Here's all I need to know.

 

Nationally Obama captured 53% of the Catholic vote, a 13-point swing from 2004 and the largest advantage among the group for a Democrat since Bill Clinton.

 

Most Catholics ignored the bishops who told them not to vote for a pro-choice candidate. Hispanic Catholics, who are touted as the future of the church in the United States, voted overwhelmingly for Obama and white Catholics split their vote between the two candidates.http://insightscoop.typepad.com/2004/2008/11/catholics-vote-for-obama-evangelicals-dont.html

Here's all I need to know.

 

Nationally Obama captured 53% of the Catholic vote, a 13-point swing from 2004 and the largest advantage among the group for a Democrat since Bill Clinton.

 

Most Catholics ignored the bishops who told them not to vote for a pro-choice candidate. Hispanic Catholics, who are touted as the future of the church in the United States, voted overwhelmingly for Obama and white Catholics split their vote between the two candidates.http://insightscoop.typepad.com/2004/2008/11/catholics-vote-for-obama-evangelicals-dont.html

 

Shocking statistics. What do they prove from your standpoint? Furthermore, while I know that you or I lack the resources to truly find out, as a Catholic, I can tell you that a lot of people identify as Catholics without following Church laws, going to Church regularly, knowing the Catholic Church's actual stances, etc. (FWIW, in a recent statistics class, the proportion of those who attended Church 3+ times a month and also identified as Catholic was lower than the same for Protestants). So, I ask again, what do those statistics provide for you?

 

Likewise, when you say "Hispanic Catholics, who are touted as the future of the church in the United States" what does that mean? I know nothing of that. The future of the Church in the United States relies on how we react to God's Word. It has nothing to do with any ethnicity.

Here's all I need to know.

 

Nationally Obama captured 53% of the Catholic vote, a 13-point swing from 2004 and the largest advantage among the group for a Democrat since Bill Clinton.

 

Most Catholics ignored the bishops who told them not to vote for a pro-choice candidate. Hispanic Catholics, who are touted as the future of the church in the United States, voted overwhelmingly for Obama and white Catholics split their vote between the two candidates.http://insightscoop.typepad.com/2004/2008/11/catholics-vote-for-obama-evangelicals-dont.html

 

I thought these were interesting stats myself, but what's your point or at least your question???

 

BTW--The answer, and I quote a famous politician: "It's the economy, stupid"!!

Shocking statistics. What do they prove from your standpoint? Furthermore, while I know that you or I lack the resources to truly find out, as a Catholic, I can tell you that a lot of people identify as Catholics without following Church laws, going to Church regularly, knowing the Catholic Church's actual stances, etc. (FWIW, in a recent statistics class, the proportion of those who attended Church 3+ times a month and also identified as Catholic was lower than the same for Protestants). So, I ask again, what do those statistics provide for you?

 

Likewise, when you say "Hispanic Catholics, who are touted as the future of the church in the United States" what does that mean? I know nothing of that. The future of the Church in the United States relies on how we react to God's Word. It has nothing to do with any ethnicity.

 

BTW--I'd guess that at least this percentage, if not higher, favor priests being allowed to marry, and even women priests?? While I'm quoting, per Bob Dylan: "The Times They are a Changing"!!

 

That might be better saved for another thread??

BTW--I'd guess that at least this percentage, if not higher, favor priests being allowed to marry, and even women priests?? While I'm quoting, per Bob Dylan: "The Times They are a Changing"!!

 

That might be better saved for another thread??

 

Excellent idea for another thread, but I have no idea of the numbers. I do draw a distinction between practicing Catholics and cafeteria Catholics.

I agree with the Priest's stance 100%. I wish priests took stances like this more often. I am not expert on the various intrinsic qualities that make a sin mortal or venial, but I wish that the clergy would take more hard-line stances on when and when not to receive. The Body of Christ is a gift that is often taken for granted, even by Catholics.

An absolutely excellent post, cch5432! :thumb:

Well, I'm conflicted on this. Do I respect what the priest says? Yes. Do I understand why he's saying it? Yes. But, in a country where every candidate I can think of has had something on their agenda that the Church would disagree with, should I sacrifice my right to vote for the candidate that I feel would be the best for ALL of America? Or do I vote for that person, and continue my PERSONAL work in promoting a pro-life agenda? I'm going to have to talk to my priest about this one. I have a real problem with people who feel that a vote for a pro-choice candidate automatically means I'm pro-choice. I also have a real problem with people who feel that voting pro-life is the end of their responsibility in being a part of the solution.

Here's all I need to know.

 

Nationally Obama captured 53% of the Catholic vote, a 13-point swing from 2004 and the largest advantage among the group for a Democrat since Bill Clinton.

 

Most Catholics ignored the bishops who told them not to vote for a pro-choice candidate. Hispanic Catholics, who are touted as the future of the church in the United States, voted overwhelmingly for Obama and white Catholics split their vote between the two candidates.http://insightscoop.typepad.com/2004/2008/11/catholics-vote-for-obama-evangelicals-dont.html

And they have to live with their decision, I hope they realize what they were voting for on the issue of abortion.

Well, I'm conflicted on this. Do I respect what the priest says? Yes. Do I understand why he's saying it? Yes. But, in a country where every candidate I can think of has had something on their agenda that the Church would disagree with, should I sacrifice my right to vote for the candidate that I feel would be the best for ALL of America? Or do I vote for that person, and continue my PERSONAL work in promoting a pro-life agenda? I'm going to have to talk to my priest about this one. I have a real problem with people who feel that a vote for a pro-choice candidate automatically means I'm pro-choice. I also have a real problem with people who feel that voting pro-life is the end of their responsibility in being a part of the solution.

Interesting perspective. I get what you are saying.

 

In terms of should he say it or not because there are positions on both sides against the Church's position, I believe it is right to say this in terms of abortion, but (dare I say it) a bit hypocritical to not have the same outcry for other immoralities. Then again, I guess it comes down to proportionality (as I mentioned earlier), and the grave wrongs of abortion outweigh a lot of other political issues that interfere with our morality.

 

I agree 100% about the bolded- and I find myself guilty. I need to start looking for more to do.

 

I feel like, while your work to do as much individually to end abortion is admirable, I would have a very hard time supporting what I believe is the most disturbing and widespread state-sanctioned murdering campaign of all time. I know you don't personally support abortion, but I just think I would have trouble voting in favor of a person who looks to expand it.

Way back when, in 2004 , when John Kerry was running against George W. Bush, a substitue priest we had told us that if you were planning on voting for John Kerry you had no business taking communion.

 

The following week, I talked to my pastor about it and he said in his opinion, it was only wrong to vote for a pro-choice candidate if that was the only reason you were voting for them. In other words, if you agreed with enough of their other positions, and were voting for them despite of their abortion stance.

 

I tend to consider the candidate's consideration of the already-born, in addition to the pre-born.

 

How many pregnant Iraqi women have been blown to bits by bombs? How many American infants and children suffer from poverty?:irked:

Way back when, in 2004 , when John Kerry was running against George W. Bush, a substitue priest we had told us that if you were planning on voting for John Kerry you had no business taking communion.

 

The following week, I talked to my pastor about it and he said in his opinion, it was only wrong to vote for a pro-choice candidate if that was the only reason you were voting for them. In other words, if you agreed with enough of their other positions, and were voting for them despite of their abortion stance.

 

I tend to consider the candidate's consideration of the already-born, in addition to the pre-born.

 

How many pregnant Iraqi women have been blown to bits by bombs? How many American infants and children suffer from poverty?:irked:

 

What do pregnant Iraqi women or poverty in America have to do with a priest in South Carolina condemning communion for Obama voters????

Edited November 16, 200817 yr by rockmom

Interesting perspective. I get what you are saying.

 

In terms of should he say it or not because there are positions on both sides against the Church's position, I believe it is right to say this in terms of abortion, but (dare I say it) a bit hypocritical to not have the same outcry for other immoralities. Then again, I guess it comes down to proportionality (as I mentioned earlier), and the grave wrongs of abortion outweigh a lot of other political issues that interfere with our morality.

 

I agree 100% about the bolded- and I find myself guilty. I need to start looking for more to do.

 

I feel like, while your work to do as much individually to end abortion is admirable, I would have a very hard time supporting what I believe is the most disturbing and widespread state-sanctioned murdering campaign of all time. I know you don't personally support abortion, but I just think I would have trouble voting in favor of a person who looks to expand it.

 

What were my choices, really? Vote for someone who's position on abortion is one I disagree with? Or vote for the other candidate, of whom I felt was not going to bring anything of import to the table, pretty much across the board? I voted for what I felt would be the greater good for the country as a whole. Now, even though I don't support abortion, and try to help with solutions on a personal level, I can't take communion. I respect that position from the priest, and if this is indeed the position of the CHURCH, I'll abide. But, how could I honestly go to confession and repent, when I know I wouldn't be TRULY sorry for the vote I cast?

What do pregnant Iraqi women or poverty in America have to do with a priest in South Carolina condemning communion for Obama voters????

 

Because people like shamrock fan and I don't vote on one issue alone. T

What do pregnant Iraqi women or poverty in America have to do with a priest in South Carolina condemning communion for Obama voters????

 

It's really pretty simple. To many, abortion is wrong and a sin, but Pope John Paul II spoke out against the war in Iraq. How can a priest deny communion to people that voted for Obama, but not deny it for those that voted for McCain, who voted for the war that the Pope denounced?

It's really pretty simple. To many, abortion is wrong and a sin, but Pope John Paul II spoke out against the war in Iraq. How can a priest deny communion to people that voted for Obama, but not deny it for those that voted for McCain, who voted for the war that the Pope denounced?

 

Something to ponder.