Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 11

Author Topic: Sitting out the election?  (Read 4667 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stanley N

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1208
  • Reputation: +530/-484
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sitting out the election?
« Reply #105 on: July 05, 2020, 08:15:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Argentino on July 05, 2020, 03:42:09 PM
    Are you saying that if a man has on his platform that he would support something intrinsically evil, that it would not be intrinsically evil to vote for him?
    Consider a politician supporting something intrinsically evil, but in practice it is low priority or not feasible, so you could expect that things would not get worse on that point. Would it be unconditionally impossible to support that politician?
    Logged

    Offline Minnesota

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1804
    • Reputation: +943/-462
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #106 on: July 05, 2020, 09:16:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!3
    • Now, what if one of the more libertarian-leaning Republicans that are conservative on economic issues, but liberal on social issues, abortion included, are on the ticket in 2024 for president? So both major party candidates are not pro-life? Would we be obligated to not vote?
    Logged
    Christ is Risen! He is risen indeed

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4189
    • Reputation: +2432/-557
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #107 on: July 06, 2020, 06:04:58 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline claudel

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1776
    • Reputation: +1335/-419
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #108 on: July 06, 2020, 07:50:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Cera on July 03, 2020, 05:44:13 PM

    Not for me and my DH. We woke up in the 60s.

    You have your very own designated hitter? I am impressed. I thought that the DH was the exclusive property of the American League, the league Satan roots for. (Beelzebub roots for the National League, of course, the league where Astroturf is king. Hell wouldn't be hell, after all, without diabolic confusion.)
    _______________________________
    On a less serious note, permit me to suggest that commenters read two columns, this one and this one, by Joe Sobran before they extend this thread by several more pages. The columns contain insight and wit in equal measure.

    Also, consider this a formal request to XavierSem that henceforward he clear his comments before posting them with the resident faculty experts in moral theology and situational ethics. It is an embarrassment to faithful Catholics to have a priest in the making exhibit his confusion and outright ignorance about matters large and small on so disappointingly regular a basis.
    Logged

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31183
    • Reputation: +27098/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #109 on: July 06, 2020, 08:02:11 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Minnesota on July 05, 2020, 09:16:33 PM
    Now, what if one of the more libertarian-leaning Republicans that are conservative on economic issues, but liberal on social issues, abortion included, are on the ticket in 2024 for president? So both major party candidates are not pro-life? Would we be obligated to not vote?
    Just vote for Trump; he's pro-life!
    Logged
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline Nishant Xavier

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2873
    • Reputation: +1893/-1750
    • Gender: Male
    • Immaculate Heart of Mary, May Your Triumph Come!
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #110 on: July 06, 2020, 10:00:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Logged
    "We wish also to make amends for the insults to which Your Vicar on earth and Your Priests are everywhere subjected [above all by schismatic sedevacantists - Nishant Xavier], for the profanation, by conscious neglect or Terrible Acts of Sacrilege, of the very Sacrament of Your Divine Love; and lastly for the Public Crimes of Nations who resist the Rights and The Teaching Authority of the Church which You have founded." - Act of Reparation to the Sacred Heart of Lord Jesus.

    Offline Nishant Xavier

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2873
    • Reputation: +1893/-1750
    • Gender: Male
    • Immaculate Heart of Mary, May Your Triumph Come!
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #111 on: July 07, 2020, 12:52:10 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Argentino, President Trump (1) has appointed 200 conservative judges. In 4 more years, these judges will be more than half the total, and have a huge impact on shaping a pro-life, conservative judicial future for America. (2) has granted many protections to the Catholic Church, and removed Obama-era limitations on Her religious freedom. (3) Has been stronger than even some Bishops in defending against those attacking Catholic Statues, and taken counter-measures to protect America and the Church from that. And much more.

    Double Effect comes into play when one action has two effects, (1) one effect of which is direct and intended, and that here is the effect of ending abortion, supporting the Catholic Church, promoting life, liberty (understood in a Christian sense, as the freedom to serve God, and to live virtuously, and not in the libertarian sense) and the rights of God. And the other (2) which is indirect and unintended, and which may or may not come about. So e.g. if the US as a nation sometimes supports, or at least does not oppose, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity abroad, that would come under this. Those who support this line of thinking would say "ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity" etc can only be dealt in 2024, because everything cannot be changed at once. Those who disagree seem to make any improvement impossible, by insisting everything should be done at once, or not at all. That is unreasonable imo. Step by step, things should be improved morally. And (3) the good effects intended (such as saving millions of life when RvW is overturned, which will certainly happen with 200 more federal judges, and 2 more Supreme Court Justices) vastly outweigh the negligibly few bad effects foreseen as possible perhaps but not intended in any way.

    Moreover, many of the judges themselves are pro-life, pro-family conservatives. And they replace pro-abort, flaming liberals appointed by Obama or Clinton. The effects of this will be perceptibly felt soon. The time has not yet come, because a critical mass has not yet been reached; but it surely will, with 2 to 3 more years of judicial picks. I hope that clears it up. God Bless.
    Logged
    "We wish also to make amends for the insults to which Your Vicar on earth and Your Priests are everywhere subjected [above all by schismatic sedevacantists - Nishant Xavier], for the profanation, by conscious neglect or Terrible Acts of Sacrilege, of the very Sacrament of Your Divine Love; and lastly for the Public Crimes of Nations who resist the Rights and The Teaching Authority of the Church which You have founded." - Act of Reparation to the Sacred Heart of Lord Jesus.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41869
    • Reputation: +23922/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #112 on: July 07, 2020, 09:29:37 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: XavierSem on July 07, 2020, 12:52:10 AM
    Double Effect comes into play when one action has two effects, (1) one effect of which is direct and intended, and that here is the effect of ending abortion, supporting the Catholic Church, promoting life, liberty (understood in a Christian sense, as the freedom to serve God, and to live virtuously, and not in the libertarian sense) and the rights of God. And the other (2) which is indirect and unintended, and which may or may not come about. So e.g. if the US as a nation sometimes supports, or at least does not oppose, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity abroad, that would come under this.

    Great.  I'm glad we're discussing this question in Catholic terms now, appealing to "double effect" instead of "lesser evil".

    As I said, I could see double effect being a Catholic justification for voting Trump.  I don't want to hear about "lesser evil".

    Keep making your case on these terms, and I'm all ears.

    Certainly, if I lived in a decidedly Blue state like New York, I would NOT vote for Trump out of principle.  But I am on the fence because I live in a swing state that could be decisive in the election (Ohio).

    I think where we're at is establishing the proportionality between the good effect and the evil effect.

    Let me extend my analogy from earlier.

    There's a person in critical condition at a health clinic.  There's also a person waiting for an abortion.  I drive the Dr. to the clinic so that he could save the person in critical condition, but I know that by taking him there he'll also perform the abortion.  Can I do that?  In this case, no, I cannot, because the evil would outweigh the good, especially since there's a decent chance that the person in critical condition won't make it anyway.  So this consideration regarding the proportionality between the good and the bad effects is where the argument must be joined among Catholics.
    Logged

    Offline Argentino

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 177
    • Reputation: +68/-62
    • Gender: Male
    • Fighting the good fight.
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #113 on: July 07, 2020, 10:50:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stanley N on July 05, 2020, 08:15:09 PM
    Consider a politician supporting something intrinsically evil, but in practice it is low priority or not feasible, so you could expect that things would not get worse on that point. Would it be unconditionally impossible to support that politician?
    You are avoiding the part about the platform being intrinsically evil because something on the platform stated is intrinsically evil.
    Such as expressed wish for abortion for rapes and threats to the life of the mother.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41869
    • Reputation: +23922/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #114 on: July 07, 2020, 11:11:32 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Argentino on July 07, 2020, 10:50:13 AM
    You are avoiding the part about the platform being intrinsically evil because something on the platform stated is intrinsically evil.
    Such as expressed wish for abortion for rapes and threats to the life of the mother.

    But let's try to consider this from the principle of double effect.  If someone were voting Trump with the intention that he would promote legal protection for sodomites, then one would be a formal accomplice in evil.

    But the intention is to vote for Trump so that he would appoint judges that would be Pro Life and favor a Pro Life agenda.  Unfortunately, that comes with unintended double effect of voting for a man who favors sodomites.  We can also consider that there is NO candidate out there who would propose to legislate against sodomy, so that'll never happen anyway.  I don't think that Trump's policies would create more sodomy.  In practice, it amounts to greater toleration than active promotion.

    With regard to abortion in case of rape, etc., that's certainly evil.  But that exception is often simply viewed as a tactical concession.

    If a politician came and said, "I want to ban abortion in the third trimester," there's the negative implicit toleration of abortion in the first two trimesters, but it could also be seen as a tactical move "it's the best I can get right now."  Few politicians who make the "rape/incest" exception do so for anything other than "tactical" reasons.  Of course, if you agree to this in principle, you're undermining your own argument against abortion, that it's a human life, because if it's a human life you can't take it no matter what circuмstances led to it.  But that's a separate issue.
    Logged

    Offline Cera

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5210
    • Reputation: +2290/-1012
    • Gender: Female
    • Pray for the consecration of Russia to Mary's I H
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #115 on: July 07, 2020, 11:20:33 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Logged
    Pray for the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary

    Offline Cera

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5210
    • Reputation: +2290/-1012
    • Gender: Female
    • Pray for the consecration of Russia to Mary's I H
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #116 on: July 07, 2020, 11:21:36 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: claudel on July 06, 2020, 07:50:13 PM
    You have your very own designated hitter? I am impressed. I thought that the DH was the exclusive property of the American League, the league Satan roots for. (Beelzebub roots for the National League, of course, the league where Astroturf is king. Hell wouldn't be hell, after all, without diabolic confusion.)
    _______________________________
    On a less serious note, permit me to suggest that commenters read two columns, this one and this one, by Joe Sobran before they extend this thread by several more pages. The columns contain insight and wit in equal measure.

    Also, consider this a formal request to XavierSem that henceforward he clear his comments before posting them with the resident faculty experts in moral theology and situational ethics. It is an embarrassment to faithful Catholics to have a priest in the making exhibit his confusion and outright ignorance about matters large and small on so disappointingly regular a basis.
    No clue what you are babbling about. DH is short for Dear Husband. Duh.
    Logged
    Pray for the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary

    Offline Stanley N

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1208
    • Reputation: +530/-484
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #117 on: July 07, 2020, 12:33:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Argentino on July 07, 2020, 10:50:13 AM
    You are avoiding the part about the platform being intrinsically evil because something on the platform stated is intrinsically evil.
    Such as expressed wish for abortion for rapes and threats to the life of the mother.
    No, I'm not avoiding it. Politics is classically defined as a practical science, not a contemplative science. Practical considerations are relevant to evaluating a stated plank in a platform.
    You have a politician with a plank in the platform allowing abortion in cases of rape and/or incest. I would of course prefer the politician didn't allow that, but the political question should be: will that politician increase or decrease the incidence of abortion for rape/incest in the particular circuмstances of the U.S. in 2020?
    Like Ladislaus says, many "pro-life" politicians with that plank don't really support it, and even for other politicians there is no practical likelihood they would make things worse on that point. Thus their platform plank, while distasteful, has no practical consequences and can be practically ignored for political considerations.
    The  "life of the mother" exception, on the other hand, is an unfortunate phrase that can mean the same thing as Catholic double-effect, so it's not necessarily even "intrinsically evil".  It can be permissible to perform a procedure intending to preserve the life of a mother even if the death of the baby in the womb is a likely consequence, so long as the death of the baby is not the intended goal or means.
    Logged

    Offline Argentino

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 177
    • Reputation: +68/-62
    • Gender: Male
    • Fighting the good fight.
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #118 on: July 07, 2020, 01:32:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on July 07, 2020, 11:11:32 AM
    But let's try to consider this from the principle of double effect.  If someone were voting Trump with the intention that he would promote legal protection for sodomites, then one would be a formal accomplice in evil.

    But the intention is to vote for Trump so that he would appoint judges that would be Pro Life and favor a Pro Life agenda.  Unfortunately, that comes with unintended double effect of voting for a man who favors sodomites.  We can also consider that there is NO candidate out there who would propose to legislate against sodomy, so that'll never happen anyway.  I don't think that Trump's policies would create more sodomy.  In practice, it amounts to greater toleration than active promotion.

    With regard to abortion in case of rape, etc., that's certainly evil.  But that exception is often simply viewed as a tactical concession.

    If a politician came and said, "I want to ban abortion in the third trimester," there's the negative implicit toleration of abortion in the first two trimesters, but it could also be seen as a tactical move "it's the best I can get right now."  Few politicians who make the "rape/incest" exception do so for anything other than "tactical" reasons.  Of course, if you agree to this in principle, you're undermining your own argument against abortion, that it's a human life, because if it's a human life you can't take it no matter what circuмstances led to it.  But that's a separate issue.

    What you are saying is not realistic. This isn't a matter of one ambiguous statement you can read and then put blinders on to judge and imagine the person might be favorable down the road.  Anyone running for POTUS has lots of statements to review to give a true picture of just what he thinks. Abortion is a hot issue, and a prospective POTUS will be repeatedly pressed for answers on what he actually thinks.

    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41869
    • Reputation: +23922/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Sitting out the election?
    « Reply #119 on: July 07, 2020, 05:36:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Argentino on July 07, 2020, 01:32:09 PM
    What you are saying is not realistic. This isn't a matter of one ambiguous statement you can read and then put blinders on to judge and imagine the person might be favorable down the road.  Anyone running for POTUS has lots of statements to review to give a true picture of just what he thinks. Abortion is a hot issue, and a prospective POTUS will be repeatedly pressed for answers on what he actually thinks.

    I don't know.  I've rarely seen the media go into any depth on the abortion issue.  I've rarely seen a politician required to give more than a statement of "I'm against abortion ... except in cases of rape and incest."  I actually heard ONE TIME where a liberal pro-abortionist called out a pro-lifer, "You say you're against abortion because it's the taking of a human life, but then why do you say it's OK in the case of rape and incest?"  95% of them are too rabidly pro-abortion to think straight and come up with a stratagem like this; all they hear is the part about the candidate being "against abortion".  Media has let candidates get away with nothing but sound bites on many issues.

    In fact, the statement "I'm against abortion ... except in cases of rape and incest." is actually the candidate's way of short-circuiting further discussion.  It used to be that a candidate would just say "I'm against abortion" and then would get immediately attacked with, "what about the poor rape victim or victim of incest, hmmmm?, hmmmm?" ... so rather than deal with it they pre-empt it with the exception clause out of the gate.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 11
    « previous next »