Life, Faith, Family: Vote Your Conscience »
Posted By ZiegfeldGirl 1 year, 2 months ago in ReligionThe things at stake in this election are more important than bracelets, airplanes and eye glasses.
Read Full Story at catholicvote.com »
799 Views Share Story 24 Comments Report
Submitted By:
ZiegfeldGirl
"No, we tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco." ~Governor Sarah Palin ...
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 89 (view all)
-
45%
Nixie1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Great video! This touches on one of my biggest problems with Obama, his opposition of the Born Alive Act. It's just sick to intentionally let a baby die after it is "born". Even by liberal definitions of when humanity begins, ie. at first breath, that is a living person you are killing. Let them be put up for adoption, but do something. Ask someone who grew up in an American orphange, if they would rather they had been killed. I'm betting you wouldn't get any more than if you asked the everage angst-ridden teenager.
Reply-
60%
willottica1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama's opposition to the Born Alive Act was because there's no need for a new law, since the law already states that killing or neglecting a born, breathing infant is illegal.
Reply
So what would the Act do?
Why pass a new law when the old one already covers it?
The Act would force 2 doctors to be present for every abortion, one who performs the abortion, and I would assume the second would have to be morally opposed to abortion in order to qualify to 'supervise' or 'intervene' in case of a live birth. If the 2nd is morally opposed, how are you going to get him to supervise the 99.99% of successful abortions that DON'T result in a live birth? -
-
-
-
-
58%
Goppy1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What I like about this topic is the fact that it points out THE crux of the the Modern Republican Party.
Reply
And that is ABORTION.
When I talk to my fellow Christian Conservatives, they lay it on the line in the frankest of terms. But it's not JUST Abortion that is the agenda of Christian Conservatives. There are five main elements.
This is the Essence of What Christian Conservatives want.
1) Reverse Roe V. Wade
2) Expand Executive Power
3) End Racial Preferences
4) Faster Executions
5) Promote Introduction of Religion into Public Schools
That's it. That IS the Christian Conservative agenda.
This is what they are fighting for.
---
Continued.
-
-
68%
Bkumm1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ah yes, the appeal to emotion.
Reply
Is the Catholic Church willing to foot the bill for the hundreds of thousands of unwanted children? Will the Church feed, clothe and educate the hundreds of thousands of unwanted children? Will the Church support those families that do not want children and choose to give them up for adoption? Will the Catholic Church deny the rights of individuals based on sexual preference, even when those individuals may want children to adopt, but are unable to?
It would be a wonderful thing if the world were a place of black and white. It isn't.
I do not support abortion, but I do support choice. I do support homosexual marriage. I'm appalled by the inference in this piece that if you are a Catholic you must vote against those who are trying to see the world as it is, rather than as we wish it would be.-
40%
memestryker1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bkumm, I agree whole-heartedly. I am not "pro-abortion"--I want to limit the number of unwanted pregnancies through birth control, the morning after pill, or early term abortions, so most women carrying healthy fetuses will choose to carry them to term. I strongly support abortion for life/health of the mother, incest, or defect of the fetus. I also see it as a very personal issue, based on religious belief, and I think government needs to stay out of it beyond requiring they be performed by a trained individual.
Reply
I support homosexuals' right to form unions, although I would prefer they not use the word "marriage," which is already defined as a union between a man and a woman in this culture's common usage and many laws. I think polygamists and many who would seek to place women in abusive situations would like to loosen the definition for destructive purposes that have nothing to do with gay rights. I think it's an assault on the sensibilities of those who strongly oppose it to adopt that particular word (I have a lot of very religious relatives who are Catholic, various Protestant, evangelical, etc. and I respect their freedom of religion).
-
-
60%
nostalgia1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I'm appalled by the inference in this piece that if you are a Catholic you must vote against those who are trying to see the world as it is, rather than as we wish it would be."
Reply
Would you have given that advice to Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela or Mahatma Gandhi
Those men saw the world as it was but worked to make it what they wished it to be
They stood on principle
As the saying goes: "You've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything"-
62%
Bkumm1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
None of the men you mentioned did it as a function of their religions. MLK did not say that racism was a function of not being a Christian. He did say that "good" Christians should not be racist, but he did not say that you had to oppose racism to be a Christian. Further, when he did use his religion as a function of his struggle for equality he included the entire Christian faith and not just his little part of it.
Reply
Nelson Mandela was similar. Gandhi, to my knowledge, was fighting some of the issues of his faith at least as much as he was fighting the British.
To stand on principle is one thing, but if the principle is that all life is sacred then the Catholic Church should be encouraging its members to not join the military or support the death penalty. They should be encouraging their members to be on the front lines against genocides like Rwanda and Darfur. They should be standing arm in arm with the Palestinians AND the Israelis in their struggle. And there are literally hundreds of places where they could make a difference in the suffering and death of people that are already born.
Yet, they choose to issue a statement dealing with abortion and the "strengthening of marriage" within the US during a political season.
If they want to "stand on principle" then they should do it. Otherwise it's just a convenient excuse.
-
-
-
-
50%
nostalgia1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually the Catholic church has a much more consistant stand on "prolife" issues than those who are "pro-choice"
Reply
Catholic church - against abortion and against the death penalty
Pro-choice: pro-abortion but against the death penaly no matter what the crime
How do you explain that???
A fetus has committed no crime. In fact was conceived based upon the choice of 2 other people. A criminal facing the death penalty made a choice - a very poor one and is facing the consequences of their own actions
-
-
50%
moxxxxxxxxxx1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Vote your conscience.
Reply
War kills.
Guns kill.
Lack of health care kills.
Insurance Companies denying claims kills.
Homelessness and foreclosures kills.
Poor nutrition kills.
Greed of the wealthy elite and corporate scandals kills.
Lack of education kills.-
56%
Goppy1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There you have it.
Reply
This commenter understands the essential message that Jesus Christ taught.
Kindness, Love, Peace, Consideration for the needs of Children.
What to the Modern Christian Conservatives stand for?
War,
Fighting to permit the President to LIE to go to war,
Keeping Children from getting Health Care,
Fighting for the Rights of Polluters,
Fighting for the Rights of Insurance Companies,
Fighting for the Wealthy,
Fighting for Quicker Executions,
Fighting to ensure that Women have the 'Right to Die' in Childbirth.
Anyone in their right minds can see this agenda and can tell instantly that Modern 'so-called' Christian Conservatives have completely PERVERTED everything about the Beautiful Message that was given to us by Jesus Christ.
If you don't believe that Modern Christians have perverted Jesus' teachings ... just look ... somebody actually 'negd' moxxxxxxx's comment.
It's obvious.
Christian Conservatives is a NAME ... a NAME only ... it has no actual bearing on Christianity. It's a NAME that is being used as the Moniker for Angry, Narrow Minded, War Loving, Bigoted, people ... with an interest in politics.
That's it.
-
-
67%
RickyDawkins1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Four fallacies in Pro-Zygote arguments:
Reply
The self-styled "pro-life" battalions are in reality waging war on women. Their hypocrisy becomes obvious once their contentions are stripped of emotional rhetoric and analyzed dispassionately and realistically.
Argument#1: Children's lives are at stake. Children's? No. Only the zygote-embryo-fetus stages. Once they leave the womb to become, as one wag suggested, predead instead of preborn, the legislators who forced their births vote overwhelmingly against every measure that would provide food, medicine, safety, and good schools they need to thrive.
Inconsistent? It would be if they cared two hoots about the children. They don't. They use compulsory pregnancy as an effective way to oppress women, especially those who are poor, exhausted, and unable to ease their children's suffering. Theologically, this makes perfect sense. God's curse on Eve for sin in Eden (presumable having sex) has been handed down to all her daughters. The more the woman suffers, then, the better.
Argument #2: God alone gives life and takes it away. When a woman conceives after a vicious rape, or an 11-- year-old by the father who's abused her for years, why, this is the work of a gracious god.
Yet this same life-giving god allows half or more of all conceptions to abort spontaneously. It follows, surely, that if abortion is murder and spontaneous abortion is from God, then He has committed mass murder on a scale greater than all the abortion providers combined.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3861/is_20... -
63%
RickyDawkins1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Argument #3: Christians have always upheld the sanctity of life. They have? Christian history is drenched in blood and littered with corpses. The Albigensian crusade alone claimed an estimated million lives and devastated most of France. Pope Gregory VII thundered, "Cursed be the man who holds back his sword from shedding blood." Raymond of Aguilers, chronicling the gore crusaders spilled in Jerusalem, enthused, "It was a just and marvelous judgment of god, that this place should be filled with the blood of unbelievers."
Reply
This isn't just ancient history. The tradition continues today, with atrocities and bloodletting in Ireland, Bosnia, and wherever religious sects battle each other.
Argument #4: Abortion slaughters "the innocent unborn." In other ages, anyone who uttered such rank heresy would have faced rack and stake. The whole point of Christianity, its raison d'etre, is that because original sin is transmitted to every zygote at the instant of fertilization, all humans are vile, depraved, loathesome, irredeemable except through faith in Jesus, which alone can snatch them from eternal damnation and hellfire. Since babies who do not in time dump their sins on Jesus are doomed to perpetual, hideous agony, wouldn't it be more merciful if they'd never been born?
Not that all children wait until death to suffer. Fifteen million of them, five and under, die every year after lives that were hell on earth. Countless unwanted urchins run wild in city slums. Countless unwanted little girls are sold into prostitution. Where are the "pro-life" contingents for them?
How pro-life is it to prize every fetus above the mother and reduce her to an animated carrying case for it? To abandon newborns to poverty, hunger, neglect, sickness, brutality? To vandalize and bomb family planning clinics, threaten them with anthrax, harass clients, and murder staff? To instruct a husband with AIDS that it is more sinful to use a condom than to protect is wife from the disease? To compel a woman carrying a grotesque malformed fetus, with no chance to survive, to go to term rather than undergo the procedure, used only in dire emergencies, which fanatics, in incendiary and dishonest language, label "partial birth abortion," although only thus can she survive to produce other children?
The god the pro-zygote zealots have created in their own image is anything but pro-life. It is progestation and rabidly anti-female. It belongs in the religious trash bin with other savage gods that exacted human sacrifice and encouraged murderous assaults on other human beings from their worshippers.
Adherents of a pro-life god would promote birth control in a world where the population is increasing exponentially and threateningly. They would see to it that society provides for children who are already here and for the mothers who nurture them.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3861/is_20... -
-
NixieComment removed: Spam
-
40%
Nixie1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Corruption, lies, death, theft."
Reply
Yeah, sounds like Obama:
"Corruption, lies, death, theft."
Yeah, sounds like Obama:
Corruption- http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/749138...
-
-
40%
Natureboy1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am concerned for the rights of the born.
Reply
The US violated the "right to life" of at least a million Iraqis over the past couple of decades by terminating their lives via bombs and bullets. And lets not forget the depleted uranium that will be causing birth defects in the region for the next thousand years.
Of course, the catholic church doesn't give a tin sh!t about the rights of the born. they are more than glad for young women and men to be sent off to fight, kill and die in this foolish "holy war" in the middle east.
The Catholic Church is all about the $$$ and the social control. And that's why they want to get right-wingers in office.-
40%
Goppy1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
~ """ The Catholic Church is all about the $$$ and the social control. And that's why they want to get right-wingers in office.""" ~
Reply
Natureboy ... maybe you can say this about the Catholic Hierarchy ... but a large percentage of Catholics are very focused on Peace and Justice.
This, after all was the message of Jesus .... and Jesus is the inspiration of the Christian faith.
(Although many would falsely have you believe that the Old Testament is the inspiration of the Christian faith.) -
33%
willottica1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hey, I'm a left-winger. And I feel quite supported by my Catholic Church... btw, I lost the election handliy. Unfortunately, I live in the "reddest state" in Canada, and there wasn't much hope. It was also my first time, and I managed my own campaign, my own volunteers, my own finances and materials, all while working full-time and volunteering 12 hours per week in Community Theatre.
Reply
I think the $$$ and control part of the Church, at least here in Canada, is mostly restricted to the upper echelons (Bishop and higher). All the priests and chaplains I have met have been very much "men of the cloth", meaning that seem to practice the humble life that they preach.
-
-
0%
moxxxxxxxxxx1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Jesus was a liberal!!! He preached to take of children, the poor, the sick, the imprisoned. The wealthy SHOULD share the wealth with those in need.
Reply
Jesus wouldn't deny anyone healthcare, housing, food, clothing.
Jesus would not shoot another human being in the act of war or give a lethal injection to a criminal.
Unfortunatley the sanctity of human life begins and end in the uterus according to one issue prolife voters.-
0%
moxxxxxxxxxx1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
...and since the wealthy won't share on their own like Jesus commanded they have to be taxed.
Reply
Going against Jesus and giving tax breaks to the wealthy in hopes that the weath would trickle down didn't work either.
We have to take care of our brothers and sisters as Jesus told us to do. Robinhood had to take the lead now it's the tax man's turn.
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.