106-year-old voter chooses Obama

BBC ^ | October 12, 2008 | David Willey

[NYer]

b>A 106-year-old American nun living in a convent in Rome could well be the oldest person to vote in the 2008 US Presidential election.

Sister Cecilia Gaudette, who last voted for President Eisenhower in 1952, has registered to vote and says she will vote for Democrat Barack Obama.

Although hard of hearing, she keeps herself informed by reading newspapers and watching TV at the convent.

"I'm encouraged by Senator Obama," she says.

"I've never met him, but he seems to be a good man with a good private life. That's the first thing. Then he must be able to govern," she adds.

Sitting in her modest office in the convent where she has lived for the past 50 years, the diminutive nun appears uninterested in the row inside the American Catholic church over Senator Obama's support for pro-choice policies on abortion.

Asked about her hopes for the US under an Obama presidency, she says: "Peace abroad. I don't worry about the Iraq war because I can't do anything about it. Lord knows how it will end."

"It is very complicated," she said. "Those Eastern people are not like we are."

But despite taking part in the 4 November election, Sister Cecilia does not intend to return to the US.

"I have no plans for the future. I am too old to go back to the US. Life has changed too much."

But she still watches "very important events" on TV. The election comes under this category.

[Gerish]

"I've never met him, but he seems to be a good man with a good private life. That's the first thing. Then he must be able to govern," she adds.

That statement alone troubles me more than anything, mainly because it is the same reasoning I believe the uneducated are voting for Obama, "he seems like a nice man." Well Sister, people are not always what they seem. Remember our Lord's warning about wolves in sheep clothing? God help her.

[Salvation]

I still disagree.

You must think that it is OK to endorse a candidate who willfully breaks the commandment: “Thou shalt not kill.”

My response — never OK to endorse abortion. Even in the case of a mother’s death. Most mothers decide to let their infant live, and they will take their chances with God.

It’s doing what is right...........and abortion is never right. Babies can always be adopted or raised by someone else.

Please, please, pray for an end to abortion.

[AuntB]

“” Well Sister, people are not always what they seem. Remember our Lord’s warning about wolves in sheep clothing? God help her.”

How in the world does one live to be 106 and never learned that lesson?

[Salvation]

Pray for an end to abortion and the conversion of America to a culture of life!

Our nation has been warned repeatedly, and unless we stop abortion, the United States will reap the consequences.

[MoTiger]

“

As unbelievable as it may seem, most nuns supported Kerry in the last election. They do not like Bush- at all. Nuns are big on social programs, dislike Bush for the war and seem to ignore the big one- abortion.
“

Most nuns? Tell that to Mother Angelica.

[tioga]

Does she understand he is pro-abortion and would likely kill his unborn grandchildren this way?

[armydoc]

You must think that it is OK to endorse a candidate who willfully breaks the commandment: “Thou shalt not kill.” My response — never OK to endorse abortion. Even in the case of a mother’s death. Most mothers decide to let their infant live, and they will take their chances with God. It’s doing what is right...........and abortion is never right. Babies can always be adopted or raised by someone else. Please, please, pray for an end to abortion.

No, I was clarifying Catholic Teaching on the issue. I am staunchly pro-life and believe that voting for the Obamanation is unthinkable for a Christian to do for a multitude of reasons, his abortion stance being at the top. No, I am not Catholic as you certainly know, but I can read:


“A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voters intent is to support that position. In such cases a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. At the same time, a voter should not use a candidates opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues involving human life and dignity.”

Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Call to Political Responsibility from the Catholic Bishops of the United States United States Conference of Catholic Bishops http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/FCStatement.pdf


Let me guess: the Bishops of the UCCB are not Catholic?

[caseinpoint]

So this sister at 106 can be trusted to know the issues enough to vote, yet we cannot trust the recollection of Percy Sutton, almost 20 years younger, about Obama’s education funding?

[netmilsmom]

>>As unbelievable as it may seem, most nuns supported Kerry in the last election. They do not like Bush- at all. Nuns are big on social programs, dislike Bush for the war and seem to ignore the big one- abortion.<<

Make that some nuns.
Not most.

This is not the 80s. Most of the polyester orders are quickly dying. The habited traditional nuns are exploding.

They stand with us on the Right to Life and pray at abortion clinics.

[Ezekiel]

Where are her brains?

After 50 years in Italy? On permanent reposo!

[Irish Owl]

This poor old lady thinks she’s voting for another FDR. All she knows is what she hears from the Euro media. She has no idea that she has now been used to promote an evil cause.

[Irish Owl]

Its unfortunate that the Bishops Conference wrote that “A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion OR RACISM..” (my emphasis). Gee, I haven’t heard of any candidates running on the racism platform. That’s because there aren’t any. Yet, “racism” is still included although it isn’t an issue. Why have the Bishops so muddied the water? It would seem to this observant Catholic that the bishops are holding out some wiggle room to leftist kooks who accuse conservatives (with no proof) of racism. If one candidate is pro-abortion and one is pro-racism, then the voter can do as he wishes, so the leftist kook would conclude. Of course, this would only really work if conservatives supported the murder of 1,000,000 non-whites a year. Otherwise, it is still not an equivalent to abortion for Catholics. There are millions of clear-headed conservatives among the ranks of Catholics. Unfortunately, few of those Catholics happen to be bishops or professors in “Catholic” universities these days.
Armydoc further writes: “Let me guess: the Bishops of the U[S]CCB are not Catholic?” My friend, you have no idea...

[Salvation]

I do believe we are witnessing the fruits of Pope Benedict's meeting with them (the U. S. Bishops) earlier this year. Following Vespers, he addressed all the bishops.

"Is it consistent to profess our beliefs in church on Sunday, and then during the week to promote business practices or medical procedures contrary to those beliefs? Is it consistent for practicing Catholics to ignore or exploit the poor and the marginalized, to promote sexual behavior contrary to Catholic moral teaching, or to adopt positions that contradict the right to life of every human being from conception to natural death? Any tendency to treat religion as a private matter must be resisted. Only when their faith permeates every aspect of their lives do Christians become truly open to the transforming power of the Gospel. "
FULL TEXT

[Salvation]

Cardinal Ratzinger (now the Pope) wrote in his letter to Cardinal McCarrick back in 2004:

“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 favor 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.”

[AnAmericanMother]

Here's the crucial point:

. . . which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons . . .

What could POSSIBLY be a 'proportionate reason' to set against the death of 1.3 million babies annually in the U.S. alone?

hint: there isn't one. "Social justice" doesn't cut it.

I don't know why no-one has pointed out that "social justice" is simply code for socialism, and that no Catholic should support turning over to the government the charitable duties incumbent on each human soul and the Church herself.

The problems are twofold:

1. By saying "let the government do it," liberal Catholics abandon their own duty of charity. This is why CINOs like Joe Biden give almost nothing to charity (even their supposed church).

2. By turning over their own and the Church's duty of charity to the government, such "Catholics" allow the government to use tax dollars for all sorts of anti-Catholic purposes -- like abortion, stem cell research, and even the persecution of Christians and withholding funding for Catholic charities that don't toe the line on abortion.

[verga]

I don’t believe so. My grandmother-in-law is 104 and she is not even the oldest person voting in Lubbock County (another voter is 105). Grandma is voting for McCain, btw.

Seeriously give her a hug and thank you from me. Not to hard though.

[an amused spectator]

...but he seems to be a good man with a good private life.

Guess she's never heard of Vera Baker - then she'd know exactly how sweet and good his private life is...

[MEGoody]

Sister Cecilia is senile, so of course she voted for Obama.

[HighlyOpinionated]

Has someone explained to Sister Cecilia that Obama is pro Abortion?

“If we do not protect life, there is no reason to fight for any other cause.”

[NYer]

Sister Cecilia is senile, so of course she voted for Obama.

Sister Cecilia's source of information is the the mainstream media. That does not make her senile; it makes her a victim.