Regardless as to whether this is a sin, a question that is really between you and Our Lord, the real question is why would you?
Do you do so because you support the right of every woman to abort those they should truly love?
Do you do so because your family always voted this way?
Do you do so because this candidate has policies that will benefit you economically in some way?
Search your heart for a really valid reason to support the institutionalization of evil and then follow your conscience.
Depends who else is running for office.
If there is only two candidates and one is calling for abortion and the other for euthanasia well…I’d try to find out which one has the least objectionable agenda.
Finances do warrant a consideration though sadly, there is not point voting for someone thats going to do something to make you homeless just because they dislike abortion too.
Grave matter, certainly. I’ll leave the mortal sin angle to a theologian.
That said, in contexts where both candidates are “pro-choice” (as in my country: both major parties are strong on “family planning”, but don’t want to liberalize the abortion laws any further), then voting for the one who is less objectionable on other moral issues (say, one who is not anti-Catholic or pro-gay marriage) is acceptable.
Or is it because abortion is already the law of the land and whoever is elected will be very unlikely to have much effect on that but will be liable to promulgate police is that will severely harm the poor?
Your faith should be your guiding light. I am not Catholic yet, but live to serve the Lord.
If you have one pro choice and one pro life candidate - you should always vote pro life. It is a huge statement of that person’s morals and priorities, it tells you where they stand.
We have some that voted for our current president at our parish - it blows my mind.
With the “Affordable” Care Act you will see a battle for pro life at the end of life as well as the beginning.
I can be pretty open on a lot of theology - but if you have a choice and vote pro choice you need to evaluate your priorities.
It is not that any president will change the legalization of abortion. They won’t. But their view on it does reflect on their view of life and therefore of humanity.
Neither political party has more than a peripheral care as to Christian morals. I have to lift up the Democrats on this, at least they were brave enough to show their beliefs when they voted to remove God from their official party platform. They have at least announced they are at opposition with Him and the church, and yet there are still Christians who vote for them.
I think what we can hope for is the more diligent raining of Christians who actually live their faith. After all, politicians are just a reflection of the desires of the society.
Thanks for bringing the topic.
Yes, that’s true. Just as giving tax cuts to t he wealthy at the expense of the programs that assist the needy reflects their view of the poor. The difference is that that view will harm millions of people while a pro life viewpoint will will not change the current law.
So allowing people to die because they can’t afford medical insurance is pro-life?
Ouch - wrong! It is proven social progams in the long run are bad for society. Some to help the truly needy are very, very good (I know personally), but longer term bad news.
I would never vote for someone that will “help” the poor (which they really don’t), because you won’t change pro life anyway.
Someone that is pro choice will not value life period - even for the poor. They tell you they don’t care about life, and it will show in what they do.
Our Bishop once told us that if we vote for a pro-choice candidate exclusively because he/she is pro-choice (“single issue voting”) then that is a no-no. However, just because a candidate happens to be pro-choice does not automatically mean that Catholics are committing a sin to vote for him/her.
That could make sense. However, I doubt voting pro-choice would be any type of sin. It simply does not compute because it is not limited to just one party.
Party, no. Individual, yes.
I suppose if one were to examine each candidate in detail, every one will have will have something about him/her that could be in conflict with Church teaching. But then, all of us are probably guilty of the same thing; there is no “perfect” candidate.
If both candidates are pro - abortion then the issue is effectively off the table.
Otherwise we must stand against the intrinsic evil.
This is an excuse that is often floated in the US. But abortion is not really “the law of the land” here in the way you portray that. For example, every single one of the last four Presidents has used the Mexico City policy as the target for one of his first executive orders when gaining office. For that reason alone, it would wrong to vote for a pro-“choice” candidate for President over a candidate who is pro-life. Then there’s the appointment of the Attorney General and the SC justices that greatly affects how abortion policy is implemented vs. how life is protected. And lately, we have seen the influence these federal office holders have had on state policies meaning that a pro-abortion President could have a chilling effect on the good work of pro-life Governors and state legislators.
When it comes to voting, we must not, if at all possible support someone who promotes an objective evil. Abortion is always evil. Full stop. Ignoring the poor is also evil. Having different ideas on how best to serve the poor and the country is not evil. That’s just a difference of opinion and can’t be used as a rationale to support a pro-abortion candidate.
Of course abortion is not the only absolute evil. If one candidate was pro-abortion and the other wanted to legalize slavery, then other issues would become more important. Or if one candidate supported abortion and the other wanted to criminalize the free expression of religion.
Bottom line, in most cases, supporting and voting for a pro-abortion candidate for a national office such as President is going to be a gravely immoral act. It may also be a mortal sin if the other conditions for mortal sin are met.
Where both of them are pro-abortion then you would look at other moral issues such as gay “marriage”.
It’s not always a mortal sin because some people are just ignorant of the gravity of the issue. Anyways, it doesn’t make sense to vote for somebody that supports the legalized killing of approximately 1 million people every year. If a politician supported it being allowed to kill Asians for example no one would vote for them except a few crazy people; though since people do not see the mass slaughter of the unborn, they just don’t think that it is that important.
This is actually not true; I know right-wing media parrots this “point” a lot, but it just plain isn’t true. What a lot of Democrats were objecting to was the tied-in resolution declaring the capital of Israel to be Jerusalem; it had nothing to do with God being in the motion or not. If you want to get angry over a huge portion of Democrats objecting to the capital of Israel being declared Jerusalem in the Party platform, then sure. But don’t act as if they were opposed to the measure discussing God.
As for the thread at hand, usually the pro-life candidate is the better choice, unless you believe they would oversee casualties of a similar nature. If you’re discussing a position where one’s views on abortion are totally irrelevant (e.g. if you’re voting for the state agricultural commissioner, etc.), then you don’t need to consider it. But as far as political candidates, you do. That doesn’t mean it’s a mortal sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate if that’s not why you’re voting for them, but it does suggest one should re-evaluate their priorities if ignoring that part of their voting position. Two pro-life or two pro-abortion candidates, obviously, opens up the door for further evaluation.