AmericanPapist Comments
I just did my own request for a draft copy. Now to see what happens.
The teaching on abortion is clear. The very first Church document we have of teaching by the Church Fathers--The Didache--clearly states the evil of abortion.
Yet many liberal "Catholics"--actually gnostics who look at themselves as Catholics--will vote for pro-choice candidates. All this "voting guide" document is about is easing their conscience by implying that other issues are equal in importance. They are not.
Racism: Affirmative action is racism, and Republicans are generally against it. Pretty clear there.
Death penalty: The death penalty for severe crimes has NEVER been against Church teaching. If this "voting guide" implies it has been, it is misrepresenting the teachings of the Church.
Unjust war: Tell that to Al Qaeda.
Torture: Tell that to Al Qaeda.
Unjust immigration policy: Tell that to open borders advocates and illegal aliens who are not respecting the law. True, as of now, we have an unjust immigration policy since we are not deporting illegals, making our system unjust to those who have come here illegally and to those who are losing their jobs to illegal immigrants.
All in all, it is very clear that conservatives represent Church teaching and liberals do not, but the "voting guide" put out by liberal "Catholics" is trying to obfuscate this point.
The death penalty is to be used only as a last resort when the safety of society continues to be in peril. We don't have that problem today with our prison system. I challenge you to find a bishop that endorses the use of the death penalty.
I'm not quite certain what your point is in bringing up al Qaeda in terms of unjust war and torture. Are you saying that because these people, who pervert what their religion teaches, engage in such matters, we're allowed to do it, as well? If that is what you're saying, and I could be wrong since conjecture is difficult to discern on an informal message board, then I guess human rights can get thrown out the window. I don't think the Church has that in mind.
As for illegal immigration, our Church leaders in this country understand the government has a broken policy and that we need to secure our borders, but most all of them oppose splitting families through deportation of those who are already here.
So with the exception of abortion (the granddaddy issue of 'em all, of course) and gay rights, I don't see where conservatives can say Church teachings lies squarely in their corner.
Sent my request in at 1:30pm. Got my copy at 2:18pm same day.
Sometimes it helps to work for the Church.
I'm a conservative, and I agree with Nathan's post.
Just out of curiosity, what is the perceived "conservative" view on illegal immigration?
In terms of electoral politics, I've read from many different articles that Republicans in both Iowa and New Hampshire are livid with John McCain primarily for his support for the immigration bill that died early this past summer. And also look no further than Tom Tancredo's platform.
Furthermore, this past summer at a family reunion on my mom's side of the family a conservative aunt and uncle became enraged with another aunt--who's a nun--for her compassion for illegal immigrants. Sister Dominic wasn't the only religious person I know of to have received heated words from those who have no love for illegals. My archbishop got this email this past May: “Goddamn your soul to hell for protecting those lowlife filthy [illegal immigrant] vermin." And, while I certainly wouldn't unfairly generalize all conservatives of feeling that way, I think it's representative of most.
My last word above was "most." I also don't think that's fair. "Many," I think, would be the better word. My parents certainly don't possess such views, and I know many other conservatives who don't, either. However, I just don't get the sense of such animosity toward illegals described above when I talk to liberals.
Your Title is in error...it reads USSCB (reminds me of USSR...) where it should reas USCCB. Just so you notice.
Nathan,
I can tell you are a liberal and vote for pro-choice candidates by your justification of the other issues.
Immigration: Sure you can find sob stories about immigration and a few people that use heated language about deporting those who broke our laws. However, it is far less compassionate to not secure our borders and deport those who broke the law. How on earth is deportation of families not compassionate? It is not like they are being executed. They are simply being sent back at taxpayer expense to the countries they came from. They were not supposed to enter our country and yet they chose to have no respect for our laws and to break them.
This is not fair or compassionate to those immigrants who came the correct way. The only country in our hemisphere that it could be justified in not sending them back would be Cuba, but as shown by Elian Gonzalez, "compassionate" liberals were gung-ho about deportation then.
I bring up Al Qaeda for the reason that liberal "Catholics" like to say that the U.S. humiliating a few Al Qaeda killers is equal to the type of torture Al Qaeda would inflict on their prisoners. It is absurd, but that is what the "voting guide" is implying.
Liberal "Catholics," who often are simply neo-gnostics, have a very difficult time in knowing the difference between appearing compassionate, i.e. let me show my goodness and enlightenment to the world so I can get praise, and true compassion. Conservatism, by its very nature, whether in the Church or in society, is compassionate.
The death penalty is to be used only as a last resort when the safety of society continues to be in peril. We don't have that problem today with our prison system.
Sure we do -- the lives of other prisoners and those who guard them are at risk, particularly from prisoners who are in prison for life and who have nothing to lose.
The death penalty shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as torture and unjust war, let alone abortion.
I consider myself a conservative, and I like to believe that I think issues through very carefully before forming an opinion.
I don't know what I think about the whole illegal immigration mess at this point, and I don't think that there is a genuine "conservative" view on it (at least not one that's based on ideology).
Here are some of my concerns:
1. The border issue is serious, but far more aliens become "illegal" by entering the country legally and then overstaying. This is true of all of the 9/11 hijackers. Building a fence will not stop them, and it will not catch the ones who are already here.
2. Much as I love all of my conservative brothers and sisters, there is an undercurrent of racism in a lot of the chatter about illegal immigrants. Almost all of these folks have come here for the same reasons that my northern European ancestors came -- to make a better life for themselves and their children. They come from places where you can work hard all of your life and never come close to the type of prosperity and economic security available here.
3. I don't live anywhere near the Southern U.S. border, so I have very little first hand experience or knowledge with the type of problems those states and cities are experiencing as a result of illegal immigration. It strikes me as worthy of some weight, however, that the former Governor of Texas (Pres. Bush) and the present Senator from Arizona (Sen. McCain) both hold similar views about these issues . . . views that are not shared by a large number of their conservative friends.
4. Do we have many illegal immigrants from prosperous, democratic nations? I think not. Spreading democracy and helping to build prosperity among our neighbors might, therefore, be a prudent step toward dealing with the problem.
5. Having said all that, I still don't have any idea who, if anyone, has the right approach here.
E-mailed my request a week ago.
Still waiting. *Sigh*
Brassband, I don't know what the right approach is, either. When the Senate bill was going through that seemed to be a compromise between both parties back in May and June, I thought that was pretty much the best option we could devise. It was better than the present status quo. Something has to get fixed and fast.
I also never once equated matters of racism and torture and the death penalty, as abhorrent as they are, to abortion. Those issues were brought up to say the Church represents the conservative spectrum of American politics, and I respectfully disagreed. Then I'm labeled a Catholic who votes for pro-choice candidates. I'll choose not to respond to that.
dcs, you do make the valid point that some prisoners do murder other prisoners or guards. I believe in the past decade or so I've read where such a prisoner or two was executed for his actions inside the pen, but I don't know what the reaction of Church leaders was to that. I also know that problematic prisoners are sent to the Supermax prison in Colorado. I would imagine the Church prefers this latter option over the former, but I don't have a problem with the former, either.
abortion's pre-eminence.
The pre-eminence of the abortion issue is not honored by those on the right wing who limit themselves to one initiative (partial criminalization) in response to the tragedy of abortion and oppose other initiatives (social assistance).
The right wing philosophy that we must stop abortion in any way that does not raise their taxes is to deny pre-eminence due to this issue. And for that, they should worry about the state of their soul.
You do not have the right to say "I am against abortion and it must be addressed my way and only my way". Pre-eminence means you must use all available means to protect life.
4 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
