OK. You beat them over the head with the stick and they (the Obamaphiles) deserved it. But where is the carrot? What if they vote down abortion this time around? Strange things like that have happened before and could happen now (*).

Will History look back and say, "This was their finest hour"? Against almost the full might of the American Media and the Democratic Party they voted their consciences, God Bless Them! They kept America the shining city on the hill before all the world. Will that happen? It very well could and I pray day and night it will.

Catholics all by themselves could swing this election and seldom has a religious group been challenged so clearly to "Put up or shut up!" Surely this would be the gates of hell prevailng.

(*) cf. Harry S. Truman and John Dewey

Catholics voting for Obama have done a horrible job making a valid argument, but that doesn't mean the argument isn't there.

Every time Deal or someone else raises this Nazi comparison, I'm going to throw it right back - abortion is not state policy like the mass murder of Jews was. Abortion is a choice made by millions of Americans. The government only enables it.

There are no gas chambers, there are no death camps, run by the US government. There are no legions of jackbooted thugs roaming the streets looking for unborn babies to murder. But you wouldn't know it from this sort of rhetoric. You'd think we had a one-child policy like China does, or that Obama was going to enact one over the consent of the Congress. This problem begins in the hearts and minds of people who live on your street, shop at the same stores, drive on the same roads as you do. They want abortion to be legal.

Deal writes,

"If Barack Obama is elected president on November 4 with substantial help from Catholic voters, the historical record will show precisely that. As Justin Cardinal Rigali has argued, Catholics will have voted to remove all legal restrictions to abortion, as well as taxpayer funding of abortion both here and abroad. Why? Because Barack Obama has promised, as his first presidential act, to sign the Freedom of Choice Act."

This is simply false. Catholics will have voted for a candidate who would like the opportunity to do these things, but will in all likelihood never have it. I've said it 10 times here, and I will say it again until it is acknowledged; presidents are not dictators, they cannot arbitrarily impose their will on the country.

Think of it this way: pro-lifers have long bemoaned the reality that the GOP, in spite of all of its pro-life rhetoric and posturing, has not been able to overturn Roe v. Wade. It will be no different with Obama for the pro-choicers. He simply won't be able to go as far as they want him to go. And I am going to have just a little faith that Obama will not do anything to bitterly divide this country yet again, which is what FOCA would do, and he knows it. I'm going to have a little faith that he was pandering to his base, as all politicians do in the primary season, only to later move to the center, as most politicians end up doing in office.

The big political error here is mistaking the election of a US president for a referendum on legalized abortion. Chuck Baldwin doesn't stand a chance of being elected, and John McCain is pro-choice. He just moves the choice to the states instead of the individual woman. And he's voted to confirm pro-choice judges in the past. Just ask Chuck. Both major candidates are pro-choice, and so the decision falls to other issues.

I refuse to be compared to a Nazi sympathizer or voter by a person who is going to vote for a federalist version of the Holocaust over the national version, or vote for a guy like Baldwin who has absolutely no chance of winning.

Instead I'm going to stop calling it genocide and the Holocaust, recognize it as a sin that is carried out not by the state but by millions of ordinary Americans, and do what I can at a grass roots level to build a culture of life, which to me means regenerating the economic health of the local community through distributism. In that effort I am going to trust Obama to be on my side.

I think I have adequate reasons for doing so, and if anyone wants to challenge them, please do so respectfully and orderly. Please try not to make points that I've already addressed, and add something new to the discussion. And know that I don't think everyone voting for McCain is an evil, terrible person, so there is no reason for anyone to presume that of me. Also know that I don't agree with Obama on everything, I am not a part of the official fan club, but that I do like him and think he'll be a pretty good president.

Thanks.

Joe and others of his shared perspective,

it isn't Deal's voice you need to counter, but rather pray for the grace to hear the voices of the 50 million and counting unborn babies...... It is their cry that emboldens Deal to use his sharp blade of journalistic skill at the risk of being sacrificed by some who seek a perfect Truth-bearing vessel to .......their blood covers our American hands....not just Catholic American hands..... that is the Nazi comparison..... The Supreme Court made that decision to legalize abortion, I remember the day; I was just a child; I wore a silver bracelet for the unborn babies; I cried for America on that day. I was mad that the women didn't line the streets in protest the next day when it would have been easiest to undo........ I've cried ever since!

It took a lot to remove slavery from our country.... and some would argue the residue still remains...... It took a lot to get Women to count enough to have a voice to Vote.....

Joe you seem like a man with a sincere and passionate soul. I can't imagine this post without your voice. What if the 50 million babies had been allowed to live.... what might they have contributed to America.... what gifts would they have place on the altar?

Don't counter Deal's voice, I pray that you will hear the voice of the babies..... there is no way that God would reverse Abortion down a path that retains Abortion rights..... that would be the path of deception.....

I love you in Jesus.... and pray you will hear the babies and make this VOTE be THE VOTE that brings the momentum we need to protect all unborn going forward. Imagine Joe that history-making work!!

Joe H, You are wrong to say that John McCain is pro-choice. He has voted pro-life consistently during his 26 years in the Congress. He may not have carried water for us, but we in Arizona could count on him for his pro-life votes. And while his record shows some bumps in the road, he has always been willing to talk with us on hise issues. He is not someone who panders to Planned Parenthood and promises to help them kill more babies.

Those who have abandoned the pro-life cause to support Obama have given up on the movement. They have quit and they now want us to lose so they can feel morally justified. We saw these types during the Battle of Britain, people who were not willing to count the cost and instead wanted to capitualte.

Same here.

As for the political parties, let us not forget that in 1975 we had over 127 pro-life Democrats in Congress. Then the pro-life movement was very non-partisan. But the pro-abortionists in the democratic Party took control of the party and wiped out all the pro-life Democrats. They put in a plank supporting abortion on demand in 1978. One could not aspirre to higher office if one was pro-life.One had to abandon one's pro-life views in order to seek the democratic nomination for president. Many prominant Catholics also abandoned the truth for the poilitically expedient. Kenendy, Cuomo, Kerry, Biden, to name a few, started this "personally but" routine. Cardinal Bernadin and other apologists for the Democrats in the 1980s gave them "cover" with the "seamless garment' argument. In so called Catholic states, where 75% of the Catholics never grace the inside of the church, pro-abortion Catholics won elections and most of the bishops at the time said nothing.

So is it surprising that a few renagade Republicans have left the reservation to endorse the oppostion? There will be no consequences to them or to the pro-abortion Catholic politicians who pander to the left. If Obama wins, and the babies lose, the press will once again sound the death knell of the movement. But fortunately the movement will not end, it will not quit. And though it take more time and though tragically more babies die, we will never stop proclaiming the truth that all innocent human life is sacred.

Still I must hope in the mercy of God and that He will not abandon us to the evil so many have embraced. And I will challenge all who read this site to recommit themselves to actively participating in some work that will help save unborn children and offer real hope to women facing unplanned pregnancies.

I am so tired of people calling this a privacy issue that ordinary citizens make decisions on - and that it is a personal sin. This is ridiculus.

Ordinary citizens make a personal decision to murder their spouse who is cheating on them - and that it is a public crime. Ordinary citizens make a personal decision to earn a living by selling their bodies to a willing person - and that is a public crime. Taking the life of an innocent child - who is fully and completely indepedent from his/her mother from the moment of conception except for needing a warm place to grow and eat (just like a two year old or a ninety-two year old)- and that is a private choice and a personal sin.

Catholics who support Obama are so hungry to finally return to the Status of "Catholic Democrat" that they turn a blind eye to the truth. It will be very hard to console you who turn to me after the school nurse has taken your thirteen year old for an abortion without your parental notification, for that is what the Freedom of Choice Act mandates - but I will be there for you, and together we will spend another forty years trying to accomplish that which we are on the brink of RIGHT NOW.

I agree with Deal Hudson, Catholics will either rise to this most important hour and shine - or we will make a selfish emotion based decision - and bear on our shoulders the lives of the unborn that will be slaughtered at the hands of Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid. Like Pontius Pilate, the choice is ours - I guess it is a matter of how comfortable we are with the blood that will rest on our hands.

There are no other issues for a faithful Catholic that trump Life.

You either cast a vote for or against Life in this election. You either stand with the Church or excommunicate yourself. You either see through the smoke-screen of economic fear and mumbo-jumbo or you allow yourself to be desensitized to murder.

All the Kmiecs in the world cannot speak more truthfully than Bishop Hermann. Are YOU listening?

Joe H. writes, "Every time Deal or someone else raises this Nazi comparison, I'm going to throw it right back - abortion is not state policy like the mass murder of Jews was. Abortion is a choice made by millions of Americans. The government only enables it."

When the laws of a state protect an act so contrary to natural law as the killing of the unborn, the state cannot be exonerated from responsibility. In addition, the United States, in the past, has adopted and funded abortion as a tool of population control and world poverty.

I predict under an Obama administration the funding will be restored for foreign and domestic abortions, and abortion will also used to fight "global warming."

Deal, absolutely correct! If elected, Obama will be like his Democrat predecessor Bill Clinton and turn the US into a player for the culture of death in Third World countries through population control, unlimited abortion, condoms and contraception, etc.

Look at what the UN and the population control zealots are trying to do to Catholic Latin America, burgeoning Catholic Africa, the Phillippines, other parts of Asia, etc. Clinton spread the culture of death into these countries, and Bush has tried to reverse that to bring the culture of life. Obama will try to restart Clinton's agenda for the Third World.

Joe, please read this piece before you pull the lever for Obama. Everyone struggling with this issue should - it's not just about FOCA.

http://tinyurl.com/5vgg4d

You stated that you don't think Obama will go through with his promise to sign FOCA. This is an unusual approach to forming an opinion. I've heard of people not believing someone who promises to do something good, like, say, lower taxes. But to NOT believe someone's promise to do something very grave, like sign FOCA - well, you're really rolling the dice there.

I know you love distributism, but my understanding is that distributism strikes a balance between capitalism and socialism, so you could vote for either candidate based on that premise. But there is no balance to be struck on the life issue. When you're voting as a Catholic on a fundamental issue, you must PUT POLITICS ASIDE. If the candidates happen to agree, then you can start to consider other issues.

Republican, Democrat - who cares? As I've stated before, the way I look at it is:

Who gets to live? Who dies? And who decides?

This election year, we are all, every one of us, voting for this and this first.

Where did I read recently that one of the first things Hitler did when gaining power was to greatly expand the availablity of abortion, that he considered it paramount to his mission?

I have a problem, as I mentioned in a post on another thread, with comparing abortion to slavery. I would also argue that abortion is a different kind of evil than the Holocaust, even though both kill human beings.

Deal likes to throw the red meat around. I understand this. Yet Joe H.'s point that the president is not a dictator is an important one (I, for one, do not agree fully with Joe H. and do not think that Catholics can vote for Obama). If the choice on Nov. 4 was between candidate "A" who will overturn abortion law and candidate "B" who will fight all attempts to overturn abortion law, then the choice would be easy. But because this is NOT the choice in November, the decision is a lot tougher. Republicans had their chances for 6 years. They have frittered it away through rapid expansion of government and an unnecessary war. Electing John McCain president (remember, he cannot rule by dictates!) is more than likely not going to end abortion.

I think that we should remember the priest pedophilia/bishop cover-up scandal here and the residual effect it has had. The bishops have little credibility, and rightly so. 75% of Catholic bishops in the US, according to Leon Podles' statistics, knew of sexual abuse by their priests and did not take adequate steps against it. How can we expect anyone to listen with a priviledged ear to what the bishops have to say? In addition, it came out last week that the Catholic Campaign for Human Development gave millions of dollars to ACORN. This should also lead us to pause and dig deeper. What is going on here? Is it surprising that 40 bishops speak and few Catholics listen?

Mr. Hudson's article is spot on in regard to the Democratic Party in general and Barack Obama in particular.

But I have to confess a strange uneasiness in so many prominent Catholics seeming to want to drive us all to the GOP. The GOP has its own crop of moral evils.

The argument is made that in an election like this, we must choose the lesser of two evils. But isn't this constant appeal to lesser evilism exactly what has put us here in the first place? Election after election, we vote for the lesser evil, and every election the candidates seem to get more evil.

It's time for Catholic voters to stand up and stop supporting ANY evil. It seems as if we are being told, "Moloch is more evil than Mammon. Vote Mammon!"

I'll vote neither.

You can't beat Sauron by joining Saruman. You gotta fight 'em both.

Mark, I would be "driving" voters to the Democratic Party if the roles were reversed, believe me.

The GOP is far from perfect, far from perfect , let me repeat that. But they have the best record right now on the most important issues.

If the Bishops wanted to...they could clean up this mess in the Church and in their diocese as well. Here in my opinion, would be a very simple solution and a new beginning. This Sunday and the next.....mandate something like this be read at every Mass:

To my fellow Brothers and Sisters in Chirst....Good Morning/Evening....

"If you are planning on receiving Our Lord today in the Blessed Sacrament...and....are pro choice/pro abortion.....or.....you are planning on casting your upcoming vote for candidates who are pro choice/pro abortion....PLEASE DON'T RECEIVE the Blessed Sacrament today. Please....as your Bishop....I am asking you in charity and in love....not too. You have no earthly idea what you are doing to yourself and to Our Lord's Church. Do the right thing...do the honorable thing...Again please....do not receive today. Hopefully, you can continue to come to Mass and ultimately I pray, you will be fully reconciled back into Our Lord's Church. However, if you simply cannot come to believe in the Church's position on this issue of abortion.....maybe this is not the Church for you. It saddens me to even suggest this. From my perspective...it seems so easy...so elementary to understand that the killing of a child while that child lives and grows in their mother's womb....is so wrong and so evil. Is this what we have come to! Have we become so blinded...so spirtually "lazy" that we cannot see...we cannot recognize the very face of evil.

As your Bishop, entrusted by Jesus Christ Himself to teach, I realise that there are many, many other things where there seems to be some confusion on what Our Lord's Church teaches, and I will look forward to the challenges ahead in addressing these things with you. But today....let us begin with this life and death issue. Together and with the power of the Holy Spirit we can and we will get there. Remember this...."we can do all things in Chirst who strengthens us". Amen....God Bless you all...and God Bless America!"

Someone explain to me...why something like this would not be effective. Truthfully, the Bishops have forgotten the power of the Eucharist. When you are accustomed to receiving the Blessed Sacrament and suddenly you can no longer receive Our Lord.....there is a feeling of being cut off. You feel alone. It is convicting. It can be overwhelming and will most of the time inspire someone to get their life back together. I speak from experience unfortunatey.

I know this much. The Bishops had better do something different than what they have been doing. It is simply not working. It is so sickening and so very frustrating to see and watch the ones primarily entrusted with teaching, and shepherding their flock remain silent. Who are these people? Are they afraid...are they scared? Can they just stand up and do something courageous for a change....something right for a change. Couldn't they individually talk with these "so called" pro choice/pro abortion Catholic officials privately.... and the rest of us collectively who are destroying Our Lord's Church? Or...are they themselves so lost and can't see what is happening? You tell me.

If this were a close election, Deal might have a point. And I emphasize might. But the Republicans have got themselves into a spectacularly bad spot. It would be one thing to have engaged the nation in war and conducted the fighting and peacekeeping well. But the Bush Administration has had a horrific record at getting the job done.

There's a substantial laundry list of incompetence from the Republican-led nation, 2000-06. This election is more about turning the bums out of power. I want somebody in the White House who can get the job done. John McCain is not that man. The GOP is not the party.

Senator McCain may have been a much more compelling candidate in 2000. While the social conservatives wouldn't have liked it, I think a Gore-McCain race for the presidency without the machinations of Rove and Cheney would have been far more interesting and better for the country.

But eight years, pandering, and ineffective attack-dog politics have made him a very bland choice. It's a credit to the Republican machine he's still hanging in this race and has West Virginia, Arkansas, and Montana in his column.

As a person who won't be voting Republican in two weeks, I can't say pulling Democratic or third-party levers energizes me either. Deal and his comrades seem to think other people are as fired up for the party cause as they are. That is the huge hole in their line of thinking. Many social conservatives are just too ideologically inbred to see the whole truth. They wouldn't hold their nose and pull a lever, so they can't imagine anyone on the other side would either.

And let's be real about what the voters at-large care about: the economy is out-polling social issues six to one. Deal Hudson, the Republicans, and their forty-some bishops are behind, way behind the times.

It's time also to turn pro-life lobbyists out of jobs. The PR effort s***s, they can't get out of the hero-worship of bishops that just turns off mainstream Catholics and enrages anti-Catholics, and abortion rates remain grossly unacceptable. The incompetence is at Katrina level.

Too bad we can't vote for the pro-life lobby to work for us. That would be an interesting race.

It is tempting to want an ideologically pure Church, where we are all 100% of every issue. But here is the problem. First of all, there would only be about five people left if we went around on some Inquisition, chasing people out.

What's next? Should the priest ask everyone who has ever take the birth control pill to refrain from communion too? Used a condom? Anyone who supports the death penalty? Anyone who voted for Obama or any pro-choice Democrat ever in their whole life?

I think, in our world today, it is better that we bring as many people into the Church as we can, because at least when they come to Mass or give their children the gifts of the sacraments, something can seep through.

I'm not saying that the priests and bishops should be wimpy and not stand up for and address Catholic teachings ever, in the danger of offending some. Not at all.

I’m not trying to downplay the importance of this election or the damage posed by FOCA. However, I remember Bill Clinton promising to sign FOCA when he was running in 1992. Despite his victory, and Democrat control of both houses of Congress for two years, the bill was not passed, thank God. In fact, I’m not certain it was ever taken up by Congress during that time. Does anyone know why? I can’t find much information on that.

Our Catholic faith and its teachings should be the driving force behind our vote. I know several Christians who are not voting for either McCain or Obama this election because they’re tired of having to choose the lesser of two evils. I understand that argument and have grappled with this as it relates specifically to McCain. I also know those who offer the excuse that ‘Well, the Republicans haven’t done anything to stop or slow down abortions when they’ve been in power, so a vote for Obama won’t be any worse”. This statement is a copout.

Any current attempts to put restrictions on abortion are ALWAYS put up as a challenge to the ‘Constitutional right to an abortion’, which ALWAYS goes all the way to the Supreme Court. The problem is that Roe v. Wade removed abortion as an issue which could be dealt with by legislation (either pro or con) by enshrining it as a Constitutional right. Take a look at how difficult it was to pass restrictions on even the most brutal form of abortion.

I continue to be amazed at the number of people who do not understand this. I even heard a caller into Al Kresta’s radio program expressing anger at President Bush for not outlawing abortions; the poor fellow didn’t seem to understand that it isn’t that simple, despite Kresta’s continued efforts to explain it to him.

This is why it is so important to overturn Roe v. Wade so that extensive changes can happen, and real limitations can be placed on abortion, and hopefully it will eventually be outlawed. I would love to see this issue addressed specifically in the constitution, but in order for that to happen, the beast of Roe v. Wade must be destroyed first. Then the issue can be fought over at the state level, and eventually 38 states would be needed to amend the constitution to deal with abortion directly. This process isn’t going to move forward with President Obama appointing justices who will defend Roe v Wade until hell freezes over.

Bishop Chaput and the other bishops who have spoken out on this issue are correct. We can either ignore their counsel or take heed. But at some point, our own Catholic identity must be called into question if we ignore our faith when casting our ballots for candidates who stand in diametric opposition to the values of Catholicism.

In other countries, abortion is not a personal choice at all. I have a daughter from China and have spent much time researching what may have led to her abandonment. Right now, the U.S. does not support population control in China. Thank God, because in China, population control extends to FORCED ABORTION of little girls like mine. Many women have their "unlicensed" children in secret and abandon them, avoiding the forced abortion. With Obama in the White House, I fully expect the Mexico City policy to be repealed, and then our tax money will go to fund population control in other countries like China, where it's not simply a matter of handing out condoms.

Perhaps with better funding, those women and their husbands, who would rather give their children a chance at life, even in an orphanage, than abort them, will not be able to get away from the Population police. My daughter is valuable beyond imagining, like all children, and the thought of my money going to fund the abortion of little girls who are treasures like her, makes me ill.

If any of you feel you can support Obama, look into the Mexico City policy and then think about it again...

When the chips are down - invoke the Nazi's. Sad, but a tried and true Republican strategy.

There is too much at stake right now in this election to boil it down to a single issue. Abortion will continue on demand under McCain or Obama. Overturning Roe V Wade will not end abortion. At least with the abortion reduction policies of an Obama administration, babies and their mothers at least have a fighting chance and the access to housing, education and health care that Republicans have sought so long to deny them, thus forcing them into abortion.

A true pro life vote this fall is for Barack Obama.

If by "most important issues" you solely mean abortion, then you are correct in shunning the Democratic Party, at least on the national level.

But the GOP doesn't exactly come out shining on this score either. Since I started voting (1990) I have been told in every election that THIS is the most crucial election in history in regard to the abortion issue. In those years, the GOP has held the White House for a sum total of ten years, Congress for several of those, and dominated the Supreme Court. Under part of Bush's administration, the GOP dominated all three branches of government. And abortion is not only still legal, but wasn't even challenged. The GOP took absolutely no leadership on this issue. The GOP showed more passion and conviction in seeking to privatize Social Security than it did in saving the lives of millions of unborn persons.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. But we Catholics have been fooled again and again and again and again and again in the voting booth, and we keep lining up to get fooled again. I'm not standing in that line any more.

Had our bishops been doing their job, we would not find ourselves in this predicament. Until quite recently, our bishops fit in far too comfortably with the political left. The priestly sex scandals caused them finally to open their eyes and see what obedient Catholics had seen all along: the media and the liberal elite hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular.

The liberal bishops' erstwhile buddies turned on them and refused them and the Church a fair hearing. The media didn't for a moment hesitate in calling for their ecclesiastical heads. The good Cardinal Archbishop of Los Angeles received little aide and comfort from his democrat allies--they turned on him viciously. Now we see two dynamics at play:

1) Good bishops replacing bad ones.

2) Those weak bishops yet to be replaced have finally gotten religion.

...is immense, given the self-immolation of the "sex scandal."

At that time I argued that the media hype of the sex scandal was a direct attack on the Church's authority in regards to abortion. It is clear that played out to a great extent in the laity, rather than the bishops. We see heroic efforts to lead by Archbishop Chaput, Bishop Hermann, and others; seemingly beginning (to my perception) with Archbishop Burke. Even our local ordinary, Bishop Swain of Sioux Falls, stated at his installation that his first action as Bishop was to register to vote in South Dakota so that he could vote for the abortion ban. And yet you have the Pro-life Obama movement with all its argumentative contortions, Kmiec, and the others attmepting to neutralize the Bishops.

What amazes me though, is that I would have thought the Conference would have made some great faux pas here in these last days. Surely, they have not been reformed?

After this statement, what more can be written? I know, how about claiming that Sarah Palin is really John Cleese in drag?

Mark,

Believe me, I respect your quandary and your frustration. For the last few elections, I've always flirted with the Constitution Party as the purest pro-life, pro-America party as opposed to those two tainted major parties: Republicans and Democrats. But, what keeps me coming back to the admittedly very imperfect GOP are the life issues. They stand both in their platform and in the majority of their candidates for life, even if the results we've been waiting and praying for haven't come about yet in total. A saying I keep in mind is this: Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

As for your Sauron/Saruman analogy, the GOP isn't Saruman since the evil wizard was secretly in league with the Dark Lord Sauron. The GOP hasn't betrayed the life issue. Rather, the GOP might be more like Gondor and Rohan before Gandalf the White came around to revivify them.

Either because he has to clean up the keyboard from the coffee spill or for starting a flame war.

I really can't agree. Reading the Gospels, the saints, even good ol' Chesterton, I can't reconcile the Faith with the policies of the GOP --- pro-war, pro-torture, greed is good, profit before people.

Others will be quick to point out that the Democratic Party is no better, and I won't disagree. There is no pro-life party in American politics today. They're taking different paths at different speeds in the marathon of the Culture of Death, but make no mistake: They're in the same race on the same team.

My Saruman/Sauron analogy stands. If there is a Gondor or Rohan among the nations today, I don't see them. The Vatican is perhaps Rivendell, and it is under seige. The Holy Father's guidance and counsel continues to go unheeded by the princes of this world.

With all due respect, Jonathan, I don't know of any bishop saying this. Bishops are the ones authorized to teach in the name of the Church. Based on your comment it is clear to me that your conscious is not a well-formed conscious.

To help you in forming your conscious here are a few things the bishops are saying: "To suggest - as some Catholics do - that Senator Obama is this year's 'real' prolife candidate requires a peculiar kind of self-hypnosis, or moral confusion, or worse. To portray the 2008 Democratic Party presidential ticket as the preferred 'prolife' option is to subvert what the word ''prolife'' means. Anyone interested in Senator Obama's record on abortion and related issues should simply read Prof. Robert P. George's Public Discourse essay from earlier this week, 'Obama's Abortion Extremism,' and his follow-up article, 'Obama and Infanticide.' They say everything that needs to be said."

Another Bishop says: "How can a so-called good Catholic vote for a candidate who supports laws that take the life of innocent children, when there is an alternative? If there were two candidates who supported abortion, but not equally, we would have the obligation to mitigate the evil by voting for the less-permissive candidate...How can a so-called good Catholic vote for a candidate that supports laws that justify the killing of a child that survived a botched abortion?...How can such a so-called good Catholic receive the Holy Eucharist? Have some of our so-called good Catholics become so hardened against the Gospel of Life that they believe that other issues outweigh the Gospel of Life?"...Save our children and save our so-called good Catholics who have abandoned Church teachings in favor of personal gain.

Jonathan, please listen to those who are authorized to teach in the name of the Church, our Bishops in communion with the Vicar of Christ, the Pope. Remember what Jesus told Peter, "Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me." (Lk. 10:16)

Will you reject what our Popes and Bishops have consistently taught on abortion and teaching that Catholics are not to vote for politicians who support abortion, Jonathan?

Not coffee; gin.

And I'm not completely humorless. John Cleese is genetically incapable of not being funny, and Palin hit a homerun on SNL the other night.

Now to get to this keyboard...

Right on, Deal. This cannot be good for the Church.

Unfortunately, Marxists or socialists or whatever they call themselves cannot be persuaded by pro-life arguments. They do this for government-enforced redistributionist schemes and in the name of social justice. But the schemes have not worked anywhere in the world. On the contrary, people inevitably became poorer. And there is the trail of blood left by millions and millions of dead.

So what if there are a mere few thousand abortions a day in this country. So what if it is old people tomorrow or social security recipients the day after tomorrow.

Something predictable happened in the past when similar people acquiesced to murder: They lost all sense of their own humanity. To enforce their view, they were only too ready to silence the rest of us in the gulag.

Deal:

I don't "exonerate" the state, I simply point out that the state in only an enabler. There is moral culpability there, a great deal in fact, but it cannot be the SAME level of culpability that the Nazi regime incurred for the Holocaust.

Saying that these two regimes and their respective policies are morally different is not an exoneration.

Meanwhile, comparing them and saying that they are simply feeds hatred and rage. It would be one thing if it were actually true, but it isn't. It's a tactic you're using to basically shock and awe people into your camp.

John Jakubczyk:

I am not wrong to say McCain is pro-choice, because he is. He is a different kind of pro-choice. A typical pro-choicer says: let the individual woman have the right to choose. McCain says: let the state choose. How is that not pro-choice?

We know California and New York won't ban abortion - thats 20% of the population right there that will continue to abort with impunity. Guess which two states have the highest abortion rates? McCain is essentially for the right of all those women to choose by virtue of living in a state that will most assuredly keep abortion legal.

So, if we're going to talk culpability, where is it for McCain and the rest of the abortion federalists? Look at a map of the U.S. by population percentage, and compare that with the breakdown of abortions by state, and look the political map too.

Finally, meg:

"You stated that you don't think Obama will go through with his promise to sign FOCA. This is an unusual approach to forming an opinion. I've heard of people not believing someone who promises to do something good, like, say, lower taxes. But to NOT believe someone's promise to do something very grave, like sign FOCA - well, you're really rolling the dice there."

It isn't that unusual, because of the reason I stated. During the primaries candidates pander to their base, and I don't doubt that Obama himself believes what he says to the base about abortion. But during the presidential campaign a candidate is forced to move to the center or lose. We know Obama did that, much to the chagrin of the hard-left base, on wire-tapping, the Iraq war, and a few other issues. And as president, he must move even more to the center.

It's not that I'm positive he won't sign FOCA - I said I hope he won't, I hope he'll realize how that would divide the country. That's a longshot. If it made it through Congress, he would most likely sign it.

It's that I think he'll never get the chance to sign it because it isn't going to make it through the Senate.

It's almost as if 8 years of Bush, who called the Constitution a "g** d*** piece of paper", has made people forget how laws are made and passed in this country. FOCA hasn't passed and I don't think it will. Francis Wippel of all folks, a person I couldn't disagree with more on some basic political issues, even pointed this out. This thing isn't going anywhere.

You are wrong, about abortion not being like the holocaust and slavery. As a black american from the south, I say they are exactly alike.

When people with power want to do something they KNOW isn't right to other people, they'll convince themselves well, "Those 'niggers/kikes/fetuses are not really human beings"

From 1787 to 1860, slavery went from something the writers of the U.S. constitution were so ashamed of they couldn't mention it to "a positive good" according to Senator Calhoun and "negroes have no rights that white people are bound to respect" according to chief justice Taney in another poorly reasoned Supreme court decision. I see the same trend in downward spiral of moral sentiment in abortion. Why not, if they're not really human beings?

Perhaps next they'll say Catholics who really believe what the Church teaches aren't really human beings. Like the lady said, I could be a marytr if they killed me quick.

Catholics should thank Obama. His deployment of Kmiec,et al. requires sharper and sharper focus on the catechism, forces bishops to teach, and provides a litmus test on orthodoxy.

All the gnat-straining of the vast left-wing conspiracy reveals them for what they are. The faith is simple,explainable to seven year olds.

I used to make the same argument, BPS, but it just doesn't fly. Abortion is nothing like the Holocaust, because that was state policy. The US government doesn't abort babies, US citizens do.

It IS more like slavery, I will grant you that, at least in some respects. Are you prepared to fight a civil war over abortion?

I say if the answer is NO, then you should stop acting and talking like it is YES. That includes comparing legalized abortion to slavery and genocide.

And, you know, you don't have to compare abortion to those evils in order to say that it is evil. Do we compare every homicide to the Holocaust? No. Does that make murder less evil? No.

Imagine...you are walking down the street with Jesus Christ and Barak Obama and his followers... his supporters. Yeah...all of you who fully intend on voting for this man. This great champion of life and his pro life administration. You are all walking together when suddenly....in a trash bin.....someone notices an obviously unwanted newborn infant lying there...helpless....in the trash bin....desparately gasping for breath and struggling for life.

Question....which of the two messiah's stop and render aid and help and comfort for this desparate little one. The real messiah....or the phony one!...You know....the one you intend on voting for.

There are those running for office that would stop..... and that is who I will be voting for. They may not win...but they are much more worthy of my vote then "the one"...yes "that one" described above....who wouldn't even take the time I'm sure to dial 911. I'm sorry if this hurts your feelings...but the past facts speak for themselves.

Joe, H.

While McCain has stated that he wants reversal of Roe which arguably would send the issue back to the states (although the Court could recognize the obvious and acknowledge the unborn child to be a human being and therefore subject to the protection of the 5th and 14th amendment), McCain did in years past sign on to the Human Life Amendment. He supported efforts in the 1980s to get an Amendment passed. He supported all laws to protect children.

Legal scholars can quibble about whether a constitutional amendment is needed, appropriate or whatever, but the sense of the people is that the issue should return to the states for further regulation and/or prohibition. Therefore McCain has reflected that sense in his statements. However, he believes in total protection for the unborn. So it is not fair to call him pro-choice for that reason; especially when comparing him to a pro-abortion extremist like Obama. Obama wants to spend your tax dollars to kill unborn children. How is that different from state action?

Ironic how some people get all so indignant when one compares the killing of babies to that of the killing of Blacks and Jews?

And even more ironic haw these same people were the ones condeming the Pius XII and the Church for not doing enough.

John,

I notice that the past tense comes up a lot in explaining the merits of John McCain's pro-life record. Why isn't he supporting a right to life amendment today? Why has he voted to confirm pro-choice judges? Why does he support stem cell research?

Who cares what McCain "believes" if those beliefs aren't going to be reflected in his policy? He may believe in protections for the unborn but sending abortion back to the states is no guarantee that such protections will emerge. My reading of the relevant demographics and statistics suggests that it isn't going to save many lives, while his persistent war-mongering may cost a lot more.

I do not "get indignant" at the comparison of the lives of human infants to Jews or black Americans - I get indignant at the idea that the policies of the US government with respect to abortion are the same as the Nazi regimes policies with respect to Jews. They are not the same.

I think for myself, and I come to my own conclusions. I am in no one's "camp". I know that is hard for some people to grasp, but that may just be projection. Usually independent thinkers can recognize one of their own.

Nor am I one of "those people" who condemns Pope Pius XII - I am firmly on the side of those scholars who have debunked the hateful myth of "Hitler's Pope", such as Rabbi Dalin. Please don't try to pigenhole me.

serreno, oh on the wastebasket comment, just stop while you are ahead. For crying out loud.

Do you think Jesus would hang out with George Bush and John McCain and Dick Cheney?

Those guys bring to mind the name "whitey" and they deserve anything you can say. It is impossibly hard to believe that they are really good hearted wonderful people as we are supposed to do when we post to IC. I think the issue is very clear this election year, we should all stop beating around the bush. Because we personally wern't aborted we should thank God and vote for our brothers who were.

I know that in over 50 years of marriage and probably 8 years before that I never used either a condom or any kind of device or pill, yet had a wonderful marriage and raised two great children. If that makes me some kind of Weirdo Catholic, then so be it. I couldn't bear being a murderer, especially of my own child. How anyone else can I don't know. I suppose they do it by just not thinking at all. Our outspoken opponents seem to have mastered that feat. Perhaps they could give us all lessons. Just keep it to the close and personal, stop talking about mass murder in the abstract. Just case by case in the here and now, up close and personal.

Ann...I am sorry....you must not have read what I wrote. Your response makes absolutely no sense. Jesus would hang out with all of them. Yeah...you and me too! We are all of His children you see....yeah....even the one in the "trash can". That is His child too. The one your man would walk away from...the one your man and your party care absolutely nothing about. Your man dosen't get it....he is certainly not stupid....but he is "da_n" sure blind. And so are you if you support him. Do I count you among those who wouldn't stop and help the child in need...or care enough about even dialing 911. I sure hope not! That wouldn't look too good on your "eternal resume"! Mine either.

All I need to know is that NARAL, Planned Parenthood, et al LOVE the guy - Obama, that is. They are the experts, they should know what best supports their agenda, no? I don't hear any pro-aborts out there blowing the horn for McCain. Why? Because it would be preposterous, he doesn't support their issue!

You're wrong on this one, Joe.

People get carried away with presidential politics.

Of course NARAL and the pro-aborts love Obama. If he gets the chance, he will do what they want. My point is, he won't get the chance. He won't have the votes. That's what counts.

And of course the pro-aborts would rather have abortion protected at the national level than the state level.

I never argued that pro-choicers liked McCain, I'm only arguing that in practice, McCain's best policy would only make getting an abortion more expensive for the average American intent on getting one. What the pro-choice lobby thinks about that is irrelevant. It's what the person intent on getting abortion will be able to do that matters.

The real point is that this is beyond politics. It's a cultural problem that demands a cultural solution. It's about what we are able to do as citizens and presidents, and not what we think we ought to be able to do. That's the difference that is lost on everyone in this dispute.

...when pro-abortion Obama is elected with the help of the Catholic vote.

Good questions Joe, so let me answer them. I spoke in the past tense because that was when he had to vote on some of these matters. I try to remain accurate in my comments about when events take place. The subject matter has not come up recently. In various votes in the Senate now, he has voted for pro-life bills when he was there to vote.
As for the stem cell issue,a past point of contention, this is a question that he and I have discussed and I have argued with his past position. He has come to appreciate the value of our consistent position on this issue and he recognizes that all research dollars should be spent on adult stem cell research. His website also reflects his realization of the new technology. As for the rape/incest issue, hope to discuss that with him in the future, but it is not of a current concern as a practical matter. Lest anyone take offense at the comment, it only addresses my awareness that unfortunately we are not at that stage politically to move past the confusion in that area.

I want the Court to address the humanity of the unborn child. Will thy do it? Who knows? But until we get full and complete protection for the children, we take what we can and do what we can. That is why I get so infuriated with all these whiners and naysayers and quitters.

As for the so-called war mongering, I would suggest that a strong presence is more likely to maintain a peace than a perceived weak presence.
There is the parable in the New Testament where Our Lord speaks to the appearance of strength as preventing war from taking place. Our enemies are not nice people. They just as soon destroy us. Even Joe Biden said today that if Barack is elected, he will be tested his first six months and that crises in the world will increase.

John McCain has seen the effects of war first hand. and yet even after suffering at the hands of the communists, it was John McCain who worked to normalize relations with Viet Nam. He forgave his tormentors and torturers. We are all imperfect people. But forgiveness is a very important attribute. And John McCain has exhibitd this quality. He will be the one more reticent to send our soldiers into harm's way. He does not have anything to prove.

Before addressing specific points, I notice this:

"As for the rape/incest issue, hope to discuss that with him in the future, but it is not of a current concern as a practical matter. Lest anyone take offense at the comment, it only addresses my awareness that unfortunately we are not at that stage politically to move past the confusion in that area."

I agree with you! And I think the confusion is worse than you think, because most Americans simply do not accept the rights of the unborn child in the first trimester, or before "viability". That's where we are at.

So how come when you take political reality into account that's fine, but when I do, it's not? The political reality is that McCain's state's rights position won't have a significant impact on abortion rates in this country, that it doesn't actually prohibit abortion, that is in fact permissive of abortion if that is what the voters in each state want.

The political reality is that Obama does not and will not have the 60 senate votes he needs to pass FOCA, or any other extremist piece of legislation. Individuals can hold extreme beliefs; presidents can only sign into law policies that make it through both houses of Congress.

I support Obama on the basis of what I think he can actually do as president, not because of what he most likely will not be able to do. Isn't that how it is supposed to be?

And I just disagree with you on McCain and war. What matters is not what McCain thinks of war, but what his criteria is for the use of force as an instrument of foreign policy, and also whether or not his foreign policy is likely to increase global tensions that could lead to war. I think his bellicosity on Russia is dangerous - unconditional support for Georgia and Ukraine into NATO, the missile shield in Poland, booting Russia from the G8; these are dangerous policies! I think Obama will approach Russia with greater caution and respect.

There is no reason for Catholics to compromise in this election. There is a 100% pro-life Catholic candidate running for president. His name is Alan Keyes. He is running as an independent. He can be found on the ballot in Florida and California as the candidate of the AIP Party. In Colorado he is an independent candidate. He can be entered on the ballot in at least 31 other states, just write in A L A N K E Y E S.

To learn more about Alan Keyes visit www.americasrevival.com and aipnews.com, the home of America's Independent Party, the new home for conservatives in America.

Vote pro-life...Vote A L A N K E Y E S.

Joe,
Barack Obama has no history of caring for the unborn child. He is in league with their enemies. Addressing practical concerns with the public's confusion is doable if i have a president who at least agrees that we are dealing with human life and snot something above his pay grade.

Second. If the states were to have the abortion issue back in their jurisdiction, the issue would end up in the federal courts eventually because of the issue of movement. A mother moves from a pro-abortion state to a pro-life state. Does the child now have a right to life? What happens ion reverse? But i can deal with the legal arguments and the law. I first need to have the opportunity to save the lives without being attacked by the pro-abortionists who want to strip you of everything. don't believe me - as Joe Scheidler how they went after him for 20 years.

What can Obama do as president to advance Catholic values? The guy wants to redistribute the wealth, socialize medicine, make abortion easier to obtain, fund Planned Parenthood, the list goes on.

Seriously, what is he going to do to advance the cause of human rights?
What did he ever do successfully in Chicago or in Illinois?
Really, how many lives has he positively affected?

Barack has no clue how to deal with Putin. I have studied Russian history and McCain will understand the situation better than young Barack.

But then again, if the fact this guy thinks killing babies is no big deal, then everything else is in play.

You cannot point ot one thing that Obama has done to help real unborn children and lessen their risk to be aborted.

John and Cindy McCain have a member of their family alive because they said yes to life and adopted a little baby with special medical needs.

Ditto for DSArah palin.,

Joe Biden - the guy has made millions of dollars and is to sheap to even open his wallet a little bit.

no we're done. you want to support a guy who has no problem taking money from people who kill unborn babies for a living. I truly hope and pray that you reconsider.
Good night

People get indignant when history is brought up because they know how very true they are repeating it.

Obama has already promised to wipe out every legislation restricting abortion, and to go even further to make it state-sponsored. FOCA is almost guaranteed to be signed. Congress will have enough seats after this election to force it through. The pro-abortion camp has gleefully bragged about it.

There is absolutely no difference between a government supported military doing the genocide, or the government supported civilian 'army', abortion mills, and hospitals(if Obama is elected) doing the genocide. Unborn children are being forcibly killed against their will, just as the Jews and other unwanteds were. He even declared a new-born infant was not a human being in order to try to keep legislation from being passed that might have even the inkling of the logic against RvW. This is public record. Just how far is he willing to go?

Accordingly, Obama has pronounced it is above his pay grade to recognize human life. He has NO respect for the life and dignity of a human person.

Oh, and don't forget about euthanasia. Look at what is happening in Oregon and Washington. A woman was murdered by her husband in a hospital while other patients heard her say no many times. The man was let off and applauded by the judge for being concerned about his wife's welfare. What is this country and world coming too? So people are allowed to murder others if they are concerned about the others welfare?

Obama leads towards the future for such acts. You care about your health care when it my very possibly be determined legally just to kill you instead, no matter how old you are, to cut costs.

In accord with his anti-family agenda, he is sympathetic to the homosexual agenda. They lie about it not being forced down on children as soon as they enter school. What interest does a teacher's union have on the proposition 8 in California that they would donate $1 million? Didn't they just say it would not affect in any way the education of children in the schools? Look to MA for proof of what will happen. Parents there are no longer even able to attain the course schedule in order to ensure their right of maintaining a child's education.

The negatives of McCain (quite a few), pale in comparison to Obama. The worst case with McCain is the status quo. No one will be immune to the evils Obama will help to herald in during his term. The full damage caused by Obama will not be actualized fact until many years after his term. No rights at all are guaranteed if a human being is not even guaranteed his/her right to actually live.

His "change" may take half a century or more to reverse. At least with McCain, we will only have to endure 4 years before new candidates will be available who have a chance of winning. Hopefully those will be chosen more wisely.

BO's "change" may take half a century or more to reverse. Another civil war could still be possible (or maybe not) in the next century. Orwell may just be a prophet after all. I doubt the worse case situation of all of what I have said together will come about, but the probability is still significantly large enough. Obama may not intend on all of what may come about, but he will be a major factor.

Catholic teaching leaves no doubt AT ALL about who we can not vote for in good conscience.Whether you choose to separate yourself from the Church is up to your free will and choice. There was a time when bishops had the courage to excommunicate the likes of Pelosi and Biden.

Well, I'm sorry you're "done", but I'll respond anyway, because I like this sort of thing.

I noticed that you shifted the whole debate to issues other than abortion. You ask,

"What can Obama do as president to advance Catholic values? The guy wants to redistribute the wealth, socialize medicine, make abortion easier to obtain, fund Planned Parenthood, the list goes on."

I don't define raising taxes on the wealthy as "redistribution of wealth", because wealth is a social product. The workers of this country and of the world create wealth; a broken and morally disordered economic system allocates the vast majority of it to a handful of individuals. That is unjust. And Obama isn't really going to fix that, but he will make it more bearable until we can.

Socialized medicine? First of all, he doesn't support that, secondly, its prudential, and thirdly, once again, the political support doesn't exist for such a thing. Obama just wants national health insurance. That is not socialized medicine.

Abortion easier to attain? Fund Planned Parenthood? He's got to have the votes in Congress, and he doesn't. I don't support these policies, you understand. But I support Obama because I think he will be able to do the things I prefer, and he won't be able to do the things I find reprehensible. Why is this so hard to simply acknowledge and understand?

I sincerely believe that Obama will not have the political support he needs to enact the extreme pro-abortion agenda. I mean, I'm not lying when I say that, but I guess some people can't entertain the idea for one second that an Obama supporter might not be a totally evil, lying scumbag.

You ask whose lives Obama has changed. I don't know - how about McCain? Obama worked with Catholic Charities as a community organizer, helping unemployed workers and working on issues such as education and affordable housing. Yes, I know, thats all just a left-wing radical conspiracy, right? Please.

Joe,

The question is, are you willing to have your life staked on Obama not signing it (and not in the way that I described in my previous post), or just the children that you will not have to meet until the after-death?

It is also clear that you ignored the article that meg so kindly linked for you.

Ok, just ignore all of my posts up to this point. The meaning has been changed by the moderators extensively even though non of the rules were broken. Information on events currently ongoing (i.e. the school systems)was censured (again nothing that could possibly be against rules.) Perhaps the future I'm worried about has made an appearance far quicker than I thought it would. So much for faith in Christ. Let's see what they could possibly edit in this post. I pray that all Catholics still in communion with the successor of Peter will maintain their faith and those that have lost it will regain it.

I live in the San Francisco Bay area, where there are many liberals. But what saddens me is that most of my acquaintances who are Catholics are liberals and are big Obama supporters.

I am not surprised at all when one of my athiest co-workers says he supports Obama. But I am surprised when I hear that one of my Catholic co-workers, who went to Catholic school, who is very religious and attends church says that he is also voting for Obama. He says he is against abortion and Roe v. Wade. But somehow he also supports Obama, who said that his daughter shouldn't be "punished" with a a child if she makes a "mistake" and has a baby.

The Senate voted 98-0 to outlaw live birth abortions, where children with abnormalities are born and then left to die on their own in some quiet part of the hospital without anyone there. This is barbarism similar to that practiced by aboriginal Indians in the Amazon. But Barak Obama voted not to ban the live birth abortions when he was a state senator in Chicago. And he cannot claim that he did not know what he was voting for, since he voted 3 times to allow this abortion. He also voted in favor of partial birth abortions.

The truth of the matter is that the President does not make abortion policy. This is done by individual state legislatures. If the law is challenged, it could end up in the US Supreme Court, who decide if the laws are constitutional. The President's role in abortion is therefore in selecting the members of the Supreme Court who decide on the legality of abortion. Thus I think it is unfair to criticize President Bush because abortion has not been elimited during his presidency. It is not up to him to outlaw abortion. He does not have that power. It is up the Supreme Court. Despite fillibusters, he has appointed two Justices, Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, who are ardent pro lifers. On the other hand, Obama promises to appointment radical pro-abortion, anti-life Supreme Court Justices that will overturn the ban on partial birth abortions.

So that is what I don't understand about my Catholic friends. They say they want to see Roe v. Wade overturned, but they are fanatical Obama supporters even though they KNOW that Obama is going to pick pro abortion Supreme Court nominees. And with both sides of Congress having democratic majorities, his picks will be confirmed right away.

God sheds tears for each of the 50 million innocent lives that have been slaughtered by abortion. It is time for Catholics to take a stand and not support the abortionists, like Mr. Obama. If we are not part of the solution, we are part of the problem. By voting for Obama, Catholics have the innocent blood of God's children on their hands.

God bless

September 29, 2005 Obama voted against the conformation of Chief Justice John Roberts.

January 31, 2006 Obama voted against the confirmation of Justice Samuel Alito.

Barack Obama has promised, as his first presidential act, to sign the Freedom of Choice Act.

What more needs to be said, the choice is clear. Is it life or death?

Now, finally, Ken asks a relevant question:

"The question is, are you willing to have your life staked on Obama not signing it (and not in the way that I described in my previous post), or just the children that you will not have to meet until the after-death?"

Would I bet my life on it? No. I'm reasonably certain he won't be able to sign it, but there are no 100% guarantees. I'm not 100% certain John McCain would start World War III either, but I think it is possible, and that he is more likely to do it than Obama.

So yes, when I meet those children, I think I will be able to say with a clean conscience that:

a) I voted for Obama expecting that he would not be able to establish an extreme pro-abortion agenda, as he would lack the political support to do so (I voted for a president with constitutionally limited powers, not a dictator),

b) John McCain is essentially pro-choice, and those supporting him essentially support the idea that the rights of the unborn are subject to a vote,

and c) I believed McCain was likely to initiate a war that could lead to the extermination of vast swaths of humanity that may make the number of babies killed by abortion pale in comparison, and render parts of the Earth uninhabitable for generations to come.

That will be my case, and I believe these things sincerely. I know others think that my beliefs about McCain and WWIII are unwarranted, but what can I say, they haven't convinced me.

Deal said "The Catholic Church is often accused of complicity in a variety of moral evils... the rise of the Nazi Party..."

Probably only the Galileo and the clergy sex scandals rank higher on the list as favorites of the leftists to portray and slander the Church. So Joe H, your portrayed indignance rings hollow.

And here, let me throw this back at you!
"abortion is not state policy like the mass murder of Jews was"

Mass murder of the Jews was NOT codified under a free German democracy -- Nazism soon canceled free elections; it was forced upon the citizenry mostly in secret, government by fiat, and not much unlike purposely stacking the U.S. Supreme Court to unconstitutionally legislate murder from the bench.

And this is why I would argue our state of affairs is WORSE! We are a free society willing to justify and put to death millions of children.

Sick.

Well Joe H, I am back after a couple of hours of playing hoop with some priests and visiting my brother and his family. Came home and after a pleasant time with the family decided to see what nonsense you wrote in responsse to my brilliant repartee.

And I find that nothing has changed.

You seem willing to bet the farm that the Democrats won't pass the Freedom of Choice Act. Tell me your reasoning behind that one. Are we pro-lifers going to scare the Congress into doing what's right?

You have totally ignored Obama's plan to provide tax monies to pay for abortions. This is something high on Planned pareenthood's agenda. that plan alone could raise the number of abortions in this state.

You ignore the reality that the next president will have the opportunity to select one or two Supreme Court justices.

As Ken and others mentioned in their post, the courts are a major consideration.

And as someone mentioned earlier, there is the other elephant in the room, the issue of same sex marriage. Barack Obama is in favor of changing the current definition of marriage. He may say one thing to the middle class voters in the battleground states. But he tells his homosexual supporters a whole different story. Again look at who is supporting him. The pro-abortionists, the homosexuals, the left, all enemies of the Church.

so how will history judge those who abandoned their Catholic principles to support a man whose monies and support come from vililant anti-Catholic elements in our society. Will they ask the same questions that historians ask the German people who lived and voted during the 1932 elections? Will they pour on the same disgust as those who look at the peoples of Germany and Italy who according to the historians allowed the holocaust to happen?

What will they think about the cirucular reasoning exhibited by some who have decided to believe in Obama without any evidence that he is serious about changing the culture of death, but with lots of examples that he embraces the Planned Parenthood mentality.
You see the future generations will know that one third of them have been killed - by the same mentality that votes for a Barack Obama. I think they will not be pleased with their response to your comments.

Finally even Joe Biden is worried about what happens if Obama is elected. And the scenerio Biden paints is not good for the country. So if you are worried that McCain may get the country into hostilites, imagine Obama getting into office and the crises that his presence witll create.

Finally I cannot see God wanting to have this happen.

Well, the hits just keep on coming.

In response to "nobody", who wrote this:

"Mass murder of the Jews was NOT codified under a free German democracy---Nazism soon canceled free elections; it was forced upon the citizenry mostly in secret, government by fiat, and not much unlike purposely stacking the U.S. Supreme Court to unconstitutionally legislate murder from the bench."

Two points:

1) It's been said that two or three SC seats may open up for the next president. That means simply that Bush's appointees will be balanced out by Obama's, which means, no change in the abortion status quo. It's another nullified issue, since McCain's appointees will send it back to the states - MAYBE - and that is still a pro-choice position.

2) I absolutely reject the paranoid claim that Obama is going to go beyond the powers of his office to force an extreme pro-abortion agenda on the country. I believe he is running for president, and will remain a president, unlike Hitler, who ran for president and became a dictator.

For John,

You asked a good question.

"You seem willing to bet the farm that the Democrats won't pass the Freedom of Choice Act. Tell me your reasoning behind that one."

My reasoning is simple - it will take 60 votes in the Senate to pass, and I don't think FOCA will get it, because it is simply too extreme. My sense is that most Democrats will preserve the status quo, because popular opinion is shifting away from abortion extremism and towards more "centrist" views. Pro-life Democrats are also no longer pariahs in the party. I think any Democratic senator or representative concerned about reelection in more moderate parts of the country will think long and hard and vote no on FOCA. I think a vote for FOCA will be the kiss of death for a lot of Democrats from certain areas of the country.

I am 100% for an all out effort to put pressure on legislators not to vote for FOCA. Obama can't sign what doesn't get to his desk. Provided he doesn't have the votes to do what he wants on abortion, I say he'll make a good president, certainly a better one than McCain. In the meantime we can go about the more important work of winning hearts and minds for the pro-life cause.

On a final note, the Holocaust comparison still doesn't work. As "nobody" pointed out, Germans didn't vote for the Holocaust. That election was a referendum on the Treaty of Versailles. And on that note, McCain has a very "Versailles-like" approach to Russia. Dangerous stuff. Meanwhile it is the average American that is indifferent towards or participating in abortion. The state has yet to compel anyone to abort.

Hi Ken,

We didn't "censor" you but we did remove a bizarre and largely incoherent paragraph wherein you ask Joe H if he would be comfortable with a loaded gun pointed at his head and hooked up to a rope that would go off the instant Obama did... something (it wasn't exactly clear).

So, yes, we'll take out the violent, vaguely threatening stuff. I don't believe you intended that, but you may not have been aware of how it came across. The Internet is anonymous, so we don't have the benefit of knowing anything about one another. That's why we need to exercise extra care with our online interactions.

If you had a point to make on schools, feel free.

But Joe, doesn't it bother you that HE WOULD IF HE COULD? Does this not give you pause? To answer your question, that is what is so hard to understand about your posts. He is and will IN ALL RESPECTS POSSIBLE advance the cause of abortion (and homosexual unions) - to our young people, to every person who has been taken in by his speaking ability and his smooth demeanor. He is giving these things an agreeable face, and by doing so is greatly influencing the mindset of the country. You are a Catholic man who knows better, and you're playing a dangerous game.

Vote third party, sit it out. But don't vote for Obama, Joe.

This election is special; protection of innocent life hangs in the balance.

Any politican that does not recognize the sanctity of life, of the vulnerable, is shirking his duty & responsibility to protect & defend it. How will Obama be stopped from signing the Freedom of Choice Act?? This is his promise to groups who have funded his campaign with excessive donations.

It is a core duty of a politician in his/her service to the people they govern; to defend & protect life.

The Obama BIGGEST LIE: "Nobody wants abortion." "Nobody likes abortion." There is a billion $ industry that has a self-interest in perserving itself for profit. Greed.

No one is persuading voters toward the GOP. Vote for anyone you like EXCEPT Obama. He is looking like a dictatorship in the making with each passing day. He has many powerful people behind him (even Marxists). And that is THE threat to Liberty.

OBAMA is DEATH for AMERICA as we know & love Her.
A Vote for OBAMA will destroy this Nation in the short run.

Mark,

I won't belabor the Lord of the Rings analogies (as much as I like them), but I will say that some of your caricatures of the GOP are false. Take the "pro-war" caricature. After being attacked on 9/11, just what were we supposed to do -- smoke dope and sing Kumbaya and hope for those nice, misunderstood Muslims to quit attacking us? Afghanistan and yes, Iraq, are just two battles in a global war against Jihad. Make no mistake, they won't rest until we all bow to Mecca five times a day or pay the jizya tax just for having the privilege of being infidels.

As for torture, I won't argue with you there. Some (not all) Republicans defend interrogation techniques which come close to if not cross the line of being torture. I will remind you though that Sen McCain spoke out against Abu Ghraib and waterboarding. He should know a thing or two about torture techniques.

As for the "greed is good" and "profits before people" caricatures, they are relics of the Democrat talking points of the 1980s. Some Republicans favor a no-holds barred approach to capitalism while others (like McCain) favor regulation where it makes sense to do so. Both sides of the political divide are guilty of favoring corporate and multinational business interests at the expense of the working man or the small business owner. Everyone like to focus on the GOP 1980s as the decade of excess and greed. Well, if you remember the Clinton 90s, you will also see corporate excess -- remember the dot.com bubble? Remember the corporate interests falling all over themselves to do business with Red China during the 90s? Remember all of the Red Chinese money funnelling into the Clinton/Gore 1996 campaign coffers precisely to further their business and military interests? It's not just the Republicans who are guilty of greed.

Joe H,

I think you have too much of faith in Obama. Almost every other paragraph in your first comment mentions about your faith in Obama. It is not good my brother to have such kind of blind faith (except I would say in the case of Jesus Christ). And that I say coming from a mainly non-Christian third world country where people can hardly read or write, but because of their faith in Jesus their lives and living has turned around.

I understand that you have a problem with people comparing abortion in this country to the Holocaust. The argument however is not to be understood at the level of every technical detail, but rather by the spirit of the events. For example, in Matthew, he compares Jesus' return to Nazareth to a verse from Hosea, which says, "Out of Egypt I called my son". The verse there was talking about Israel's exodus from Egypt, but because Jesus completely identifies with Israel as the suffering servant, Matthew applies this verse to Jesus, as God's son. However, Jesus didn't go through the exodus under Pharaoh. Israel did. But Jesus suffered under Herod, which Matthew notes.

In the same way, we can't search for every technical detail when we compare the great holocausts of the 1940's and abortion of the last few decades. But the principle is the same. In both cases, vast majorities of the Christian population were deceived into thinking eradicating segments of human population would actually be better for them and the human race. In the 1940's the Nazis argued that removing people with genetic defects would actually be good for the human population and thus we would have a better human population with less sickness and diseases. Thus, weaker individuals mostly comprising of the sick, infirm, mentally ill, handicapped were methodically exterminated. Similarly, because the Jews were considered a cursed race, they were also exterminated. Abortion, also has been explained as a justification for the human population. The argument has been put forth that the world is in need of resources and having an extended population does not serve humanity. Plus it is not Christian to have children and not be able to provide for them. Similarly, rape and incest are proper exceptions.

In both cases rational justifications are provided. In both cases, the government or arms of the government, such as the law have been used to propagate or protect these evils.

In the end, the technical details don't matter. Both abortion and the holocaust are the mass killing of several individuals while nations and world leaders remain silent. The greater evil is this as St. James says: So then, if you know the good you ought to do and don't do it, you sin. (James 4:17). In these 2 senses, the killing of human beings without the twinge of a conscience and the silence of Christians, both abortion and the Holocaust are comparable.

Your analogy of comparing abortion simply to murder as a crime but not the Holocaust does not hold water. Because deep down inside anyone who's committing murder hopefully know that they are doing something wrong. Nevertheless even if they don't, society for the most part considers murder unacceptable and a crime. In the cases of both abortion and the Holocaust, not only did society turn a blind eye. They actually thought the deed was acceptable!

God Bless you brother!

Brian, it was a sentence and not a paragraph. And anyone following the thread would know that it was not threatening in any way (unless I'm overestimating the shrewdness of the common reader on these forums.) The sentence was to illustrate the here and now immediacy, not the theoretical happenstance. Peter refused Jesus 3 times when the moment came even though he said he would not. Abortion is a most violent subject also. Yet every where abortion is mentioned was not removed.

Anyways, I was more concerned about the post before it. As an example I gave, what I had said about what was occurring in Massachusetts. Many of the schools there are refusing to let parents know about their kids education. The courts there are slamming down all cases, without any concern to the constitution. These schools are reading books and showing videos to elementary aged children that are nothing more than homosexual pornography for the sake of their "Sexual Education Program." Parents have a right to maintain their child's education. The worst possible thing stated in this segment was the word pornography (or was it "pornographic"?). Yet this statement of what they are doing was removed (censored?).

And this wasn't the only occurrence. Other things were removed and edited. Honestly, the worst thing I believe I said was the part about the excommunication of politicians. Nothing was done to that sentence. I believe that you are not the one who did this since you don't seem to be aware of this. I was just trying to say that one of the moderators may be unjustly switching things up because they didn't like the examples given. Though I am surprised they left the one about euthanasia.

Actually, then, it sounds like it was just a mistake. We have started to edit comments to make sure they conform to our charity code, and to make some of them more understandable. But we don't change the meaning of posts, and it doesn't sound like your other comment had anything we would have taken out.

The software here is a little bit tricky, so it sounds like we (and it was probably me) lost the data on your earlier comment. Apologies. Don't worry: There's no policy of censoring you.

Joe, you're wrong again. The Nazi government would not have been able to do anything without the acquience or active participation of the citizens of German. Likewise, a more recent example of mass murder by citizens without direct government participation, but with the active participation and encouragment (sound familiar) was the Rwanda killings of Tutsis by the Hutus.

It all starts from the same point. Disregard of the natural law (and Christian law) strictures that all men are equal. Then begin treating people like things.

And I was only half kidding about those in power killing believing Catholics. Who hasn't read the liberal social "scientists" (psychologist, sociologist, etc) who say conservative thought is due to "a mental disorder". It's a really short step from that to rationalizing "It would be a kindness to put them out of their misery". Didn't someone say "Tenderness leads to the gas chamber"?

Brian: Ah, ok then. I apologize for my accusative tone and getting a little irritated. A lot of times I use examples to help explain what I mean, so that it doesn't end up as "not relevant" as Joe H puts it. For certain is that I am not as eloquent and smooth as some. I am sorry, and will move back onto topic.

Meg:

I hear you, and believe me when I say I've thought about it a lot. I know that if I'm wrong here, I'm morally culpable. It is a gamble of sorts.

But to me, those of you voting for McCain are all gambling as well, with the future of the entire planet.

I know I could vote third party, but I live in a state that could end up being closely contested, and therefore, my vote may actually count. Sigh.

If it looks like a pretty solid lock on election day for one candidate or the other, I may just leave the spot for president blank on the ballot. But if its close, if I think my vote could contribute to the outcome, I have to vote Obama, because I think it is what is best for the country and the world - and that's really more of a testament to how BAD I think McCain is more than it is how great I think Obama is. I think I can do so cleanly, but if my vote doesn't matter, I won't roll the dice.

If that means you guys are going to give me nothing but grief from now on, I guess that's just what I'll have to live with.

Serreno,

Great thought piece! I wouldn't want to be a Catholic Obama supporter who went into the voting booth knowing that he would sign the FOCA upon taking office and also opposed the Illinois version of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act and then have to face all of the unborn children he's had a hand in aborting during my particular judgement.

Sam

Joe H,

In the end I think you have to do what's best. Having weighed the issues and checked your conscience, you have to make your decision. Whoever you vote for is in between you and God. Nevertheless, you cannot forget that your vote IS important and thus if you are in a swing state could significantly impact the course of the nation. Also, the statements and teachings of the Catholic Church as articulated by its bishops is clear. You cannot say you were unaware of it or try to rationalize it away. That said, whatever decision you make, you alone are responsible for it in the end. I don't think anyone will give you grief, if you think you are doing what is right keeping Christ at the center, the teaching of the Church in mind, having weighed the issues and made your decision.

In the end again, whoever wins, God is sovereign. If things go worse, He is still sovereign. If things go better, He is still sovereign. Only we cannot fool ourselves and think, that just because He is sovereign, we can do whatever we want. In every generation, he presents human beings with a choice. In our times more so because we live in a democracy. Thus, God knows our hearts and will sovereignly judge our actions based on what we know. I don't think anyone can put God in a box and say because He is sovereign, it does not matter. For me personally, his record on the issue of abortion, gay marriage and other things speaks volumes. Also, at this crucial time I definitely feel we need a strong and tested leader in this nation. What scares me about Obama is that not only does he have no experience, but he has all of a sudden risen up claiming to solve all the problems of Americans and bring CHANGE to this world - a change, that I know as a Christian, only Christ and the gospel can bring. Does the change he talks about seems not only hollow to me, but also scary. When a human being is not humble enough to realize that they just arrived on the scene and there are many other people who are well-qualified to do the job better than them, and yet claims the mantle of change, it does seem scary to me. Moreover, when they use the liberal media to cover everything they do and either hide or twist their stand on issues to suit the public, it bothers me even more. Finally, when they try to sell themselves as a Christian, because they know without the evangelical/Catholic vote, they could never win - and yet don't believe in the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith such as the Virgin Birth and the Physical Resurrection of Christ, it scares me even more. Honestly, I'd rather have a Hillary Clinton, who everyone knows what they stand for rather than someone who pretends to be the world's saviour and Messiah. Indeed, Obama's ambition is to change the world, change America. I don't take his words lightly like I do every other at election time, because I know he really wants change according to his agenda.

Yet, I know God is sovereign and God will sovereignly judge nations. He sovereignly sent Israel into exile and sovereignly destroyed the pagan nations around her. If this is what it takes to bring us to our knees, God can very well sovereignly do it. In my judgment, I hope it does not come to that. And I hope the Lord will protect us and that we as His people would have the wisdom to distinguish between what is good and evil.

May God Bless you brother(s). The above is how I have been feeling about this election. Not to mention, when Obama first came on the scene, I was really excited, but knowing him better, I'm wary. How many people are so ambitious that 4 yrs ago they were nobody, then they use the media (Time magazine) and write 2 books about themselves in an attempt to get to the highest position in the land and change the world!

I appreciate those words, Clinton. With regard to this:

"don't think anyone will give you grief, if you think you are doing what is right keeping Christ at the center, the teaching of the Church in mind, having weighed the issues and made your decision."

This is precisely what I am doing. I know that is unfathomable to some people, I know that they simply cannot see how it can be so. I've tried to explain myself as best I can.

These days there is such an emphasis on "Oh, we must do good, and help global poverty, help the widows and orphans and AIDS victims, etc etc" I am so grateful for this emphasis.

But yet as usual, we really do not want to do it. For, if we did, like St. Francis we would be denying ourselves, taking up our crosses and setting about the mission of preaching the gospel of the Lord and ministering to people.

Instead, even more dangerous, we want our government to do it for us. We want to be felt and thought of us as a good nation around the world. We are tired of people telling us we don't care for the poor and lonely, because we voted a certain way. So we have taken the more dubious route - we want CHANGE! We have trusted a leader, a man we think will truly bring the change we seek and represents what we are going through. On the issues though the man's record is not very clear. He has appeared out of nowhere and yet he is everywhere. The whole world is going gaga over him, and saying "who is like unto this man?"

For me, I think the wisdom of old is better. The true Messiah, who came long ago said, "only those who lose themselves for ME will save themselves. Only the seed that falls in the ground and dies for Jesus will bring true, enduring fruit to the world."

I think governments are great. But I don't want the government to preach my gospel. If they do, its great, but I don't want to shift the burden. I want to preach the gospel too. I want the Church to preach it. I want to be part of that Body and trust Christ alone as my Lord and the true CHANGE agent in the world!

SOME QUOTATIONS:

You must be the change you want to see in the world - Mahatma Gandhi

It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish - Mother Teresa


Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person.
Mother Teresa

Everytime you smile at someone, it is an action of love, a gift to that person, a beautiful thing -Mother Teresa

If you can't feed a hundred people, then feed just one - Mother Teresa

Words which do not give the light of Christ increase the darkness - Mother Teresa

An injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere- Martin Luther King Jr. (what about abortion?)

All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing (Edmund Burke, quoted by Winston Churchill during World War II)

Once abolish the God and the government becomes the God - G.K.Chesterton

These are the days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed except his own- G.K. Chesterton

Joe, don't worry. You're welcome. Just put your trust in the Lord, pray, ask God to give you a clear mind and wisdom.

I think its good for us to have these discussions anyways. That way new reflections on the issues come out and hopefully with everything set before us, we are able to think better, pray better, make good informed decisions and ultimately impact our world for Christ! Best in Jesus.

Clinton - wise words said with gentleness - there should be more posts like yours.

Joe H. - I know you've put a lot of thought into your decision - God bless you whatever you decide.

Joe H.,

Thanks for taking the time -- and all of the flak from other readers -- to write what you have posted. You have done a heroic job of putting your feelings (and mine, and many other Catholics') into words.

I once spent a good long time on-line arguing with an Evangelical Atheist (weeks). Naturally as Atheists do, he thought he knew a lot more about the Catholic Church that I did. He was often scandalized at some of the things that I said. He never could believe me when I tried to explain the wide range of personal opinions that was tolerated - under the sheets so to speak. He absolutely would never believe that many of the comments that have been posted above could actually have been made by practicing catholics. I have a hard time believing it myself. Surely this could only arise from the changes made after Vatican II.

If I were a real monster I would send him the URL of this discussion. But that might end up in defaming the church I hold so dear. So I won't do it. However, If I were some of you, I would think carefully about the subject and include the aspect of the scandal I would be responsible for in ignoring the clear message of the magesterium on abortion. I have heard just about every possible excuse mentioned above - except "the Devil made me do it". Strange, come to think of it, that you neglected that one which is really pretty apt about the whole business of sex in the church.

The Republicans have had complete control of Goverment until 2006

Now, with an economic meltdown before our eyes, with a recession which may yet turn into the Great Recession Redux, and with an unnecesary war which threatens defeat in the other war we are in, with all the cronyism and corruption, will the daily display of incompetence, are we asked to vote for the same bums again because they might, *might*, if they ever get down to it, if they ever feel like it,- if they do not worry about alienating prominent people of their own party who *do* want "choice" to remain where it is - do something about abortion?

Why would you trust a bunch of incompetents to do *anything* but screw up?

Please do not ask people who are losing their jobs, their homes, their retirement funds, their hopes for the future, to vote again for the bums that got theim into his mess.

Frankly, the Republicans should we grateful that we do not hang them from the lampposts this year.

We listened to you the last two elections. You, with your pro-life rethoric stuck us with Bush and the whole gang who are sending our country down the tubes.

You think that it is enough that a candidate be pro-life to obviate the need for honesty or competence. That has got to stop. Just because you, in your zeal, you overlook that Sarah Palin is ethically challenged, it does not mean that the rest of the country does so. The lady is corrupt, and most people do not want her, for this an another reasons.

So, Deal, save your condemnation for those who thought that the best way to save babies was to inflict idiots on the American People.

Adrianna,

I understand your frustration. But the Republican party didn't get you into this mess - at least the "economic" mess. You got yourself into it and I got myself into it. Honestly, we all got ourselves into it.

We need to stop playing the blame game. How many of us have 5 cell phones per family? And even give our 5 yr old kids some? How many parents have stopped teaching their children the values of saving, and are buying them whatever they desire - including iphones???

How many of us have 10 or more credit cards per family and are heavily into debt? How many of us are gluttonous and eat unhealthily every day and then run to the ER for a headache thus overburdening the health care system?

We are all responsible. No one convicted you to vote Republican earlier. You voted yourself. If you voted because you were pro-life and now you're angry, then you have lost your conviction. You can't blame anyone for that.

I don't agree with all Republican policies. But I don't agree with all Democrat ones either and its Democrats who have been controlling Congress for the last 2 years.

In the end, we are all to blame for the economic mess, the morality, the division in this country: Republicans, Democrats, the government, corrupt CEO's, Wall Street, everyone.

If we really want change, we need to start with ourselves. Like St. Francis of Assissi, we need to follow the message of Jesus, start forsaking our earthly goods and our dependence on them more than that, and start living for Jesus. I don't think government can do this for us. We need to start doing this and thank God for this crisis to wake us up.

We need to take responsibility for our lifestyles. And in terms of government, please don't expect McCain or Obama to solve all our problems. That's shifting the burden to government again. In another word, its socialism...in Christianity, social work starts in the heart...every Christian is like Jesus a social worker. We forgive those who have sinned against us, but like Jesus we speak out against injustices like abortion and the hijacking of marriage and we exhort our unbelieving friends to believe in Jesus, repent and believe the gospel!

Just a minor point: Humanae vitae was issued by Paul VI, not John XXIII.

I am pro-life and a democrat, but, in the past, have often voted republican based on their pro-life position, despite the fact that I generally agree with the democrats on almost EVERY other issue.

No more. I've been had. I am now convinced that most "pro-life" politicians are simply using the issue to get elected. Members of the hierarchy have become shills for certain candidates who pull roe v. wade out of their pockets every four years in order to get elected and then don't care. I voted for Pres. Bush twice. For this, I am deeply ashamed.

At present, we will be far more effective in reducing the number of abortions if we seek to change hearts, rather than laws. Unfortunately, many pro-life politicians do not strike me as profoundly caring individuals. We are spending $10 Billion a week in Iraq, but if I were to suggest that this money were better spent on the poor here in our own country, I am accused of being a miserable socialist. Imagine if a politician had suggested we spend an extra $700 billion to fund vocational programs for young unwed mothers two years ago. What howls of indignation! But now, our pro-life president does not hesitate to send it along to a group of Wall St. investment bankers. Enough.

I will be voting for Obama. Furthermore, I will continue to be a practicing Roman Catholic. Our Lord and our Gracious Lady know the struggle that has brought me to this conviction. They know what is in my heart.

Hi NH Catholic,

I think your heart is good. I don't think people are saying that we should not spend money on the poor and help weaker people etc. We should do it as individuals and as a country. I think what people are saying that a certain group is trying to use this to divide Catholics and other Christians - almost using it as a bait to make them not vote pro-life.

Also, I think Christians want to do good and we should make sure that our government does good. But what I was highlighting above is that many Christians are kind of feeling ashamed that America as a nation has not been doing as much good and the government should do more.

I don't think that is true coming from a third world country myself. Christians in this nation spend a lot of money on global poverty, missions, diseases, etc. When I look at other people that I work with, I find so many Christians supporting third world children, giving to charity, etc etc. Many Christians give their tithes every month to churches. In our own church we have an active ministry to the homeless every week and people cook, give clothes, etc etc. All this does not get recorded. The liberal media, which considers only itself moralistic always tries to put Christians down, but its not true.

Growing up in a third world country, the best schools, hospitals, nursing homes, etc in my native country are all run by Christians.

Even in the Bush administration, President Bush set up billions of dollars for AIDS and malaria victims. Yeah, we can do more and we should do more. But should we do it at the expense of having 40 million babies worldwide aborted every year?

Obama presents himself as a compassionate candidate. Yet most of his record has been with far-left politics - anti abortion, pro-gay marriage, etc etc. On the other hand, Cindy McCain has been involved in many social issues all over the world, gone to many countries and done a lot of good. The media does not talk about this. When in Bangladesh, a Mother Teresa nun asked her to adopt one of the orphan children - she and her friend immediately took two.

It is true that the Democrat party presents itself as more moralistic about social issues. But I would advise you: don't buy their lie, that McCain is like Bush. McCain is not! He has helped immigrants, has been against torture, is pro-life, wants to help the environment, etc.

And on the war, I understand your frustration. I lived in the Middle East for sometime. It is true I think that the Bush administration messed up a bit, but you can also be certain of one thing. From my experience of having lived in the Middle East, the Jihadists are intent and determined on bringing down America and destroying it. If the Middle East (and right now Iraq) is not stabilized, we would only have to deal with many more problems later on.

In the end, for me I think I'm an independent. If I could vote, I would vote McCain, because I think we need a strong leader right now. On the issue of abortion, McCain may not be able to stop it, but he maybe able to appoint supreme court justices. On the other hand, Obama would sign the Freedom of Choice Act and remove all restrictions on abortion. He would appoint pro-abortion justices. he has no experience as a leader in war-time and with the economy. Plus even though he claims to be bipartisan, his record has been far-left. And although he claims to be Christian and wants to do moral things, his idea of being moral is not the Christian one, but more like enforcing "social issues" through government.

You are right. Our hearts need to change. The government forcing us will result in what happened during World War II and after. Like Jesus and St. Francis, we need to give up of ourselves and live for Jesus.

In the end, a candidate who deliberately divides Christians by pitting abortion vs social issues, and the Church vs Christians sounds like a wolf in sheep's clothing to me. Thats what I would be really worried about.

God Bless.

Well thank you for those words! Makes me feel a little better, and that's no small feat these days :)

What manner of man would oppose a law to require medical assistance to the victim of an unsuccessful abortion? And, how much will he care about you and your measley little life?

ANYONE contemplating voting for a person in any way supportive of abortion needs to 'meditate' on the video at http://www.obamawantsyou.com/what.html . I invite them to watch it with their family then decide if they have searched their soul sufficiently to justify their vote.

It's been said that it is necessary to change public attitudes since the state is ony responding to those atitudes with pro-choice policies. However, Catholics/Christians need to look closer to home according to scripture. 2 Chronicles 7:14 - if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. The focus is on the behaviour of "my people" (God's people), not "them out there". If Catholics/Christians in any way support the killing of God's creations how can there be healing and God knows how much America needs healing right now.

Regards from Australia

I was watching a program on G.K. Chesterton; Britsish master of the paradox and one of the few complete thinkers from recent centuries. An excellent debater proficeint in the art of argument, he could only do so successfully if there was common ground upon which the debaters could agree. There must be a 1st Principle; the origin upon all those debating must fundamentally agree.

Chesterton went through a period of depression in his life where the sole notion he clung to for survival was the 1st principle that it was better to exist than not to exist.

The issues of life, choice & death depend on a beginning point, an ending point and the goal. Life is a gift bestowed by God, the goal of which is to be respected & shared(poured out for others--charity) all to return to the Creator.

It is impossible to debate about abortion (murder of innocent life) if to begin, those debating do not acknowledge the 1st Principle that it is better to exist than not to exist.

It is impossible to debate about warfare with a terrorist who believes that life is expendable & to be used to effect political gain or honor as opposed to one who believes life to be sacred and to be nurtured & preserved at all costs. They have no common 1st Principle, no reason upon which to develop dialogue.

There are some who would compartmentalize the the abortion issue splitting it into two parts; saying they can be pro-choice and NOT pro-abortion simultaneously. They equate the latter as a moral issue, but the former as a political, social issue where they do not think criminalization (of the Dr.& those assisting plus the woman desiring the procedure) has reduced the number of abortions. They believe social care programs are the answer to reduced abortions. Indeed there needs to be an increase in these practical helps for women in crisis pregancies. In a more disciplined world the choice factor should lie in the sexual act and not in the consequence of it. Afterall, the more reproductive rights clinics that are built, the more customers will come; not less.

As Christians (most especially Catholic Christians) every act must be a moral act if we are immitating Christ and following Him in our daily walk. Morality, for the Christian, can never be divorced from any action; it must be governed by it. * * *

I pray history will not alter Martin Niemoeller's moving poem.

Then the came for the unborn and I didn't speak up because I was Catholic.

Christ died for our sins, the very least we can do in return is defend the life he give us.

http://tinyurl.com/5bf8t9

by Edward Cardinal Egan
Archbishop of New York

I haven't rehd the Freedom-of-Choice Act, and I don't plan to; but I'm fairly sure it doesn't demand the inception of a Wire-Coathanger Brigade that shall scour the countryside in search of pregnant women.

Sure, abortion is the 'wrong' choice ... the 'right' choice being abstinence until marriage; but we also don't 'choose' what these bodies want, so we're stuck with a "wrong" anyway!

The Democratic Party is the biggest, most well funded, agressive, pro-abortion organization in the world, largely thanks to Catholics.

The quote below is from a friend of mine and I think he puts it very well on why voting on the pro-life issue makes you so much more than a "single-issue" voter. Please ponder and pray on this as we move towards election day.

" if you cannot stand up for the sanctity of life itself, then any pretense to helping others, improving immigration, pulling out of the war, etc., is worthless because it means there is no underlying belief of the inviolability of human life but rather just an ungrounded, sanctimonious political pragmatism. In other words, it's based on popularity rather than a true, well thought-out, well-grounded valuation of human life itself... "

Catholic artist and author Michael O'Brien of Canada poses the question: Have we unconsciously struck a peace-treaty with the spirit of murder? We arefloating on a sea of innocent blood."

5 million babies have died in Canada as a result of abortion; 25 times as many in America over the span of 35 years.
*************

Bishop Olmsted (Phoenix AZ) described his reasons for re-releasing the book, Catholics in the Public Square saying:

“Not to act when our neighbor’s life or the foundation of the family is at stake, as in the case of not attempting to protect unborn children threatened by abortion or to protect the institution of marriage, is a particularly grave scandal of omission. Jesus said, ‘Things that cause sin will inevitably occur, but woe to the person through whom they occur’” (Lk 17:1). *************

Writing a Friday post on the Jesuits’ America magazine group blog “In All Things,” Stricherz responded to fellow blogger Michael Sean Winters’ description of the prelate as the nation’s “second most vocal supporter of the GOP.”

Calling the description a “mischaracterization,” Stricherz, a pro-life Democrat, said he thinks it reflects “a larger misunderstanding that progressive Catholics have about their co-religionist opponents.”

He then referenced Archbishop Chaput’s August remarks in which the prelate acknowledged many important issues are relevant to the election, but also asserted that the right to life is “foundational” and all other rights depend on it.

“We can’t build a healthy society while ignoring the routine and very profitable legalized homicide that goes on every day against America’s unborn children,” Archbishop Chaput commented, continuing:

“Yet for thirty-five years I’ve watched prominent ‘pro-choice’ Catholics justify themselves with the kind of moral and verbal gymnastics that should qualify as an Olympic event. All they’ve really done is capitulate to Roe v. Wade.”

Stricherz said the archbishop’s stance should not be interpreted in a partisan spirit.

“This position is not, strictly speaking, Republican or Democratic,” he noted, saying it was the same position of the late Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Robert Casey, Sr.

Stricherz, whose book Why the Democrats are Blue discusses the secularizing changes the Democratic Party has undergone, reported that during the 1992 Democratic National Convention Gov. Casey organized a full-page ad in the New York Times which called Roe v. Wade “the most momentous act of exclusion in our history.”

Further, Stricherz argued, Archbishop Chaput’s position is echoed in the Catechism, which teaches “The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation.”

He then noted the parties’ official positions on Roe v. Wade: “The Republican’s platform calls for the passage of a human life amendment, which if enacted would reverse Roe; the Democrats’ platform calls for preserving Roe. Naturally, the archbishop has made a descriptive statement about the GOP: that on cultural issues the GOP is ‘the natural ally’ of the church.”

Stricherz expanded on his comments in a Friday e-mail to CNA.

“Many progressive Catholics assume that any criticism on Democratic Party policy is an attack on the Democratic Party,” he wrote. “This is a gross simplification.”

“As blogger Mark Shea once wrote, the logic is reminiscent of Otter's speech in the movie Animal House that any criticism of Americans' conduct was an attack on America itself.

“More seriously, progressive Catholic Democrats assume that they are the only pro-life voices in the party: in fact, plenty of pro-life Democrats wish to overturn Roe and provide necessary resources to women in crisis,” Stricherz told CNA.

On Tuesday Cardinal Justin Rigali, who is chair of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Pro-life Activities, joined Bishop William Murphy in issuing a joint statement from the bishops’ conference on the subject of faithful citizenship.

In their letter, the prelates insisted that reversing Roe v. Wade is not “a mere political tactic,” but is “a moral imperative for Catholics and others who respect human life.”

The CATHOLIC VOTE is a MORAL VOTE; we are God's / Jesus' voices, hands & feet in this world. Choose Life & Blessing!!

What about the economic and social justice situation that McCain has promised to make even worse, and that Obama wants to ameliorate, again to some degree? My copy of the Bible says a lot more about social justice than it does about abortion -- which the Church didn't even have a position on until the 19th century. In fact, St. Augustine points that out: there was no patristic consensus on the issue. Good luck ignoring 99.5% of the teachings of the Christian Church for a tiny and rather new snippet.

Mike, you do not consider the legalized genocide of 1.5 million Americans every year an issue of social justice? Really?

There are many economists who will tell you that Obama will be just as bad or worse for the economy than McCain. There's no telling on how well either side will work honestly. Do you really trust someone who would waste thousands and thousands of dollars in court simply to keep a real $12 Certified Birth Certificate sealed and from being made available for public scrutiny? Just $12 to put a stop to the so called conspiracy theory that he is not able to be president constitutionally. Is that how he plans on running the economy? How many people could have been fed or given health care with the money wasted.

The Catholic Church has always maintained that abortion is wrong. It is not a recent development. Centuries ago there were questions as to when a person really came to exist (when he or she was conceived) inside the womb, as they did not have the medical science we have today. Even so, the Church has always considered the deliberate destruction of the child inside the womb to be murder.

As to the quantity written on different issues in the Bible, murder is murder is murder. Not much else to write about it. It does not lessen the moral gravity of it. No other issue of social justice matters if you and the rest of us do not even have the right to live to even care about the other issues. In conclusion, we do not ignore 99.5% of the teachings. The truth is we remain in full accordance to the teachings of Christ and His Church.
With Peace and Love!

Thank you for your commentary Deal, and thank God for the
Bishops who speak up against abortion in attempt to guide
our country.
It should be well known that Hitler and the Nazis
legalized abortion and euthanasia. It is also a fact
that there were many top nazi officials who were gay and
it was tolerted, though not for all.
Today, we have a society that has abortion, euthanasia,
and same sex couples. And we potentially have a future
president in Obama, who together with a democratic lead
congress, that could bring official recognition to these
same acts that the hated Nazis practiced!!
Should Catholics obey the Catholic leadership in union
with Rome, or are we our own church, we don't need the
guidance of humble bishops? If some catholics in Hitlers
time ignored the true voice of Catholicism, why should
you? Let vote for BO. Although maybe as the saying goes,
we shall say of Obama "at least he started out good..."

Joe H

So it would seem you think there is a better chance that McCain starts WWIII than Obama will sign FOCA. If you have been looking at the political tea leaves you might notice the Democrats are shooting for a super majority in both houses. You frame yourself on some kind of realist that understands the current political landscape, but ignore this fact, I find that laughably naive or deliberately disingenuos. That's fine, but I prefer you just be honest and just tell people that social injustice is a bigger concern to you than abortion.

You make the argument that the President has no power to promote a prolife agenda - that is just false. I don't know how politically astute you are or if you study government but here is a link that gives a little perspective on everything the President can do to affect change in this arean. Since it hasn't been mentioned in this discussion yet - pay specific attention to the Executive Orders that can affect the prolife lanndscape.

http://www.aul.org/Pro-Life_President

Every election Democrat Catholics feel the need to rationalize their choice so strongly. I wish they would try a little harder in the primary process to get prolife candidates.