1 - 10 of 136 Comments

1. Mike of GR MI

   10 months ago

   I find it AMAZING that some of us "Catholics" will reject, with extreme prejudice, the idea of voting for a Person that is NOT Perfectly aligned with our beliefs, Especially when it is patently clear the alternative is practically evil incarnate! Is it any wonder WHY we Lose elections when we arrogantly hoist ourselves up on our ideological Hi-Horses and begin committing harry carry for all to see?? IS it really any mystery why Voters will cut and run from a Candidate even though they more closely represent their own Christian beliefs??
   IF we allow ourselves to be swayed by People like the Author of this article, focusing on the differences that obviously exist with other Faithful, God-fearing people- WE WILL LOSE OUR FREEDOMS!! The FREEDOM to Practice our Faith is under threat by this regime, We are in Peril - We are in the Midst of being "Fundamentally Transformed"!! NOTHING in this current regime's agenda is based on, or in Christianity or Catholicism in ANY WAY!! I don't believe it serves us as Catholics, or Christians or as Americans, to Focus on differences we all know exist between God-Fearing People and Faiths.
   I don't care if Mr. Romney is Jewish, Mormon, or Protestant - WE CATHOLICS have a POPE already, so we are not looking for a Religious Leader to run this Great Nation.
   We are NOT so narrow-minded that we need to have a President who believes EXACTLY as WE Believe, which isn't possible anyhow.
   We do need a President who fears and respects God's Judgement, and believes in ALL of our Constitutional Rights. Mr. Romney has proven that He is a God-fearing Man, Principled, and devoted Husband and Father. Mr. Romney has publicly expressed his admiration and respect for our Pope and the Catholic Church, He is Pro-Life, and He's ESPECIALLY outraged at this regimes attempts to Force our Church to pay for Abortions, and Birth Control..and He has Vowed to Overrule this regime's attacks on our Constitution and on our Church, and on our Nation's Security!!
   It's Time to END this current regime's tenure, and put an end to the Attacks on our Church, our Beliefs, and our Freedoms - UNITED WE STAND!! Divided- is what's happening Right Now!! We Are Americans, We need a President for ALL - not just for certain groups, races or Political Persuasions - It's time to End the Transformation - ASAP!

2. RKC

   11 months ago

   I think all followers of Christ should stop nit-picking each other. Mormons and Catholics have much in common- including their devotion to God. It seems like Romney is a man of religious conviction.

3. Mark Johnson

   1 year ago

   Mormons very specifically do NOT believe that the soul enters a child's body at birth (in direct contradiction with this article), but much earlier. Every President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormon is a nickname) in modern times has taught that the spirit enters the body of a child much earlier that that. However, you must really understand what the church teaches as revealed from God, and what is often expressed only as opinion, even from church leaders. When our daughter was still born at full-term, just days before her due date, I had some questions about LDS church policy in record-keeping of that event. A good friend was managing director of budget for the LDS church, and met daily with a member of the LDS First Presidency. Wayne got specific direct answers to my questions, and was told additional specifics. There is NOT an official doctrinal definition of when the spirit (soul) enters an unborn fetus, because no LDS church President has received specific information from God about that subject, However, every leader in the past century and a half has indicated that it is their personal belief that this occurs at or around the time of quickening, when a mother first feels movement. However, very specifically, the LDS church does NOT believe that the spirit enters at birth, but much earlier. It was expressed to me that the LDS church leaders have never had a revelation from God as to when this happens, nor do they expect one. They will also not express something as doctrinal when they have not had specifics revealed, even if it would make things much easier for us all. LDS Church doctrines and beliefs are simply not arrived at by personal opinion or by committee decision.
   I have recently encountered several articles where a writer indicates that the LDS Church believes some particular doctrine, but is in complete error. If you want to represent beliefs of the LDS church, get your facts straight, stop going to those who "think" they know what the LDS Church believes, and then write books that are rampant with error and falsehood. If you want to know facts about chemistry, don't ask a traffic cop. Ask a Chemist. Get the official position of any church directly from it's leaders. The website www.lds.org is a an official LDS Church website. It is a good "beginning", and contains answers to most questions. I think this principle also applies to the Catholic church. If you want to know the official doctrine, ask church representatives. Say what is the truth.

4. Theresa

   1 year ago

   I had occasion to visit the "Mormon Compound" in Salt Lake City last year and was astounded at their beliefs--so I don't doubt the author. Nonetheless, I still think one more term of Obama would be even worse....I voted for Santorum in our Primary Election, but I don't think we have any choice but to vote for Romney at this point; if the votes would be split three ways, Obama will surely win and we will see the utter destruction of our nation.

5. Rob

   1 year ago

   Romney will get my vote in November because of two factors, 1) economy is still in the toilet and 2) abortion remains legal. If Romney wins, he will not get my vote in the next cycle if economic conditions have not improved or if abortion is still legal. I might consider voting if they pursue some serious pro-life legislation and really fight for it, but I'm not going to continue to pretend that these guys are getting the job done. Brian, I understand what you are saying, but voting in this manner has only managed to get us a sick status quo because conservative politicians count on that approach. They do not have to be serious about a lot of these issues because they have your vote...they will never be held accountable. I'm not playing anymore. 40 years of abortion is enough for me. And if the only thing that matters to these guys is losing their spot in our government royalty, then unless they really feel like they might lose it, is the only way we start making progress.

6. JoAnn

   1 year ago

   Brian Harrison: Great post!! I hope everyone heeds your words. God bless.

7. Judy

   1 year ago

   Brian Harrison: BRAVO! WELL SAID! EVERY CATHOLIC NEEDS TO READ IT!
   Blessings...

8. Rob

   1 year ago

   Judy, I had a great article discussing this and I can't find the darn thing. Of course the most obvious issue is their approaches to healthcare. But what I found interesting about the article was that it pointed to a distinction between campaign positions and actual legislation signed. Since Obama has caved on so many issues, he hasn't exactly been that liberal in terms of taxes etc, again seperating rhetoric from actual signed legislation. And Romney, while claiming to be a "severe" conservative, hasn't actually matched that with the the pen and we all know his propensity for evolving positions. I wanted to share that article with all of you, but of course I can't find it.

9. Brian Harrison

   1 year ago

   "Not voting for Romney can be seen as a vote for life"?? What sort of "logic" is that?
   It's true that failing to vote at all on election day is not exactly "cooperating with evil". (You don't "cooperate" with something by simply doing nothing.) But failing to vote for Romney in November, no matter how subjectively good and sincere one's motivation and intentions may be, will be objectively a similar type of sin, and one with the same result in this case, namely, a sin of omission.
   
   There is a grave moral obligation on all faithful Catholics to get out and vote for Mitt Romney on election day.
   
   Since no better quality candidate has any chance of winning, and since the clear and present danger of another four years of Obama is plainly a far worse evil than a Romney presidency, a pro-life, pro-marriage citizen witholding his/her vote from Romney will by that very omission be either increasing Obama's majority over Romney by one vote, or decreasing Romney;s majority over Obama by one vote. If a large number of Catholics take that option, their sin of omission will collectively bear a significant - possibly critical - responsibility for handng over the presidency for another four years to the most anti-life, militantly secularist, left-wing president in U.S. history.
   
   Obama's avowedly "evolving" position on gay "marriage", for instance, is clearly going to turn into open support for that travesty of true marriage as soon as he is re-elected. (Joe Biden is softening us up for that already, with his recent statement of now being "converted" to a pro-gay-marriage position). Romney, on the other hand, though not as strong as Santorum, is pledged to support DOMA, and favors a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one woman and one man. Since that is also official Mormon teaching, all that you say about Mitt's sincerity and devotion as a Mormon simply gives us further confidence that as President he will at least not go back on his pledges on that issue.
   
   As regards abortion, we already KNOW what sort of judges Obama will appoint to the Supreme Court, if one or more vacancies come up in the next four years. And even you will have to admit there's at least a good CHANCE that Romney, if elected, will fulfil his campaign pledge to appoint non-activist (i.e., socially conservative) judges.
   
   Moreover, even supposing Romney is the fickle hypocrite you make him out to be, going back on his campaign pledges on abortion and marriage would go against his own political self-interest, He has already shown in the Repubican primaries that he realizes his need to court social conservatives. So he is surely smart enough to realize that going back on his campaign pledges to them once he is in office would prove people like you to be right, thereby totally disillusioning all social conservatives who voted for him in 2012, and so ruining his own chances for re-election in 2016. (His pro-life backers in Massachusetts, by the way, claim that the pro-choice judge Mitt appointed while Governor of that State was not in a position to hand down verdicts having to do with abortion anyway; so it was for practical purposes a moot point.)
   
   You and may others claim that not voting for Romney, and hopefullywatching him lose as a result of this inaction, will "send a message" to Republicans for the future that they'll have to choose more solidly pro-life candidates if they want to win. This is totally unrealistic, highly conjectural, and objectively ethically unjustifiable, because (among other reasons) it will very likely be too late, if Obama wins again, for there to be any chance of the Supreme Court reversing Roe v. Wade, and stoppng it from striking down all the state pro-marriage laws and
   constitutional amendments once the California Prop. 8 finally gets up there. Already that issue is in a very perilous situation, since "swing vote" Justice Anthony Kennedy has a 'pro-gay' record in Lawrence v. Texas (2003), for which he actually wrote the majority opinion (rebutted magnificently in a dissenting opinion by Scalia, who pointed out that Kennedy's reasoning was loigcally opening the door for a future pro-gay marriage ruling by the Court).
   
   So, again, refusing to lift a finger to avert the clear and present danger of a far worse evil -Obama - on election day, by declining to vote for Romney, will be objectively a grave sin of omission. Rationalizing such an option by speculating it will improve the long-term quality of Republican candidates is about as valid as 'passing by on the other side' of the road when you see a big kid savagely beating up a toddler, while excusing your inaction by promising yourself that you'll campaign for much better police patrolling of that part of town.
   

10. judy

    1 year ago

    Rob: What? You must know some things I don't. How about posting facts for each one? I'm LOST.....Blessings

Leave a Comment