voting for prochoice over prolife - when acceptable?

[dairygirl4u2c]

ty

[LittleWaySoul]

I would've answered these all with "depends." It's more complicated than what you've described. 

[WhiteLily]

I will always vote for life. 

[dairygirl4u2c]

voting matters. if abortion cannot become illegal, but you have a chance to reduce abortions and don't do it, you are committing sin. you are placing ideology over human life. to the extent that this scenario plays out in the real world, whoever votes 'no' has the blood of innocents on their hands.

[Jack4]

Material cooperation with evil. Serious reasons excuse. 

[Anomaly]

There is always a chance that abortion laws can be further expanded, or further restricted.  I'm old enough to remember when abortion was illegal.  

You younger voters will tell the next generation you remember when abortion wasn't tax funded and the government could not make you have an abortion if they decided  you shouldn't have a child. 

[Anastasia13]

It's ok when the other person is a massacring evil genius bent on genocide?

 

When the thought of that person having the power to choose to use nuclear weapons makes your entire block's hair turn white?

[Socrates]

On 10/2/2016 at 5:44 PM, Anomaly said:

You younger voters will tell the next generation you remember when abortion wasn't tax funded and the government could not make you have an abortion if they decided  you shouldn't have a child. 

. . . and no doubt, the bleeding heart "Catholics" will find ways to justify those policies, and supporting the politicians who brought them about.

[Papist]

It's about a woman's right to privacy,

[mommas_boy]

Briefly, it's not OK to vote for someone pro-choice in the eyes of a Catholic. Ever.

Off the top of my head, there are two main reasons:

1. Laws other than the outright repeal of Roe v Wade. These include limited restrictions on access to abortion as your questions rightly point out. However, they also include laws for conscientious objectors to de facto participation in abortions. Examples of the latter include rights for individual doctors to say no to prescribing abortifacients such as "the pill" and "the morning after pill" or the "plan B pill", as well as the rights of tax payers and purchasers of health insurance that pays for abortions and abortifacient "contraceptives". I believe that it is very hard to go through even a two-year term of a congressman without having at least one vote called for such a broad category of laws. Further, it is not possible to predict the future as a voter, and know what issues will come up during a tenure in office, so it's not possible for a pro-life voter to be certain that there won't be a vote that could be impactful.
2. While you do point out a very unlikely situation where no comes up, I'll go ahead and assume for a moment that the situation you describe is true. If we somehow know that no vote, related directly or indirectly to the pro-life cause, will come up during a particular tenure in office, Catholics still cannot vote for someone pro-choice. The reason for this is scandal. It means that we are compromising our values when it is convenient to do so. This sets a bad example for others who do not understand our values, and is to be avoided as well.

Hope that this helps,

Kris

Edited October 11, 2016 by mommas_boy
clarification

[polskieserce]

And what exactly are you supposed to do if neither candidate is pro-life?  Hillary Clinton supports abortion as a form of birth control but has criticized the death penalty.  Trump has criticized abortion (though this is mostly just for show) but he favors capital punishment.  Stein and Johnson are also in favor of abortion.

The Church's teaching is to protect life from conception until natural death, even if the person is a heinous killer.  Getting strapped down and injected with toxic chemicals, electrocuted, or forced to breath lethal gas is not a natural death.

[Nihil Obstat]

Exactly which part of "does not forbid recourse" is so difficult for you to understand?

[Anomaly]

6 hours ago, polskieserce said:

And what exactly are you supposed to do if neither candidate is pro-life?  Hillary Clinton supports abortion as a form of birth control but has criticized the death penalty.  Trump has criticized abortion (though this is mostly just for show) but he favors capital punishment.  Stein and Johnson are also in favor of abortion.

The Church's teaching is to protect life from conception until natural death, even if the person is a heinous killer.  Getting strapped down and injected with toxic chemicals, electrocuted, or forced to breath lethal gas is not a natural death.

The Church teaches that the death penalty can be moral.  It is a prudential opinion that current circumstances allow other choices that makes the death penalty unnecessary.

Abortion is never moral according to the Church.

A few dozen are executed every year , less than one per week.   Compare that to overc 13,0000 abortions every week.   Over 700,000 n the US in 2015.  I can understand not being happy with both, but they two issues certainly aren't equal and cancel each other out, making iHillary okay.  

 

[little2add]

the killing of innocent preborn humans to the capital punishment of a heinous premeditated killer is two very different things

[little2add]

and is not a fair comparison 

[polskieserce]

21 hours ago, Anomaly said:

The Church teaches that the death penalty can be moral.  It is a prudential opinion that current circumstances allow other choices that makes the death penalty unnecessary.

Abortion is never moral according to the Church.

A few dozen are executed every year , less than one per week.   Compare that to overc 13,0000 abortions every week.   Over 700,000 n the US in 2015.  I can understand not being happy with both, but they two issues certainly aren't equal and cancel each other out, making iHillary okay.  

 

The Church is not always right and death penalty is completely unnecessary.  During the middle ages, some of the Popes went to war against other Catholics in the days of the Papal States.  Lavish building projects were executed while many people were fighting to survive.  Was the Church right in those instances as well?  Most of Europe has abolished the death penalty and they are still doing better than America.  Canada has abolished it as well and is doing just fine without it.  Instead of holding on to medieval punishments, most of the industrialized world decided it would be better to create societies based on egalitarianism and the expansion of human rights.  And you know what?  It's a pretty good idea.  It's absurd that someone should be put to death just to satiate the victim's primal instincts for revenge.  Also, there is always the possibility of putting an innocent person to death.  When I was still in college, a guy named Ray Krone came in to talk about how he was wrongfully convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Arizona.  His story is a cautionary tale to all of you who think that the DP is a good idea.

I never said abortion was moral.  I am 100% against it, even in cases of rape, incest, medical complications, etc.  But what I'm saying is that none of the 4 candidates are pro-life.  Hillary Clinton, Jill Stein, and Gary Johnson are all openly ok with abortion.  Trump has said during his presidential campaign that he is prolife, but he's most likely just faking it to get votes from Republicans.  Republicans have had to opportunity to nominate many Supreme Court Justices and they did.  But abortion is still around.  Why?  Because the Republican establishment is not sincere about abolishing abortion.  Getting rid of abortion would require a considerably larger welfare state to care for all of the children being born into poverty.  Personally, I would welcome a large welfare state with open arms.  But the Republican establishment, as well as many of you, would not.

That being said, I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton.  I was originally a Sanders supporter during the democratic primary because he's socialist, like me.  Hillary Clinton is far too capitalistic for my tastes.  To make things worse, she is the face of radical feminism in US politics.  I am socially conservative but economically leftist.  She is economically conservative but socially radical (the exact opposite of me).  I will be voting for Donald Trump tomorrow, not because he is supposedly prolife (very dubious claim if you ask me), but because he is the anti-feminist vote in this election, he wants to renegotiate trade deals, and he wants to deport illegal immigrants.

 

11 hours ago, little2add said:

the killing of innocent preborn humans to the capital punishment of a heinous premeditated killer is two very different things and is not a fair comparison

It's not that different when you look at the root causes.  Many unborn children are killed because the mother is living in poverty and doesn't know how she will be able to provide proper care.  Many death row inmates are marginalized people who grew up around poverty, drugs, violence, no father and no positive role models.  Oftentimes, they did not have access to a good lawyer once they entered the criminal justice system.  Treating people with dignity and giving them equal access to resources can go a long way in solving these problems.  I'm against abortion and the death penalty because those are society's methods of exterminating inconvenient life.

 

[little2add]

1 hour ago, polskieserce said:

 

 

It's not that different when you look at the root causes.  Many unborn children are killed because the mother is living in poverty and doesn't know how she will be able to provide proper care.  Many death row inmates are marginalized people who grew up around poverty, drugs, violence, no father and no positive role models.  Oftentimes, they did not have access to a good lawyer once they entered the criminal justice system.  Treating people with dignity and giving them equal access to resources can go a long way in solving these problems.  I'm against abortion and the death penalty because those are society's methods of exterminating inconvenient life.

 

I was talking about the baby not the mother and father.   The preborn is or was inocent

[polskieserce]

1 hour ago, little2add said:

I was talking about the baby not the mother and father.   The preborn is or was inocent

I know exactly what you were talking about.  And my point still stands: many unborn children and death row inmates are getting killed due to lack of resources.  The mechanics are obviously very different, but the root causes are the same.

[Socrates]

Communism will fix everything.

[little2add]

6 hours ago, polskieserce said:

I know exactly what you were talking about.  And my point still stands: many unborn children and death row inmates are getting killed due to lack of resources.  The mechanics are obviously very different, but the root causes are the same.

unborn are not evil or bad, honey! 

i guess the meaning of innocent is beyond your understanding 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt75VjvRW34