be too much common sense for some people to handle.


Quote
If 80-90% of the Roman Catholics are as religious as john kerry, then the Roman Catholic church is sure in a dire situation. (this could explain why so many RC's vote for secularists)

Go figure. The spirit of "protestantism" is running rampant in the Roman Catholic Church & it's affecting many members who think they have a right to rebel against church teaching and the magesterium, alot of them call themselves cradle catholics also.

Quote
The reason the silence from me was "deafening" is because I haven't been on the Internet all weekend, until now.

LoL, there must be a new rule out that says those with more conservative leanings have to post within 24 hours on a topic over the weekend, or they are being hypocrytical.



Quote
Otherwise, I would have been glad to be the first one to say that Arnold is wrong.

Same here

Quote
The main reason the focus of criticism has been on Kerry is because he is running for President of the United States.

Yea, & Kerry "claims" to be personally against abortion. Well, I don't know any people who are "personally" against abortion & then to go out & make time to actively promote it & speak in front of the left wing sewer groups who also actively promote it. This sounds like a big whopper on Kerry's part. He's not Clinton & he's not going to be able to get away with his lies because he is not smooth like slick willy was.
Logged

"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world."--Mere Christianity
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #25 on: May 03, 2004, 09:26:01 AM »

Ahhh, Here we go again......Jennifer, what are you talking about?? Most republicans are pro choice??? Most, (like 90%) are Pro life.

90% of republicans are pro-life?  Hardly.  Do you have any evidence to support your claim?  Oh, wait a minute you don't need evidence.  You "just think" it.  BTW, I found an article on the web suggesting that about 68% of republicans are pro-life.  http://www.cavalierdaily.com/CVarticle.asp?ID=19350&pid=1137

Quote
Wow!!! Why don't you try to give us alteast a few days to respond please before you make accusations. You posted this on a Saturday. Alot of people are busy over the weekend. I hate pro choice(abortion) republicans just about as much as I hate pro abortion democrats.  Balloney..... Cheesy Out of the 52 republicans in the Senate, only 3 at the very most are pro abortion. Lincoln Chafee, Arlene Spector & Olympia Snow........Wow, where are you getting your facts from??? Sounds very dubious to me.
Even when there are a few pro abortion republicans out there, you won't ever see them going out parading themselves in front of the worshippers of death abortion groups like the democrats do. The republicans who are also for abortion aren't for full blown abortion like the democrats who want no limitations on it.

Abortion was a big issue in the recent PA primary where Spector (the supposed liberal) won.  If 90% of republicans are pro-life as you claim, then how could Spector win his party's nomination?  

Quote
I agree, lets call evil evil no matter what political party it is that advocates death.What do you mean "alleged". I have said many times & have simply stated what has been known for 2000 years that abortion is a grave sin. If the persons intent is to vote for evil, then they are depraved  and in grave sin for supporting such politicians that continue the genocide on the innocent. I don't care what political party it is. Wow, this was just posted the other day & on the weekend. Lets give people a few days to respond before any knee jerk reactions. I know I'm being consistant in what I beleive, I hope others do the same...Hmmmm.........When John Kerry brings cameramen to mass with him as a political trick to get unsuspecting Catholics to vote for him.......then I would say he is presenting himself as a church going religious person who is parading it in front of the public eye. Hmmmm, I wonder who that could be?? Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
What I think is strange are people who vote for someone who is rabidly pro abortion & makes a point of it by parading himself in front of hundreds of thousands pro abortion groups. I don't know how someone who is "personally" against abortions as Kerry says he is could then go out & activley promote it. This sounds like another big lie of John Kerry. If he does win, we'll have to rename the white house the "Waffle House."  ;)I would too, but that would be too much common sense for some people to handle. Go figure. The spirit of "protestantism" is running rampant in the Roman Catholic Church & it's affecting many members who think they have a right to rebel against church teaching and the magesterium, alot of them call themselves cradle catholics also. LoL, there must be a new rule out that says those with more conservative leanings have to post within 24 hours on a topic over the weekend, or they are being hypocrytical. Same hereYea, & Kerry "claims" to be personally against abortion. Well, I don't know any people who are "personally" against abortion & then to go out & make time to actively promote it & speak in front of the left wing sewer groups who also actively promote it. This sounds like a big whopper on Kerry's part. He's not Clinton & he's not going to be able to get away with his lies because he is not smooth like slick willy was.

I'm sorry I didn't even read the rest of your rant.  It's just the same old "I think" "I just know" "I don't care about evidence."
Logged
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #26 on: May 03, 2004, 02:17:32 PM »

Yes, I get to decide what it means.  And so do you.  And we can argue about it.  That's what makes this country great, we can all have opinions. In my opinion, one cannot be religious and pro-choice.  If one thinks s/he is, s/he is a hypocrite.

But how is a religious Jew who is pro-choice a "hypocrite?"  His religion allows abortion.  

Certainly we all have a right to our opinions but "religious" has a definition that we're bound to.  A religious Jew is religious even though he's not a Christian.  Your definition of "religious" is obviously Christian which isn't an accepted definition of "religious."  

Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #27 on: May 04, 2004, 08:04:38 AM »

So what's your point in all this, Jennifer?

If you were alleging that we were attacking Kerry only because he is a Democrat and giving Arnold a free ride only because he is a Republican, I think the responses have proven you wrong.

Are you advocating the so-called Pro-Choice position or saying it's a legitimate option that should not be held against political candidates?

Trying to convince yourself that it's okay to vote for Kerry despite his anti-Christ position on some important issues?

Logged

The first condition of salvation is to keep the norm of the true faith and in no way to deviate from the established doctrine of the Fathers.
- Pope St. Hormisdas
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #28 on: May 04, 2004, 10:35:10 AM »

I think that some posters here are overly partisan and will excuse being pro-choice against a republican and not a democrat.  I'm unconvinced by their claims otherwise given their other responses.  People don't often understand what their motives are.  

I think the overly partisan tone of some posters is evidenced by overly harsh comments about "evil dems" and outright lies like "90% of all republicans are pro-life."  That someone would say that indicates that they are overly partisan because they see the facts in a light most favorable to their political party.  

I also don't think that we are commanded to be 'single issue' voters.  Abortion is an important issue and if we had a truly pro-life candidate, we would have to vote for him.  But being anti-abortion doesn't make someone pro-life.  The pope cautions against a 'culture of death.'  A 'culture of death' is manifested in many ways.  Including executing retarded people or people who can't speak english.  I don't the death penalty is immoral by itself but if it's used then we must ensure that we safeguard life and Bush's actions in Texas don't indicate a "respect for life."  And undoubtedly some of the people executed are innocent.  

I also think a pre-emptive strike (condemned by the pope as well) is not indicative of a "respect for life."  

Overall, Bush won't do anything to outlaw abortion so voting for him when we know he'll do other anti-life things isn't the 'moral' choice in my opinion.  

Truthfully what is Bush done to stop abortion?  He passed a law outlawing partial birth abortions which everyone knows is unconstitutional so it will be struck down.  

I think his claim to be pro-life is an easy for him to make because the average american (squeamish about abortion but doesn't think it should be illegal) knows that voting for him won't make abortion illegal.  

Abortion is allowed in this country because of the supreme court and the majority of justices sitting on the court were appointed by republican presidents.  

If Bush had indicated an overall respect for life in a catholic way I'd give his anti-abortion stance more credit.  But I think his disrespect for life and protestant affiliation proves that his anti-abortion stance is 'establishment.'  Since it's 'establishment' he won't go against the norm.  Look what 'life' issues he chooses to care about.  Unborn children over potentially innocent illegal immigrants and off-white people far away.  Being anti-abortion isn't just concern for unborn children.  There's a 'maintenance of the sexual status quo' as well.  I suggest that his anti-abortion stance is more the latter reason than a catholic 'respect for life.'  
Logged
Nacho
Warned
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: EasternOrthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,482

The face of Corporate America


« Reply #29 on: May 04, 2004, 04:00:52 PM »

Quote
90% of republicans are pro-life?  Hardly.  Do you have any evidence to support your claim?  Oh, wait a minute you don't need evidence.  You "just think" it.  BTW, I found an article on the web suggesting that about 68% of republicans are pro-life.  

LoL, OK Jennifer, you know that I'm reffering to the politicians themselves, not the general voting public. 90% of republicans politicians are in line with the pro life platform of the republican party. I would venture to guess that maybe 2% of democrat poloticians are pro life. I have acdtually never heard or know of any current democrat politicians that are pro life.

Quote
I also don't think that we are commanded to be 'single issue' voters.  Abortion is an important issue and if we had a truly pro-life candidate, we would have to vote for him.  But being anti-abortion doesn't make someone pro-life.  The pope cautions against a 'culture of death.'  A 'culture of death' is manifested in many ways.  Including executing retarded people or people who can't speak english.  I don't the death penalty is immoral by itself but if it's used then we must ensure that we safeguard life and Bush's actions in Texas don't indicate a "respect for life."  And undoubtedly some of the people executed are innocent.  

Your right, the Pope is against the "culture of death" & I would put my money that the pope would vote republican if he could. If you read the "Catholic Voters Guidlines", that gives you 4 good reasons to vote against the democrats. It also gives you 5 good reasons to vote for Bush when seeing how thier views stack up to what the guidlines call for in voting for a candidate.


Quote
Truthfully what is Bush done to stop abortion?  He passed a law outlawing partial birth abortions which everyone knows is unconstitutional so it will be struck down.  
Enough for 1,400 pro abortion organizations, close to 1 million pro abortion supporters & John Kerry to march on Washington to denounce Bush's pro life policies & how they have limited a women's right to "choose."

Quote
Overall, Bush won't do anything to outlaw abortion so voting for him when we know he'll do other anti-life things isn't the 'moral' choice in my opinion.  
Jen, Bush can't do it all on his own. He couldn't anyway because repubicans don't have a majority to get it passed in the house in senate to bypass a filibuster.

Quote
If Bush had indicated an overall respect for life in a catholic way I'd give his anti-abortion stance more credit.  But I think his disrespect for life and protestant affiliation proves that his anti-abortion stance is 'establishment.'  Since it's 'establishment' he won't go against the norm.  Look what 'life' issues he chooses to care about.  Unborn children over potentially innocent illegal immigrants and off-white people far away.  Being anti-abortion isn't just concern for unborn children.  There's a 'maintenance of the sexual status quo' as well.  I suggest that his anti-abortion stance is more the latter reason than a catholic 'respect for life.'  

It's sad to see a "Catholic" post such drivel. So in other words because Bush is a protestant & a republican, he can't have a true geniune stance on abortion without having a hidden agenda??




Logged

"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world."--Mere Christianity
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #30 on: May 04, 2004, 04:08:42 PM »

I don't think the pope would vote for either Bush or Kerry.  His criticism of Bush's attack of Iraq was very severe.  And the pope has criticized many other foundations of the Republican party.  

I didn't say he didn't have an agenda because he's a republican but because he's a protestant.  

I don't think you understood what I wrote.  It goes a bit beyond your simplistic talk radio, "Catholic voter guide" mentality.  


Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,413


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #31 on: May 04, 2004, 04:09:13 PM »

Quote
Enough for 1,400 pro abortion organizations, close to 1 million pro abortion supporters & John Kerry to march on Washington to denounce Bush's pro life policies & how they have limited a women's right to "choose."

Dude, this is the biggest crock you've posted.  You're acting like Bush alone was the reason why the pro-death folks marched on Washington.  As someone who lives here, this kind of thing happens all the time, especially in an election year, no matter who's in charge.  This crap happened when Clinton was president, too.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Nacho
Warned
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: EasternOrthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,482

The face of Corporate America


« Reply #32 on: May 04, 2004, 04:25:02 PM »

Quote
didn't say he didn't have an agenda because he's a republican but because he's a protestant.

What??? So protestants now have "ulterior" motives???

Quote
I don't think you understood what I wrote.  It goes a bit beyond your simplistic talk radio, "Catholic voter guide" mentality.  

In typical Jen style, attack the mesenger & not the content of the message itself.

Quote
Dude, this is the biggest crock you've posted.  You're acting like Bush alone was the reason why the pro-death folks marched on Washington.  As someone who lives here, this kind of thing happens all the time, especially in an election year, no matter who's in charge.  This crap happened when Clinton was president, too.

Well, from all the anti bush speaches they gave & saying things like, "Bush, keep you hands off our bodies & that he should go to hell", you would have thought they came there for that. Also, it's been since 1992 that they have organized anything on this magnitude. It seemed just as much an anti bush rally as a pro abortion rally.
Logged

"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world."--Mere Christianity
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,413


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #33 on: May 04, 2004, 04:40:08 PM »

Did it ever occur to you that they said those things because, oh, he happened to be in office?  You're really turning this into some personal thing when it doesn't matter who is in office at the time if that person is pro-life.  

You're one paranoid dude, Nacho, paranoid for a guy you don't even know and who looks at you not as an individual but as a vote.

Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #34 on: May 04, 2004, 05:05:58 PM »

What??? So protestants now have "ulterior" motives???In typical Jen style, attack the mesenger & not the content of the message itself.

But Nacho, you don't have a message.  If you do have a message you're incapable of expressing it in a way that others can understand.  I think it's obvious from your posts that you merely parrot what you hear on talk radio.  It's not your own message.  

Quote
Well, from all the anti bush speaches they gave & saying things like, "Bush, keep you hands off our bodies & that he should go to hell", you would have thought they came there for that. Also, it's been since 1992 that they have organized anything on this magnitude. It seemed just as much an anti bush rally as a pro abortion rally.


Now that's just absurd.  This is indicative of the overly partisan tone of your posts.  

Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong." - Carl Kraeff
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12,101


I'm back, Mom...miss Me?


WWW
« Reply #35 on: May 04, 2004, 06:36:34 PM »

Being anti-abortion isn't just concern for unborn children.  There's a 'maintenance of the sexual status quo' as well.  I suggest that his anti-abortion stance is more the latter reason than a catholic 'respect for life.'  

What is "maintenance of the sexual status quo"?
Logged

"Best of all, Mor Ephrem won't trap you into having his baby." - dzheremi

"Mor Ephrim will not be allowed in(to the getes of heaven) because God doesnt know him." - Cackles

"You are consistently one of the cruelest posters on this forum." - William
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #36 on: May 04, 2004, 06:43:46 PM »

People can be against abortion because the idea of women being able to have control over reproduction is threatening to the sexual status quo.  The same can be said about divorce.  

Of course that doesn't make abortion or divorce right.  But there are 'right' reasons to be against them and 'wrong' reasons to be against them.  For example, abortion was forbidden in some Soviet bloc countries.  Certainly protection of life was not the motivation for outlawing abortion.  It was eugenics which is undoubtedly an evil philosophy.  

Logged
Nacho
Warned
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: EasternOrthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,482

The face of Corporate America


« Reply #37 on: May 04, 2004, 07:16:58 PM »

Quote
You're one paranoid dude, Nacho, paranoid for a guy you don't even know and who looks at you not as an individual but as a vote.
If defending a "culture of life" makes me paranoid, I'll wear that title on my sleves any day... Cheesy

Quote
But Nacho, you don't have a message.  If you do have a message you're incapable of expressing it in a way that others can understand.  I think it's obvious from your posts that you merely parrot what you hear on talk radio.  It's not your own message.  

Wow Jennifer, you sure like to make it personal. Again, I have posted & stuck to the ideas of the teachings of the Catholic church on the issue at hand. You choose to attack me & say absurd things like I must have got it from talk radio. I stuck to such things as "The Catholics Voter Guidlines", (which by the way was not from talk radio) and you dismiss it & make up other tedious arguements that have nothing to do with what we are talking about.

Quote
Now that's just absurd.  This is indicative of the overly partisan tone of your posts.  
How's it absurd??? I watched it on TV & saw alot of the speeches & that's what they said. How is that partisan??? I'm just repeating what I heard from some of the speeches. By the way, I think it's partisan of Congresswomen Maxine Waters to get up there & say that "Bush should go to Hell." I don't think any republican could ever get away with saying something like that.  
Logged

"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world."--Mere Christianity
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #38 on: May 04, 2004, 09:01:11 PM »

Nacho, you're not a Roman Catholic so you're hardly in the position to "stick to the ideas of the Catholic Church."  Further, as I've told you before I think you're still overly protestant and haven't yet adopted a catholic worldview.  Frankly you just don't get *it.*  You'll need to be catholic for a while longer before you move past this 'literalist' mindset.
Logged
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #39 on: May 04, 2004, 09:29:11 PM »

I also don't think that we are commanded to be 'single issue' voters.  Abortion is an important issue and if we had a truly pro-life candidate, we would have to vote for him.  But...Bush's actions in Texas [with respect to the death penalty] don't indicate a "respect for life."...I also think a pre-emptive strike (condemned by the pope as well) is not indicative of a "respect for life."

Well said, Jennifer.  I think we've got to look to more immediate matters right now; Bush has proved himself to be impulsive at best, his black-and-white version of the world having left a bad taste in the world's mouth as far as we're concerned.

As horrific a holocaust as legalized abortion is, we as a nation have to play our cards realistically, fixing the messes we CAN fix at the moment.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #40 on: May 04, 2004, 11:03:43 PM »

It's ok Jennifer we all love you anyway, but just save us all some time and energy and just admit that you are pro-abortion.
Logged
Nacho
Warned
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: EasternOrthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,482

The face of Corporate America


« Reply #41 on: May 04, 2004, 11:11:12 PM »

Quote
Nacho, you're not a Roman Catholic so you're hardly in the position to "stick to the ideas of the Catholic Church."  Further, as I've told you before I think you're still overly protestant and haven't yet adopted a catholic worldview.  Frankly you just don't get *it.*  You'll need to be catholic for a while longer before you move past this 'literalist' mindset.

Deeming the quality of the "content" of your post, I think I have a better handle of what the RC teaches than you.

More reasons why it's never acceptable to vote for pro abortion candidates:

Questions about voting (from EWTN.com, a highly respect Catholic website)

3. If I think that a pro-abortion candidate will, on balance, do much more for the culture of life than a pro-life candidate, why may I not vote for the pro-abortion candidate?

If a political candidate supported abortion, or any other moral evil, such as assisted suicide and euthanasia, for that matter, it would not be morally permissible for you to vote for that person. This is because, in voting for such a person, you would become an accomplice in the moral evil at issue. For this reason, moral evils such as abortion, euthanasia and assisted suicide are examples of a “disqualifying issue.” A disqualifying issue is one which is of such gravity and importance that it allows for no political maneuvering. It is an issue that strikes at the heart of the human person and is non-negotiable. A disqualifying issue is one of such enormity that by itself renders a candidate for office unacceptable regardless of his position on other matters. You must sacrifice your feelings on other issues because you know that you cannot participate in any way in an approval of a violent and evil violation of basic human rights. A candidate for office who supports abortion rights or any other moral evil has disqualified himself as a person that you can vote for. You do not have to vote for a person because he is pro-life. But you may not vote for any candidate who supports abortion rights. Key to understanding the point above about “disqualifying issues” is the distinction between policy and moral principle. On the one hand, there can be a legitimate variety of approaches to accomplishing a morally acceptable goal. For example, in a society’s effort to distribute the goods of health care to its citizens, there can be legitimate disagreement among citizens and political candidates alike as to whether this or that health care plan would most effectively accomplish society’s goal. In the pursuit of the best possible policy or strategy, technical as distinct (although not separate) from moral reason is operative. Technical reason is the kind of reasoning involved in arriving at the most efficient or effective result. On the other hand, no policy or strategy that is opposed to the moral principles of the natural law is morally acceptable. Thus, technical reason should always be subordinate to and normed by moral reason, the kind of reasoning that is the activity of conscience and that is based on the natural moral law.
----------------------------------------------

4. If I have strong feelings or opinions in favor of a particular candidate, even if he is pro-abortion, why may I not vote for him?

As explained in question 1 above, neither your feelings nor your opinions are identical with your conscience. Neither your feelings nor your opinions can take the place of your conscience. Your feelings and opinions should be governed by your conscience. If the candidate about whom you have strong feelings or opinions is pro-abortion, then your feelings and opinions need to be corrected by your correctly informed conscience, which would tell you that it is wrong for you to allow your feelings and opinions to give lesser weight to the fact that the candidate supports a moral evil.
-----------------------------------------

5. If I may not vote for a pro-abortion candidate, then should it not also be true that I can’t vote for a pro-capital punishment candidate?

It is not correct to think of abortion and capital punishment as the very same kind of moral issue. On the one hand, direct abortion is an intrinsic evil, and cannot be justified for any purpose or in any circumstances. On the other hand, the Church has always taught that it is the right and responsibility of the legitimate temporal authority to defend and preserve the common good, and more specifically to defend citizens against the aggressor. This defense against the aggressor may resort to the death penalty if no other means of defense is sufficient. The point here is that the death penalty is understood as an act of self-defense on the part of civil society. In more recent times, in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae, Pope John Paul II has taught that the need for such self-defense to resort to the death penalty is “rare, if not virtually nonexistent.” Thus, while the Pope is saying that the burden of proving the need for the death penalty in specific cases should rest on the shoulders of the legitimate temporal authority, it remains true that the legitimate temporal authority alone has the authority to determine if and when a “rare” case arises that warrants the death penalty. Moreover, if such a rare case does arise and requires resorting to capital punishment, this societal act of self-defense would be a *morally good action* even if it does have the unintended and unavoidable evil effect of the death of the aggressor. Thus, unlike the case of abortion, it would be morally irresponsible to rule out all such “rare” possibilities a priori, just as it would be morally irresponsible to apply the death penalty indiscriminately.
---------------------------

6. If I think that a candidate who is pro-abortion has better ideas to serve the poor, and the pro-life candidate has bad ideas that will hurt the poor, why may I not vote for the candidate that has the better ideas for serving the poor?

Serving the poor is not only admirable, but also obligatory for Catholics as an exercise of solidarity. Solidarity has to do with the sharing of both spiritual and material goods, and with what the Church calls the preferential option for the poor. This preference means that we have the duty to give priority to helping those most needful, both materially and spiritually. Beginning in the family, solidarity extends to every human association, even to the international moral order. Based on the response to question 3 above, two important points must be made. First, when it comes to the matter of determining how social and economic policy can best serve the poor, there can be a legitimate variety of approaches proposed, and therefore legitimate disagreement among voters and candidates for office. Secondly, solidarity can never be at the price of embracing a “disqualifying issue.” Besides, when it comes to the unborn, abortion is a most grievous offense against solidarity, for the unborn are surely among society’s most needful. The right to life is a paramount issue because as Pope John Paul II says it is “the first right, on which all the others are based, and which cannot be recuperated once it is lost.” If a candidate for office refuses solidarity with the unborn, he has laid the ground for refusing solidarity with anyone.
--------------------------

7. If a candidate says that he is personally opposed to abortion but feels the need to vote for it under the circumstances, doesn’t this candidate’s personal opposition to abortion make it morally permissible for me to vote for him, especially if I think that his other views are the best for people, especially the poor?

A candidate for office who says that he is personally opposed to abortion but actually votes in favor of it is either fooling himself or trying to fool you. Outside of the rare case in which a hostage is forced against his will to perform evil actions with his captors, a person who carries out an evil action né+ such as voting for abortion né+ performs an immoral act, and his statement of personal opposition to the moral evil of abortion is either self-delusion or a lie. If you vote for such a candidate, you would be an accomplice in advancing the moral evil of abortion. Therefore, it is not morally permissible to vote for such a candidate for office, even, as explained in questions 3 and 6 above, you think that the candidate’s other views are best for the poor.
---------------------------------

8. What if none of the candidates are completely pro-life?

As Pope John Paul II explains in his encyclical, Evangelium Vitae (The Gospel of Life), “GǪwhen it is not possible to overturn or completely abrogate a pro-abortion law, an elected official, whose absolute personal opposition to procured abortion was well known, could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done by such a law and at lessening its negative consequences at the level of general opinion and morality. This does not in fact represent an illicit cooperation with an unjust law, but rather a legitimate and proper attempt to limit its evil aspects.” Logically, it follows from these words of the Pope that a voter may likewise vote for that candidate who will most likely limit the evils of abortion or any other moral evil at issue.
-----------------------------------

9. What if one leading candidate is anti-abortion except in the cases of rape or incest, another leading candidate is completely pro-abortion, and a trailing candidate, not likely to win, is completely anti-abortion. Would I be obliged to vote for the candidate not likely to win?

In such a case, the Catholic voter may clearly choose to vote for the candidate not likely to win. In addition, the Catholic voter may assess that voting for that candidate might only benefit the completely pro-abortion candidate, and, precisely for the purpose of curtailing the evil of abortion, decide to vote for the leading candidate that is anti-abortion but not perfectly so. This decision would be in keeping with the words of the Pope quoted in question 8 above.
-------------------------------------

10. What if all the candidates from whom I have to choose are pro-abortion? Do I have to abstain from voting at all? What do I do?

Obviously, one of these candidates is going to win the election. Thus, in this dilemma, you should do your best to judge which candidate would do the least moral harm. However, as explained in question 5 above, you should not place a candidate who is pro-capital punishment (and anti-abortion) in the same moral category as a candidate who is pro-abortion. Faced with such a set of candidates, there would be no moral dilemma, and the clear moral obligation would be to vote for the candidate who is pro-capital punishment, not necessarily because he is pro-capital punishment, but because he is anti-abortion.
----------------------------------

11. Is not the Church’s stand that abortion must be illegal a bit of an exception? Does not the Church generally hold that government should restrict its legislation of morality significantly?

The Church’s teaching that abortion should be illegal is not an exception. St. Thomas Aquinas put it this way: “Wherefore human laws do not forbid all vices, from which the virtuous abstain, but only the more grievous vices, from which it is possible for the majority to abstain; and chiefly those that are to the hurt of others, without the prohibition of which human society could not be maintained: thus human law prohibits murder, theft and such like.” [ emphasis added]. Abortion qualifies as a grievous vice that hurts others, and the lack of prohibition of this evil by society is something by which human society cannot be maintained. As Pope John Paul II has emphasized, the denial of the right to life, in principle, sets the stage, in principle, for the denial of all other rights.
------------------------------------

12. What about elected officials who happen to be of the same party affiliation? Are they committing a sin by being in the same party, even if they don’t advocate pro-choice views? Are they guilty by association?

Being of the same political party as those who advocate pro-abortion is indeed a serious evil IF I belong to this political party IN ORDER TO ASSOCIATE MYSELF with that party’s advocacy of pro-abortion policies. However, it can also be true that being of such a political party has as its purpose to change the policies of the party. Of course, if this is the purpose, one would have to consider whether it is reasonable to think the political party’s policies can be changed. Assuming that it is reasonable to think so, then it would be morally justifiable to remain in that political party. Remaining in that political party cannot be instrumental in the advancing of pro-abortion policies (especially if I am busily striving to change the party’s policies) as can my VOTING for candidates or for a political party with a pro-abortion policy.
-----------------------------------

13. What about voting for a pro-abortion person for something like state treasurer, in which case the candidate would have no say on matters of life in the capacity of her duties, it just happens to be her personal position. This would not be a sin, right?

If someone were running for state treasurer and that candidate made it a point to state publicly that he was in favor of exterminating people over the age of 70, would you vote for him? The fact that the candidate has that evil in his mind tells you that there are easily other evils in his mind; and the fact that he would publicly state it is a danger signal. If personal character matters in a political candidate, and personal character involves the kind of thoughts a person harbors, then such a candidate who publicly states that he is in favor of the evil of exterminating people over the age of 70 - or children who are unborn - has also disqualified himself from receiving a Catholic’s vote. I would go further and say that such a candidate, in principle - in the light of the natural law - disqualifies himself from public office.
-------------------------------------

14. Is it a mortal sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate?

Except in the case in which a voter is faced with all pro-abortion candidates (in which case, as explained in question 8 above, he or she strives to determine which of them would cause the let damage in this regard), a candidate that is pro-abortion disqualifies himself from receiving a Catholic’s vote. This is because being pro-abortion cannot simply be placed alongside the candidate's other positions on Medicare and unemployment, for example; and this is because abortion is intrinsically evil and cannot be morally justified for any reason or set of circumstances. To vote for such a candidate even with the knowledge that the candidate is pro-abortion is to become an accomplice in the moral evil of abortion. If the voter also knows this, then the voter sins mortally.
Logged

"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world."--Mere Christianity
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #42 on: May 04, 2004, 11:14:14 PM »

Quote
Nacho, you're not a Roman Catholic

He's Antiochian that is close enough.
Logged
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #43 on: May 04, 2004, 11:22:23 PM »


Except in the case in which a voter is faced with all pro-abortion candidates (in which case, as explained in question 8 above, he or she strives to determine which of them would cause the let damage in this regard), a candidate that is pro-abortion disqualifies himself from receiving a Catholic’s vote. This is because being pro-abortion cannot simply be placed alongside the candidate's other positions on Medicare and unemployment, for example; and this is because abortion is intrinsically evil and cannot be morally justified for any reason or set of circumstances. To vote for such a candidate even with the knowledge that the candidate is pro-abortion is to become an accomplice in the moral evil of abortion. If the voter also knows this, then the voter sins mortally.

Does one not become an accomplice in the moral evil of murder when one votes for a candidate who will hurl our country into pointless wars which will take tens of thousands of innocent lives?

What if the pro-life candidate appears to be pro-life in word alone, but either does not have the power to overturn Roe Vs. Wade, or will not push for it to be overturned because it would alienate him from a large segment of the voting population? What if you believe this pro-life candidate will destabilize entire regions of the world, which will lead to countless deaths in the future, world wide turmoil, and will do nothing but stir up other nations' hatreds for us?

Is it still safe to vote for the pro-life candidate, solely because he is pro-life, banking on the extremely slim possibility that he will overturn Roe V. Wade which the majority of Americans support?
« Last Edit: May 04, 2004, 11:23:04 PM by Bogoliubtsy » Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
Nacho
Warned
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: EasternOrthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,482

The face of Corporate America


« Reply #44 on: May 04, 2004, 11:24:08 PM »

Quote
It's ok Jennifer we all love you anyway, but just save us all some time and energy and just admit that you are pro-abortion.
I'm also waiting for the "moment of truth." She should read what I posted from EWTN. I would like to see her explain that away.....
 Wink


Quote
Nacho, you're not a Roman Catholic

He's Antiochian that is close enough.

LOL, woooooohooooo Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
Ahhhh, I needed that little humor break.
Most of the time I'm accused of being a "protestant"  Tongue Tongue Tongue Tongue
Logged

"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world."--Mere Christianity
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 3 4 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.148 seconds with 72 queries.