Democratic Battle for Catholics Intensifies

Ed,
We do not ignore it, in fact we open discuss it. See the recent posting on CatholicDemocrats.org. The real question is when the folks who oppose criminalization will stop being obstructionist and work with us on real solutions to lowering the number of abortions in this country. The Democrats have a laudable legislative record on this issue. Other than saying "no", can conservatives say as much?

See:

http://www.catholicdemocrats.org/news/2008/03/old_abortion_language_doesnt_w.php

Sincerely,

Bill Roth
Communications Director
Catholic Democrats
roth@catholicdemocrats.org
http://www.catholicdemocrats.org

Let's see...a couple thousand soldiers over 6 years verses 1.5 million innocent babies every year for the last 35 years, most of them minorities...

Hmmm..I dunno. That's a real hard decision there.

Ann writes:

"Let's see...a couple thousand soldiers over 6 years verses 1.5 million innocent babies every year for the last 35 years, most of them minorities...

Hmmm..I dunno. That's a real hard decision there."

Why is this an either or? What's interesting about many Catholics, including high profile ones like Doug Kmiec and The Pope, is that they are opposed both to abortion and war, and for the same reason.

Catholics should listen to their Church's teaching, and not just to DNC or RNC talking points.

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: "a well-formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents of faith and morals."

US Bishops: "There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate's unacceptable position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons. Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil."

"I want an estate tax cut" is not a morally grave reason.

But beyond that, it is mostly a matter of personal discernment. It is a debatable question as to if a McCain presidency or an Obama presidency will save more unborn lives. And between McCain and Obama, only one of them is in a traditional marriage.

But after those two issues, we still have health care, worker rights, war and economic justice.

www.catholicsforobama.blogspot.com

"It is a debatable question as to if a McCain presidency or an Obama presidency will save more unborn lives."

Sure, every question is debatable. You could be correct in the more general sense that women likely don't chose to abort based on who occupies the Oval Office. Then again, of the two, McCain is the more likely to approve on restrictions on abortion by the very nature of his being pro-life, and Obama is the more likely to veto any legislation on the very nature of his being pro-choice.

"And between McCain and Obama, only one of them is in a traditional marriage."

That's neither a fair nor rational judgment, as neither Obama's faith nor McCain's explicitly believe in the indissolubility of marriage, and both permit divorce. That's very much like someone who follows kosher restrictions evaluating the piety of a hog farmer.

"But after those two issues, we still have health care, worker rights, war and economic justice."

Not really. Unless I'm mistaken, much of that sounds a lot like Liberation theology, which has more or less fallen into official disfavor in the Church during the last twenty years.

I suspect the majority of us Catholics are going to break for McCain, at least us church-going types who "cling to [religion]." I'd rather support the jingoist than another enabler of the silent holocaust.