The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Augoustinos, Poliscifi, The Cub, P H, Hardrada
5604 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 324 guests, and 538 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Church of the Holy Trinity (UGCC) - Brazil
Papal Audience 10 November 2017
Upgraded Russian icon corner
Russian Greek Catholic Global Congress
OL EuroEast II (2007) Group
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics34,743
Posts411,995
Members5,604
Most Online2,716
Jun 7th, 2012
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: byzantina] #291945 06/16/08 01:03 PM
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 179
R
robster Offline
Member
Offline
Member
R
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 179
Byzantina,

No, there is no need to have to choose between what I like to humorously call the evil of two lessers.

Vote for what you believe in!

Best,
Robster

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: robster] #291967 06/16/08 04:31 PM
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 337
Nathan Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 337
Exactally...I'm not going to feel guilty this election cycle for what some would call "throwing" away my vote. I will vote for my favorite candidate regardless of party.

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: Nathan] #292053 06/17/08 04:14 AM
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,007
dochawk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,007
A few cycles ago, as I was weighing third party candidates for a protest vote, my ballot arrived and I was happily reminded that "None of the Above" is actually a choice on the Nevada presidential ballot. (Electors are a statewide office, and the choice is mandated by our constitution for all statewide offices. The combined votes for none of the above and third parties is greater than the margin of victory more often than not . . .)

hawk

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: Michael_Thoma] #292064 06/17/08 09:02 AM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
F
Fr Serge Keleher Offline
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
Reminds me of a famous quote from Eugene Victor Debs: "I would rather vote for what I want, and risk not getting it, than vote for what I do not want, and be sure to get it!".

Me, I plan to vote by secret ballot.

Fr. Serge

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: Deacon Robert Behrens] #292134 06/18/08 02:00 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,759
Paul B Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,759
Fr.Deacon Robert,

Thanks for your post. As a Pennsylvanian, I was shocked when Sen. Casey endorsed radically pro-abortion Obama.

Being as charitable and open minded as possible I can only think that young Casey truly feels that he can sway Obama away from a radical abortion position toward a less inflammatory left of center. After the Democrat party leadership realized that they were alienating many of the supporters they needed there was a lot of discussion about modifying their radical policy.

I don't buy that it will happen, but if God wills that it happen, and that Sen Casey feels that he has chosen for this call, then I add my prayers for this intention.

May God help my lack of faith. However, Obama will not get my vote without sincere statement rejecting his present views of abortion and the homosexual "marriage."

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: Paul B] #292172 06/18/08 03:04 PM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Terry Bohannon Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
I can't imagine that Obama's minders would let him get away with the inconsistency of changing his position on abortion. It would damage his brand.

I don't like copy and paste PR advisors; I've almost had enough of Obama's talking points. If he is able to say what he means and explain why he means it, then he would fare better without a script. He's so bound to the script right now it's hard to know what his positions on policy truly are, or would be if he becomes president.

Terry

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: ZAROVE] #292263 06/19/08 06:55 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,680
Deacon John Montalvo Offline
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,680
Originally Posted by ZAROVE
My answer is the same as always.

anyone who supports Barak Obama supports Infanticide and Communism.

That sums up my position .





You paint with a broad stroke. Let's put this into perspective. In his reply to the Theodore Cardinal McCarrick as then president of the USCCB on the question about who is worthy to receive Holy Communion, then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger wrote,

Quote
A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: Deacon John Montalvo] #292295 06/19/08 03:18 PM
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 571
Michael McD Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 571
Quote
A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.


Setting aside the question of receiving Holy Communion, let's just look at remote material cooperation.

"Proportionate reasons" includes an appreciation of the certainty and the gravity of the goods/evils involved.

What little we actually know about Obama's positions tells us that he will not simply permit, but actually require infanticide, lest the concept that any "not yet born fetus" ever be regarded as a person under the law, thus threatening the "right to an abortion". That paraphrases his rationale in the Illinois legislature as reported in the press. It doesn't get more certain than that, and we all know about the gravity of killing.

Balanced against this is what? "Change?" What does that mean?

And if one of the changes is a universal healthcare system run under US Federal statutes, and the 14th Amendment, and they eliminate a right to "conscientious objection", then what? This is not fantasy, it is already being done/attempted at the state level in various places, including NY, MA and NJ.

As others have said in this thread, this man needs to be challenged like he's never been challenged before about his "philosophy" in these areas before I would even consider voting for him. Notice how easy it was for him to switch churches after twenty years when the heat began to rise! Does that augur well for allowing a "conscientious objection"? When the going gets tough, change!

Michael

P.S. I agree with Zarove's characterization of "communism" although I would use the word "socialism". If European socialism is any guide, it is absolutely critical not to allow any exceptions -- no "conscience clauses" -- everybody must toe the party line. I have seen this up close and personal in Spain.

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: Michael McD] #292318 06/19/08 05:21 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,680
Deacon John Montalvo Offline
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,680
Michael McD-

thanks for the reply. Both major party candidates fall way short vis-a-vis Catholic teaching on the sanctity of life. You've touched upon Senator Obama's position (though I wouldly hardly say his position "requires infanticide.")

McCain is a federalist on this issue. He states he'll nominate justices to the Supreme Court in order to overturn Roe v. Wade so that the issue is decided by state courts. Is this any better from a Catholic perspective?

Overturning Roe v. Wade is not the answer. The government in this instance is failing. IMHO, we, as Catholics and other people of good will, need to address the issues that cause women to seek abortions.

When all is said and done, neither major party candidate can be endorsed as pro-life. As a result, Catholics will vote for the next president based on "the presence of proportionate reasons."

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: Deacon John Montalvo] #292323 06/19/08 06:24 PM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
F
Fr Serge Keleher Offline
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
Abortion will not be got rid of by the simple electoral process. We who believe in the traditional moral teaching that abortion is murder must set ourselves to change the present public opinion (yes, it can be done - it was done, after all, in the last fifty years). In my own view ordering people to vote for this candidate or that candidate is counter-productive.

Fr. Serge

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: Deacon John Montalvo] #292329 06/19/08 07:31 PM
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 571
Michael McD Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 571
Deacon John,

I'm not advocating any candidate, I'm trying to point out, from the standpoint of moral theological principles, that just because there is a matter of "remote material cooperation" does not remove the analysis required by Catholics from the area of serious inquiry into the candidates' real principles rather than going with slogans and political affinities alone.

I've read a bit of "analysis" on the Web, where the writer, having noted that formal cooperation (let's say in procuring an abortion, as an example) is not involved, and that therefore, Catholics are "free" to vote "any way they want". That is not accurate.

As an extreme case, let's say we know that Obama will win in November (or hope he does). Catholics, especially those with influence with him, need to help shape his principles in the direction of being "not so bad" as they might otherwise be (insisting on "conscience clauses" for example). That was the counsel of St. Thomas More for anyone engaged in public life in his day.

I have no personal animus to tell others how to vote, and I am a registered independent.

Michael

P.S. By "infanticide" I was referring to his work in the Illinois legislature to defeat a bill which would have legally protected the life of a baby who survived an abortion procedure. The quote from him indicated the rationale for his (successful) opposition to the bill, as I indicated. Maybe it's just me, but I regard leaving a 9-month old new-born to die as equivalent to killing him.

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: Michael McD] #292331 06/19/08 08:06 PM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
F
Fr Serge Keleher Offline
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
Michael - I'm curious; how does one register as an independent?

Fr. Serge

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: Fr Serge Keleher] #292335 06/19/08 08:51 PM
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 571
Michael McD Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 571
Fr. Serge,

When one registers to vote (at the local municipality), on the form there is either a checkbox for "independent", or one simply omits to check Republican or Democrat.

One thereby is registered to vote in actual elections, local, state and national, but not necessarily in party primaries (some states do allow that also).

In Christ,
Michael

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: Deacon John Montalvo] #292341 06/19/08 09:21 PM
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 571
Michael McD Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 571
Deacon John,

Originally Posted by Deacon John Montalvo
McCain is a federalist on this issue. He states he'll nominate justices to the Supreme Court in order to overturn Roe v. Wade so that the issue is decided by state courts. Is this any better from a Catholic perspective?


This is, I think, a good example of a prudential judgement in the political arena. Is returning the issue of abortion to the states (presumably the legislatures not the state courts) better than Roe v. Wade? (BTW, the best thing to do to persuade oneself that Roe v. Wade is pretty bad jurisprudence is simply to read the darn thing!)

a) Some have argued that if the people in the states can use the freedom from Roe v. Wade to eliminate or limit abortions, that would be a better thing.

b) Others have argued that Roe v. Wade ought to be resolved by passing a "pro-life" federal amendment to the Constitution, because otherwise lawyers will play off one law vs. another, etc., and there will never be any resolution to the issue (that is the argument of a personal friend who is a prominent lawyer around here, who has done a lot of pro bono work of a pro-life nature.)

IMHO, either would be "better" than our current situation. "b" might be the long-shot, risk the whole kaboodle on one throw, at the risk of accomplishing nothing; "a" might be more certain of achieving some good results, but not an "ideally" good "Catholic" result.

Each Catholic (as each voter, generally) would need to decide which of them (or any other approaches) seemed "better" in the concrete political circumstances. I wouldn't call either a Catholic solution, nor would I label either an Un-Catholic solution. [In other words, it is possible for 2 equally-faithful Catholics to disagree about the proper approach.]

Quote
IMHO, we, as Catholics and other people of good will, need to address the issues that cause women to seek abortions.


No question about it. I don't see a dichotomy, though.

In Christ,
Michael

Re: Roman Catholics for Obama '08 [Re: Michael McD] #292342 06/19/08 09:51 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,680
Deacon John Montalvo Offline
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,680
Michael-

I whole-heartedly agree with your last post. Catholic voters do need to analyze the candidates positions. That's what the Bishops are advocating in their USCCB publications.

Since both major party candidates are not defenders of life from a Catholic perspective, Catholic voters need to analyze the candidates' position on, say, healthcare issues. How many babies can be saved if a woman has access to adequate prenatal care? At the very least, a woman could not decide to choose abortion based upon the availability (or the lack of availability) to medical care.

I am quite uncomfortable when others (like Zarove above) judge voters who support one candidate over the other.

The Catholic Bishops have spoken out against politicians (and by extension, voters) who support a candidate because of a candidate's position which is at odds with Church teaching.

Example- Voter supports candidate because candidate is an advocate for the use of waterboarding on prisoners.

Because of the myriad of issues we will continue to face, it becomes imperative for us to look beyond the sound bites and slick commercials.

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2019 (Forum 1998-2019). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3