AmericanPapist Comments
If the bishops believe abortion is intrinsically evil, and the Democrat Party supports abortion on demand as part of its party's official platform, whereas the Republican Party does not, then where is the choice? Maybe one bishop says this document doesn't favor one political party over the other, but I think it does for a committed Catholic unless one can convince themselves that the minimum wage or capital punishment is in parri passu" with abortion.Look, the bishops should have condemned that portion of the Democrat platform, pure and simple. Such bold action may have even
convinced Dems to remove it and look for ways to actively promote life and avoid abortion. Unless the bishops are willing to do that, they're part of the problem, not the solution. Tom
While I concede that the platforms of each party are different in regards to matters of life, there is nevertheless a choice. Many Republicans aren't pro-life, and several Democrats in Congress are. At the local level, a very close friend of my parents is a Catholic (very active in our parish) pro-life Democrat who was running for City Council, and Kansas Right to Life endorsed the Republican simply because she was a Republican and he was a Democrat. I find that to be wrong. If the Church started playing the game of labeling every Democrat bad and every Republican as good, it would be extremely foolish.
And I think Democrats are starting to realize that they need to compete for pro-life votes, hence the several candidates that ran as pro-life in 2006. Also, it's been awhile since I read the story, but I saw there was a plan among Democrats to attempt to radically reduce the number of abortions in this country. It doesn't seem like the plan went anywhere, but it suggests that many in the Democratic Party are beginning to understand that abortion is wrong. Nevertheless, they have a long way to go from a few individuals understanding that to getting the whole party to understand that.
Nathan, you know and I know that the Republican Party is committed to the anti-abortion position, although given the left-wing loon media, they have not been nearly as successful
as either one of us would like.
Contrast that with the Dem Party's (aka Abortion Party)pro-abortion plank which they force every Presidential candidate to accept, a plank which is intrically evil. Thus
until the Dem Party removes the plank, how then, in good conscience,
particularly in light of the Vatican's recently issued, "Catholics in Public Life,"
could a practicing Catholic
vote for a Dem presidential candidate who adheres to their party's orthodoxy? I think a simple yes or no would do. Tom
The Republicans say they're committed to protecting the unborn, but I don't see much action on that. George W. Bush had a majority in Congress for six years, and the best that could be done in terms of defending the unborn is a Partial-Birth Abortion Law, in which 63 Democrats in the House and 17 in the Senate voted in favor. Without the help of the Dems in the Senate, the measure wouldn't have passed. Don't be too proactive on the issue, Republicans. Also, the GOP majority failed to ban all forms of embryonic stem cell research. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Ronald Reagan George H. W. Bush appointed pro-choice Supreme Court justices after opposing abortion was instituted into the platform. And it's quite possible a pro-choice candidate might be the Republican nominee next year!
Now I would agree that the GOP has a much better track record on the issue than Democrats, but where are the results? I don't see how anyone can think that they've done a whole helluva lot on the issue in 30 years. So, yeah, Catholics should vote for pro-life candidates, but there are Democrats who buck their party's platform. With that in mind, I just don't believe it's fair to blanket all members of the Democratic Party as enemies of the unborn. Republicans standing idle on the issue are just as bad, in my book.
Nathan, you forgot that George Bush by executive order prohibited federal funds to be used to pay for abortion. Hillary Clintoon or some other Dem will surely sign an executive order re-instating those funds. If Piux XI were alive today he would likely condemn the Dem Party (as he did Nazism and Facism)as intrinsically evil because of its official support of abortion, euthanasia, cell stem research and gay marriage. Sorry,Nathan, but given the Party's official positions, and the Vatican's statement on Catholics in Public Life, I can't see a practicing Catholic voting for the Abortion Party aka Dem Party. It's living a lie. I was a Democrat Official and left the party over its official position and it cost me money. Tom
I'm not disputing the official positions of either party. We're in complete agreement that the official position of the Democratic Party is unacceptable. I just happen to think that when it actual action, the Republican Party isn't worth extolling on the issue.
So what's the solution Nathan? Voting democrats into power on the local level so as to somehow "send a message" to the national party that being pro-abortion is a winning platform?
How does that work, exactly?
It doesn't matter how wonderful the local guy is, if his victory allows the pro-abortion PARTY to take control of crucial committees, etc. that can block all pro-life judges and officials from being put in government positions.
The only way to effect change is to make it crystal clear that abortion is radio-active for a political party's fortunes and individual politician's careers.
Commenting by HaloScan
