Skip to main content

Catholics who vote for politicians who support abortion and same-sex marriage commit moral evil

Catholics have obligations above and beyond other voters. Why? Because they have received the Truth. The following principles apply to them.

Catholics who cast a vote for a politician who supports abortion and same-sex 'marriage' "commit moral evil," if a moral candidate is available. Advancing pro-abortion candidates and their aims is incompatible with the Catholic faith.
"Voting is a moral act." In some matters of morality, such as immigration, universal health care, and affordable housing, "the use of reason allows for a legitimate diversity in our prudential judgments." Other acts, regardless of the motive or circumstances, always "involve doing evil" and must be opposed: "These choices include elective abortion, euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide, the destruction of embryonic human beings in stem-cell research, human cloning, and same-sex 'marriage.'"

"Such acts are judged to be intrinsically evil, that is, evil in and of themselves regardless of our motives or the circumstances. They constitute an attack against human life, as well as marriage and family."

Catholic voters have to bring a "correct conscience" on matters regarding innocent human life and the family even when faced with the choice of two unacceptable candidates.

"When there is no choice of a candidate that avoids supporting intrinsically evil actions, especially elective abortion, Catholics should vote in such a way as to allow the least harm to innocent human life and dignity."

"We would not be acting immorally therefore if we were to vote for a candidate who is not totally acceptable in order to defeat one who poses an even greater threat to human life and dignity."

Who said all this? It is contained in a voters' guide issued by the four bishops of the State of Kansas. It presents authentic Catholic moral teaching. It applies in Canada, the United States, Great Britain and anywhere else in the world.


Unfortunately, in NZ, politicians don't want to touch the abortion issue. As Garth George said a while back, our politicians are gutless on abortions.

Related Link: "Catholics who cast a vote for a politician who supports abortion and same-sex 'marriage' "commit moral evil"

Comments

  1. "Unfortunately, in NZ, politicians don't want to touch the abortion issue. As Garth George said a while back, our politicians are gutless on abortions."

    As usual Daft George gets reality wrong!

    In NZ politicians are driven by votes, if there are no votes in an issue then they have no motivation to address it. This is of course particularly true in an election year!

    In NZ despite what a lot of people say abortion is not a voting issue. People will talk passionately about it but the percentage who will adjust their vote over it is in the noise.

    I was involved last year in some study group work for a political organisation. It was a bit of an eye opener watching this effect actually occur. Study participants would get really worked up over various issues but at the end of the study you compared who they would vote in now compared with the start and there was not much of a change. Sometimes you got a change but quite often it would get balanced out by somebody else's change. I.e. Mr X would change from party a to party b, but Miss Y would change from party b to party a.

    So its not that they politicians have not guts its much simpler than that - there are no votes in it.

    Sb

    ReplyDelete
  2. So you're obviously not voting for National, ACT or NZ First who are full of politicians who support abortion and same-sex marriage amongst other things. What about United Future who indirectly supports all those things by fealty to Labour? You're stuck with the Kiwi Party (not a bad choice but mediocre in every way except these issues) or the Family Party (Destiny Church by another name).

    No, in the situation where a pro-choice candidate was the lesser of a range of evils it would be permissible to vote for them. This would be the case if all the candidates were pro-choice, or if one believed that the good effect of a pro-life candidate wouldn't outweigh the evil they would bring otherwise or wouldn't outweigh the good the pro-choice candidate would bring otherwise.

    The issue of the evil of abortion is abundantly clear. However the issue of who to vote for isn't quite so black and white unfortunately. I wish it were.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Universal:
    "You're stuck with the Kiwi Party (not a bad choice but mediocre in every way except these issues) or the Family Party (Destiny Church by another name)."

    The Kiwi Party is mediocre, I can't really see much difference between them and UF, except the abortion issue. Furthermore they have no chance of actually getting in.

    The Family Party is NOT "Destiny Church by another name". We represent a wide range of churches, including the Catholic church - the board and candidates come from eight different churches at the moment, and this is growing. We also have former members of Christian Heritage, United Future, and the Destiny party - so a wide representation of former conservative parties too. Destiny is one of the many churches represented. This is a common misconception unfortunately.

    You'll find we have a far higher chance of getting in than Kiwi (possibly higher than NZF based on current polls...) as we have a good chance of taking the Mangere electorate seat. Have a look at our policies and see what you think. If you're in Auckland, we have a conference this weekend (free entry and free lunch!), it would be great to see you.
    http://www.familyparty.org.nz/party/events/pre-election-conference-flyer

    ReplyDelete
  4. sjdennis,

    I do apologise for my ignorant dismissal of the Family Party it was unfair. I will make sure to rectify that perspective in people I talk to in future.

    Although looking at your party's policies I can see you aren't terribly much better than the Kiwi Party, if at all.

    You do have a better website and a more comprehensive set of policies and they are better than most of the other parties overall... but you still endorse a swath of Socialist policies such as Socialised Medicine, State Schools, Income Tax, State Welfare and a general top-down authoritarian approach. There is no mention of Monetary Policy or Banking System reform which the current world economic crisis has put into stark relief.

    Family Party policies only represent Conservatism in their Pro-life aspect, and that's not good enough.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hey SJ Dennis, whats all this about the Family Party's tactics making a coalitin between the christian parties impossible.

    Whats this about the Family party uurging people to vote for Jerry Filipaina stating the reason to do this is because because the incumbent, Taito Philip Field will be in prison.

    ReplyDelete
  6. One of the best job applications I've read in a long time Universal :-)

    Actually Mr Dennis, I too confess to not having carefully studied The Family Party. Expect a blog post (or two) about it prior to the election. Maybe we (authors and commenters) can help polish up a rough diamond just in time for a few of the MSM hacks to pinch the work and run an article on the front page... :-)

    ReplyDelete
  7. I love the site! I wanted to email to let you know I was adding it to my blogroll, but there's no link to contact you. But I am adding you to my blogroll. :)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.