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

Author Topic: Voting for Trump?  (Read 23898 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline St Ignatius

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1024
  • Reputation: +795/-158
  • Gender: Male
Voting for Trump?
« Reply #30 on: October 22, 2016, 11:11:26 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    if not slightly isolationist viewpoint.


    I'm not opposed to this idea at this point. To paraphrase the author Eric Freyfogle; When society collapses, you retreat, rebuild and set out anew.

    I believe anything to put any distance between America and Israel, would be a good thing. After all, the Jews are very much responsible for engineering the social rot we have today.

    Offline Charlemagne

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1439
    • Reputation: +2103/-18
    • Gender: Male
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #31 on: October 22, 2016, 01:57:33 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is an absolute no-brainer for me. Of COURSE I'll vote for Trump! I hear NeverTrumpers all the time: "Well, he's not a real conservative. We don't know what he'll do." But here's the problem: We know exactly what his opponent will do, don't we? She'll stack the Supreme Court with leftist thugs. She'll stack the federal courts with leftist thugs. She'll stack her cabinet with leftist thugs. She'll bypass Congress and rule by executive order. And if she dies in office (if she even makes it past the inauguration), Kaine the reprobate will make The Hag look like Teddy Roosevelt. So, by all means, die on that hill of "principle."
    "This principle is most certain: The non-Christian cannot in any way be Pope. The reason for this is that he cannot be head of what he is not a member. Now, he who is not a Christian is not a member of the Church, and a manifest heretic is not a Christian, as is clearly taught by St. Cyprian, St. Athanasius, St. Augustine, St. Jerome, and others. Therefore, the manifest heretic cannot be Pope." -- St. Robert Bellarmine


    Offline hollingsworth

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2842
    • Reputation: +2932/-517
    • Gender: Male
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #32 on: October 22, 2016, 03:11:31 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • JDK:
    Quote
    Ignore the presidential election and go downballot. Both of them are wretched candidates.


    You really mean to say that Trump and Clinton share wretchedness eqully?  I can't believe I'm hearing this.

    Trump is no more wretched, (and I assume you mean, basically, from a moral standpoint) than a number of our presidents have been.

    FDR had at least one affair.  His favorite mistress was right at his side in Warm Springs, GA the day he died in April of 1945.  Kennedy was a notorious womanizer.  Nobody disputes that. So was Lyndon Johnson.  Woodrow Wilson was blackmailed during is first term by the Jew, Samuel Untemeyer, over the wife of a fellow professor at Princetion U. with whom, allegedly,  he had had an intimate affair.  

    I'm sure other presidents of our nation were guilty of sowing their wild oats, as well.

    But before you and other trads become too righteous in your indignation, just remember this:  Hillary promises to appoint pro-choice justices, one promise alone which should put miles between her and Trump in the minds of all true Catholics.  She wants entirely open borders and unrestricted foreign immigration.  That's just for starters.  

    Trump has clearly outlined his program, item by item, for the restoration of this country, the elimination of government corruption, and the preservation of its Constitution. https://www.c-span.org/video/?417328-1/donald-trump-unveils-100day-action-plan-gettysburg-address

    Clinton makes very few specific recommendations for correcting our country's wrongs and putting it back on the path towards prosperity and national restoration of moral integrity.  She is in the pocket of the lobbyists, the big banks and foreign donors.

     

    Offline St Ignatius

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1024
    • Reputation: +795/-158
    • Gender: Male
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #33 on: October 22, 2016, 03:34:17 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: hollingsworth
    She wants entirely open borders and unrestricted foreign immigration.  That's just for starters.


    This alone constitutes high treason of the first degree probably punishable by death. (I say this because it undermines the very basic principles of a sovereign nation.) Can't necessarily put that on an equal plane as that of a man with an Immoral personal life.

    Offline St Ignatius

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1024
    • Reputation: +795/-158
    • Gender: Male
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #34 on: October 22, 2016, 05:08:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: JezusDeKoning
    Ignore the presidential election and go downballot. Both of them are wretched candidates.

    That means focusing on governor races, senate, state house, etc. They have much more clout than the presidential election. Remember that you live in the third biggest nation and least functioning federal government on Earth. Your local state will 30x more for you directly than anything in Washington.


    Than why is it that the Alinskyite Obama got everything, plus some, that he wanted? Did not the last mid-term elections yield over a thousand seats being taken from the Democrats by the Republicans across the country? Did not both Houses become a Republican majority? What gives here?


    Offline mw2016

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1351
    • Reputation: +765/-544
    • Gender: Female
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #35 on: October 22, 2016, 07:11:47 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    I'm trying to decide whether I should in conscience vote for Trump this November.  Don't get me wrong.  I think that he's personally a reprobate.  But in terms of the positions he has publicly articulated, I don't have any problems with him.  In fact, I was disappointed when he backed off his comment that women who have abortions should be punished somehow.  Now, despite what he has publicly stated, I don't entirely trust him to be sincere.  Now, as everyone knows, I am most adamantly against the lesser of two evils voting philosophy (it's not Catholic).  But I see no positive evils in any of the positions he has publicly taken (while running for president).  On the other hand, Hillary is demon incarnate.  If, by not voting for Trump, Hillary gets elected, then appoints wicked justices to the Supreme Court, that would be a huge (yuge) disaster.  Regardless, if Trump were positively evil, I could not vote for him.  Now, I suspect that Trump is way too cozy with the Jews.  But he did invoke Jєωιѕн scorn for saying that the US should be even-handed in dealing with the Palestinian situation.

    1) So, does anyone know of any positions Trump has taken that are positively problematic?  In that case, he's totally disqualified.

    2) Is it your opinion that we we would be bound under these circuмstances to vote for Trump?

    Trump exemplifies the true "unworthy candidate".  He does not have the character desired of a President.  But simply being unworthy doesn't disqualify him to receive our vote, and could one say that it's even obligatory to vote for him?
     


    Yes, it's obligatory.
    As far as I'm concerned, any Catholic who sits out the Presidential vote on some misperceived idea of "moral high ground" will have the blood of the innocents on their hands.

    This has to do with stopping the march of liberalism in our Supreme Court and our government - not whether or not Trump is the best example of marriage morals or whatever.

    Offline St Ignatius

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1024
    • Reputation: +795/-158
    • Gender: Male
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #36 on: October 22, 2016, 07:40:02 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!2
  • Quote from: mw2016
    Yes, it's obligatory.

    Says who?
    Quote
    As far as I'm concerned, any Catholic who sits out the Presidential vote on some misperceived idea of "moral high ground" will have the blood of the innocents on their hands.

    Your right, that's your concern.

    Offline St Ignatius

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1024
    • Reputation: +795/-158
    • Gender: Male
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #37 on: October 22, 2016, 08:06:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Catholic Principles
    for Voting



    Is it morally obligatory to vote?

    From the February 2007 issue of The Angelus

    It is certainly true that the modernists consider democracy, and the right to vote, as sacrosanct, an immediate consequence of human dignity, directly connected with their humanistic religion.

    Reacting against this, knowing as we do how much the electoral system is unjust, realizing how much modern democracy is based upon the false liberal principle of human freedom, which rejects all objective divine and moral law, being aware of the narrow margin of choice between the candidates, and also having the impression (though mistaken) that one man’s vote will not make a real difference in such a secular, ungodly system – we might easily conclude that one is not obliged to vote at all.

    Yet the Church’s teaching on the subject is by no means new. Without approving the modern system of democracy and its false principle of the sovereignty of the people, the Church nevertheless binds us to contribute towards the common good of society, by an obligation of legal justice. This principle is expressed well by Pope Pius XII in his April 20, 1946, discourse to Italian Catholic Action:

    The people are called on to take an always larger part in the public life of the nation. This participation brings with it grave responsibilities. Hence the necessity for the faithful to have clear, solid, precise knowledge of their duties in the moral and religious domain with respect to their exercise of their civil rights, and in particular of the right to vote.

    In fact, Pope Pius XII had clearly explained that it is precisely on account of the anti-Catholic and secular spirit that surrounds Catholics that they have the duty to defend the Church by the correct exercise of their right to vote. It is to prevent a greater evil. He had stated on March 16, 1946, to the parish priests of Rome:

    The exercise of the right to vote is an act of grave moral responsibility, at least with respect to the electing of those who are called to give to a country its constitution and its laws, and in particular those that affect the sanctification of holy days of obligation, marriage, the family, schools and the just and equitable regulation of many social questions. It is the Church’s duty to explain to the faithful the moral duties that flow from this electoral right.

    Pope Pius XII was even more explicit two years later, again when speaking to the parish priests of Rome. He explained that in the precise circuмstances of the time it was an obligation under pain of mortal sin for all the faithful, both men and women, to use their right to vote, since the common good depended upon all Catholics voting wisely.

    Here is the text of March 10, 1948:

    In the present circuмstances, it is a strict obligation for all those who have the right to vote, men and women, to take part in the elections. Whoever abstains from doing so, in particular by indolence or weakness, commits a sin grave in itself, a mortal fault. Each one must follow the dictate of his own conscience. However, it is obvious that the voice of conscience imposes on every Catholic to give his vote to the candidates who offer truly sufficient guarantees for the protection of the rights of God and of souls, for the true good of individuals, families and of society, according to the love of God and Catholic moral teaching.

    This application of the Church’s social teaching to the particular situation of the time is in accord with the teaching of the moral theologians, who speak of the grave sin of omission for those who simply neglect to elect good, Catholic representatives, and of the duty of doing all in our power of encouraging suitable laymen to work towards using the electoral system to obtain worthy lawmakers.

    But how far we are removed from this situation. Clearly, we are no longer in the circuмstance of having to choose between Catholic and non-Catholic, morally upright and liberal representatives. All the alternatives are liberal, the deception and the manipulation of the public by the media is rampant. In practice, it generally comes down to the question of whether or not it is permissible to vote for an unworthy candidate (e.g., a candidate who only approves abortion in cases of rape or incest), for he would at least (we suppose) be the lesser evil. In such a case, there can be no obligation to vote, for all the reasons mentioned by Pope Pius XII that could oblige, no longer apply. Nevertheless, it is still permissible to vote in such a case, provided that one can be sure that there truly is a lesser evil, and that there is a grave reason to do so (e.g., to avoid abortion on demand, or promotion of unnatural methods of birth control), and one has the good intention of providing for the good of society as best one can. This is called material cooperation. However, it can never be obligatory
    .

    Consequently, in the rare case where there are informed Catholic candidates who publicly support the teaching of the Church, there is a strict moral obligation to vote, under pain of mortal sin. Where there is a clear gain possible from the correct use of a vote for some other candidate, it can be recommended or counseled. However, when there is no clear advantage it would be better to abstain, so as not to contribute even to a material participation.

    Can a Catholic vote for a candidate who condones initiatives not in accord with the moral law?

    Originally published in August 2007 issue of The Angelus

    The Catholic Church does not tell Catholics to avoid all involvement in politics simply because there is injustice, greed, ambition, just to mention some of the evils involved. The Church teaches us that all our involvement in politics ought to be motivated, inspired, and directed by the Church’s social teachings, and in particular by the Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Voting, as well as involvement in political campaigns, must have as its ultimate motive these higher, supernatural principles, that the law of God, the Ten Commandments, and the rights of the one true Church be acknowledged publicly in society.

    Manifestly, we are presently very far removed from achieving these aims. It does not mean that we should do nothing. It does mean, however, that whatever we do will necessarily involve the toleration of many evils, which we in no way desire or will. However, it can be permissible to tolerate the lesser of two evils for a proportionate reason, and such toleration can be for the common good, precisely because it is the lesser of two evils. Thus it is possible to vote or even campaign for a candidate whose platform contains evils with which we do not agree. Everything depends upon a hierarchy of the most important values and issues taking priority over lesser ones.

    For a Catholic, there can be no doubt that the issues that take the highest priority must be the moral issues, and not personal or economic issues. The whole continuation of society as we know it depends upon this, and those who deny the most basic principles of the natural order are bringing about an unheard of perversion. Consequently, it is permissible and prudent to vote on the one single issue of proscribing abortion, or forbidding same-sex marriages, or putting an end to euthanasia, or freedom of the Catholic Church to run educational institutions. All of these issues are of the utmost importance. Consequently, it would be permissible and prudent to vote for a candidate who promotes an unjust war, on the basis of one or other of these issues. Consequently, it is likewise permissible to vote for a candidate who is known to be a Freemason, although Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ is an evil society condemned by the Church and opposed to the Catholic Church, if he maintains an important principle of the natural law such as the evil of abortion.

    Lesser issues are also of moral importance, such as the justice or injustice of a particular war, or the paying of a just wage to employees, maintaining the right to private property by limiting government intervention, and so on. All other things being equal, one could vote on the basis of such issues. However, it would be wrong to vote for a candidate who has a correct position on one of these issues, but a perverse and wrong position on a more important issue.

    Consequently, it would be manifestly immoral and sinful to vote for a candidate who pretends to be Catholic, but who in fact is pro-abortion, pro-gαy, or pro-euthanasia.

    Voting in local and national elections can only be considered a moral obligation when the candidates propose a solidly Catholic, non-liberal platform that truly promotes the Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ. It is not obligatory to vote for a lesser evil, but simply prudent and permissible. However, it would certainly be obligatory to use the democratic process in place in the unlikely event that it could be used to introduce Catholic candidates who do not accept the propaganda of modern liberal democracy.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46957
    • Reputation: +27811/-5167
    • Gender: Male
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #38 on: October 22, 2016, 08:47:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: mw2016
    Yes, it's obligatory.
    As far as I'm concerned, any Catholic who sits out the Presidential vote on some misperceived idea of "moral high ground" will have the blood of the innocents on their hands.


    Ridiculous.  If Trump is a positively evil candidate, you can't vote for him ... regardless of the consequences.  So the question is whether there's any positive evil that might result from voting for Trump.  I am not yet seeing it.

    Offline RomanCatholic1953

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10512
    • Reputation: +3267/-207
    • Gender: Male
    • I will not respond to any posts from Poche.
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #39 on: October 22, 2016, 09:09:38 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Good News

    Professor with Remarkable track record predicts a Trump Win:

    Fox News Insider

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/05e8d8d9-478f-35a2-bc81-4c3563853a30/ss_professor-with-remarkable.html

    Saturday on Fox & Friends, Tucker Carlson sat down with a college professor with a remarkable record of predicting election outcomes.

    Professor Helmut Norpoth, from Stony Brook University in New York State, has correctly predicted the outcomes of the last five presidential elections.

    This year, he steadfastly believes Donald Trump will win the election.

    Norpoth said he uses two "models" to make his prediction:

    One is the "primary" model, where he compares a candidate's strength in their respective primaries.

    "The candidate who does better in his party's primary beats the other guy who does less well," Norpoth said.

    Looking at New Hampshire and South Carolina's primaries, Norpoth projected that Trump would be the general election favorite because of the strength of his showing, versus Hillary Clinton.

    The second model he created is called the "swing of the pendulum" model.

    Offline Geremia

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4897
    • Reputation: +1605/-363
    • Gender: Male
      • St. Isidore e-book library
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #40 on: October 22, 2016, 10:16:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    I'm not trying to create an argument here, but genuinely trying to decide.  I am very much on the fence about this.
    Did you read what I posted from Fr. Cranny's book?
    St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co


    Offline poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 16729
    • Reputation: +1224/-4693
    • Gender: Male
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #41 on: October 22, 2016, 11:24:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!3
  • Quote from: hollingsworth
    JDK:
    Quote
    Ignore the presidential election and go downballot. Both of them are wretched candidates.


    You really mean to say that Trump and Clinton share wretchedness eqully?  I can't believe I'm hearing this.

    Trump is no more wretched, (and I assume you mean, basically, from a moral standpoint) than a number of our presidents have been.

    FDR had at least one affair.  His favorite mistress was right at his side in Warm Springs, GA the day he died in April of 1945.  Kennedy was a notorious womanizer.  Nobody disputes that. So was Lyndon Johnson.  Woodrow Wilson was blackmailed during is first term by the Jew, Samuel Untemeyer, over the wife of a fellow professor at Princetion U. with whom, allegedly,  he had had an intimate affair.  

    I'm sure other presidents of our nation were guilty of sowing their wild oats, as well.

    But before you and other trads become too righteous in your indignation, just remember this:  Hillary promises to appoint pro-choice justices, one promise alone which should put miles between her and Trump in the minds of all true Catholics.  She wants entirely open borders and unrestricted foreign immigration.  That's just for starters.  

    Trump has clearly outlined his program, item by item, for the restoration of this country, the elimination of government corruption, and the preservation of its Constitution. https://www.c-span.org/video/?417328-1/donald-trump-unveils-100day-action-plan-gettysburg-address

    Clinton makes very few specific recommendations for correcting our country's wrongs and putting it back on the path towards prosperity and national restoration of moral integrity.  She is in the pocket of the lobbyists, the big banks and foreign donors.

     


    Why not vote for a third party candidate?

    Offline Nishant

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2126
    • Reputation: +0/-7
    • Gender: Male
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #42 on: October 23, 2016, 05:07:44 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    I'm not sure I even see this as "double effect".  I see this more as "unworthy candidate".  Double effect implies that voting for Trump would be the endorsement of some evil.  I don't see that in his current positions.


    I'm not a fan of Trump because he's never recanted the liberal hollywood values he's lived all his life. Supreme court appointees aside, is he really going to make a persuasive stand for life, marriage and family values? This should have been the first thing conservatives asked for when he came to them asking for their vote. Like the Pope demanded of Henry VIII and St. John the Baptist of king Herod, no matter the cost. If he had repented and pledged to change, it would be different now. But they didn't and the rest is history. The thing is Hilary is bad enough that I think a case could conceivably be made for double effect. Double effect comes into play when one action has two effects, one of which is intended, the other which is not intended but only foreseen as inevitably joined with the first, and the good effect outweighs the bad effect in circuмstances sufficiently grave to justify causing the bad effect. Even if we consider only public policy positions, its not as if there are none which Trump has taken that are contrary to natural law. He supported the law permitting "transgenders" to use a washroom for the opposite sex and Cruz got into a fight with him over it. But all that's passe now.

    As for opposition to unjust wars, Trump sounds great but doesn't really have a record. He says he opposed the Iraq war from the beginning but his Howard Stern interview in 2002 doesn't really corroborate that. This is what was said, STERN: "Are you for invading Iraq? TRUMP: "Yeah, I guess so. You know, I wish the first time it was done correctly." The very best case scenario is two or three pro-life justices appointed by Trump and the pain-capable act (which he has pledged to sign, that outlaws abortion after 20 weeks) becoming law and another president taking it further from there later.

    Offline OHCA

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2834
    • Reputation: +1866/-112
    • Gender: Male
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #43 on: October 23, 2016, 06:56:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Quote from: poche
    Quote from: hollingsworth
    JDK:
    Quote
    Ignore the presidential election and go downballot. Both of them are wretched candidates.


    You really mean to say that Trump and Clinton share wretchedness eqully?  I can't believe I'm hearing this.

    Trump is no more wretched, (and I assume you mean, basically, from a moral standpoint) than a number of our presidents have been.

    FDR had at least one affair.  His favorite mistress was right at his side in Warm Springs, GA the day he died in April of 1945.  Kennedy was a notorious womanizer.  Nobody disputes that. So was Lyndon Johnson.  Woodrow Wilson was blackmailed during is first term by the Jew, Samuel Untemeyer, over the wife of a fellow professor at Princetion U. with whom, allegedly,  he had had an intimate affair.  

    I'm sure other presidents of our nation were guilty of sowing their wild oats, as well.

    But before you and other trads become too righteous in your indignation, just remember this:  Hillary promises to appoint pro-choice justices, one promise alone which should put miles between her and Trump in the minds of all true Catholics.  She wants entirely open borders and unrestricted foreign immigration.  That's just for starters.  

    Trump has clearly outlined his program, item by item, for the restoration of this country, the elimination of government corruption, and the preservation of its Constitution. https://www.c-span.org/video/?417328-1/donald-trump-unveils-100day-action-plan-gettysburg-address

    Clinton makes very few specific recommendations for correcting our country's wrongs and putting it back on the path towards prosperity and national restoration of moral integrity.  She is in the pocket of the lobbyists, the big banks and foreign donors.

     


    Why not vote for a third party candidate?


    So, Poche, you have clearly stated that you cannot vote for Trump.  Can (will) you vote for Hillary?

    Offline OHCA

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2834
    • Reputation: +1866/-112
    • Gender: Male
    Voting for Trump?
    « Reply #44 on: October 23, 2016, 07:02:36 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Nishant
    Quote
    I'm not sure I even see this as "double effect".  I see this more as "unworthy candidate".  Double effect implies that voting for Trump would be the endorsement of some evil.  I don't see that in his current positions.


    He supported the law permitting "transgenders" to use a washroom for the opposite sex and Cruz got into a fight with him over it. But all that's passe now.


    I have only heard him say that this is a states' rights issue that should be left to the states.