Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: campaignPete R-CT
The good bishop specifically told his correspondent that it was not his function as bishop to tell her whether to vote or for whom, that he recommended that she inform her conscience according to Catholic Church principles and act accordingly. He also told her that, if all candidates were pro-abortion to one degree or another, there were three approaches to choose from: voting for the less objectionable candidate, voting for a pro-lifer not a candidate, i.e. in the bishop's diocese "Baby Angela," or not vote for the specific office or at all. What Catholic can reasonably and comfortably disagree with the bishop?

It is true that we often have a wider choice of candidates in a primary than in a general election. We ought to vote in a primary for a well-qualified PRO-LIFE candidate in the primary but there is no moral excuse for voting for a candidate who is generally a pro-abort in the primary or the election. I am tempted to vote for Bruce Rauner for Illinois governor but only because Pat Quinn is such a public policy disgrace on so many levels including abortion, taxes, spending, personal and systemic political corruption and his support of "gay" everything including "gay""marriage" because "his Faith demands it to which Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield responded: "And what Faith is that? Certainly not the one I represent!" And yet, Bruce Rauner is a Lutheran and not a Catholic (presumably the very liberal ELCA), would be a lot better on taxes and spending and a lot more competent manager and, though a supporter of legal abortion and "gay""marriage," Rauner seems for now not inclined to support further degeneration. We have several third party pro-lifers on the final ballot. My "Republican" Congressman and State Senator are not worth voting for and the Congressman is unopposed at an early age, regrettably. I find myself asking conservative Democrat friends including a deacon who was a long-time pro-life and pro-family and anti-tax state rep before he gave up his seat to become a deacon, if it is not possible to arrange a pro-lifer's Democrat nomination against the GOP Establishment stooge and sock puppet but no luck so far. The GOP primary with a good candidate against the Stooge Adam Kinzinger came out with the good candidate drowned in Establishment $$$$$ and losing about 2-1.

The Body of Christ is not really involved in these contests just a bunch of sinners presented with bad choices and the bad choices.

I have very seldom consciously voted for a pro-abort in my life. Only Joe Lieberman comes to mind. I believed that he was SUCH an Orthodox Jew that he was good for a pro-life vote to be named later. Weicker was good for absolutely nothing. Rauner may be the second but I won't know until my pen is on the ballot in the voting booth. Realistically, my vote won't make the difference, If the election comes down to a one vote margin, Rahm Emmanuel will just find an extra thousand ballots in some campaign workers' trunk and they will be unanimously for Quinn. Then my morals are intact. I'll know next Tuesday night.

One final note. Even when he was still generally a liberal Democrat, Hartford's Archbishop John Whealon (then your bishop and mine) made no bones about delivering the message that Reagan was the candidate for Catholics to vote for. He also wrote columns in the archdiocesan newspaper about how the Democrats had been right on all the little issues in American history: taxes and spending, defense and war, labor, etc., but that there really were only two BIG issues in American history: slavery and abortion---and the Democrats had blown both. The Archbishop then wrote that he was giving scandal by being a registered Democrat in the age of abortion. He re-registered as a Republican and gave public favor to Reagan because of the pro-life issue.

God bless!

18 posted on 10/28/2014 5:28:03 PM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club: Rack 'em Danno!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: BlackElk

I have not read your rely yet, but
a. there is a man named Suzio here in CT that lost his re-election by 250 votes out of 40,000.

over 1500 Romney voters in the district, voted blank in that race. I met many at the polls after they were walking back to their car.
“I knew the Democrat was Planned Parenthood and N.O.W., but I wasn’t sure about Mr. Suzio, so I left it blank. Next time, he gets my vote.” The undervote is ours.

we have disabled ourselves. Only Religious People can talk themselves into such a corner. Bad Religions is disabling. And they were encouraged to think like that by pro-life amateur theologians.

90% of the People in the Catholic pews in Tobin’s diocese do not vote in primaries. Perhaps it would occur to him that the poor choices in November are a result of that fact.


19 posted on 10/28/2014 5:46:04 PM PDT by campaignPete R-CT (Let the dead bury the dead. Let the GOP bury the GOP.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: BlackElk
"to tell her whether to vote "

Voting is a Duty for Rhode Island Catholics, especially in primaries. I'd like to see the Church document which leaves it to the discretion of the individual whether any particular election is necessary to participate in.

What Catholic can reasonably and comfortably disagree with the bishop?


I not only disagree, but have enmity for such ideas. It is the sin of Pilate. Indifference when faced with difficulty.

80% of mankind will choose Pilate's path when faced with impossible choices ... we've invented the secret ballot to make it easier for certain types to participate. THey say "I am avoiding the near occasion of sin", but they are twisting doctrine to come up with an excuse.

"my vote won't make the difference"

Our votes are trivial. But doing anything that spreads the horrific practice of blank voting and/or not voting at all ... contributes to making a futile situation even worse. If Catholics are voting wrong, that is easier to correct, if their values are proper. If they develop a superstition about voting, it is futile. Better to vote wrong occasionally than to vote blank. IF THE STATE HOUSE WERE FILLED WITH JUST MEN, NOW THEY SHOULD SHOW UP AND PARTICIPATE IN PROCESS?

BUT THE WORSE THINGS GET, the less they should participate? As Buchanan said, they are abandoning their post in a time a war.
FLEE!!! FLEE!! FLEE!!! FLEE EVIL!!

After all, only ONE of the 12 made it to Calvary.
22 posted on 10/28/2014 6:59:37 PM PDT by campaignPete R-CT (Let the dead bury the dead. Let the GOP bury the GOP.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson