Five Non-Negotiable Positions Ignore Crimes against Humanity


#1

The “five non-negotiable positions” do not address several far more significant and morally important issues that affect the lives of billions of people already living on this earth. By focusing on these ‘non-negotiable positions’ it appears we Catholics are not concerned with the crimes our elected politicians are committing against humanity.

Far more significant to the poor, the starving, the sick and the downtrodden are the illegal and immoral wars which kill millions of innocent people, the avarice of the powerful elite which starves millions of others, the exploitation of poor countries, and the military expansionism which is used to subjugate other countries and is burdening this country with intolerable debt.

It appears that Catholic Answers, by recommending the ‘five non-negotiable positions’ as guidelines for the selection of candidates, backed a regime which started the Iraqi war, a genocidal war of aggression, has supported evil regimes throughout the world, conducted assassinations, and supported policies that keep two thirds of the people on this planet in abject poverty. Does Catholic Answers and the Catholic Church feel any responsibility to prevent these crimes?

I am Catholic, but I certainly do not think that the five non-negotiable positions describe what our first priorities and considerations should be when selecting a political candidate. It’s just too convenient a way for Catholic Answers to support a regime while ignoring its crimes against humanity.


#2

Argumentum ex ignorantia et ad captandum vulgas

Abortion is not a crime against humanity? Euthanasia is not a crime against humanity? Cloning is not a crime against humanity? Embryonic creation for the purposes of scientific study is not a crime against humanity? Redefining the divinely appointed institution of marriage is not a crime against humanity? Indeed, these are the fundamental issue that stike at the core of humanity, as they are crimes against life, against hope, against the future, and against the family. Nothing could be more destructive to humanity than to destroy the sanctity of life.


#3

[quote=Uracan] Does Catholic Answers and the Catholic Church feel any responsibility to prevent these crimes?

I am Catholic, but I certainly do not think that the five non-negotiable positions describe what our first priorities and considerations should be when selecting a political candidate.
[/quote]

I can’t speak for Catholic Answers. It is a private organization that does not speak for the CatholicChurch. Their focus groups told them that “five non-negotiable positons” was the best way to convince people to vote for their candidate.

The Catholic Church, however, has never used that phrase. The Church has been a loud and powerful voice for peace and against torture be it by the Bush Administration or the Iraqi dictatorship.


#4

[quote=katherine2]I can’t speak for Catholic Answers. It is a private organization that does not speak for the CatholicChurch. Their focus groups told them that “five non-negotiable positons” was the best way to convince people to vote for their candidate.

The Catholic Church, however, has never used that phrase. The Church has been a loud and powerful voice for peace and against torture be it by the Bush Administration or the Iraqi dictatorship.
[/quote]

The Church has said the these five were always evil.God Bless


#5

[quote=Lisa4Catholics]The Church has said the these five were always evil.God Bless
[/quote]

Quality of life issues cannot trump fundamental life issues such as the right to life.


#6

The CA five non-negotiables did not ignore other important issues, they did not include these issues as having a significant bearing on the front stage political positions being wagered in the past election.

I hope this clarifies this for you. If not, then you are choosing to ignore the political and practical realities of pursuing a sound and strategic Catholic political agenda based on a heirarchy of Catholic moral and social issues.


#7

[quote=katherine2]I can’t speak for Catholic Answers. It is a private organization that does not speak for the CatholicChurch. Their focus groups told them that “five non-negotiable positons” was the best way to convince people to vote for their candidate.

The Catholic Church, however, has never used that phrase. The Church has been a loud and powerful voice for peace and against torture be it by the Bush Administration or the Iraqi dictatorship.
[/quote]

Just as you can’t speak for the Church, CA voting guide presents in a coherent manner what the Catholic Church teaches in a pro-active, relevent and decisive consideration for Catholic voters.


#8

[quote=katherine2]I can’t speak for Catholic Answers. It is a private organization that does not speak for the CatholicChurch. Their focus groups told them that “five non-negotiable positons” was the best way to convince people to vote for their candidate.

The Catholic Church, however, has never used that phrase. The Church has been a loud and powerful voice for peace and against torture be it by the Bush Administration or the Iraqi dictatorship.
[/quote]

And do you have evidence regarding this “focus group” statement?

Catholic Answers said they chose the 5 non-negotiables because they were currently debated issues and because all 5 are always and everywhere wrong. Are you saying they lied about how they came up with them?


#9

[quote=Uracan]The “five non-negotiable positions” do not address several far more significant and morally important issues that affect the lives of billions of people already living on this earth. By focusing on these ‘non-negotiable positions’ it appears we Catholics are not concerned with the crimes our elected politicians are committing against humanity.

Far more significant to the poor, the starving, the sick and the downtrodden are the illegal and immoral wars which kill millions of innocent people, the avarice of the powerful elite which starves millions of others, the exploitation of poor countries, and the military expansionism which is used to subjugate other countries and is burdening this country with intolerable debt.

It appears that Catholic Answers, by recommending the ‘five non-negotiable positions’ as guidelines for the selection of candidates, backed a regime which started the Iraqi war, a genocidal war of aggression, has supported evil regimes throughout the world, conducted assassinations, and supported policies that keep two thirds of the people on this planet in abject poverty. Does Catholic Answers and the Catholic Church feel any responsibility to prevent these crimes?

I am Catholic, but I certainly do not think that the five non-negotiable positions describe what our first priorities and considerations should be when selecting a political candidate. It’s just too convenient a way for Catholic Answers to support a regime while ignoring its crimes against humanity.

[/quote]

You will not be taken seriously by people of reason by labeling the Iraqi war genocidal.


#10

[quote=felra]If not, then you are choosing to ignore the political and practical realities of pursuing a sound and strategic Catholic political agenda
[/quote]

I see your point. This is about a political agenda, human judgements on practical realities, and strategy.

I certainly respect other people’s decision to persue their political agendas and strategies, as long as we are clear as that is what it is.

The Church has said the these five were always evil

But she has never said there are only five which are always evil.


#11

No but the Church has stated that these 5 issues are always evil no matter what.

The other things which you and Uracan (another hit and run poster by the looks of it) have multiple sides which a faithful Catholic can stand on.

I can be for the war on terrorism and still be a faithful Catholic but I can not be for abortion and be a faithful Catholic.


#12

[quote=ByzCath]No but the Church has stated that these 5 issues are always evil no matter what.

The other things which you and Uracan (another hit and run poster by the looks of it) have multiple sides which a faithful Catholic can stand on.

I can be for the war on terrorism and still be a faithful Catholic but I can not be for abortion and be a faithful Catholic.
[/quote]

And if I have determined in good conscience that a particular war is unjust (even if other faithful Catholics have a different conclusion), I am not at liberty to negotiate over condoning what I beleive to be an unjust war.


#13

[quote=katherine2]And if I have determined in good conscience that a particular war is unjust (even if other faithful Catholics have a different conclusion), I am not at liberty to negotiate over condoning what I beleive to be an unjust war.
[/quote]

4,000 children slaughtered in the womb every day in this country,does not compare with the war in Iraq.Even if you are against the war in Iraq the war on the unborn makes the objections miniscule.God Bless


#14

[quote=katherine2]And if I have determined in good conscience that a particular war is unjust (even if other faithful Catholics have a different conclusion), I am not at liberty to negotiate over condoning what I beleive to be an unjust war.
[/quote]

That is true, but if you in good conscience determin that a particular issue, which we are free to disagree on, is unjust and you want to follow a candidate who agrees with your view but that same candidate holds that one of the non-negotiables is really acceptable, you can not as a faithful Catholic support them.

If you do you are doing nothing more that rationalizing an immoral act.


#15

katherine2 cannot seem to grasp this. This has been thoroughly explained to her in other threads, but she just doesn’t get it.


#16

[quote=katherine2]I see your point. This is about a political agenda, human judgements on practical realities, and strategy.

I certainly respect other people’s decision to persue their political agendas and strategies, as long as we are clear as that is what it is.

[/quote]

[font=‘Comic Sans MS’]Don’t sell short sincere and clear thinking orthodox Catholic voters with a condescending characterization “[font=‘Comic Sans MS’]human judgments”. CA voter’s guide is for those serious Catholics who seek to better inform themselves and to allow the Holy Spirit to impress and enlighten their understanding of critical voting considerations. [/font]

[/font]


#17

Ok, one more time.

The reason the 5 non-negotiables are there is because there are actual political movements and politicians openly dedicated to promoting these evils and making them legitimate.

When we start seeing political movements dedicated to deliberately starving people, commiting genocide, etc. we may reasonably assume CA will add them to the list of non-negotiables. There is little point in adding starvation, poverty, genocide to a voter’s guide when there is actually no way to vote for or against them concretely.

Scott


#18

[quote=Scott Waddell]Ok, one more time.

The reason the 5 non-negotiables are there is because there are actual political movements and politicians openly dedicated to promoting these evils and making them legitimate.

When we start seeing political movements dedicated to deliberately starving people, commiting genocide, etc. we may reasonably assume CA will add them to the list of non-negotiables. There is little point in adding starvation, poverty, genocide to a voter’s guide when there is actually no way to vote for or against them concretely.

Scott
[/quote]

Scott, be careful there, I can just see the response now.

But Mr. SoAndSo is against raising the minimum wage so he is against a “Living Wage” so that means he is for starving people and commiting genocide against the poor or Mr SoAndSo supports the war against terror so he is for the killing of innocent civilians (even though our military does not target such), so he is for killing innocent people.

This is how they draw the line so that they can rationalize supporting candidates who are for and support those 5 non-negotiables.

They seem to have a hard time differentiating between items where we can have differences from those were we can’t.


#19

[quote=ByzCath]Scott, be careful there, I can just see the response now.

But Mr. SoAndSo is against raising the minimum wage so he is against a “Living Wage” so that means he is for starving people and commiting genocide against the poor or Mr SoAndSo supports the war against terror so he is for the killing of innocent civilians (even though our military does not target such), so he is for killing innocent people.

This is how they draw the line so that they can rationalize supporting candidates who are for and support those 5 non-negotiables.

They seem to have a hard time differentiating between items where we can have differences from those were we can’t.
[/quote]

I see you too have been down this road before;) :whistle: God Bless


#20

[quote=ByzCath]Scott, be careful there, I can just see the response now.

But Mr. SoAndSo is against raising the minimum wage so he is against a “Living Wage” so that means he is for starving people and commiting genocide against the poor or Mr SoAndSo supports the war against terror so he is for the killing of innocent civilians (even though our military does not target such), so he is for killing innocent people.

This is how they draw the line so that they can rationalize supporting candidates who are for and support those 5 non-negotiables.

They seem to have a hard time differentiating between items where we can have differences from those were we can’t.
[/quote]

I’m not worried so much about that. The sophistry would be self-evident to any serious mind.

Scott


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.