Who Can Faithful Catholics Actually Vote For?

[Jaime]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' post='1463810' date='Feb 15 2008, 09:47 PM']President Bush was likely to appoint conservative justices to the Supreme Court for one, hot stuff. And President Bush did just that.

John McCain would appoint judges that would agree with his own legislative philosophy. And McCain's legislative philosophy includes using the full power of the federal government for the purpose of banning pro-life organizations from advocating for pro-life candidates (among other free speech violations).[/quote]

How quickly people forget Harriet Miers.


McCain is quoted to say that he would appoint conservative justices. You don't believe him and that's fine. But show me one conservative justice that McCain has not confirmed?

[XIX]

I stated earlier that McCain-Feingold was not a life issue. I stand corrected.

I think it's fair to say that McCain is more liberal on social issues than Bush. I'd be more nervous about his stance on the abortion issue. Ergo, I don't think it's hypocritical to vote for Bush in 2004 and then for McCain in 2008.

To be fair, President Bush nominated 2 out of 3 conservative judges. Harriet Myers was nominated but did not survive firestorm that ensued. My impression of McCain--who knows with him? I think he's nominate "strict constructionalists." He's not a terrible option considering the alternatives. Nevertheless, I can't fault a guy for voting third party this election.

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote]McCain does not support abortion.

If you want to waste your vote on somebody who cannot win, and help the culture of death, that is your sin, not mine.[/quote]

yeah laying the smack down.
it's a little hypocritical all these not wanting to vote for mccain. for the reasons jaimie said.
they're quick to say hot stuff's etc has been sinning all this time for not going for the lesser evil, but now they're not.
the ironcy is sickening.

but in case it's just a lack of info... please research the main. www.ontheissues.org

[dairygirl4u2c]

any accusations of flip flop could jsut as easily be lobbed at romney. yet i doubt most would have done that.
cause that's not what the media is telling people to argue.
people argue the rhetoric that media tells them to.
it's really really sad.
he's obviusly much against abortion. at least much more than the others. to a significant degree.
oh well.

[Jaime]

[quote name='XIX' post='1463820' date='Feb 15 2008, 09:56 PM']I stated earlier that McCain-Feingold was not a life issue. I stand corrected.

I think it's fair to say that McCain is more liberal on social issues than Bush. I'd be more nervous about his stance on the abortion issue. Ergo, I don't think it's hypocritical to vote for Bush in 2004 and then for McCain in 2008.[/quote]

I'm sorry but McCain-Feingold is not a pro-life issue. At best it indirectly impacts the pro-life movement. The way that NRLC makes it seem like its this diabolical piece of legislation for prochoice and its not.


Yes McCain is more liberal than Bush on social issues. That's what is bothering me. If people would come out and say "You know what? I don't like his social views I'm not voting for him" then that's fine. But people are using the Church to defend not voting for him, when they used the Church to get people to vote for Bush.

And that is wrong.

I don't think its about prolife for some folks here. I don't have a problem with that but let's call it what it is and not hide behind the skirt of Holy Mother Church.

[qfnol31]

McCain has switched his position in 10 years, as is hinted by his words during his campaign.

[url="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17222147/"]Check it out[/url] The guy actually opposes Roe v. Wade now, while he didn't necessarily the year after that correspondence took place. That is a huge difference!

[url="http://www.ucdailynews.com/politics/13907677.html"]And this has to be good for his case![/url] Look who's endorsing the guy.

He fails on the embryonic stem-cell research bandwagon, and I hope he recants on this issue.

Also, he is against human cloning.

[qfnol31]

I have to admit I kinda like the idea of returning some things over to the states, but I disagree with a lot of McCain's other policies.

Regardless, these are the ones that seem to matter most now.

[qfnol31]

And hot stuff, I agree that it's strange that people have switched their opinion so swiftly.

Might as well vote 3rd party this time, 1/2 of the conservative lot will be doing so giving an almost automatic win to Obama or Clinton.

[BeenaBobba]

I'ma vote for [url="http://www.voteforjoe.com/"]Joe Schriner[/url] in November. I was going to vote for him in the last election, but I ended up voting for Bush. If I could go back in time, I would have voted for him instead.

[qfnol31]

Why's that?

[Jaime]

[quote name='BeenaBobba' post='1463858' date='Feb 15 2008, 10:41 PM']I'ma vote for [url="http://www.voteforjoe.com/"]Joe Schriner[/url] in November. I was going to vote for him in the last election, but I ended up voting for Bush. If I could go back in time, I would have voted for him instead.[/quote]

See I can understand that. That's got integrity.

[XIX]

Let's not forget that the primaries are not over yet, and there is a possibility of a brokered convention in the GOP. McCain appears to have the nomination won, but it is not over.

McCain has 859, which is 302 short of the 1,161 needed to win. 994 delegates remain uncommitted. It's a long shot for the campaign to even get to convention, but it could happen.

























































And Ron Paul has 17 delegates. w00t

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1463818' date='Feb 15 2008, 10:54 PM']How quickly people forget Harriet Miers.
McCain is quoted to say that he would appoint conservative justices. You don't believe him and that's fine. But show me one conservative justice that McCain has not confirmed?[/quote]
McCain's job was simply to "vote up or down." That's it.
And no I don't believe him. He'll say a lot of things. He needs to have people vote for him, so he will talk about how he is an advocate for the right to life, the right to liberty, and the right to property.

However, he's not even a good liar. He says he's conservative while some of the most liberal legislation to date is named after him. And McCain says he's an advocate for the pro-life movement; but even some in the pro-choice movement apparently see through him, because McCain carries their endorsement.

McCain will not appoint judges that would strike down the all liberal legislation that he crafted. He will appoint judges according to his constitutional philosophy as revealed through his legislative history. The Republicans for Choice know all this about McCain. That's why they endorsed him--twice. As they recently said, pro-life is just not at the top of McCain's agenda.

[url="http://www.lifenews.com/nat3612.html"]Rick Santorum agrees on that point[/url]:
[quote]"On social conservative issues, you point to me one time John McCain ever took the floor of the United States Senate to talk about a social conservative issue," Santorum said. "It never happened."

"I mean, this is a guy who says he believes in these things," Santorum explained.

"But, I can tell you, inside the room, when we were in these meetings, there was nobody who fought harder not to have these votes before the United States Senate on some of the most important social conservative issues, whether it’s ... abortion or the like," he said about McCain.

"He always fought against us to even bring them up, because he was uncomfortable voting for them. So I mean, this is just not a guy I think in the end that washes with the mainstream of the Republican Party," Santorum concluded.[/quote]

[qfnol31]

Is pro-abortion near the top of Obama's or Clinton's list?

Isn't that good enough reason to prevent them from being able to do anything?

I'd rather put my faith in McCain than Clinton.


By the way, for all you people who say he'll do more to hurt the pro-life cause, what happens if someone worse than he gets nominated in four years? and four years after that? and four years after that?

We have no way of knowing how it'll affect 4 years from now, but we can change the next four years...it's why we vote every four years.

[Lounge Daddy]

I shall also add that President Bush didn't receive financial support from the likes of George Soros and Teresa Heinz Kerry--[url="http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56177"]unlike John McCain[/url].

Yes, both major parties have actually joined together in the socialist cause.