Based on my understanding Catholics are forbidden to vote for Obama, so are you then compelled to vote for Romney? Can you not vote for president at all (and just vote for issues or smaller races) or maybe vote for a third party candidate?
You can vote whomever you choose. But with Obama supporting gay marriage and abortion, do you really think any TRUE Catholic would? Not this one!
I’m sticking this one out. Mr Romney is anti abortion, but he is also a Mormon who belevives the Catholic church is “totally apostate”.
Mormons seem to be polytheistic and atheist at the same time, not good for me.
Dolan said that during a meeting of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League a couple of months ago, he expressed the opinion that Catholics wouldn’t have a problem voting for a Mormon in the White House.
“I said, ‘Listen, everybody, we Catholics and we Jews have felt the sting of the other side, and now one of the ways we can cooperate is to see that religious practice, religious bigotry doesn’t enter the campaign,’ ” Dolan said.
You do know that there are more than two options, right?
Catholics are to vote on principle. One of those acceptable principles is to limit damage. Clearly, one of the two will be elected. It is also patently clear that one candidate, by his record, has caused considerable harm to the morality of government, and is now forcing the Church to be complicit in this immorality. Voting for the opponent will clearly either limit that damage, or reverse it - thus it is an acceptable vote. Catholics, in the US, cannot be taught to vote, or not to vote for anyone, as that risks the Church’s tax-free status. So, we are guided by inflexible principles.
Do you have a catechism? About $8 if you shop around. Anyone considering Catholicism should have one and peruse its contents. You will be amazed at the wisdom and truth that it contains. Many difficult subjects will become much clearer when viewed through the lens of Church teaching.
Another suggestion: Catholicism for Dummies. An excellent, easily read book on the baisics of the faith. Quite a few RCIA programs use it - all of them should, IMO.
I know that more options exist on the ballot. I wasn’t sure if Catholics would have to vote for Romney (Let’s say as opposed to the Constitution party candidate) because Romney has an exponentially greater chance of winning in a practically two party system.
One of the things that disgusts me about our political system is that I am rarely able to vote FOR someone. I frequently vote AGAINST someone. The last canidate I voted FOR was Ronald Reagan. The year one canidate is a left wing socialist supporter of gay rights and abortion. I know who I shall vote AGAINST.
Thanks. I do have a Catechism. I was actually able to pick up for $2 used! Something I appreciate about Catholicism is the moral clarity (as compared with Protestantism), which I think the Catechism helps teach.
You don’t have to vote for Romney, but you definitely can’t vote for Obama.
Please vote. Romney has Paul Ryan, a conservative and intelligent Catholic, as his VP. The only time a Catholic was President was 50 years ago when JFK broke the glass ceiling. There was a lot of prejudice against Catholics then. Up until then, Catholics lived with Protestants in the White House.
Right now, Obama is trying to define religion. That is not his business. He is the most anti-religion President this nation has had. For all our sakes, he needs to go. Personally, he can say what he wants but I believe he’s an atheist and a Marxist. Biden is Catholic. I have qualms about him too. He’s pro choice so how Catholic is that and he supports Obama.
That is untrue. Please show me where the USCCB has stated this. In fact, they state that Catholics should NOT be “single issue voters”. The church is a CHURCH, not a political party.
I think all Christian’s in general RC or not should vote for Romney regardless of denomination due to Obama political stance.
Catholicism for Dummies is also an excellent resource. If you cannot find one for a good price, PM me.
From the USCCB:
"Opposition to intrinsically evil acts that undercut the dignity of the human person should also open our eyes to the good we must do, that is, to our positive duty to contribute to the common good and to act in solidarity with those in need. As Pope John Paul II said, “The fact that only the negative commandments oblige always and under all circumstances does not mean that in the moral life prohibitions are more important than the obligation to do good indicated by the positive commandment” (Veritatis Splendor, no. 52). Both opposing evil and doing good are essential obligations.
- The right to life implies and is linked to other human rights—to the basic goods that every human person needs to live and thrive. All the life issues are connected, for erosion of respect for the life of any individual or group in society necessarily diminishes respect for all life. The moral imperative to respond to the needs of our neighbors—basic needs such as food, shelter, health care, education, and meaningful work—is universally binding on our consciences and may be legitimately fulfilled by a variety of means. Catholics must seek the best ways to respond to these needs. As Blessed Pope John XXIII taught, “[Each of us] has the right to life, to bodily integrity, and to the means which are suitable for the proper development of life; these are primarily food, clothing, shelter, rest, medical care, and, finally, the necessary social services” (Pacem in Terris, no. 11)."
Two temptations in public life can distort the Church’s defense of human life and dignity:
The first is a moral equivalence that makes no ethical distinctions between different kinds of issues involving human life and dignity. The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many. It must always be opposed.3
The second is the misuse of these necessary moral distinctions as a way of dismissing or ignoring other serious threats to human life and dignity. Racism and other unjust discrimination, the use of the death penalty, resorting to unjust war, the use of torture,4 war crimes, the failure to respond to those who are suffering from hunger or a lack of health care, or an unjust immigration policy are all serious moral issues that challenge our consciences and require us to act. These are not optional concerns which can be dismissed. Catholics are urged to seriously consider Church teaching on these issues. Although choices about how best to respond to these and other compelling threats to human life and dignity are matters for principled debate and decision, this does not make them optional concerns or permit Catholics to dismiss or ignore Church teaching on these important issues. Clearly not every Catholic can be actively involved on each of these concerns, but we need to support one another as our community of faith defends human life and dignity wherever it is threatened. We are not factions, but one family of faith fulfilling the mission of Jesus Christ.
The Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith made a similar point:
It must be noted also that a well-formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents of faith and morals. The Christian faith is an integral unity, and thus it is incoherent to isolate some particular element to the detriment of the whole of Catholic doctrine. A political commitment to a single isolated aspect of the Church’s social doctrine does not exhaust one’s responsibility towards the common good. (Doctrinal Note on Some Questions Regarding the Participation of Catholics in Political Life, no. 4)
Catholics often face difficult choices about how to vote. This is why it is so important to vote according to a well-formed conscience that perceives the proper relationship among moral goods. A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism,** if the voter’s intent is to support that position**. In such cases a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. At the same time, a voter should not use a candidate’s opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues involving human life and dignity.
There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons. Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental
ehh hemm What about Ron Paul or Gary Johnson? America is not a two party system you can vote for third party candidates.
The only thing that constitutes a wasted vote is when a person does not vote their conscience.
I’ll be voting for a candidate who is:
~against gays pretending to be married.
~in favor of a STRONG national defense.
~in favor of citizens to keep and bear arms.
~in favor of HUGE tariffs on imported goods.
Since I live in Massachusetts, and since Obama will certainly carry Massachusetts, and since I despise Mittens Romney, I will cast my ballot for ME. I have just as much chance of carrying Massachusetts as Romney. *******SARCASM ALERT!!!: *******he did such a good job as governor here!
My conscience will be clear.
This is the truth!