Catholic bishops issue 2012 voter guidance

[doggie]

Ok this comes from an organization that because they don't want people to do something condemn them to death (aids) allow poor people who can't afford to have more children to have them and then watch them die (no birth control) who have started countless wars and tortured countless people who did not believe as they do. it is amazing how abortion is such a horror but starvation and aids is ok. They might as well said pick the biggest looser republican looser.

RACHEL ZOLL

Published: Oct 4, 2011 12:05 PM

The nation's Roman Catholic bishops have released a voter guide for the 2012 election that repeatedly calls abortion "evil" without making revisions that some conservatives had demanded for an even tighter focus on the issue.

The document, called "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship," is nearly identical to the bishops' guide published four years ago. It gives high priority to fighting abortion while also highlighting social concerns such as ending poverty and war. Catholics make up about one-quarter of the electorate nationwide but do not vote as a bloc. Most don't base their choice on a politician's stand on abortion.

The bishops have offered similar advice to Catholics before every presidential race since 1976, broadly applying religious teaching to policy concerns of the day. The document has become a point of contention within the church over which issues voters should consider most important: abortion or social justice. These differences have often led to bruising arguments - and an unusual public airing of differences among bishops. By releasing the document now, church leaders hope to minimize the chance for a public debate on the guide at their annual November meeting, although any bishop could ask to revisit the guide.

In an introductory note to the 2012 edition, the bishops highlighted six concerns: abortion, religious freedom, traditional marriage, immigration reform, fighting poverty and ending war. The document was released days after the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops announced they had created a new watchdog committee to challenge what they considered an "assault" on religious liberty from Obama administration policies. Among the threats the bishops cited were a plan that could require Catholic organizations to cover birth control free of charge for their employees and distribute condoms as part of HIV prevention campaigns.

The introductory note warns that "Faithful Citizenship" has sometimes "been misused to present an incomplete or distorted view of the demands of faith and politics." Some bishops have accused liberals of twisting the document's nuanced language to justify Catholic votes for abortion-rights supporters. The bishops also cautioned against attempts "to reduce Catholic moral concerns to one or two matters, or to justify choices simply to advance partisan, ideological or personal issues."

"As Catholics we are not single-issue voters," the bishops wrote in the guide. "A candidate's position on a single issue is not sufficient to guarantee a voter's support. Yet a candidate's position on a single issue that involves an intrinsic evil, such as support for legal abortion or the promotion of racism, may legitimately lead a voter to disqualify a candidate from receiving support."

The guide contains no direct instruction on whether Catholic politicians who support abortion rights should receive Holy Communion. Each bishop has the authority to decide how to approach lawmakers within his own diocese. However, the document does emphasize statements by Pope Benedict XVI on the duty of lawmakers to serve as a "public witness to our faith."

Michael Sean Winters, a Catholic author who blogs at the independent liberal newsweekly National Catholic Reporter, praised the document for "striking not just a balance, but for showing that neither political party really conforms to the fullness of the Catholic moral vision."

"Voters have to make prudential judgments," about which candidate is most likely to follow Catholic social teaching, Winters said.

Deal Hudson, a one-time adviser to the campaign of President George W. Bush, was among those urging stronger language on abortion. He called the introductory note "a positive step toward clarifying some of the ambiguities that were advantageously spun by some seeking to water down church teachings for their own agenda."

In recent years, Catholic bishops have been struggling to reassert their teaching authority within the church. However, a recent survey found that few parishioners knew that the bishops publish a voting guide. The poll conducted in May and June by Georgetown University's Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate found that only 16 percent of adult Catholics had heard of the "Faithful Citizenship." Of those who knew about the document, about three-quarters said it had "no influence at all" on how they voted.

____

Online:

"Faithful Citizenship:"http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/faithful-citizenship/

[lizzy]

If it makes you feel better, most Catholics ignore such guidance.

[CanticleoftheTurning]

Ok this comes from an organization that because they don't want people to do something condemn them to death (aids) allow poor people who can't afford to have more children to have them and then watch them die (no birth control) who have started countless wars and tortured countless people who did not believe as they do. it is amazing how abortion is such a horror but starvation and aids is ok. They might as well said pick the biggest looser republican looser.

I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from. Could you please elaborate?

[doggie]

I am glad most ignore the recommendations. what I was trying to say (I am terrible about explaining myself) They themselves have supported things that cause people to die needlessly Just to uphold how bad sex outside a marriage is but yet go on and on about abortion and that seems the only real thing they worry about in a candidate.

[Austin]

Ugghhh - I hate that the church (any church, not just the Catholic church) tries to tell people how to vote.

And I think evangelicals probably take these "voter guides" much more seriously than Catholics do, at least in my experience.

[FaustianSlip]

Honestly, I feel like if you're issuing "voter guidance" and/or advocating voting certain ways on particular issues from the pulpit, you should lose your tax exempt status.

[Austin]

Honestly, I feel like if you're issuing "voter guidance" and/or advocating voting certain ways on particular issues from the pulpit, you should lose your tax exempt status.

Co-sign!

[Kelya]

Co-sign!

SRSLY. Not okay at all.

[starfish]

Me three! It's a troika!

[Childless]

I agree. If you want to keep your tax exempt status, then keep your mouth shut. People don't need your help anyway. If they haven't bothered to find out each candidate's platform and which candidate supports what they believe, then that's their own fault. Religious institutions need to stay out of politics.

[doggie]

Honestly, I feel like if you're issuing "voter guidance" and/or advocating voting certain ways on particular issues from the pulpit, you should lose your tax exempt status.

I think that is the law. That's why this is so vaguely worded.

[TaylorMaid]

If the Church truly cared about fighting poverty they would sell the contents of a single room in the Vatican and feed Africa for 20 years. Blessed be the poor......

[MonkeyMomma]

If the Church truly cared about fighting poverty they would sell the contents of a single room in the Vatican and feed Africa for 20 years. Blessed be the poor......

Sell the Vatican, feed the world

3bObItmxAGc

[Guest Anonymous]

IMHO when churches get involved in politics and producing voters guides their tax exempt status should be revoked.

[CanticleoftheTurning]

I am glad most ignore the recommendations. what I was trying to say (I am terrible about explaining myself) They themselves have supported things that cause people to die needlessly Just to uphold how bad sex outside a marriage is but yet go on and on about abortion and that seems the only real thing they worry about in a candidate.

I'm horrible at explaining things too--so thanks. I can see your point of view. It's usually the fundie Catholics who are "one issue" voters (my family included), but the rest of us pick the lesser evil when it comes to candidates, 'cause they all have their bad sides that we don't agree with.

Ha, my mom thought I was sinning by not voting against Obama. I basically abstained from voting because I saw no way out. I would have been disowned sooner if I had voted for him.

[CanticleoftheTurning]

Ha, I showed my DH this thread for his point of view. My (presby-turned-Episcopalian) husband was looking at it from his Protestant point of view, and he just told me it doesn't come across as totally abortion-nut document like the Catholic Answers voting guide, which, he presumes, this document is designed to take attention away from. So, we're getting there :P Seriously, if you've seen that [the Catholic Answers shit], now that is batshiat crazy.

The whole abortion issue extends to the whole idea of caring for the poor and sick and weak--I can't imagine focusing so heavily on abortion issues and ignoring other life and death issues like war and national health care and things like that. So, I guess you could say more Catholics follow Cardinal Bernardin's view on these things than things like these Voter's Guides--it's all connected. You can't separate the issues, Bernardin said.

Oh, one thing DH did point out is that the IRS did speak up about churches distributing voter's guides--it doesn't step outside the bounds of tax-exempt status laws, as some people have commented. I don't know where it is online right now (effing migraine fucks with my thinking.)

While we're on the subject of church-sponsored political activism, it seems that there are two sides to the issue. On one side, any sort of blatant politicking from the pulpit or as part of church activities is obviously skirting with danger of losing their exempt status. On the other side, political activism is closely connected with social activism. The Episcopal cathedral in Chicago, St. James, holds a Gay Pride Mass every year, and helps campaign for gay rights by taking part in various gay rights events around the city. this would be political activism for a social cause--equal rights for the GLBTQ people. Another Chicago church organized an ongoing silent protest outside the deportation center in Chicago during the weekly deportation, and the group advocates reform of immigration laws to be more humane. I think this was started by a Franciscan friar, though now there's people of many faiths and denominations taking part now. Those are just two things I've read about that came to mind at the moment--these are political activities because of the need to change the laws in order to support social reform.

So, I do think churches need to stay out of politics in general, but sometimes advocating for social reform based on religious beliefs takes on a political tone.

I don't know if there's a specific line that marks, "Okay, that's going too far. Hand over your tax exempt status," or how to decide such things. So that's why as easy as it is for me to say that all churches should refrain from politics, I think that the Episcopal church and that group started by the friars should continue to advocate for gay rights and for rights of people being deported, without losing the exempt status of their respective churches.

Anywho, I probably need to take migraine medicine and go rest now. >.< thanks for putting up with my rather disjointed thoughts.

[Edited because I made some typos...]

[Boltingmadonna]

FJ-ers might be interested in this article from the National Catholic Reporter about Deal Hudson, the man quoted above as being in favor of a tougher stand on abortion.

http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org ... 081904.htm

To summarize, he had two failed marriages which were annulled when he converted to Catholicism and married for a third time. After his conversion, when he was supposedly repentant and reformed, he apparently got a troubled student, 18 years old and thus three years short of the drinking age at the time, so drunk she could hardly stand up, tried to make her have oral sex with him in his car, while he was driving, then took her to his office and had sex with her there. She never reported him to the police for sexual assault, saying that at first she blamed herself and only later realized that she had been assaulted. However, Fordham University took her allegations seriously enough that they asked Hudson to leave his teaching position. The victim brought a suit against him that he settled before going to court. He then became editor of a right-wing Catholic magazine, "Crisis." Eventually his colleagues there agitated for him to be dismissed, for reasons unspecified.

His response to having his past made public was the usual: "I said I was sorry! I said I made 'mistakes!' So anyone who ever mentions this again is just being mean to me! Waaah! I am the real victim here! Won't someone please think of MY suffering!" Typical of all such hypocrites and abusers, he still thinks he should be in charge of the morals of others.

[TaylorMaid]

FJ-ers might be interested in this article from the National Catholic Reporter about Deal Hudson, the man quoted above as being in favor of a tougher stand on abortion.

http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org ... 081904.htm

To summarize, he had two failed marriages which were annulled when he converted to Catholicism and married for a third time. After his conversion, when he was supposedly repentant and reformed, he apparently got a troubled student, 18 years old and thus three years short of the drinking age at the time, so drunk she could hardly stand up, tried to make her have oral sex with him in his car, while he was driving, then took her to his office and had sex with her there.

While I agree with your assessment of the situation and the spirit in which it was delivered, he did not "have sex" with her. He raped her. Those are two very different things.

[TheBuddha]

heh, ending tax exempt status is a fucking joke...http://youtu.be/f8Hy306pGmU

lol yes, lets end the tax exempt status, then obama can get up in church and talk about the DoD and sermon on the mount, or palin can get up and talk about witches and spaghetti.... wait- they already do?

[TheBuddha]

If the Church truly cared about fighting poverty they would sell the contents of a single room in the Vatican and feed Africa for 20 years. Blessed be the poor......

if you truly cared, you could sell every thing you dont actually need to survive, and give to feed africa.. or, you could stop funding so much of the U.Ns budget, and funding all that other useless international shit- and give direct... I mean- sure, the Vatican could, but lets also look at what YOU could do better personally, and what YOU could do better when you vote, etc...

or hell, perhaps, all the people who would buy shit from the vatican, could go ahead and donate the amount anyway, without having to buy something.. I mean- are they really "caring" about humanity, if the buyers expect to get something back (priceless artifacts, paintings, etc)?

wait, perhaps we should invade africa, to kill all the despots who take the humanitarian aide and give it to those who support said despot?

[Boltingmadonna]

I totally agree with you, TaylorMaid. The correct term for what Deal Hudson did is rape. I originally thought "rape" and then . . . I'm not sure how I ended up writing it differently. I would go back and edit, but I think your comment is a good learning moment. It shows how ingrained it's become to talk about rape as "sex" instead of what it is. It can even sneak into the vocabulary of a committed feminist like me. Again I say: you are 100% right. A rapist doesn't "have sex"--he rapes. And no, an intoxicated woman can't give consent, so yes it is rape. Especially if you deliberately made her intoxicated so she wouldn't be able to resist.

[thoughtful]

Honestly, I feel like if you're issuing "voter guidance" and/or advocating voting certain ways on particular issues from the pulpit, you should lose your tax exempt status.

That was my first thought, as well.

[Patsy]

if you truly cared, you could sell every thing you dont actually need to survive, and give to feed africa.. or, you could stop funding so much of the U.Ns budget, and funding all that other useless international shit- and give direct... I mean- sure, the Vatican could, but lets also look at what YOU could do better personally, and what YOU could do better when you vote, etc...

or hell, perhaps, all the people who would buy shit from the vatican, could go ahead and donate the amount anyway, without having to buy something.. I mean- are they really "caring" about humanity, if the buyers expect to get something back (priceless artifacts, paintings, etc)?

wait, perhaps we should invade africa, to kill all the despots who take the humanitarian aide and give it to those who support said despot?

... :?

[SheWoreLemon]

I went and looked at the actual statement (instead of just a newspaper article about the statement). It doesn't mention the name of any political party or candidate. All mainline churches present statements like this--it talks about current issues that concern the church and what the church teaches about it. Then it's up to you to decide, based on what you think about those teachings, how to vote.

<

teaching on the role of faith and conscience in political life. Although it has at

times been misused to present an incomplete or distorted view of the demands

of faith in politics, this statement remains a faithful and challenging call to

discipleship in the world of politics. It does not offer a voters guide, scorecard of

issues, or direction on how to vote. It applies Catholic moral principles to a range

of important issues and warns against misguided appeals to “conscience†to ignore

fundamental moral claims, to reduce Catholic moral concerns to one or two

matters, or to justify choices simply to advance partisan, ideological, or personal

interests. It does not offer a quantitative listing of issues for equal consideration,

but outlines and makes important distinctions among moral issues acknowledging that some involve the clear obligation to oppose intrinsic evils which can never

be justified and that others require action to pursue justice and promote the

common good. In short, it calls Catholics to form their consciences in the light of

their Catholic faith and to bring our moral principles to the debate and decisions

about candidates and issues.>>

Below are the issues they are highlighting:

• Continuing destruction of unborn children through abortion and other

threats to the lives and dignity of others who are vulnerable, sick, or

unwanted;

• Renewed efforts to force Catholic ministries—in health care, education, and

social services—to violate their consciences or stop serving those in need (read: we don't want to be forced to do abortions or hand out contraceptives in hospitals we run);

• Intensifying efforts to redefine marriage and enact measures which undermine

marriage as the permanent, faithful, and fruitful union of one man and one

woman and a fundamental moral and social institution essential to the

common good;

• An economic crisis which has devastated lives and livelihoods, increasing

national and global unemployment, poverty, and hunger; increasing deficits

and debt and the duty to respond in ways which protect those who are poor

and vulnerable as well as future generations;

• The failure to repair a broken immigration system with comprehensive

measures that promote true respect for law, protect the human rights and

dignity of immigrants and refugees, recognize their contributions to our

nation, keep families together, and advance the common good;

• Wars, terror, and violence which raise serious moral questions on the use of

force and its human and moral costs in a dangerous world, particularly the

absence of justice, security, and peace in the Holy Land and throughout the

Middle East.

[SheWoreLemon]

I was googling and found a press release going out to Catholic parishes (sorry, didn't get the website). It said that the Catholic Bishop's Voter Guide is okay with the tax exempt laws because it doesn't pick parties or candidates (and says right up front that faith is complicated and you can't distill it into just one party).

Be careful though because there are anti-abortion groups and other anti-whatever groups that are well-meaning but do push certain candidates and parties--they use the name Catholic in them, but if your church hands out those voter guides or lets them be handed out in church, then that's against the tax-exempt laws. This press release said they are very careful about that.