AmericanPapist Comments
MITT:
1. Judges
2. Judges
3. Judges
Huckabee is clearly the most catholic in his moral positions as compared to all the other people in the poll. Clinton, Obama, McCain, are just the worst on moral values for this country which is a desperate need now. Romney, it depends if you can trust his conversion on Abortion and other moral issues. Ron Paul, even though his record on moral issues is second strongest next to Huckabee, he still is only in favor of state choice on legal abortion not on overturning it at the federal level, to me that is just not good enough. To me the moral values are the most important when it comes to leadership, because our country needs a whole lot of it right now. So for me it has to be Huckabee. Peace to all.
Huck can't win!!! It does't add up.
All he is doing is acting like a spoiler tomorrow and taking the social conservative vote (ie pro-life) away from Mitt.
Introducing President Hussein Obama.
Ron Paul
1 Pro-Life
2 Understands natural law basis for the Constitution/Declaration
3 Pro-Life
3 issues Catholics must support
1. Pro-life: Mitt; McCain; Huck
2. Pro-marriage: Mitt; Huck
3. Pro-Voucher: Mitt
Mitt for President
If not during the primaries, when are we supposed to vote for the candidate we like best, not the one we think has the better chance against the Democrats?
I like both Paul and Huck, and think they are the ones who have most thought-out and internally accepted the moral issues, but they have embraced opposite extremes when it comes to the power and size of the federal government. I'd appreciate a little balance.
McCain; he's least objectionable; I keep hearing that he isn't conservative enough, but he has a 0% rating from NARAL. And we'll win the war. Ron Paul's supporters keep stuffing ballots in online polls, and Alan Keyes is unfortunately slightly insane.
McCain was endorsed by Republicans for Choice. he should get on the air NOW and repudiate it.
Me? No thank you. I'm not endorsing anyone here. It's not immoral to not vote when there's no morally acceptable candidate.
McCain also routinely gets the votes of most pro-choicers/pro-aborts, according to exit polls.
Any pro-lifer who votes McCain will find themselves standing next to an awful lot of abortion supporters.
Some are deluding themselves, and for once, I don't think that it is the pro-choicers/pro-aborts.
Pro-Life
Can Win
Won't make health care even worse
McCain supports government funds for embryonic stem cell research. McCain was part of the "Gang of 14" that opposed conservative federal judge appointments. McCain opposed Wisconsin Right to Life all the way to the Supreme Court in their effort to issue pro-life score cards for politicians.
Mitt is my man.
Ron Paul. A vote for Ron Paul is a vote to have a gay presence among the delegates at the Republican National Convention.
best candidate = Joe Schriner
www.voteforjoe.com
Can you please add Alan Keyes?
McCain - ProLife
McCain - WOT (This is a war against Islamic extremism and I don't want to wear a burka - it's not Catholic)
McCain has a chance of beating both Obama and Hillary.
Huckabee:
1) He's technically the most pro-life
2) He has Chuck Norris' endorsement.
3) And that counts for two (because if you're backed by Chuck Norris, the other candidates mysteriously die by round-house kicks on the night of super Tuesday:)
Ron Paul:
1) He will change the way the pro life movement operates to have more immediate effects. He will breath new life into the pro-life movement.
2) He will actually implement a form of subsidiarity, which, while too individualistic for Catholic political philosophy, best approaches the Catholic ideal of subsidiarity.
3) He will cut government spending and cut government leaving more money for Catholics to donate to Catholic charities, more responsibility for the Church to take up, and less money going to planned parenthood.
There's many others. But I'm limited to three.
I second Mark F.
Alan Keyes has always been steadfastly and eloquently clear and vocal in his defense of a truly Catholic polis.
Yet...
Ron Paul is on the ballot. So...
Ron Paul is an obstetrician and pro-life. He grew up on a farm and values simplicity. He is a libertarian, sure, but he will only appoint Justices who have as limited a definition of government as he does.
And that's more than ANY candidate can put together. I don't where you people got the idea that Romney's going to appoint good Justices. McCain is far far far too supportive of the DoD to be endorsable by Catholics (Just War is defined as a last resort, not a foreign policy).
If he could win, I'd support Ron Paul. Since Ron Paul can't win, I support Romney.
Reasons to vote for Ron Paul: abortion (he understands that the Congress can remove abortion from the jurisdiction of the USSC), abolition of the income tax, real money (i.e., gold/silver), return military to its proper task of defending the territory of the U.S. Romney is unlikely to confront the evils of fiat money, the income tax, and the over-extension of the military. But he will manage the country's affairs better than anyone else.
katherine: Why is it desirable to have a self-identified gay presence at the Republican convention?
Ron Paul
1) He is pro-life (and has the voting record to back it up)
2) He wants to end the un-Constitutional (and very likely unjust) war now and bring our troops home.
3) He supports shrinking our Government and slashing our budget (which will help the economy NOW before it's too late).
Ron Paul is clearly the most Catholic-friendly, home-school-friendly, family-friendly candidate available.
Super Tuesday exit polls are in --
Once again, as in every other primary/caucus, the favorite Republican candidate for those supporting abortion was John McCain.
Ron Paul or Huckabee
Unfortunatley for Huckabee, although he talks the talk, he doesn't walk the walk.
So, Ron Paul.
A comment for someone above that commented on Ron Paul supporters ~stuffing~ polls. What you need to do is look at the numbers of Ron Paul supporters. Over a million in America alone, so far. We're not stuffing the polls, we are simply responding to them. What people don't seem to understand for some reason... behind every poll vote is a living breathing person on the other side of the internet connection. We are growing. We are unhappy.. we want our country back. We are tired of voting the lesser evil. Whether he wins or not, we can finally vote for a real man, not a manufactured one. So, wake up, or what is coming to you economically will be something that you have brought on yourself.
Statement of Faith
By Rep. Ron Paul, MD.
The Covenant News ~ July 21, 2007
We live in times of great uncertainty when men of faith must stand up for our values and our traditions lest they be washed away in a sea of fear and relativism. As you likely know, I am running for President of the United States, and I am asking for your support.
I have never been one who is comfortable talking about my faith in the political arena. In fact, the pandering that typically occurs in the election season I find to be distasteful. But for those who have asked, I freely confess that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, and that I seek His guidance in all that I do. I know, as you do, that our freedoms come not from man, but from God. My record of public service reflects my reverence for the Natural Rights with which we have been endowed by a loving Creator.
I have worked tirelessly to defend and restore those rights for all Americans, born and unborn alike. The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideal of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle.
In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman. In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, H.R. 1094. I am also the prime sponsor of H.R. 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn. I have also authored H.R. 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called “population control.” Many talk about being pro-life. I have taken and will continue to advocate direct action to restore protection for the unborn.
I have also acted to protect the lives of Americans by my adherence to the doctrine of “just war.” This doctrine, as articulated by Augustine, suggested that war must only be waged as a last resort--- for a discernible moral and public good, with the right intentions, vetted through established legal authorities (a constitutionally required declaration of the Congress), and with a likely probability of success.
It has been and remains my firm belief that the current United Nations-mandated, no-win police action in Iraq fails to meet the high moral threshold required to wage just war. That is why I have offered moral and practical opposition to the invasion, occupation and social engineering police exercise now underway in Iraq. It is my belief, borne out by five years of abject failure and tens of thousands of lost lives, that the Iraq operation has been a dangerous diversion from the rightful and appropriate focus of our efforts to bring to justice to the jihad
It is my belief, borne out by five years of abject failure and tens of thousands of lost lives, that the Iraq operation has been a dangerous diversion from the rightful and appropriate focus of our efforts to bring to justice to the jihadists that have attacked us and seek still to undermine our nation, our values, and our way of life.
I opposed giving the president power to wage unlimited and unchecked aggression, However, I did vote to support the use of force in Afghanistan. I also authored H.R. 3076, the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001. A letter of marque and reprisal is a constitutional tool specifically designed to give the president the authority to respond with appropriate force to those non-state actors who wage aggression against the United States while limiting his authority to only those responsible for the atrocities of that day. Such a limited authorization is consistent with the doctrine of just war and the practical aim of keeping Americans safe while minimizing the costs in blood and treasure of waging such an operation.
On September 17, 2001, I stated on the house floor that “…striking out at six or eight or even ten different countries could well expand this war of which we wanted no part. Without defining the enemy there is no way to know our precise goal or to know when the war is over. Inadvertently more casual acceptance of civilian deaths as part of this war I'm certain will prolong the agony and increase the chances of even more American casualties. We must guard against this if at all possible.” I’m sorry to say that history has proven this to be true.
I am running for president to restore the rule of law and to stand up for our divinely inspired Constitution. I have never voted for legislation that is not specifically authorized by the Constitution. As president, I will never sign a piece of legislation, nor use the power of the executive, in a manner inconsistent with the limitations that the founders envisioned.
Many have given up on America as an exemplar for the world, as a model of freedom, self-government, and self-control. I have not. There is hope for America. I ask you to join me, and to be a part of it.
Sincerely,
Ron Paul
Ron Paul 2008
Presidential Campaign Committee
www.RonPaul2008.com
Phone: 703-248-9115
FAX: 703-248-9119
Isn't the Catholic Church pro-life and pro-peace? Didn't Pope John Paul say the war in Iraq was unjust? I guess we don't believe in "just war" anymore. As a Catholic I feel the only person that I can vote for is Ron Paul because he is both Pro-life and Pro-peace. Choose how you will sell your soul: 1+ million abortions a year (Dem) or hundreds of thousands of military and civilian deaths in Iraq.
My husband and I made a promise to the Virgin Mary to vote for the candidate that will reverse the evil Roe V. Wade.
That Candidate is Ron Paul. He is a Christian man, he has been married to the same woman for 51 years, he has 5 children, 18 grandchildren, and is a faithful and righteous man.
He is pro-life, against the death penalty, wants to end the war, protect our borders, and he will put more money back into the pockets of every American.
If you are not acquainted with his views, please visit his website:
http://www.ronpaul2008.com
I URGE you to learn more about Dr. Ron Paul.
I am a Roman Catholic and I am serious about my faith ... I am also serious about the US Constitution.
Ron Paul is the only satisfying candidate who supports my right to practice my faith AND who will restore the Constitution.
Ron Paul should receive every Catholic vote.
First reason to vote Ron Paul:
He is against war. How can anyone call themselves Christian and promote slaughter of innocent lives?
Second reason to vote Ron Paul:
He understands and abides by the law of the land the U.S. Constitution. No other candidate even mentions that as an important topic..
Third reason to vote Ron Paul:
He is a devout Christian with 2 brothers that are ministers. They all understand peace and love and their families practice this as well.
Ron Paul
1) Pro- life. As an ob/gyn he delivered some 4000 babies, but never performed an abortion.
2)Fiscally responsible He has never voted to raise taxes.
3)Sensible foreign policy. He does not want us to squander our resources
(both money and lives) trying to impose our will upon the world
There are other reasons, but the poll calls for only 3.
"Once again, as in every other primary/caucus, the favorite Republican candidate for those supporting abortion was John McCain."
This is pretty much true, and given McCain's rather impeccible pro-life record it begs the question, why? Two theories:
1. Pro-choice voters favor him for reasons other than his stance on abortion; and
2. Pro-choice voters believe that his pro-life views, however authentic, will not translate into judges hostile to Roe v. Wade.
My guess is that it is mostly 1 but some of 2 too.
Although I'm prepared to support McCain as the best option, I do worry about 2.
And a question for the parade of Paul groupies above: Why don't you just write in Jesus? He is superior to Paul in every way and has exactly the same chance of being elected.
"katherine: Why is it desirable to have a self-identified gay presence at the Republican convention?
Fr. Joe"
He's your candidate, Father Joe, why don't you ask him why he is naming gay activists as his delegates? Maybe it is because open gays are the only Republicans they trust not to misuse the rest rooms as they fly into the Convention in Minneapolis :)
Mike Petrik call the Pope and ask him if he thinks McCain will save your soul.
And a question for the parade of Paul groupies above: Why don't you just write in Jesus? He is superior to Paul in every way and has exactly the same chance of being elected.
Mike, I take my Catholic faith very seriously, as must we all. This poll doesn't ask "who has the best chance of winning", but in fact "which candidate deserves my vote". As Catholics, we must not only vote our consciences, but educate our consciences beforehand. I'm only guessing that you are a Catholic since this post is asking Catholics the question, but I'm not sure how you can faithfully support McCain at this point (remember, we're still in the primaries, not the general election... this isn't a lesser of evils/greater of goods battle yet).
And one other thing, is it really a charitable thing to call Ron Paul supporters "groupies"?
Yours in Christ,
Capitol Knight
I think Ron Paul is the most appropriate choice for Catholics because:
1. He is pro-life/anti-war. Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God
2. He is pro-life/anti-abortion (he's an OB/GYN who has delivered over 4000 babies). Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
3. He is for sound (commodity backed) money. Our government allows the Federal Reserve (which is privately owned) to counterfeit our money, and then charge interest on it. This is theft. Some may say that we need this system to prevent crisis. Although the Federal Reserve System can be used to prevent crisis, it can also create them -- plus, the ends do not justify the means. Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice: for they shall have their fill.
There are more positives about Ron Paul -- please look them up at http://ronpaullibrary.org/
RH
"And a question for the parade of Paul groupies above: Why don't you just write in Jesus?"
What a flip thing to say. If you really want an answer, I might suggest the Third Commandment.
Another one for Ron Paul.
1. Impeccable pro-life record
2. Sensible fiscal policy
3. Sensible foreign policy
katherine: I'm not sure what your point is. I don't favor, nor do I have a problem with, there being gay delegates at the Republican Convention. Whatever their other political activities, I doubt they will engage in much, or any, gay activism at the convention. In any case, I know that Ron Paul's interpretation of the Constitution would exclude any gay activism on the part of the federal government.
Father --
I'm glad you are down with gay activists having leadership roles in the GOP. If you could just get your fellow Republicans to take the same tolerant view as yours, we would all be better.
Reality Check:
No, and neither will any political candidate.
Ed and Capital:
Fair point on the Third Commandment. Substitute Cardinal George. And I'll stop being "flip" and "uncharitable" when the Paul groupies stop suggesting that votes for candidates other than Paul are somehow less than Catholic.
Just to be clear everybody: Catholicism has nothing to do with fiscal policy, federalism, gold standards, etc, and even what to do about Iraq at this point is substantially a prudential question aside from the torture issue (which McCain is right on). The suggestion that supporting McCain is a lesser of evils calculus under Catholic moral theology is unsupportable rubbish.
And I'll stop being "flip" and "uncharitable" when the Paul groupies stop suggesting that votes for candidates other than Paul are somehow less than Catholic.
So you're saying "I'll stop sinning when someone else does or doesn't do something"? How does that make sense? The challenge (and responsibility) of followers of Christ is doing His will despite how we feel or what others do. Otherwise martyrdom has no value.
As for saying voting for others is "less than Catholic", the Church (through the Bible and tradition) gives us some clear ways to figure out which candidates are the best choice for Catholics. Abortion and just war doctrine are included high-up in that list, in order of importance (the 10 Commandments are in order for a reason). Killing the unborn is objectively evil, period. War is not always objectively evil, but it is rarely just. The Pope has called the war in Iraq an unjust one (and I find it extremely hard to reason otherwise), not to mention the unconstitutionality of the war (there was no vote). As for the torture issue, thankfully McCain being against it is in line with Catholic teaching.
There, Mike. That makes much more sense. I do think CapitolKnight makes a good point about, we have to reform ourselves even if others don't... Cheers, all.
Fair point, Capitol. I'll try to remember to confess to the sin of calling some Paul supporters "groupies."
Leaving aside the Pope's personal views on the Iraq war, I'm happy you've exercised your obligation to reason to a position. Personally, I've stuggled with it since the facts necessary to get there seem uncertain, elusive and fluid, which is why I have changed my mind several times and don't have a view that I hold with much confidence, other than believing that at this point it would be more moral to stay and win than cut and run. You are welcome to disagree of course, and that doesn't make you a bad Catholic in my book -- a courtesy that Catholic Paul supporters are all too often unwilling to extend to others.
Paul seems to think that our constitution enshrines a libertarian social system. As much as I share some sympathies with such a system, he's just wrong on that in my view. Our constitution permits a socialist state as well as a libertarian one (to the extent the latter doesn't risk a contradiction in terms), and a Catholic can support either approach in good conscience.
Here's where Ron Paul loses me, and this is something Obama doesn't get, either: the war may have been unjust, but immediately withdraw would be deeply immoral, as well, and I believe Pope Benedict has stated that or at least alluded to it. Any serious observer of Iraq says that that country is in a very precarious position right now, and any massive withdrawal would ignite the tinderbox. So yeah, the war might have been a bad idea (I supported the idea, but the execution was horrible; thanks, Rummy), but we just can't leave like Paul and Obama want and allow Iraqis to resume killing each other.
Indeed, this issue has been a complicated one for me as well, Mike. The thoughts of what can happen in the vacuum are frightening and I fear for the Iraqi people left behind. If the war was indeed unjust, then we shouldn't have started it and I think we should responsibly deal with the aftermath. But can the U.S. afford to continue supporting the Iraqi defense? Don't we also have the responsibility to defend our homeland at home? And don't we have the responsibility to go to war in a constitutional way? There are legal ways to provide military assistance to countries like Iraq, including, if ever "needed", the formal declaration of war. Other countries keep pulling their support and nobody else is stepping up to the plate. Not that it makes a difference morally speaking (we shouldn't decline to help our fellow man because nobody else joins us), but won't a bankrupt United States in economic distress make it easier for terrorists to push people around? Osama bin Laden said he wanted to bankrupt the U.S., and it sure looks like that's where we're heading.
Anyway, I share your frustration on how to deal with this issue. I never said that Ron Paul was perfect (neither does he, thankfully), but other than this issue, I think he's got a lot more right than any of the others.
Just my two cents (isn't that what the dollar is worth today?... j/k)
Yours in Christ,
CapitolKnight
Dr. Ron Paul ~
The Right Man with the Right Values
http://www.prayforpaul.com/
Strength, resolve, charisma, and interest in your fellow man are the defining qualities found in a good leader, but integrity, honesty, humility and a genuine love for humanity are the qualities you find in a Godly leader.
Ron Paul is a Godly leader. He has proven himself to be a man of immense character and fortitude, 20 years as a (R) Congressman from TX, and he is still talking about freedom, liberty, and the dignities afforded to us by the U.S. Constitution. His values are your values. Peace, family, life, liberty, and reduction of intrusive, big government in the lives of Americans.
The ideals of a nation are reflected in the quality of its leadership, if we want peace, prosperity, and a leader who will not buckle to the whims of corporate, and global pressure then we need to ask God for such a man.
Pray for Ron Paul America, support him financially, and familiarize yourself with his vision. A strong economy, a return to a Constitutional form of government, the restoration of our nation’s great name in the world and a leader we can trust to do what is right in times of trial. This is exactly what we can expect from a Ron Paul Presidency.
The purpose of this site is to share Dr. Ron Paul's vision with fellow believers and catalog the prayers offered up in support. If you have a prayer for Ron Paul, please visit our prayer book and let God and the rest of the world know why we pray for Ron Paul.
Dr. Paul speaks about his "Sanctity of Life" Bill, Just Christian War Theory and advocacy of sound money principles...
___________
8,500 Attend Ron Paul Talk at Liberty University
U.S. Congressman Ron Paul, Republican candidate for president, speaks at Friday's convocation service in the Vines Center of Liberty University, Feb 7, 2008.
Hosted by LU Chancellor Jerry Falwell Jr.
INTRO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P...h?
v=PruslSx9p18
part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E...h?
v=Ek5uzGv1ijk
part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s...h?
v=seOZ2S8wV3s
part 3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k...h?v=kWmQV2y-
NwU
part 4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k...h?
v=kcm0KGHLFJ4
"Our constitution permits a socialist state as well as a libertarian one..."
I have to distinguish. Our Constitution most assuredly does NOT permit a socialist FEDERAL government, because NONE of the powers necessary to establish socialism is delegated to the Federal government in the Constitution.
The states can be considerably more socialist, if they wish. (I am speaking only of what the Constitution itself says, of course. According to Catholic social teaching, socialism is theft, murder, and tyranny--all combined into one evil system.)
"According to Catholic social teaching, socialism is theft, murder, and tyranny--all combined into one evil system.)"
Then the Pope consorts with thieves, murderers and tyrants.
Well, Katherine, I'm not sure what that proves. After all, Jesus consorted with sinners and His Church is pretty much composed of them.
Fr. Joe,
Ron Paul's understanding of the Constitution is grounded in an idiosyncratic understanding of the 9th and 10th amendments. This understanding is hard to square with either the commerce clause or the elastic (necessary and proper) clause. It is an understanding well outside the mainstream of American constitutional scholarship. As much as I disfavor socialism as inimical to human nature and as much as I believe that our social system benefits from a healthy libertarian impulse, I'm afraid the Framers delegated more power to the federal government than you, or Rep. Paul, suppose. Moreover, the power to tax alone is probably sufficient to create functional socialism. Our constitution does not prevent us from making horrible policy errors; it's mostly just a playbook for who gets to make those mistakes and how.
Mike Petrik: I don't think so. That is, I don't think Ron Paul's labelling of Social Security, or the "War on Drugs," or the war in Iraq, as "unconstitutional," is based on the 9th and 10th amendments.
Even if there were no 9th and 10th amendments, the absence of any delegation to the federal government of most of the powers the Federal government has usurped would be sufficient to brand most of the Federal government's activities as unconstitutional.
When Prohibition was wanted, everyone acknowledged that the 18th Amendment was necessary, in order to give the Federal government the necessary authority. Yet, with no corresponding "drug amendment," the Federal government enforces an identical (and much more draconian) Prohibition against hundreds of chemical substances other than alcohol.
5 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
