"No Catholic Can in Good Conscience Vote for Obama"
The Catholic bishops have come out quite strongly against abortion pushing back against the Democrats who want to minimize this issue and make it a matter of personal choice. They are quite clear that the teaching of the church is...
Many good Catholics, including Catholic legal scholars, support Obama. The Kennedys support Obama. (Heck, even the Goldwaters came out in support of Obama yesterday.) Are you giving credence to the idea that the Kennedys are bad Catholics? That Joe Biden is a bad Catholic? Abortion is not the only ethical issue at stake in this election, and the Democrats want to reduce the number while the Republicans can only call for a total ban, even in cases of incest and rape, even when the mother's life is at stake. They are out of step with the good common sense of most Americans. Poverty leads to more abortions. Desperation leads to more abortions. Bans on comprehensive sex education lead to more abortions. Lack of support for pregnant women leads to more abortions. Lack of available, decent and affordable day care leads to more abortions. Lack of health care leads to more abortions.
Republicans don't really care about reducing the number of abortions or they would act on those fronts.
No church gets to dictate who its adherents vote for. That is a matter of conscience.
The first poster is correct. There have been several new polls that show Obama doing much better with Catholics and Evangelicals. Pew has a good poll.
Read Steven Wallman's blog about the ever changing McCain/Palin wording on abortion and Roe v Wade. They have no intention of making abortion illegal. They are politicians and 60+ percent of Americans believe abortion should be legal.
How long are people going to be fooled by Republicans that flip-flop on abortion to get votes?
Reagan, Bush 2, and McCain were pro-choice until running for President
Fortunately for us, most Catholics realize they aren't obligated to pay heed to the political motivations of Bishops when they go into a voting booth. This isn't a theocracy and no religious person is obligated to follow the admonitions of a religious leader when they tell them how to vote.
"I'm Catholic, Staunchly Anti-Abortion, and Support Obama"
This article by a Catholic legal scholar appeared recently in the National Catholic Reporter. For a thoughtful, reasoned account of why someone who is anti-abortion OUGHT to support Obama, I invite everyone to read it--including Michele. It just might elevate the tone of this blog a little and keep us from going over the same tired arguments.
http://ncronline3.org/drupal/?q=node/2058
Among Catholics: 47 percent voted for Kerry in 2004; 59 percent say they will vote for Obama. (NY Times, today)
By the way, I object to your labeling of Obama and others who think abortion should be "safe, legal and rare" as "pro-abortion." Obama regards abortion as a tragedy and wants to do whatever he can to reduce the number of women seeking to terminate a pregnancy. But unlike the Republicans, he doesn't see making criminals out of desperate women and the doctors who help them as a solution. Nor does he want to see a return to the days when women went to back-alley abortionists or had to cross state lines to find a doctor or had to use coat hangers or knitting needles or do any of the other dangerous and painful things women have felt forced into doing for centuries.
We hope you pass this on....
Please visit catholicvote.com
I dont understand how anyone could vote for John McCain.
If catholics are to be such pro-life then why vote for a man who thinks it is O.K. to have a war indefinitely. That means loss of our troops, death to innocent people (including many children)?
Obama seems willing to try and meet with other countries and try
to establish some kind of workable relationship where as McCain thinks
war IS the only answer. Tell me that is pro-life????
I helped my grandson do a report for school and we did some dwelling into Obama's past. He was raised by very positive influences especially family members who do have strong faith-no matter what there religious affiliation was.
I think McCain is dangerous.
Grassroots Films, you use the image of Jack Kennedy, a Democrat, in an attempt to persuade people to vote Republican. Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?
Catholics ARE going to vote their conscience. When you consider all the moral issues, including torture; illegal spying on American citizens; grinding the faces of the poor while the rich make untold billions; endless war bringing economic devastation, mutilation, maiming and death to hundreds of thousands, including innocent children; destruction of the entire planet due to poor stewardship and greed--taken as a whole, how can anyone possibly argue that a vote for the Republicans is a vote for life? They are death-dealing cynics who are using religion and believers for their own ends.
Jesus warned us not be gullible about such people when he said "I am sending you out as sheep among wolves; therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves."
If Catholic politicians, to say nothing of voters, were to actually vote in lock-step with the teachings of the Catholic Church, then there would be a very serious question of whether a non-Catholic could, in conscience, ever vote for a Roman Catholic for anything.
And the same would apply to any other denomination or religion. The person I vote for is being hired to represent me and my interests, not the theology of Pastor Humbug or Elder Pefferstuck.
I am a Catholic journalist and I am 100 percent not only on the issue of abortion, but also in opposing torture, war, and the death penalty. The criminalization of young mothers and doctors is NOT the only answer to abortion. Let’s remember that in Latin America the abortion is illegal but there are a high number of clandestine abortions. Where are the churches in that region? A “pro life” president like George W. Bush supported the invasion in Iraq which was declared immoral by our Pope John Paul II and his government was denounced by human rights organization for cases of torture in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. Those who supported him because he is “pro-life” promoted “a culture of life” are also responsible for misleading voters and mix religion and politics. We are not electing a religious leader, we are electing a President who fights against poverty and machismo, promotes sex education and offers access to health and adoptions services to young women. Let’s be more compassionate!
Respectfully,
David Maza
I am a Catholic journalist and I am 100 percent pro life not only on the issue of abortion, but also in opposing torture, war, and the death penalty. The criminalization of young mothers and doctors is NOT the only answer to abortion. Let’s remember that in Latin America the abortion is illegal but there are a high number of clandestine abortions. Where are the churches in that region? A “pro life” president like George W. Bush supported the invasion in Iraq which was declared immoral by our Pope John Paul II and his government was denounced by human rights organization for cases of torture in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. Those who supported him because he is “pro-life” promoted “a culture of life” are also responsible for misleading voters and mix religion and politics. We are not electing a religious leader, we are electing a President who fights against poverty and machismo, promotes sex education and offers access to health and adoptions services to young women. Let’s be more compassionate!
Respectfully,
David Maza
Michele continues to spread McCain and the National Rifht to Life (Douglas Johnson) false statements about the "born alive" issue that has been debunked by factcheck and PolityFact. Both websites provide extensive information and links to supporting facts
Spreading rumors is a sin
Executives in Bush's church wrote a scathing letter to Bush before he declared war in Iraq. They told him the war was unjust and against the teachings of Christ. They said there was no evidence the weapons of mass destruction were pointed at the US or any other country. No country asked for our help.
The church wanted Bush to work with France and some other countrys on the weapons of mass destruction.
President Cheney is also a member of the United Methodist Church (UMC).
Bush never responded to many letters asking for a meeting with the UMC.
The UMC told church members to write Bush with the message:
United Methodist do not torture!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jim Winkler, UMC called for Bush and Cheneys impeachment in 2006.
McCain was on TV and radio within hours of 9/11 pushing war with Iraq, Iran, and Syria.
McCain says he knows how to win wars and get bin Laden, but we have to elect him before he will share his great knowledge.
McCain said the war would be quick and not cost much.
Bush, Cheney, McCain and others have the blood of over 4,000 US troops and millions of innocent citizens of Iraq. They are responsible for the tragically wounded that will live with disabilities and pain for the rest of their life.
It is my opinion that anyone voting for McCain is also responsible for the dead and wounded.
McCain/Palin and other Republicans have no intention of ending abortion. Just like Reagan and Bush with Republican controlled Congress that could have easily made abortion illegal.
Jack Kennedy, a Democrat, in an attempt to persuade people to vote Republican.
I didn't take the video as an endorsement of the Republican candidate at all.
I was seated in University United Methodist Church in Austin, Texas, at the time occasionally attended by George W. Bush, when the minister literally grabbed a bullhorn. He said:
"(Governor) George W. Bush, listen to me, the teaching of the United Methodist Church is that capital punishment is a sin."
Then the minister sounded an air horn. From the pulpit. At the 11 o'clock service.
I believe Bush never attended again.
I'm with Mr. Maza on this one. The trap we get into, however, is one Michelle has insightfully pointed out. We tend to vote for the lesser of two evils. Even Michelle has noted that some Christians will vote for Obama on pro-life grounds because of his support for pro-life policies after birth.
I really believe it's a mistake for Christians to expect the government to work for them. We have all this belief in the miraculous, in the omnipotence of God, and what are we doing? Dithering about which button to push in a ballot booth. The time has long since arrived when pro-life has to be lived out, not politicized.
They are quite clear that the teaching of the church is settled on this issue and that Catholics cannot support pro-abortion candidates.
Bishop Gracida retired more than ten years ago. I don't know how much canonical pull a retired bishop enjoys. Anybody?
WHYY's Radio Times spent an hour today talking about "the Catholic vote." I didn't listen to it all (yet). http://www.whyy.org/podcast/102408_100630.mp3
But someone named Michael Sean Winters had this to say:
"To be clear, it is a minority, Bishop Martino is a minority of the US bishops, in putting out this line, so in-your-face, that abortion's the only issue. There are others, Archbishop Chaput in Denver and Archbishop Burke who used to be the archbishop in St. Louis. But most bishops don't do that. And the bishops as a whole last November issued a document called Faithful Citizenship and it said here's how Catholics should form their conscience to vote. And it talked about a great number of issues. And then, of course, we have the great example of Pope Benedict who spent five days in this country in April who also spoke about a variety of moral concerns that voters should take with them into the voting booth. Certainly he spoke about abortion, but he also spoke about immigration. He also spoke about health care and other social needs."
Which website makes you think of Isaiah 5:30, the Matthew 25 Network? Ho, but you mean Isaiah 5:20!
Incidentally, my conscience is hardly ever clear.
Repost?
the teaching of the church is settled on this issue and that Catholics cannot support pro-abortion candidates.
Bishop Gracida retired more than ten years ago. I don't know how much canonical pull a retired bishop enjoys. Anybody?
WHYY's Radio Times had an hour discussion today on "the Catholic vote." I haven't listened to all of it (yet). http://www.whyy.org/podcast/102408_100630.mp3
Someone named Michael Sean Winters had this to say,
"To be clear, it is a minority, Bishop Martino is a minority of the US bishops, in putting out this line, so in-your-face, that abortion's the only issue. There are others, Archbishop Chaput in Denver and Archbishop Burke who used to be the archbishop in St. Louis. But most bishops don't do that. And the bishops as a whole last November issued a document called Faithful Citizenship and it said here's how Catholics should form their conscience to vote. And it talked about a great number of issues. And then, of course, we have the great example of Pope Benedict who spent five days in this country in April who also spoke about a variety of moral concerns that voters should take with them into the voting booth. Certainly he spoke about abortion, but he also spoke about immigration. He also spoke about health care and other social needs."
Which website made you think of Isaiah 5:30, the Matthew 25 Network? Ho, but it's Isaiah 5:20!
Incidentally, my conscience is almost never clear.
Michael, excellent comment, "This isn't a theocracy and no religious person is obligated to follow the admonitions of a religious leader when they tell them how to vote."
i couldn't agree more.
Michele, can we just get something straight? We are not "pro abortion" and I'm disgusted that you keep dishonestly using this phrase. It trivializes the issue and frankly insults intelligent people on both sides. NOBODY who is pro choice "likes" abortion or thinks it's good. It's a horrible thing to resort to and we don't WANT it to happen any more than you. Please stop the distortions.
We try to see beyond black & white perspectives to consider every life involved. We are extremely PRO LIFE as we consider the mother and her health, the reality of whether the baby would have a decent life, and everyone and everything else involved. We are also very PRO LIFE when it comes to healthcare and lifting up the poor and providing basic rights to all citizens and on and on.
I could say your party is PRO DEATH as it cheers for war, allows poverty to explode, suppresses research in stem cell medicine, roots for the death penalty, bombs abortion clinics, and quells life-saving government safety regulations, but that would be an affront to your intelligence, would it not?
I just wish you and your party would stop using inflammatory and dishonest language when discussing this complex topic. Catholics are not reactionary robots. Real issues can't always be condensed into a bumper sticker.
We are not "pro abortion" and I'm disgusted that you keep dishonestly using this phrase.
I think there is a difference between "pro-choice" and "pro-abortion". I have friends who are "pro-choice", but they have limits...partial birth abortion, late term elective abortion, protection for born alive babies, induced birth abortion - they cannot see where these procedures are good.
Obama, on the other hand, wants any abortion to be available (including these most difficult procedures), for any reason, at any time in the pregnancy AND has indicated that he would not support federal funding for pregnancy crisis centers.
That sounds pretty "pro-abortion" to me.
As for the rest of it...especially stem cell research. Most of us can discern the difference between embryonic stem cell research and adult research. Are you able to? That is an important question - especially since studies with adult stem cells have actually yielded important results and are currently being used in medical treatment, while embryonic stem cell research has seen very limited results.
I absolutely support federal funding for research in the area that has already proven to yield results (and without controversy) - that would be adult stem cell research. And most Christians I know would support the same thing.
bombs abortion clinics..."
Would you please provide a party platform link on that? Because we can support a party platform in regards to the pro-choice Democrats and the much more radical pro-abortion Obama.
Here's another challenge for Jack R. How long ago was the last murder of an abortion clinic worker (I suppose I should limit that to murders that connect with their line of work, since an abortionist who was murdered for some other reason would still be murdered...so...) when was the last murder motivated by the occupation of an abortion clinic worker?
MzEllen, of course I understand the difference between adult and embryonic research. My litany paragraph involving the bombings was intended to give you a taste of marginalization via exaggeration and distortion. I thought that was obvious. When I hear phrases like "baby killer" and "pro abortion" it's hard to take you all seriously, so I threw some red herrings back at you. Read again.
I'd advise you to run a search for "ontheissues obama abortion" and have a look at some facts. (I can't post a link since my comment will just be discarded.)
"On an issue like partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions. I have said so repeatedly. All I've said is we should have a provision to protect the health of the mother, and many of the bills that came before me didn't have that." -- Obama
"In 1997, Obama voted against SB 230, which would have turned doctors into felons by banning so-called partial-birth abortion."
Your claim about late term abortions is misrepresented. Obama voted against these bills because of outrageous provisions like sending the doctors to prison.
Obama realizes that not everyone agrees on everything, which is why he believes the ultimate decisions ought to be left to the humans involved. Let's get the facts straight: Obama doesn't "endorse" abortion. Stop this fallacy. What he endorses is the principle that it is wrong to legislate your personal beliefs onto the rest of the world.
And when you attack him for not supporting crisis centers? You are again relying on the nomenclature of such organizations to incite knee-jerk repulsion and misinformation. Those centers should not receive federal funding as they often flat out lie to women. Too often they locate themselves near clinics that provide abortion services to prey on confused and scared women. While Planned Parenthoods and other clinics that offer abortion services provide women with a plethora of options or point them to government services that can help them if these women choose to carry a pregnancy to term, whether that means adoption or parenting a child. On the other hand, CPCs often grossly and knowingly misrepresent both abortion and pregnancy. (Again, run a search for "Get Real! Should I Visit a Crisis Pregnancy Center?") This is why he doesn't support funding them.
What you are doing, again, is removing context to gain cheap political points and incite ill-founded hatred. You need to take a broader and more honest look at things.
What I do is relate a deeply held belief. Some of us call that a difference of opinion.
Jack R, you can put up to 2 links in a comment before it goes into a moderation que.
"On an issue like partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions. I have said so repeatedly. All I've said is we should have a provision to protect the health of the mother, and many of the bills that came before me didn't have that." -- Obama
That's rich...considering that he pledged to Planned Parenthood that the first thing he would do as president would be to sign the FOCA - which would supersede all of the state laws.
"To take the sum of the two facts, we can paraphrase..."Absolutely, I believe the states can outlaw abortion..and it won't matter because if I'm elected, I'll sign a federal law that will overturn them anyway.
MzEllen, and others here and around the country - I respect your beliefs. I truly do. I cannot prove you "wrong" because what you are saying is defensible. However, so are other people's' beliefs, like Jack's and women around the world. I am an evolutionary biologist, so I also see things very differently than you do.
This is why I think you really need to understand that "separation of church and state" is not just a liberal wish. It's in the Constitution. What you are arguing essentially comes down a deep, personal religious feeling, which, while understandable, cannot and should not be leveraged on the entire country. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what America was founded on. The irony is that people like you think that the persecutors are those on the left, when in fact it is quite the opposite.
mzellen, this is one of those times where your name calling is, indeed, offensive to others. i guess you can't go on pretending otherwise anymore.
We can't allow these abortions to occur! The priests need more bodies to fondle in their spare time! Then we need to put the kid to death when he grows up to commit his own sexual offenses! Pro life!
AR - Im not calling anybody here stupid, evil, etc. I'm describing a political position - a politician supporting the right of a woman to kill the entity in her womb at ANY point for ANY reason, using ANY method.
That is different than a pro-choice politician who generally supports abortion rights, but sees a good for society in setting reasonable limits.
the "Freedom of Choice Act" would federalize abortion laws, superseding state laws, making Obama's statement about states voting to limit partial birth abortion meaningless if he is elected.
I very seldom see "pro-abortion" politicians - or anybody for that matter. I firmly believe Obama is one of the few.
AR - what name did I call somebody commenting here? Or is just having an opinion about a politician who gets a 100% NARAL rating three years running an offense. I get the feeling that somebody who HAS a conservative opinion is offensive to you.
I can only say that I'm very disappointed in the Obama supporting Catholics that I know.
"Michele continues to spread McCain and the National Rifht to Life (Douglas Johnson) false statements about the "born alive" issue that has been debunked by factcheck and PolityFact. Both websites provide extensive information and links to supporting facts"
Sorry but it hasn't been debunked and factcheck is just as partisan as an other blog run by MSM reporters. Calling yourself factcheck is easy, actually getting it right is another thing.
Obama supports infanticide (this has been proven) of a baby who survives an abortion.
Oh...by the way...do you know who owns factcheck.org?
The Annenberg foundation (remember the "Annenberg Challenge"?)
From what I've read (including articles on this site), Obama is working hard to find points of compromise between the pro-life and pro-choice camps.
It seems to me that there's a difference between fighting to outlaw abortions and working to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. You can make it illegal, but you've only whitewashed the problem (to use a biblical metaphor) that doesn't get at the heart of the matter. As Christians, we should be less concerned over whether abortion is legal and more concerned over why abortion is wanted in the first place.
I fear too many of us in the church believe that by making abortion illegal, we've done what God asks. We should be putting our efforts towards making abortion obsolete, not illegal.
Please go to the Team Sarah website and join.
Then look
at the group
Catholics for Sarah where there are Many discussions, links and prayers about
Respect for Life.
So, no Catholic can, in good conscience, vote for Obama, eh? I wonder...can any Catholic, in good conscience, listen to anything coming from a group of men who, if they were not pedophiles themselves, were pedophile enablers? Can a group of men who participated in or tolerated such an atrocity ever be trusted in any area?
non-metaphysical stephen: thank you for your comment. I agree that the myopic focus to "overturn Roe" is not really on point. If I wave my magic Supreme Court wand and overturn Roe tomorrow, abortion would still be legal in all states. Granted a number of states would outlaw abortion quickly. But, as long as abortion is legal in some states, we've accomplished little. What are the chances of getting abortion made illegal in California, Massachusetts, or New York? The only winner in this scenario is Greyhound because they'll be selling a ton of tickets as young, pregnant women travel out of state to have abortions.
Why did abortions decline in the Clinton years and surge in the Bush years? Funding social and health programs is both a more compassionate and effective answer to the blight of abortion.
Let's stop trying to feel good and holy about ourselves and start focusing on how we reduce abortions.
Regardless of how we proceed, let's all keep the rhetoric reasonable and respectful - we all need eachother to solve this.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.