Author Topic: Catholic Voting Guide  (Read 5648 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Ladislaus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18730
  • Reputation: +10334/-4868
  • Gender: Male
Catholic Voting Guide
« Reply #15 on: February 05, 2016, 02:25:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • LOL, it takes an ignorant "Feeneyite" (Brother Andre Marie) to get this right.

    Offline HiddenServant

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2839
    • Reputation: +75/-2
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #16 on: February 05, 2016, 02:49:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •   What about Brother Andre Marie. I used to be friend with him on Facebook.
    He was good but not sure totally how traditional he is and may still be. :detective:


    Offline MaterDominici

    • Owner's Wife
    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 4945
    • Reputation: +3675/-69
    • Gender: Female
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #17 on: February 05, 2016, 05:35:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I appreciate the accurate explanation, but it didn't seem to me to have much effect on the overall conclusion.
    "If I could only make the faithful sing the Kyrie, the Gloria, the Credo, the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei ... that would be to me the finest triumph sacred music could have, for it is in really taking part in the liturgy that the faithful will preserve their devotion. I would take the Tantum ...

    Offline McCork

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 626
    • Reputation: +10/-31
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #18 on: February 05, 2016, 05:55:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    It is neither "prudent" nor "permissible" to vote for a lesser evil.  Sorry.  That's false ends-justifies-the-means moral reasoning.  It is NOT Catholic.


    The principle is that if one ONLY has two choices of evil, he must choose the lesser evil. But "voting" really isn't that....because you can choose NOT TO VOTE, or to vote for a WRITE IN CANDIDATE....at least in the U.S.

    Online Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18730
    • Reputation: +10334/-4868
    • Gender: Male
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #19 on: February 05, 2016, 08:18:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: MaterDominici
    I appreciate the accurate explanation, but it didn't seem to me to have much effect on the overall conclusion.


    No, no, no.  Principles matter, Mater.  Two people can do the exact same action, materially speaking, but it could be a sin for one but a virtue for the other depending upon their formal intent, and it's the reasoning and principles applied that will determine the formal morality of the action.  This is absolutely crucial and cannot be blown off as mere pedantic or academic splitting of hairs.

    "Lesser evil" thinking is morally repugnant and must be repudiated by all Catholics.  Period.

    And there can in fact be radically different material outcomes of applying double effect vs. lesser evil.

    So, no, it's absolutely NOT just hair-splitting.

    Let us imagine a presidential election in which one candidate favors abortion but only in the first trimester while the other candidate wants no limits up to and including partial birth abortion.  So can you vote for the first-trimester abortion proponent as a "lesser evil"?


    Offline MaterDominici

    • Owner's Wife
    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 4945
    • Reputation: +3675/-69
    • Gender: Female
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #20 on: February 05, 2016, 08:37:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus

    Let us imagine a presidential election in which one candidate favors abortion but only in the first trimester while the other candidate wants no limits up to and including partial birth abortion.  So can you vote for the first-trimester abortion proponent as a "lesser evil"?


    I'm teeter-tottering on the edge of quite confused. : )

    No real Catholic would say they're voting for him because "he's for 1st trimester abortion" (an evil) but rather, "because he's against 2nd and 3rd trimester abortion" (a good). Presuming no one else is against abortion at all, wouldn't it be permissible to vote for the only candidate who is against 2nd and 3rd trimester abortion?
    "If I could only make the faithful sing the Kyrie, the Gloria, the Credo, the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei ... that would be to me the finest triumph sacred music could have, for it is in really taking part in the liturgy that the faithful will preserve their devotion. I would take the Tantum ...

    Offline B from A

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 533
    • Reputation: +380/-104
    • Gender: Female
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #21 on: February 05, 2016, 08:53:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: MaterDominici
    Quote from: Ladislaus

    Let us imagine a presidential election in which one candidate favors abortion but only in the first trimester while the other candidate wants no limits up to and including partial birth abortion.  So can you vote for the first-trimester abortion proponent as a "lesser evil"?


    I'm teeter-tottering on the edge of quite confused. : )

    No real Catholic would say they're voting for him because "he's for 1st trimester abortion" (an evil) but rather, "because he's against 2nd and 3rd trimester abortion" (a good). Presuming no one else is against abortion at all, wouldn't it be permissible to vote for the only candidate who is against 2nd and 3rd trimester abortion?


    No.

    I'll let Ladislaus or others comment more on the principles, but I'll just say, imagine if the only 2 candidates were Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse-tung, would you vote for Stalin since he'll kill fewer people?  Hopefully that example helps illustrate it.  

    Offline B from A

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 533
    • Reputation: +380/-104
    • Gender: Female
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #22 on: February 05, 2016, 09:00:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • "It is a moral evil to support a candidate whose platform runs contrary to the natural law. "



    Offline B from A

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 533
    • Reputation: +380/-104
    • Gender: Female
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #23 on: February 05, 2016, 09:09:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: McCork
    Quote from: Ladislaus
    It is neither "prudent" nor "permissible" to vote for a lesser evil.  Sorry.  That's false ends-justifies-the-means moral reasoning.  It is NOT Catholic.


    The principle is that if one ONLY has two choices of evil, he must choose the lesser evil. But "voting" really isn't that....because you can choose NOT TO VOTE, or to vote for a WRITE IN CANDIDATE....at least in the U.S.


    Just so I understand what you're saying:

    People are arguing that there are only 2 choices:

    1. vote for evil candidate X
    2. vote for evil candidate Y, who is supposedly slightly less evil than candidate X (because it's only way to keep out supposedly even worse candidate X)

     Whereas you are saying that is incorrect, in that we have more choices,

    1. vote for evil candidate X
    2. vote for evil candidate Y, who is supposedly slightly less evil than candidate X
    3. don't vote at all because both X & Y are evil (and our voting system is a complete fraud anyway)
    4. write someone else in

    i.e. It's not like someone is putting a gun to our head, saying "you must vote for evil candidate X or Y."

    Is that what you're saying above?  

    Offline MaterDominici

    • Owner's Wife
    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 4945
    • Reputation: +3675/-69
    • Gender: Female
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #24 on: February 05, 2016, 10:14:49 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from:  B from A
    Quote from: MaterDominici
    Quote from: Ladislaus

    Let us imagine a presidential election in which one candidate favors abortion but only in the first trimester while the other candidate wants no limits up to and including partial birth abortion.  So can you vote for the first-trimester abortion proponent as a "lesser evil"?


    I'm teeter-tottering on the edge of quite confused. : )

    No real Catholic would say they're voting for him because "he's for 1st trimester abortion" (an evil) but rather, "because he's against 2nd and 3rd trimester abortion" (a good). Presuming no one else is against abortion at all, wouldn't it be permissible to vote for the only candidate who is against 2nd and 3rd trimester abortion?


    No.

    I'll let Ladislaus or others comment more on the principles, but I'll just say, imagine if the only 2 candidates were Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse-tung, would you vote for Stalin since he'll kill fewer people?  Hopefully that example helps illustrate it.  


    OK, I was thinking how some chip away at abortion rather than attempt to take on the entire immoral practice, but even those sort would never say they are "for" 1st trimester abortion.

    So does it follow that anyone who says they're "against abortion except in cases of A, B, C" would likewise be not an option for a Catholic?
    "If I could only make the faithful sing the Kyrie, the Gloria, the Credo, the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei ... that would be to me the finest triumph sacred music could have, for it is in really taking part in the liturgy that the faithful will preserve their devotion. I would take the Tantum ...

    Offline Nadir

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6171
    • Reputation: +3343/-199
    • Gender: Female
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #25 on: February 06, 2016, 01:05:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: MaterDominici
    Quote from: Ladislaus

    Let us imagine a presidential election in which one candidate favors abortion but only in the first trimester while the other candidate wants no limits up to and including partial birth abortion.  So can you vote for the first-trimester abortion proponent as a "lesser evil"?


    I'm teeter-tottering on the edge of quite confused. : )

    No real Catholic would say they're voting for him because "he's for 1st trimester abortion" (an evil) but rather, "because he's against 2nd and 3rd trimester abortion" (a good). Presuming no one else is against abortion at all, wouldn't it be permissible to vote for the only candidate who is against 2nd and 3rd trimester abortion?


    Mater, put it this way:
    A candidate says:
    Quote
    I believe it is OK to kill 1 yr old children, but I think killing a 2 or 3 yr old is going too far.


    Does that make the issue less confused. He is not against abortion per se. He against aborting older babies, and, I would presume, he is for it in difficult circumstances, in the case of rape, young girls, women endangered, disabled child, etc.


    Offline MaterDominici

    • Owner's Wife
    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 4945
    • Reputation: +3675/-69
    • Gender: Female
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #26 on: February 06, 2016, 01:46:24 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Nadir
    Quote from: MaterDominici
    Quote from: Ladislaus

    Let us imagine a presidential election in which one candidate favors abortion but only in the first trimester while the other candidate wants no limits up to and including partial birth abortion.  So can you vote for the first-trimester abortion proponent as a "lesser evil"?


    I'm teeter-tottering on the edge of quite confused. : )

    No real Catholic would say they're voting for him because "he's for 1st trimester abortion" (an evil) but rather, "because he's against 2nd and 3rd trimester abortion" (a good). Presuming no one else is against abortion at all, wouldn't it be permissible to vote for the only candidate who is against 2nd and 3rd trimester abortion?


    Mater, put it this way:
    A candidate says:
    Quote
    I believe it is OK to kill 1 yr old children, but I think killing a 2 or 3 yr old is going too far.


    Does that make the issue less confused. He is not against abortion per se. He against aborting older babies, and, I would presume, he is for it in difficult circumstances, in the case of rape, young girls, women endangered, disabled child, etc.


    So likewise, you wouldn't support someone who is only in favor of killing disabled children or children who were the result of rape.

    So, my next question is whether or not there is any amount of good positions in line with the natural law a candidate could have which would be sufficient to override the evil of being in favor of any sort of abortion?
    "If I could only make the faithful sing the Kyrie, the Gloria, the Credo, the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei ... that would be to me the finest triumph sacred music could have, for it is in really taking part in the liturgy that the faithful will preserve their devotion. I would take the Tantum ...

    Offline clare

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2269
    • Reputation: +887/-34
    • Gender: Female
      • h
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #27 on: February 06, 2016, 02:10:19 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    Quote from: MaterDominici
    I appreciate the accurate explanation, but it didn't seem to me to have much effect on the overall conclusion.


    No, no, no.  Principles matter, Mater.  Two people can do the exact same action, materially speaking, but it could be a sin for one but a virtue for the other depending upon their formal intent, and it's the reasoning and principles applied that will determine the formal morality of the action.  This is absolutely crucial and cannot be blown off as mere pedantic or academic splitting of hairs.

    "Lesser evil" thinking is morally repugnant and must be repudiated by all Catholics.  Period.

    And there can in fact be radically different material outcomes of applying double effect vs. lesser evil.

    So, no, it's absolutely NOT just hair-splitting.

    Let us imagine a presidential election in which one candidate favors abortion but only in the first trimester while the other candidate wants no limits up to and including partial birth abortion.  So can you vote for the first-trimester abortion proponent as a "lesser evil"?

    What if you see it as a matter of not voting for the lesser evil, but voting against the greater evil?

    Offline Nadir

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6171
    • Reputation: +3343/-199
    • Gender: Female
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #28 on: February 06, 2016, 03:07:10 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • MaterDomenici said:
    Quote
    So likewise, you wouldn't support someone who is only in favor of killing disabled children or children who were the result of rape.



    In answer to your first question, Mater. I would never vote for a candidate who supports any abortion whatsoever.

    What is this only the disabled and only the child conceived in rape?
    Is (being in favour of) the killing of a disabled child or a child of rape any less heinous than (being in favour of) killing a presumedly healthy child or a child conceived within marriage?

    Quote
    So, my next question is whether or not there is any amount of good positions in line with the natural law a candidate could have which would be sufficient to override the evil of being in favor of any sort of abortion?


    No.  "Any amount of good positions in line with the natural law" could not overide the evil of supporting abortion in any circumstance. Isn't abortion the killing of the innocent child that God Himself decreed should live on this earth? How could such a person who is willing to support abortion represent us, our needs and our beliefs etc? He is not fit to do so. No Catholic ought to vote for him.

    Offline McCork

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 626
    • Reputation: +10/-31
    Catholic Voting Guide
    « Reply #29 on: February 06, 2016, 07:39:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from:  B from A
    Quote from: McCork
    Quote from: Ladislaus
    It is neither "prudent" nor "permissible" to vote for a lesser evil.  Sorry.  That's false ends-justifies-the-means moral reasoning.  It is NOT Catholic.


    The principle is that if one ONLY has two choices of evil, he must choose the lesser evil. But "voting" really isn't that....because you can choose NOT TO VOTE, or to vote for a WRITE IN CANDIDATE....at least in the U.S.


    Just so I understand what you're saying:

    People are arguing that there are only 2 choices:

    1. vote for evil candidate X
    2. vote for evil candidate Y, who is supposedly slightly less evil than candidate X (because it's only way to keep out supposedly even worse candidate X)

     Whereas you are saying that is incorrect, in that we have more choices,

    1. vote for evil candidate X
    2. vote for evil candidate Y, who is supposedly slightly less evil than candidate X
    3. don't vote at all because both X & Y are evil (and our voting system is a complete fraud anyway)
    4. write someone else in

    i.e. It's not like someone is putting a gun to our head, saying "you must vote for evil candidate X or Y."

    Is that what you're saying above?  


    Yes. We can vote for an evil when we have no other choice but to vote for an evil, and if that time comes, we would be forced to choose the lesser evil. But we DO have a choice to refrain from voting, or to write in a candidate. Until people realize this, evil will forever be voted in, and the degradation of society will continue.

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16