Voting and the Death Penalty
So, yes, we oppose the death penalty in that we hold all life to be sacred, but we realize also that in some circumstances it may be deemed necessary. But Catholic teaching can never weigh opposition to capital punishment the same way it does to abortion. The thousands of innocent pre-born babies killed every year by abortion constitute a much greater evil than the number of executions of convicted criminals by the state, not only because of the sheer number of deaths but because of the gravity of abortion itself. Abortion, unlike capital punishment, is an intrinsic evil and can never be justified.
No candidate is going to be perfect. Even in voting for one who does not fully represent our beliefs, we are not compromising our ultimate goal, which must be the protection of all human life, especially pre-born children. Voting for a certain candidate does not mean that we endorse his positions on every issue. We have a duty to use our vote to advance the common good.
posted by David at 4:48 AM
Track with co.mments
Rate this post:
7 Comments:
Ahh, let's rationalize killing one more time, shall we? Those durn pre-born children are getting killed everyday, especially when you use contraceptives. But we don't really care about chemical abortions, do we?
I care about chemical abortions. I want to see an end to them just as much as medical abortions. No distinction there. What you think I care about and what I actually do care about are two different things.
Ahh... if that were true, you'd write about it once in a while. You write about physician performed abortions like in 40 percent of your posts.
>>>Ahh... if that were true, you'd write about it once in a while. You write about physician performed abortions like in 40 percent of your posts.
Why would you assume that what I believe can be only be determined by what I write here? You comment over and over about chemical abortions. I did not respond because it should seem obvious that a pro-life Catholic is against all abortions. And I am realistic in what knowing what the federal government can do. I know the differences between the president and his opponent on abortion, and though I believe our government can and must do more, we all know Sen Kerry will do nothing to stop abortion, medical or chemical. President Bush will. And we have a better chance with him in the White House, to save innocent babies from being slaughtered and change our culture so we will view all humans, born and unborn with the dignity they deserve.
I viewed your comments as an attempt to distract or discredit. But, now that I have cleared it up for you, you accuse me of lying since I do not write about it. So what will you write about next? What will you accuse me of lying about next? If your arguments were rational and had any basis in Catholic teachings it would be different, but they are not so you attack and distract. I'm willing to discuss all this rationally, are you?
>>I care about chemical abortions. I want to see an end to them just as much as medical abortions. No distinction there. What you think I care about and what I actually do care about are two different things.
You care about it, but don't write about it? Is it your 'hidden' agenda to care about it secretly, but not openly write about it like you write about physician assisted abortions in a bunch of your posts? I'm not calling you a liar or nothing- I'm just concerned that your perspective on stopping killings and such are focused on stopping the majority of killings which occur- that of chemical abortions. My question is, how could you NOT write the majority of your 'abortion'-related topics on chemical abortions? Perhaps it's just not popular/politically correct enough for ya to give a shout out to your peeps. If you give the topic 'proportionate' representation in your postings, I'd stop harping on it. But since you've NOT given it proportionate representation, I feel there's something fishy goin' on on this here website.
I care about my family and I do not write about them. I care about the 0-4 record of the Buffalo Bills and I do not write about that. I care about the scourge of AIDS in Africa, but I have only written about that once or twice. I care about the genocide in Darfur, Sudan and have only written about that a few times. I care about Catholic Republicans who ignore church teachings and I do not write about that.
There is a limited amount of time I have to write and post in this blog. My apologies that I do not sit here longer and share my views and my concerns. I wish I could. But since I cannot, I priortize and post what I think is important given the time have. So, you will just have read what I post.
As for calling me a liar, no you have not, but you have accused me of not telling the truth. Here's your quote, "Ahh... if that were true, you'd write about it once in a while."
>>There is a limited amount of time I have to write and post in this blog. My apologies that I do not sit here longer and share my views and my concerns. I wish I could. But since I cannot, I priortize and post what I think is important given the time have. So, you will just have read what I post.
I understand, but it seems to be ABORTION ALL THE TIME, and chemical abortions none of the time. What's the deal? You spoke several articles ago about using proportionate reasoning to figure out which candidate to vote for. Are you using proportionate reasoning to decide that physician assisted abortions (1.3 million) is somehow MORE important to spend your limited time on than chemical abortions (20+ million)? Why the dodge?
Post a Comment
<< Home