Obama & the Catholics

He’s taking a hit.

According to the latest Pew poll, the president is down eight percentage points with Catholics.

As he should be. Among other things, the HHS Mandate affects the Catholic business owner, as much as a cardinal with charge of a chancery building or a religious sister working at a Catholic school. (A point the bishops have been clarifying in point out.)

According to the poll, Mitt Romney is now at 57 percent with White Catholic registered voters.

Joe Biden is vice president in no small part to his Scranton altar-boy cred. It’s going to take more than Biden’s nostalgia – or other “ardent, practicing Catholic” propaganda cover — to explain away this administration’s hostility to religious liberty as we’ve known it.



  • Arlene B. Muller

    I agree that an effective poll should be done of ALL Catholics, and if they wish to break it down by gender, race, etc. this breakdown can and should be reported as well.

    I am hoping that more and more Catholics will become disenchanted with Obama, not only because of his extreme pro-abortion stand (which I think should be an obvious “no brainer”, but unfortunately even some very decent and intelligent Catholics apparently do not recognize or consider significant enough, in view of issues like the economy and war) but especially now that the Obama administration has taken an arrogant position by insisting via the HHS mandate that Catholics violate Church teaching and our conscience.

    I am still hoping that by some miracle Rick Santorum will either be our Republican candidate or have substantial input and play a substantial role in a Republican administration.

    It is true that many Catholics are not concerned about the contraception issue and not sufficiently concerned (in my opinion) about the abortion issue and the religious rights issue. On the other hand, even many pro-life Catholics side with Democrats and liberals because of social justice issues and still believe (whether correctly or incorrectly) that Democrats and Liberals have greater compassion for the poor and unmarginalized. Mitt Romney is a rich capitalist. Some Catholics have voted for Romney in the Republican primary because he is more liberal–I would have hoped that Rick Santorum could have cornered not only the Evangelical vote but the “Catholic vote” (if there really is such a thing). But if Romney turns out to be the Republican candidate, as predicted, I think that in order to win Catholics effectively he will need to show that he has a compassionate and understanding heart for poor people and for working people and will put that compassionate understanding into action rather than merely being a white capitalist Republican alternative to Obama. Except for taking a rather hard line on illegal immigration, Rick Santorum clearly conveys a compassionate and understanding heart and a plan to help working people and that he is one of us. We need a President who is genuinely pro-life who has “heart”. Can Romney demonstrate that he has one?

  • Pingback: patheos notre dame abortion obama | ThePulp.it

  • Mike

    Actually at the same Catholic Bishop Conference you linked to in your post there is a scathing criticism of Republican policy.

    In it they state:

    1.Every budget decision should be assessed by whether it protects or threatens human life and dignity.

    2.A central moral measure of any budget proposal is how it affects “the least of these” (Matthew 25). The needs of those who are hungry and homeless, without work or in poverty should come first.

    3.Government and other institutions have a shared responsibility to promote the common good of all, especially ordinary workers and families who struggle to live in dignity in difficult economic times…

    Then they note:

    “Just solutions, however, must require shared sacrifice by all, including RAISING ADEQUATE REVENUE, ELIMINATING UNNECESSARY MILITARY SPENDING and other spending, and fairly addressing the long-term costs of health insurance and retirement programs.

    And they also note: “The House-passed budget resolution fails to meet these moral criteria.” Bishop Blaire also wrote that cuts to nutrition programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP- food stamps) and the Child Tax Credit (CTC) will hurt hungry children, poor families, low-income workers and other vulnerable people. Additionally, he wrote that if cuts to the federal budget need to be made, SAVINGS SHOULD FIRST BE FOUND IN PROGRAMS THAT TARGET MORE AFFLUENT AND POWERFUL INTERESTS.”

    Ouch, that was a scathing rebuttal of the core of the Republican Party’s values!

    • Cheryl

      First, human life and dignity are better protected with jobs which provide them, not becoming dependent on society and robbed of the self respect of earning your way. Therefore, it follows that providing an environment which provides those jobs is the first moral imperative. The Obama administration is an absolute failure at that. Shared sacrifice should equate with shared effort. Eliminating unnecessary military spending should be a simple matter of cutting the landscaping and cafeteria budgets of hundreds of military bases. Nothing hurts hungry children and poor families like being robbed of the dignity of honest work for honest pay. The core of republican values is getting able people working and providing for themselves rather than the indignity of being dependent on society to take care of them. Jesus never meant for us to care for every able bodies person. He called on us to care for the disabled and sick, and mentally ill. He asked us to pay a fair wage for a fair days work. Democrats would create a nanny state that makes a large segment of society dependent and lacking the self-respect of providing for themselves and their loved ones. There is no honor in that.

      • Mike

        Cheryl: The core values of the Republican Party were taken to task by the U.S. Bishops’ Conference statements. The author of this blog used their words on contraception to show a division between the church and Obama. But that same body along with much of church teaching is in direct contradiction to the core of the Republican Party’s ideology.

        The statement by the Bishops says for example: *”Government and other institutions have a shared responsibility to promote the common good of all, especially ordinary workers and families who struggle to live in dignity in difficult economic times.” *they mention RAISING ADEQUATE REVENUE, ELIMINATING UNNECESSARY MILITARY SPENDING.*They mention “SAVINGS SHOULD FIRST BE FOUND IN PROGRAMS THAT TARGET MORE AFFLUENT AND POWERFUL INTERESTS.” The Bishops also list a number of government programs that help the poor that should not be cut. How is that Republican???!!!

        • Shawn

          Catholics must vote to uphold the dignity of life and vote to reject moral evil first and foremost.


          • Mike

            Shawn: The Bishops mentioned that too when bashing the Republican budget: “Government and other institutions have a shared responsibility to promote the common good of all, especially ordinary workers and families who struggle to live in DIGNITY in difficult economic times.”

          • Djohn

            Obama is a fascist and a Child killer.

            Romney is a more moderate fascist and a reformed child killer.

            Those choices suck, but those are likely to be our choices…

            Reformed child killer wins over active child killer.
            Everything else is secondary.

          • Mike

            Djohn: how is Obama a fascist? He’s a black guy, collaborating with all major religions and skin colors. Do you really think that he’s going to start rounding up Jews and communists and send them to the gas ovens? It’s ok you don’t like somebody but applying the label of Hitler’s ideology would be silly if it weren’t so sad.

          • Djohn

            Mike I have already explained this to you in great detail on another thread. Being a fascist has nothing to do with your skin color. Fascism is an economic ideology/system. As i have already, repeatedly, explained to you, Obama’s policies are almost perfectly ideologically fascist. Particularly the Healthcare plan. Fascist does not mean Nazi, the Nazi’s were fascist, all fascist are not Nazi’s.

            Fascism does have a tendency embrace a us vs them mentality in an effort to motivate its followers, Obama has certainly done that, Us does not have to be a racial group. As for rounding people up, The NDAA did give him that legal authority, to detain and even kill American citizens without trial…. but of course he’ll never do that, will he.

          • Mike

            Djohn: Explain all you want, you are trying to tar somebody with the label fascism that doesn’t deserve it. We don’t hate Hitler because of the Autobahn he is responsible for, it’s because of all the people he had killed and the wars he waged. Stop trying to label people you don’t like Nazis and Fascists. Especially the historic victims of those totalitarian ideologies!

          • Djohn

            I have not called Obama or Romney a Nazi, not anywhere. I have called them both Fascist because that is what they are. Fascism is a system of economics where private enterprise and private property is subject to the control of the state and used for the states purposes, but not, as in a communist or traditional socialist system confiscated. Usually, a fascist is content to simply co-opt private property for the states use, and usually, they pay quite well, making the private owners quite wealthy as they use government force to make everyone purchase the private companies product.

            Fascist direct private property to serve the state interest, but they don’t take it.

            This is exactly what the healthcare plan does, it is classic fascist economics. Romney too instituted fascist policies while governor, however, as I said, he is more moderate, as he at least believes that states should not be subjected to fascist policies without their consent.

            Again I never said anything about Hitler, except when you brought him up. As for being totalitarian, I think our country is headed that way, Obama is part of that movement, but it didn’t start with him, nor do I think Romney will stop it, Santorum wouldn’t have stopped it either, he just would have focused it in a different way.
            I look at the two parties like this.
            Their is the party that publicly and directly advocates killing babies, AND intends to take basically all the major freedoms away in a reasonably quick manner.

            Then there is the other party, which does not advocate killing babies and intends to take basically all the major freedoms away in a slow manner.

            This year both of the parties candidates are basically fascist- one is a more left fascist than the other one.

            If those are my choices, then I’ll choose the second party.

          • Matt

            I’m with you Djohn. I hate that Romney is a Wall Street insider with $250 million in networth, most of it in off shore tax havens, and I just don’t trust him one bit, he feels really disconnected from the struggles of the middle and working class, but after all is said and done as a lifelong Catholic I have to vote according to who is pro-life, so I guess I’m voting for Romney, sigh.

        • Joe M

          Mike. The Bishops, with all due respect, are not economists. How best to raise revenue is a matter of prudential judgment. — Lets compare plans for raising revenue. Obama is focused on the Buffet Rule. A plan that, if enacted, would raise less than 1% of a years budget. Republicans are focused on growth policies. A 2% increase of GDP over the low Obama levels would introduce over 300 trillion US dollars into our economy. This isn’t something that is out of reach since the historical average rate of growth is 5% while growth under Obama has been around 2%. Ryan’s plan doesn’t seek to remove the safety net. It seeks to save the safety net by making it sustainable.

          • Joe M

            Whoops. That should be 300 billion rather than 300 trillion. Just a small rounding error.

  • Leticia Velasquez

    Considering the contempt with which Catholic beliefs are treated by the Obama Administration, he should have lost more points, but then again, when it comes to contraception, Obama has about the same respect for official Catholic teaching as most Catholics do.

  • Mike

    Republicans and Catholics have a problem too:

    “In particular, the bishops spoke out loudly against the budget blueprint passed by the House last month, as well as legislation passing through committees that would turn spending cuts into reality through changes to social welfare programs.

    “Major reductions at this time of economic turmoil and rising poverty will hurt hungry, poor and vulnerable people in our nation and around the world,” the Rev. Stephen Blaire, bishop of Stockton, Calif., and the Rev. Richard E. Pates, bishop of Des Moines, wrote for the conference. “A just spending bill cannot rely on disproportionate cuts in essential services to the poor and vulnerable persons; it requires shared sacrifice by all.””

  • Dr. sipmac

    I wonder why Obama still has that 57% of Catholics…

    • Arnold

      No, Romney has the 57% of white Catholics. Not Obama.

      • Ol’ Uncle Lar

        You still have to wonder why Obama has even 43% of the Catholic vote.

    • Ah one and ah two and ah three

      That’s 57% of “***White***Catholic registered voters,” Dr. Sipmac.

      What’s the percentage of Black Catholics who support President Obama? I couldn’t find reference to it, but my guess is well over 90%.

      According to a FOX news poll, 70% of Hispanics support President Obama? Romney only has 14% support from Hispanics).

      I wonder what’s the percentage of women Catholics who support President Obama? My guess is over 60%.

      Why would anyone focus just on White Catholics in this case?



Receive our updates via email.