In a few days, most of us will go vote for our next
president of the United States. So how
do we choose between candidates? What
are the criteria that we are to use in determining who is best for the job? Our leaders in the faith answer…
Archbishop of Baltimore mentioned what we are to ask
ourselves when deciding. He said: “The question to ask is this: Are any of the
candidates of either party, or independents, standing for something that is
intrinsically evil, evil no matter what the circumstances?”
We find in the words of another Archbishop that people “who are practicing Catholics cannot have
alternate views on abortion. Such
foundational issues have a huge impact, and it’s important that Catholics make
those distinctions. A person may be
right on a lot of secondary issues but wrong on the foundational issues. And if that’s the case, it would be very
difficult for a Catholic to vote for someone who, for example, favors unlimited
access to abortion… undermines the meaning of marriage or supports policies
that really undermine the foundation of our culture.”
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/archbishop-chaput-be-catholic-before-you-are-democrat-or-republican/
Archbishop Chaput also tells us “So can a Catholic in good conscience vote for a pro-choice candidate?
The answer is: I can’t, and I won’t. But I do know some serious
Catholics—people whom I admire—who may. I think their reasoning is mistaken,
but at least they sincerely struggle with the abortion issue, and it causes
them real pain. And most important: They don’t keep quiet about it; they don’t
give up; they keep lobbying their party and their representatives to change
their pro-abortion views and protect the unborn. Catholics can vote for
pro-choice candidates if they vote for them despite - not because of - their
pro-choice views. But [Catholics who
support ‘pro-choice’ candidates] also need a compelling proportionate reason to
justify it."
The passage following that sentence continued, "What is a ‘proportionate’ reason when it comes to the abortion issue?
It’s the kind of reason we will be able to explain, with a clean heart, to the
victims of abortion when we meet them face to face in the next life - which we
most certainly will. If we’re confident that these victims will accept our
motives as something more than an alibi, then we can proceed."
If the only two candidates to vote for can both be labeled
pro-abortion then Cardinal Burke, prefect
of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura (the Vatican's highest
court) said : “You may in some
circumstances, where you don’t have any candidate who is proposing to eliminate
all abortion, choose the candidate who will most limit this grave evil in our
country.” http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2010/oct/10102806)
In fact, in a recent letter Bishop Ricken of Green Bay stated
that the church has a responsibility to speak out regarding moral issues,
especially on those issues that impact the “common good” and the “dignity of
the human person.”
The bishop identified abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem
cell research, human cloning, and homosexual “marriage” as non-negotiables. The Bishop then stated:
Not being American I look at all this from a distance, but... does either candidate have the power and/or willingness to ACTUALLY change anything about abortion? I suspect not, thus its really not an issue at all.
ReplyDeleteJohn wrote:"Not being American I look at all this from a distance, but... does either candidate have the power and/or willingness to ACTUALLY change anything about abortion? I suspect not..."
ReplyDeleteHi John,
Actually, the President of the United States is the one who nominates Supreme Court Justices... the next president will likely nominate at least one or two to the bench, and just one more could help overrule Roe v. Wade and put abortion decisions back to state level control (where it belongs). So yes, the candidates DO make a difference in this election.
In JMJ,
Scott<<<
Let's not forget that the President also makes policies. The first thing he did after being installed into office is to rescind the Mexico City Policy which prohibited the government from funding for abortions overseas. That alone is grounds enough to replace with someone who would reinstitute it.
ReplyDeleteWhy should we (United States citizens) be paying for abortions in other countries for ANY reason? How ANYONE, even Democrats, can support rescinding this is beyond me!
ReplyDeleteThe saddest part of the 2012 election is the fact that if Catholics alone had voted in block against those who support abortion - President Obama would NOT be in for a second term!
ReplyDeleteFor some interesting maps, look at my political blog too:
http://a2zpolitics.blogspot.com/2012/11/election-maps-to-make-you-say-hmmm.html
As it turns out the biggest loser in this election was President Obama! He received nearly 10 million fewer votes in 2012 than he did in 2008! That being said, Governor Romney received nearly 3 million fewer votes than McCain did in 2008. The startling fact is that if Romney had all of McCain's votes - he would have won, at least in the popular vote (maybe not in electoral votes, they're still trying to figure that part out). Romney COULD have won this - IF the Republicans who supported McCain had supported Romney the same way. It was ultimately those who stayed home who passively decided this election. Sad, but true.
ReplyDelete