Comments on: Can A Catholic Still Vote For Him… Even Now?

By: Rich

Rich — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 04:09:02 +0000

“we sometimes feel ‘politically homeless,’ alienated from polarized politics and false choices that ask us to choose between defense of the unborn and protection of the poor, between Catholic moral principles and the church’s social teaching, between promotion of economic justice and protection of religious liberty.” – John Carr.

Your article would have been easier to hear if it really wasn’t just recycling your theme to vote GOP(Guess Omar’s Politics)?

Just a Reminder, the GOP Platform is not Catholic Social Teaching, nor is either platform really accomplished when the the party wins. There is absolutely no surety that Romney will effect a change in abortion laws, there is no proof that he would even have the political will to attempt to do so. He has no real history that shows he will, and it may be a false argument to say that he would be “better” than Obama from a legal perspective.
When you add in you caveats that you need not be as principled against torture, and that it may be OK for people to go hungry. I doubt any true pro-life person would tolerate children in poverty not receiving help they not only need, but that Justice demands they receive.
Lord when did we see you hungry, yet undeserving of tax supported services.
A vote for any candidate is not such a simplistic decision, which is why Catholics have always brought prayer and faith into the polling stations. Thankfully many of us have used prudence and conscience in faithfully exercising this responsibility for many years, even without your directions. It is surprising to that anyone would think this is new, or that anyone would assume that Catholics have not practiced this in their lives. The only thing really new is trying to use Catholic thought to end needed services without having good programs ready to set up in their place.

By: Joe M

Joe M — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 07:57:43 +0000

What Common Good does a welfare program serve if its cost causes more people to require a welfare program to get by?

By: Joe M

Joe M — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 07:49:29 +0000

patback. You make a curious claim. Can you please provide a breakdown of the points that Omar makes that can be construed to mean anyone should be attacked or ostracized?

By: Omar Gutierrez

Omar Gutierrez — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 02:09:53 +0000

Let’s be clear about some facts Kevin. First, if the pope is always against cutting food stamps then funding it by 15 gazillion dollars is not a problem right? Or is there a limit to how much we should spend on food stamps. If there is one, then what the pope has said is that the experts in the field ought to be the ones making that decision on the level of prudence. Do you agree with that? Or would you argue that the pope only believes Democratic experts are real experts? Second, the cuts were to increases. Third, despite unemployment having gone down during the last two years, enrollment in food stamps has gone up. There is something significantly wrong with the system Kevin. Should we just ignore that? Simplistic arguments like yours may be well-intentioned but they are simple and do not take into account a) the fullness of the Church’s social teaching, and b) reality.

By: Omar Gutierrez

Omar Gutierrez — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 02:04:24 +0000

TTT, it would also seem to leave out racism and genocide and other things, but I don’t think I need to list them all to avoid the kind of brutish, lets-cut-them-all-off logic of Randall. Also, though Romney is no where near my ideal candidate and certainly not my favorite during the primary, his defense of marriage and his fiscal responsibility make him heads and shoulders a better candidate than Obama. You didn’t say this, I know, but I get tired of the there’s-no-real-difference meme out there. There are stark differences, and those differences matter. Thanks for commenting.

By: Omar Gutierrez

Omar Gutierrez — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 00:16:19 +0000

Okay Randall, et al. I didn’t say one couldn’t “judge their opinion.” Of course you can. I said you cannot judge them, and words like “attack” and “ostracize” labels like “Catholycs” and such are judgments not of opinion but about the heart. There are a million and one reasons why someone would vote for Obama: from misinformation, to poor formation, to some trauma, what have you. But I’ll not judge them and say they should be ostracized from the Church after one conversation.

By: TAC

TAC — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 21:55:50 +0000

I think the easiest way for me to look at any Catholic who voted for Obama in 08, is to say, Since Obama has been in office, every person who voted for him is directly responsible for the murder of every child lost to abortion. And I will pray hard for their salvation. As Catholics there is no choice other than life, His will be done,….NOT ours! As a Catholic we can not pick and choose our morals and values like produce in the grocery store. There is only God’s law, and there is no argument with God that any man will win when it involves the sanctity of life.It’s God’s way or you’re on the way to Hell’s way

By: Antonio A. Badilla

Antonio A. Badilla — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 20:35:50 +0000

Are you actually telling us that a nation, particularly a world power like the United States, does not have the right to have a well-funded military because, somehow, that would be in violation of the Church’s social justice?
Can you point out “where” in any social church document, it “literally” states food stamps have to be given to those in need? Have you ever heard of the principle of subsidiarity? Have you ever heard of what “prudential judgment” means in the Catholic Church?

By: Antonio A. Badilla

Antonio A. Badilla — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 20:29:36 +0000

No, this time the bishops did what they had to do, protest a government bent on telling the Church what to do. If one works in a Catholic institution, one can’t expect that insurance cover that which the Church considers immoral. If a person, be he or she Catholic or not, does not like that arrangement, he or she is free to work for a non-Catholic institution.
The fact is that Obama with his HH mandate wants the Church to pay for abortion in its own medical institutions. Some view the separation between Church and State as meaning we Catholics and people of other faiths should not have a say in the public square. Many of us view it correctly, the State has no business getting into the Church’s business, nor can the Church tell the government what to do, except in moral matters when the Church has no choice but to speak its mind through the bishops.

By: TTT

TTT — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 19:28:20 +0000

Omar, I appreciate your responses and reasoned discourse. I think the original article comes across as a bit too much like what Randall is erroneously suggesting. Your interpretation of “the protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death” seems to leave out several issues like torture which is very convenient for anyone lobbying for a Republican. I pray that we don’t elect Obama but Romney is only marginally better if at all.