Catholic Democrats

[pres2032]

I think we need a discussion on the standing of Catholics in the Democratic party. I myself am both a strong Catholic and a strong Democrat. I have gone to a Catholic grade school and high school, where I was called a baby killer when I voted for Al Gore in the mock election. I'll admit that at that point I was pro-choice, but have since become pro-life. In my opinion, I just think that that fits with the rest of the Democratic platforms (anti-death penalty, gun control, health care for all...)

I put forth the following question...

Is there room for pro-life catholics in the Democratic Party?

Like I said, I think it fits, so I think we fit. Back in 2000, the US Catholic Bishop Association published a document stating their stances regarding Gore and Bush. They said that they agree with nearly every single platform of Gore's and disagree with nearly every Bush platform. Wanna guess what the one platform issue was which was the exception??

Abortion was the issue.

Sure, i understand i just gave an argument against Catholics, but then most democrats look down on Catholics for being Pro-life, afterall, Bob Casey, the popular former PA governor, was kept from speaking at a Democratic Convention for being Pro-life.

That being said, I have absolutly no intention of defecting to the Republican party. Never in a million years.

SO isn't it time that the Democratic Party embraces its one christian ally, the Catholics (most catholics ARE democrats)??

Is it possible for a partnership between Democrats and Catholics?

I think it is.

[Mountainman]

1. We can't keep anyone from registering Democrat or voting same

We just have to remember that abortion is legal in this country no matter what your religious beliefs are. If you don't like abortion then by all means don't have one or don't pay for one.

I also grew up Catholic. Catholic grade school, high school and college. I am pro choice. My brother is a Catholic priest. He is pro life. We don't discuss that issue because we both know we can't change the others opinion. We are both Democrats. He does understand what the law of the land is and he understands the laws of the Church. He does not try to make the laws of the Church the law of the land. You shouldn't either.

on edit:

Remember how they tried to trick Christ? It is similar to your delema I think.

Give unto Ceasar the things that are Ceasar's and give unto God the things that are God's.

[Hoosier]

2. What makes you say

that most Catholics are Dems?

The three Catholics that I work closely with & have attended Holy Day masses during lunch hour, discussed church stuff, etc are Repubs. My mom calls these types of Catholics the one that "pray, pay, and obey."

[nini]

5. REAL Catholics couldn;t be anything but Democrats

If you truly believe the teachings of Christ you can't turn your back on humanity as the repukes do.

As far as abortion.. Anyone who votes on one issue alone is an idiot. You vote republican because of abortion but you can turn the other cheek when we bomb and kill 10,000 innocent Iraqis, our own troops, cut funding for the disabled, poor and elderly? I think not.

[K8-EEE]

22. Remind Them That The Pope Opposed Iraq Invasion...

As did the head of Bush's own church. Why people who are supposedly religions blow off stuff their leaders say about wars and killing so easily -- it's hard to figure.

[youngred]

40. a perfect example of anectdotal evidence being bunk

Catholics used to vote Democratic by upwards of 75-80%. But since the repubs have made abortion such a wedge issue that number has declined to about 60%.

There are many many liberal and Democratic Catholics.

[Rich Hunt]

3. lots of Catholics

Lots of Catholics are Democrats. I grew up in a heavily Catholic area that was also all Democrats.

On DU, though, you better have a thick skin, because some people will make all sorts of assumptions about you based on your religion.

Please don't take their comments as representative of all Democrats.

[kixot]

4. Here's my take.

Myself, my morals, my faith, call for a pro-life stance. That's fine. I wouldn't want to be having any kind of a discussion with my wife other than what to name it and she feels the same. That stance works fine for me and the wife, we're married and committed to each other and so we expect to take that path someday.

This said, I can't allow my fortune to speak for anyone else nor do I believe that my government has the right to make the decision for any one. This is the reconciliation of my faith with my politics. I have my own convictions, but I don't expect my government to force it on those who don't share my beliefs.

[tigereye]

12. you raise an interesting and difficult question

although I am strongly pro-choice, I was raised Catholic and also have priests and nuns in my family. I think your point about the platform is a telling one... many Democrats around here are populist and progressive in most areas... but they are pro-life in relation to their faith. I myself, oddly enough, have crossed the great divide and voted for Pro-choice Republican women( there are still a few out there, but supplies are dwindling.)

Although I was also a pro-choice escort and a member of NARAL, I have tried to be open minded despite the Randall Terry stuff I was witness to in the 80s ( and subsequent and ongoing violence), and as a parent I have also tried to see the broader picture. I don't mind people stating their views as long as they are not violent.

Germaine Greer once said that polarizing this issue was very dangerous and ceding "moral ground" was also dangerous. (in so many words, don't remember the quote.) Many people have resolved to be have dialogue about this issue, rather than allowing both sides to resort to violence. I acutally think there is room in the tent for both views, but I have had many years to mull this question in my mind. Plus I am very philosophical about things. Anyway, I have gone beyond the scope of the question, but I think it is a good one to ponder.

[napi21]

6. I too am a Catholic Dem

I don't agree with abortion, or gay marriage for that matter, but I also don't believe I must force my beliefs on everyopne else.

I had an interesting discussion with a very good friend who is a born again minister in Pgh. He disagrees with GWB on EVERYTHING! He didn't vote for him in 2000, but for Nader. He is voting for Kerry this time. I asked him why he believed the South was soooo supportive of GWB when most of what he has done has hurt them. He said they are "one issue" voters. "What people really should do is listen to the candidates on all the issues, and support the one whose ideas are closer to yours. No one ever supports EVERY idea of ANY candidate, but to make your decision based upon one or two differences is just foolish."

I think that is one of the better explanations I've heard for Pro lifers or any religious background to support and be accepted by the Dems.

[Chicago Democrat]

7. God Loves Democrats! In fact He is One!!

Seriously, I'm a pro-life Democrat. Honest its true. I just think its a personal issue. So the right to privacy allows all women to make up their mind. I support pro-adoption counseling and maybe even a 24 delay, but that's about as far as I go with this issue to impair a woman's right to choose.

You see I was almost aborted, but because my mom was Catholic she didn't do it. She put me up for adoption, and I found out this astounding fact 30 years later when I met her. Abortion was illegal back then and its illegality apparently had little to do with whether or not you could get one. It was a back alley, coat hanger kind of thing. Women died because of botched abortions. No, it was my mom's personal beliefs that prevented my being aborted and nothing to do with the law. I'm so grateful for my life!

We need to have abortion procedures that are safe, both for the mother health as well as the fact that its her body. Supporting the right to choose (as I do) doesn't mean I'm not pro-life or hate abortions (which I also do). Our political ideas don't have to mold 100% to our religious ideas and visa versa.

To do so is both dangerous and wrong headed, in my view. Government is the realm of the secular and Church is the realm of the divine. That is why the Constitution prevents our governments from establishing one religion over another. If we force our religious views on others you might as well just throw out the Constitution and start killing people based on religion, because it will mean civil war.

[Q]

8. I don't understand...

...why we're even discussing RELIGION on a POLITICS board. It seems to me that some people just can't leave it alone...as if they demand a place in American politics.

- And abortion...it's always been about the rights of individual...not the State...to make these kinds of choices. Bringing religion into it only confuses the issue of sin versus individual rights.

[Mountainman]

13. My thoughts on the idea

When I grew up in Catholic school we were told that we had the one true faith and it was our job to take that faith to the rest of the people on earth and that at the end of the world there would be only one faith and that would be ours. If those we brought our faith to did not accept it then, since they were offered the truth and rejected it, they were going to hell.

As I grew older I saw that other religions teach the same idea about their faith. So I decided for myself not to try to force my beliefs on anyone. Some Catholics have not made the same decision as I have and still feel it is their job to take their faith to the rest of the world. That to them means forcing it on people by using the government to codify their beliefs in law.

[eagler]

9. Democratsforlife.org

nt

[Gildor Inglorion]

10. As Democrats, we should welcome ALL with open arms

But the question remains: "What does YOUR religious belief have to do with MY rights as a citizen?" It's a shame that after more than 200 years, this question still has to be asked.

[noahmijo]

15. <~~Catholic Democrat

First off thanks to the guy with the White Sox avator for your kind words. Funnily enough us Catholics can't win. On the Dem side the occassional loony has to immediately assume that we're just like the fundamentalists who want to force our beliefs on them and tell them that if they don't cut their hair really short and dress like preppies and force our daughters into a tub full of boiling water because a guy looked at her they are going to hell.

On the Republican or right wing side we're told we're not as good as the "real" Christians and we are actually heretics because we worship saints.

We actually HONOR saints not worship them but hey their minds are made up.

Although truthfully in the last few years I haven't been the best Catholic but I am currently revisiting my faith and am looking to get involved again as I was when I was younger.

As a Catholic I can't support the screwing over of the poor and our children.

Where most Catholics may differ with me is on the abortion issue which is way too lengthy to get into but admittably I guess you could call me pro-choice.

Personally I would never encourage someone to get an abortion, and I personally think partial birth abortions are sickening.

However, there are many differences and varying degrees of opinion between scientists that conclude whether or not if say a week long pregnant woman is truly "carrying" a life. Also the idea that in order for the child to have life to begin with the woman must give her life in the sense that she must carry this burden and she must deal with the pains and suffering of delivering and possibly solely raising the child should the father be scumbag who abandons her. In this sense being pro-life is giving the woman a choice of either keeping or ruining her own life.

Likewise the idea of outlawing abortions and even the disgusting partial birth abortion will only do one thing: bring back the back alley doctors who will perform these operations far more painfully and dangerously. Poor women will be stuck rising a child in poverty with no hope for a healthy life while rich wives get to fly to Europe for the operation.

How merciful are we being if we vote in politicians who will let this happen? Sure it's really easy to say "just don't get pregnant when you're not ready" What about rape victims? What about the fact that since the male doesn't have half the burden the woman has who doesn't have as much to lose by lying for the 5 minutes of sex before taking off on her?

Essentially this is why I can't support a pro-life politician. My girl and I are doing everything in our power to avert a pregnancy until we are ready for children therefore we are doing our part.

Personally I'm disgusted with certain churches not allowing people such as Kerry to recieve communion despite the fact that he will do far more to help our country and its children than a so called pro-lifer such as Bush who uses our fear as a scapegoat to bomb foreign children. I mean don't get me wrong, I'm not so holier than thou that I don't want the bastards who are truly responsible for these attacks to be punished, but calling yourself a Christian while taking thousands of innocents not to mention allowing our own soldiers to die for an unecessary war to me is far more sinful than a candidate who advocates safe abortions.

[alcuno]

11. I consider myself to be pro-life, but I want Roe v. Wade to stand.

I am a Catholic and consider abortion to be a sin. For me. However, I have come to accept that others see the issue quite differently. I want abortion to be rare and to have children with health care, food, shelter, adequate schooling and opportunity.

To my thinking, I would rather persuade people that my position is correct rather than force it upon them. I absolutely believe that you can be pro-life and a Democrat. I believe that I am both of those things.

[eileen from OH]

14. I think there is a big distinction

between "Catholics" and "American Catholics". Yeah, we have some old schoolers who take their cue from Rome. But there's a LOT of us who basically ignore it and can really handle, and indeed embrace, the separation of Church and State.

Look, I went through 15 years of Catholic ed (1 year at a secular college), married an ex-sem, taught in Catholic schools, and raised 3 kids who also went through Catholic schools.

Perhaps we are CINO, but we still go to Mass, etc. But "Rome" lost us with the ban on birth control and the no-divorce stance. Because of all of the above, I know a LOT of Catholics and not one of them believes or follows the birth control stuff.

I'm pro-life and want to prevent abortions. But making them illegal will not stop them. But, more importantly, it will also not ENCOURAGE them. You CAN be pro-life and a Dem if you accept that legalizing abortions is not the same as sanctioning them. Otherwise we could not morally vote for any candidate who supports birth control, divorce, or the death penalty as all of these are ALSO against Church teaching.

I am 100% committed to keeping abortion legal in this country, while at the same time 100% committed to the philosophy that making abortions unnecessary, rather than criminal, is the only way that the ultimate goal of fewer abortions can be realized. Supporting women in unplanned pregnancies, provided free and easy birth control, education, etc., WILL reduce the number of abortions. Turning women and doctors into criminals will not.

eileen from OH

[K8-EEE]

20. Right On Eileen!

I go to Mass too and I agree with everything you said.

I even donated to an organization that PAYS drug-addicts and prostitutes to get a NorPlant. This is hugely controversial because they say if the women ever get this or that disease they will sue you etc...but what do you do when drug addicted women keep having drug addicted babies and not taking care of them. Why do they try to tear down operations like that and call them "anti life" or whatever.

The truth is that being pregnant isn't ALWAYS a blessing...sometimes it's a disaster that is best avoided.

Pope's b-control views are at least quietly opposed by most the the Church members. It seems like 80% of them have 2 or 3 kids -- when I was a growing there were lots of 10 kid families.

I would just rather have practical solutions than all of that potificating they do on the Dark Side.

[Tennessee_tarheel]

16. a big problem about the 'debate" is that

it was never voted on except by proxy. It was decided in a split decision of the Supremes and the people never really debated the issue with votes or caucuses or constitutional amendments or other social discourse. One day it was the law then - poof it wasn’t (reminds me of the gay marriage issue today). More democratic discussion and debate and voting would make the issue less volatile and more “settled” in my opinion.

I'll only say that IF you are Catholic and adhere to the teachings - then it is pretty hard to (not impossible) reconcile the sanctity of life with candidates who vote against that sanctity - be it abortion, death penalty etc. There are a lot of issues the Church has a stand on and some are more grave (life) than others. I personally don't know how someone can be "personally against the taking of an innocent life" - e.g. pro choice, and yet vote and openly advocate for people to do just that - take an innocent life. Seems so incongruous to me.


Another issue is pure science. We do know now a lot more today about viability and the "beginning of life" than Blackmun did (it is pretty darn early – fetus’ react to their environment such as sound and motion and temperature within days). An ultra-sound will send shivers down your spine if you ever seen one and then thought about an abortion.

That said I know that most people have a difficult time with at least some teachings of their denomination & have to, as my grandma once said, "work it out with Lord at night". But if I believe strongly that the sanctity life has no exceptions then I would take no exception in exercising my political rights that reflected that belief.

I converted a few years back, the wife's family are all "cradle".

[Mountainman]

24. Two things you said got me thinking

In this country the courts interpret the law. We do not let the majority make the law for us since the majority could trample the rights of the minority as spelled out in the constitution.

I often here religious folks say that gay marriage should not be because the majority of Americans are opposed to it. That is the tyranny of the majority that the courts are to protect us from. Thus in California just because the majority vote in favor of an referendum it may not become law if it violates the constitution. A national debate on abortion should not decide the law but the Supreme Court should and did.


Also, because something looks like a baby doesn't make it a person. I doubt that science will ever be able to determine when human life begins. It remains an issue of faith. The courts should not rule on when life begins because it would have to be an arbitrary decision. The courts interpreting the constitution found that there was no support for the outlawing of abortion and if they change that opinion they would have to be making an article of faith the law.

[Tennessee_tarheel]

31. those two things

good points.

i'll play devil's advoccate though :-)

I certainly agree that minority rights have to be protected and consitutional laws must be observed but in the case of so many things -there isn't a clear (or some would argue near) constitutional issue, sometimes on the right and sometimes on the left. Interpretation of the law is the sticky issue. I must say that i find it hard to draw out the Roe decision from Blackmun's sudden discovery of a penumbra with the "right to privacy" hidden within the preamble.

If the issue at hand (say gay marriage for another instance) isn't addressed in the document or isn't a case suitable for the supremes it is (supposedly) left up to states and the people, hence more of a democratic participatory process rather than a judicial decision.

On science - we DO know about viability - that isn't an emotional issue. To try and suggest a la Wesley Clark that abortion is an option up until birth (I still can't belive a rhodes scholar said something so utterly ridiculous) is in effect legalizing infanticide. One may agree that a mother has the right to choose but at the point of viability the choice is life or death - not reproduction. Roe in fact expresses this by placing limits on third term abortions. Now that that piont of viability is earlier shouldn't the restrictions accompany the ruling?

Again just my 2 cents

[UTUSN]

17. It's the Single Issue Thing

The Catholic church has its own line of VERY LIBERAL social justice history, despite its internal reactionary policies. As the original poster stated, its social justice platform can have 99 out of 100 shared positions with the Democratic nominee, but the hierarchy hammers the ONE ISSUE as THE defining one in voting. That scary looking nun on ETWN was blatantly anti-Dem in 2000.

Working class Catholics (below the rigid hierarchical level) and lapsed Catholics tend to compartmentalize their pro-choice and birth control ACTUAL PRACTICES on the basis of separation of church & State, Caesar & God. The rigidity of single-issue-ism throws out the baby with the bathwater. There IS room for anti-choice Catholics in the Dem party, on the basis of working-from-within for their chosen agenda, but also meditating on the other 99 issues that are lost when the Repukes are in power.

[K8-EEE]

18. Catholics in L.A. Tend To Be Democrats

I went to Catholic school and I didn't even know any Republicans growing up.

My daughter goes to a Catholic all-girls middle school and every car in the carpool line has some kind of ABB or no W or War Is Not The Answer sticker.

I even had to tell them to stop being mean to the poor little Republican girl whose parents were vociferous Bush fans. I think she's the only one, poor kid!

[noahmijo]

21. Well Catholics in most big cities tend to be democrats

In NYC alone take the Italians, Puerto Ricans, Irish, just for starters.

In LA you've got hordes of Mexicans who are typically Catholic.

Typically these groups vote Democrat at least in my opinion.

[mykpart]

19. I heard this in a speech, and I think it applies:

The law was never intended to be a moral standard. The law's only purpose is to maintain order in a society, and it is quite simply merely the lowest standard of behavior that the society will tolerate.

So just because you don't believe in abortion doesn't mean that you expect the government to legislate that moral standard for everyone.

[lostnfound]

23. I find the shallowness of our party's platform part of the problem.

Raised Catholic, for many years I was an anti-choice Democrat. My strong anti-war, anti-poverty, populist beliefs overcame my strong feelings against abortion. The Catholicism I was raised with was not only pro-life but strongly anti-death-penalty, help-the-poor, anti-war. "Consistent life ethic" makes perfect sense to me.

In my 40s now, this issue as a legal question is no longer so black and white to me.
*First, there are many situations where to use the law to force a women to carry to term would pretty clearly be a brutal, abusive act in itself...i.e., young girls, rape, incest.
*Second, the burden of pregnancy and childrearing is HUGE, and highly variable, depending on a woman's physical AND mental health, AND support network -- very personal stuff -- and there is little or no support for mothers.
*Third, a spiritual belief that life begins at conception can be seen as a subset of a scientific belief that a human consciousness begins at 2 months when brain waves appear..science tells us that a huge number of embryos -- up to half of all pregnancies? -- spontaneously end in the first 3 months. Seems like a trial period, doesn't it?
*Fourth, I read Sarah Hrdy's book Mother Nature which gives an interesting portrayal of the science behind maternal choices and argues that cases of child abuse, infanticide, selective abortions, etc. very often come down to unsupportive situations..so if you really want to do something about abortion, studying the why's & wherefore's of those decisions might be much more productive than using the force of law to prohibit them.

To love your neighbor as yourself..Our challenge is to work in the world we've been given but there's no rulebook telling us what our priorities must be (i.e., 1, 2, 3, 4..) or the methods which we use. Christ never gave us an example of how to use the force of law to do anything. If you love your daughter or your neighbor, you might try to share with them a value system with life or love as a core. You wouldn't call the police to enforce an anti-abortion law if your daughter was considering having one, would you? You'd be more likely to encourage her to make the 'right' decision, and support her in carrying the burden..

Finally, organized evil in the form of a political/economic machine hell-bent on taking over the world at the expense of individual human freedom and dignity is IMO qualitatively far worse than the dispersed evil of individual acts of "care-less-ness"-- acts that are SO individual that they can only be judged by God. Organized evil is making it nearly impossible for people to live moral lives..those who speak their conscience are becoming subject to retribution more and more.

We clearly have a responsibility to not PARTICIPATE in 'organized evil' -- not to participate in 'ethnic cleansing' or aggressive wars, for example -- and to speak out about it, too, because as citizens in a democracy we 'own' part of our government. But do we have a responsibility to USE FORCE (the force of law) against others to stop others from their own individual wrongful acts?

God gave them free will.

For that reason, it is possible for a pro-life Catholic to justify voting for a pro-choice Dem over a "religious right" neocon.

So I can live with the idea that Dems are the party that believes this isn't a government decision to make..but I am still bothered by the unwillingness of Dems to admit/recognize that 1) it is not simply a "religious issue", 2) a 6 or 7 month old fetus conceivably possesses rights or 'the value of a life' or interests of their own, 3)the party's unflinching across-the-board dedication to this issue has had a high cost, in the loss of what should be natural and valuable allies.

I struggle every day with understanding this issue.

[Mountainman]

27. it is not simply a "religious issue"

Then it is not you religious beliefs that live begins at conception?

My brother and I use to go around and around on this part when we use to debate abortion.

If you believe that human life begins at conception and it is not a religious issue, than it has to be your opinion come from somewhere else. But you can not prove nor disprove that point. It is a matter of faith in the Church. Our laws can't be based on the belief human life begins at conception because it can't be proved. In any case you would have to be forcing a belief system on the rest of us if abortion was outlawed. That is just wrong. You must abide by your belief system but you have no right to make me or my wife abide by it!

[lostnfound]

29. I think you misunderstood me.

I agree that anyone who says 'human life begins at conception' is probably talking about a religious belief, and I agree that our laws should not be based on religious beliefs.

I would prefer to base laws on ethics informed by science.

Brainwaves are the scientific evidence of life / consciousness.

If brainwaves started at 6 months, I think it would be easier to find a compromise around which to build laws of some type. Based on a scientific fact.

However, they start very early, like 6 weeks. But I don't know how significant those brainwaves (at 6 weeks) are. Are there different types displayed at 6 weeks than at 6 months or after birth? I don't know, but I think such questions could be relevant.

[DustMolecule]

28. Amen...

...very very well said, imho.

[struggle4progress]

25. I'm not Catholic ...

but for many years I did attend a Catholic church because the parish had a strong social justice component (got there because I read the Catholic Worker and a gaggle of Latin American theologians, walked away after rethinking the church's stand on women in the priesthood). I consider myself consistently pro-life (antiabortion, antideathpenalty, antiwar, antipollution). The world isn't perfect and requires difficult practical thinking: although I dislike abortion, politically I will always support abortion rights because I dislike dead teenaged bodies in landfills even more; to reduce demand for abortion, I want broad effective sex education, easy availability of birth control, and a social support system that includes obgyn/pediatrics and childcare.

The Democratic Party has always been a mix of people with different views. Work for what you believe, express your views, sometimes win; you'll find people are almost always nice, and you can learn to smile at the jerks. Of course, there's room for you.

[nemo137]

26. we had an LTTE in the paper the other day

where a catholic used his 250 words to urge people to remember the social justice issues, and no concentrate so much on abortion. so yes, there is a partnership.

[DemBones DemBones]

30. But that's not a partnership -- that's a

Catholic saying to ignore the issue of abortion and focus on the other issues so you can vote Democratic. What's the Party doing?

I agree that it's better to vote Democratic but there's no partnership -- we Catholics, and others who are pro-life, are given no concessions by the Party. It would not be so difficult for the Democratic Party to begin supporting government trying to make abortion rare, while keeping it safe and legal. Nobody that I know of besides Dennis Kucinich has raised this issue. Bill Clinton said abortion should be safe, legal, and rare, but he never did anything to keep it that way. (Ironically, he made a nice little speech about the sanctity of human life when saying human cloning should be prohibited. It was quite interesting.)

[John_H]

32. My Catholic faith is maybe the strongest reason I'm a Dem

I can't for the life of me understand how a Catholic could be a Rethug. Since the church no longer has a hierarchy of sin, Abortion and Capital Punishment "cancel" each other out. That leaves social justice, peace, caring for the poor, etc. All are firmly Dem issues.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

34. Amen. What's Tommy Tompson and Scalia thinking? They're....

not hearing what saint Francis said, I can assure you. God is love!!! Not domination!!!!

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

33. I'm a convert and my Godmother is a democratic Mayor of a city...

I'm with you, to a point. I'm pro-choice because this is America. My advice is life but I feel that this country is the last bastion for true freedom. Well at least till the "christian" fundamentalist regime stole power. Don't lose heart pilgrim!

[absyntheNsugar]

35. One Christian ally?

What about us Methodists, or our brothers the Episcopals or Left Leaning Lutherans?

Or...and here's the big secret...the Seventh Day Adventists...Yep they are fundies, but because their stridently anti-war and anti-death penalty they're Dems.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

36. Y'know - based on their doctrine (i.e. the New Testament) the Bushies...

shouldn't be casting the first stones neither. If you get my meaning.


Could be once the rapture comes it's just the Amish standing...or the Moonies.

Or we missed the Haile Bop comet.

[burrowowl]

37. Seventh Day Adventists

don't vote, they don't believe in it. But they are pacifists.

[scarlet_owl]

38. I'm converting to Catholicism this year.

I'm taking RCIA classes in September, and I think that I can still be a good Catholic and a very liberal Democrat at the same time. I'm able to separate my religious life from my political one.

[ArwenJade]

39. I became a Catholic 4 years ago...

In my RCIA group someone brought up politics. I was an idiot and said I would probably vote republican because of the abortion issue. Everyone freaked out. My sponsor, the other students, the teachers and even my priest told me how stupid I was.

When the war started almost all my priest's homilies were anti-bush.


I think that most Catholics where I live (Utah) are Democrats because of the Mormon/Republican oppression.

[cclark401]

41. I'm a fundamentalist

yet I have never voted for a Republican in my life! They like to talk about religion yet they "trample" the words of Jesus when dealing with the poor and those in need.

I do not agree with abortion nor gay marriages. But my opinion is just that my opinion. Jesus once said "render unto Cesar that which is Cesar's and to God that which is God's." Government has its place and religion has its place. The two should not mix. Of course my religious beliefs help shape the person that I am. But should I force my view on everyone else--NO. Even God when he created us gave us free will, even He did not want mindless ROBOTS!

Falwell, Robertson, et. al have prostituted themselves out to the GOP. Their day will come!

[cmf]

42. Another Catholic Democrat here

I was talking to my friend who is also another Catholic Dem, about her In-Laws who are all staunch, one issue (abortion) Republicans. It just drives her crazy trying to reason with them, since they are just so brainwashed into that mindset. I think the Catholics who are Repugs just don't think for themselves. If they really saw what the two parties were for, they'd be Dems. It's like they're so obsessed with saving innocent fetuses, but willing to kick them to the curb once they are born.

[Torgo4]

43. Kerry is Catholic!!

Wait until the Pope's agents in Americaq (Bishops) try to put the hammer on him RE: abortion and gay rights!

Don't forget, Vatican is a foreign Government. Catholic clergy trying to influence elections could conceivably charged with election tampering/subversion and deported!



And our kids will breath a sigh of relief too!

Garsh---We may just have to discard our supernatural security blanket and face the universe like adults, not frightened children!!!
Geeez...I sound the like bastard child of Richard Dawkins!

[Gomer Pyle]

44. New to DU, but have an opinion

I am Catholic myself. And what I have noticed in my area is that a good number of older Catholics-- say, 50 and above, mostly identify as Democrats. But I'm starting to see a lot of younger Catholics, particularly from the X-Generation, who tend to be more conservative and probably vote for Republicans often. I'm not sure if this is just a pendulum swinging thing or some other kind of trend.

[PATRICK]

45. Non-denominational

personality or class types. Maybe the Catholic Church in its overwhelmingly immigrant ethnic roots is predisposed and situated socially to be Dem but other factors including common human nature all apply. Only blacks have a visibly inescapable social demarcation and some of them would rather be Strom Thurmond and twist it around to resent their own race.

Cuomo's position mirrors the average American Catholic's tolerance for the civil law issue. Personally I think the Church should concentrate on support and outreach for women in a positive way unless the government is actually advocating abortion.

Seeing how Bush uses wedge issues or ANY legitimate issue is highly instructive how we have wrongly and hypocritically set the parameters and easily get divided and corrupted in our stands. The bishops don't have to back anyone, but with their business management credentials, mindset and friends it is easy for a typical hot button issue to destroy the moral compass. It's great to have stronger ideals than the government, not so great to be a subset of its cheerleading section.

The path to pro-life legislation is over the graves and souls of all humanity. Under those warped rules, forget it. There is no need to hijack civil law to present a case for human decision. The mother is a human life too and that is ready to be sacrificed for the legislative quest? Death penalty support going hand in hand with terrorism and murder is a further sign that the Rightist moral stance is often illegitimate in the eyes of God. And saditistically nuts.

[mrgorth]

46. AOH

I'm a catholic dem. I'm somewhere in the middle on life/choice. I wish we could end abortion as a form of birth control which really does bother me. That said, I think early term abortions should always be legal. Also, rape, incest and anything effecting the health of the mother should make abortion an option. I'd like to promote contraception and adoption as alternatives.

Here's the thing many catholics don't get about choice. For millenia women have been oppressed BY their ability to have children. You make abortions illegal and what do you think will happen? There'll be more unwanted babies. More child abuse and more poverty from having to care for the wee ones. The rich? Heh. They can get whatever they want. Always could.

I'd like to see a middle road for the abortion debate and I'd like to see catholics line up behind that. In short, you're welcome. You do have to change the party platform though. Good luck.