Should Faithful Catholics Be Affiliated With Parties?

[eagle_eye222001]

[quote name='HereticHunter10' post='1682936' date='Oct 21 2008, 08:33 PM']The American Catholic Party would not have to be as big as the two parties to begin with. It can start small, at the county and state level.

Maybe get one on some county's commission, another in a state's house of reps. or senate, another maybe in the US Congress from a district where Faithful Catholics are a large demographic.

Think nationally, act locally. That is what true Grassroots politics is about.

Also in concern about providing a broader label to include non Catholics as well...

Why not the Citizens' Christian Party? Or something like that...

While we include non Catholics, Catholics would be our prominent party members and it will be obvious that our party's platform comes from Magisterium Teaching.[/quote]

Sorry but third party doesn't win elections. You get one senator or so but you end up with next to no influence. We would be better off working with the GOP.

As a "Catholic" or "Christian" party, we would not be the full "Religious right" though. There would be some who would not want to "blindly follow Rome" or follow some party that is based on religion solely.

Being a small party, we would take away some of the critical GOP support that allows them to beat the Liberal Left. By possibly allowing the Liberal Left more victories, we would give them the opportunity to switch everything in their favor.

Bottom line. We would go from having little influence in our nation, to NONE.

The GOP may not be perfect. They do tend to have candidates who share our views though and why waste a party that is already strong, and hand the Democrats guaranteed victories?

I can guarantee you. This "Catholic" party would not attract Democratic Catholic or Christian voters who already ignore the abortion and other life issues. Why would they support a party built on principles they already ignore? The GOP would be the bigger loser of voters and would thus lose a weapon in fighting the Liberal Left and would give more elections to Democrats and Liberals.

Having a religious named party, would be akin to the Church specifically endorsing candidates. Another thread has already spent time on the idea of the Church endorsing candidates and it would be a bad idea.

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='kamiller42' post='1682768' date='Oct 21 2008, 04:29 PM']I have to completely disagree with that. They have taken a stand the democrats fear to take. They have taken the pro-life stand even at times when it isn't so popular. That counts for something. In regards to tangible pro-life works, the party has made enormous strides for the pro-life movement.

Bush has not been as vocal or as proficient of a speaker as Reagan on pro-life issues, but he has taken enacted more pro-life legislation. If it wasn't for him, the gravity of this election for the pro-life movement would not be nearly as great as it is. The bishops know this. That's why they are being so vocal. With the Supreme Court and many Bush pro-life accomplishments at stake, they know this election will be a big win or a big loss for the pro-life movement.[/quote]
Again, "taking a stand" and a dollar fifty will get you a cup of coffee. How many times are you going to be played by politicians who "take a stand" with the net effect of business as usual?