Saturday, November 01, 2008

A Civilian National Security Force

Sort of like the KGB I imagine.

Third Party Voters- keep those feelings of moral superiority coming. It may be all you have to hold on to if you get your way.


Karen said...

I don't believe I have any sort of "moral superiority" issue going on. I have a moral obligation to my own soul going on. I really do believe that if everyone put their own judgement day ahead of what they think the US needs in terms of politics, the votes might actually come out different. I refuse to compromise my own conscience for the sake of a two-party voting system.

izzarina said...

Oh come on, Mary. Third party voters have no "moral superiority". Just because I can't come up with a decent reason to vote for the lesser evil doesn't mean I feel I am morally superiour. Something has to give in this country, and a vote for either candidate that the "powers that be" have decided we have the right to vote for isn't going to give us that change we so desperately need. That was one of those comments that was absolutely uncalled for. I'm glad you can feel good about your vote for McCain. I personally cannot get past the fact that he's a war-monger, and will have no problem throwing us all into war after war, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people for no reason whatsoever other than to advance our horribly evil American way of life.

Petrus said...

I don't remember the commandment that says "look to your own soul before anything else" but I do remember the commandments "love thy neighbor as thyself." If my neighbor includes those babies who will be killed because of the Freedom of Choice Act or those Moms who will have their lives destroyed because of the Freedom of Choice Act, then I guess I have to vote McCain.

It's a luxury to believe that we have to think of our own souls, and not have to consider the consequences of our action or inaction. It reminds me of the Buddhist principal to "do no harm." Unfortunately, that principle is impossible to live by because of original sin.

And to really live by this principle, one would never shop at Walmart or purchase any products from China, that kills a lot more babies that America. We would never visit or purchase goods from any of the European countries were euthenasia is rampant. We would never buy coffee produced by slaves in South America. We would never buy sugar from the Dominican Republic, and we would never pay taxes because our tax dollars go to Planned Parenthood both domestically and overseas.

If there is a special category of people out there who can accomplish the above, and are able to think only of their own soul, and not the lives and souls of others, I applaud you.

I live in this in this fallen world, and I have to take care of my neighbor - and taking care of my neighbor is taking care of my soul.

Thomas Shawn said...

Barack Hussein Obama said he will increase troops in Afghanistan so for you Utopian Peaceniks, then he is not your man. There are good allies of ours in countries like Columbia who are Catholics, waging a fight against Communists, and Obama is throwing them under the bus.

"to advance our horribly evil American way of life." GET OUT NOW! HYPOCRITE! GET OUT!

"I have a moral obligation to my own soul going on." You may, but this is misplaced, spiritual navel gazing does not make it permissible to stand idly-by while babies are getting murdered.

This is like having moral qualms about the main opposition party in Germany 1934 when the National Socialists (NAZIs) are on the rise.

The question is this: Where were you on November 4th? What did you do?

Karen said...

"Where were you on November 4th? What did you do?"

My answer will be that I used my Catholic conscience and did not vote for a man who admits that it is ok to murder a baby due to rape and incest, and also wants to continue funding embryonic stme cell research.

And to "Petrus".. since when are we NOT to consider our own eternal salvation? "Quidquid fit contra conscientiam, aedificat ad gehennam." (Whatever is done in opposition to conscience is conducive to damnation.)

izzarina said...

Why does my keeping to the teachings of the Church in regards to Americanism hypocritical? Please point it out for me.


izzarina said...

sorry, that should have said why does it make me hypocritical.

M. Alexander said...

Okay, so McCain is not prolife enough. What third party candidate rejects artificial contraception? And we all know that artificial contraception is nothing more than a chemical abortion in the case of the pill. And then we have no candidates who will reject immunizations made from the cells of aborted babies so it seems like no one is pro-life enough.

So since we have no pristinely pro-life candidate should we not vote at all?

Why draw the line at McCain's position rather than on the issue of contraception/chemical abortions?

And I don't think any "comment" can be called "uncalled for" when I make it on my own blog that no one is required to read and I do not force my opinion on anyone. That is what I believe and I understand that if offends people. For my part I am offended by those Catholics who will not vote for McCain in the "battleground states".

Make no mistake we are responsible for our decisions and the results of those decisions. This is true even if some of the results were not intended.

izzarina said...

Mary, you know that my issues go far beyond abortion. And it was uncalled for. Sure, you can say what you want on your blog, but you know full well that I don't find myself to be "morally superiour" to you or anyone else. What is the purpose of alienating people in this way? More divisions are not what is needed.


Jeff Culbreath said...

Mary, Catholics are under no obligation whatsoever to materially cooperate with grave evil by voting for ANY candidate who supports abortion.

There is no sin in refusing to vote for McCain, period. To say that those who abstain or vote third party are so doing for reasons of "moral superiority" is greatly offensive.

However, there MAY be sin in voting for McCain, depending on what one's proportionate reason might be. The burden is on the "lesser of evil" voters to prove that they have a proportionate reason.

A fairly persuasive case can be made in those states where a handful of votes are likely to make a difference - but even under such circumstances voting for McCain is merely *permissible*, not morally *obligatory*.

Thomas Shawn said...

"Why does my keeping to the teachings of the Church in regards to Americanism hypocritical? Please point it out for me."

Surely. So now you have switched it to "Americanism" as taught by the Church. Beating a swift retreat behind the Church while baiting and switching?

Not falling for that one, you wrote of a "horrible American way of life" nothing of Church teaching. Being wary of "americanism" does not mean going around trashing America.

You should leave immediately so as to not enjoy any of the benefits of America. Does your spouse draw a paycheck drawn in American dollars? HYPOCRITE! How do you say these things and yet raise your children in the US? Pays to have a US passport in the back pocket, eh?

Your profile mentions moving to another country ... it is time for you to act, to put your body where your mouth is. Go see how things are in Ireland! Islam will rule Europe but don't worry the Irish (like they did with Hitler) will surely cut a deal.

We're fighting off Hitler here, it time for all hands on deck. Now is not the time to make the perfect, the enemy of the good. McCain is a divorced Protestant and Palin is an ex-Catholic ... but lets not be silly.

"Catholic" Biden? He should be burnt (figuratively) at the stake as part of a new Inquisition, one not using instruments of torture, just tersely worded letters of Excommunication!

Anonymous said...

I admire you Mary for causing division, it's all about bringing not peace but the sword and one of the problems is that people think niceness is a virtue. . . Whatever the heck that's supposed to accomplish. I have had tons and tons of conversations about the election but no one will tell me how I can vote for McCain and it not being a case of the lesser of two evils. Everyone just launches into some lecture about how much worse Obama is. Fine, I agree Obama is worse but the reason I lose sleep over it is because I feel like I am wondering if I should vote for Hitler or Mussolini. And, I was born with my sense of moral superiority, (we all were. ;) Love, Kath

izzarina said...

Thomas said:
"you wrote of a "horrible American way of life" nothing of Church teaching. Being wary of "americanism" does not mean going around trashing America."

Actually, no. I said horribly EVIL American way of life. If you're going to quote me, at least do it accurately (rolling eyes).

What I said does absolutely fall under Americanism. You're just too much of an Americanist to realise it. Capitalism is not Catholic...our system of free market consumerism is absolutely evil (not to mention condemned), and yet we feel that we somehow have some obligation to force this upon every country we "liberate". And apparently we are not going to stop until we've liberated everyone. Yay America! But of course, that's of no consequence to you, being the Americanist that you are, right, Thomas? America First, after all...with everything else, including the Church, a very distant second. Look around America, and tell me what percentage of people in America you think are living in an objective state of mortal sin. I would put that number at 90-95%. Now, I am a Catholic, and I believe that grace builds upon nature. The American system...Ie: the natural system....pulls people in the exact opposite direction of grace. There has NEVER been a nation on earth that has morally survived the twin evils of democracy and Capitalism. It always leads to the nation discarding ALL morals because it is much easier to live an immoral life in these societies than it is to live a moral one. It's much easier to abort your child, or to contracept, or to divorce in this society than it is to have a child, to raise a large family, or to stick by your spouse through difficult times. These are the objective facts as found in the United States of America. Does the US have decent qualities? Yes, but if you go into a doctor's office, you don't want the doctor to tell you everything right with you. You want him to tell you what is making you sick. Americanists, unfortunately don't want to hear what's making America sick. They only want to talk about what is GOOD in their country, and what's worse, they usually want to justify what is bad and pretend it is good. I would recommend you start reading books on political/economic thought written by Catholics attempting to practically apply the principles of Catholic ethics and social teaching, instead of reading Catholics and non-Catholics that are attempting to practically apply the principles of non-Catholic/anti-Catholic ethics and social teachings. None of the defenders of Democracy and Capitalism get their principles from the Church. They get them from philosophers who reject the principles of the Church. For example, no socialist or Capitalist philosopher believes in Original Sin and the fallen nature of man. Yet the correct understanding of the nature of man is ESSENTIAL to developing a political/economic philosophy. Adam Smith misunderstood the nature of man in the exact same way that Karl Marx misunderstood the nature of man. That is why the results of Adam Smith's principles are the exact opposite of what he thought would happen. Adam Smith believed that HIS system of economics would lead to a decentralisation of wealth and a distribution of productive wealth in the hands of many. Of course, Catholics, like Belloc and Chesterton, knew this would never happen and instead would lead to the centralisation of wealth in the hands of a few and the welfare state which insures that the people without wealth will not rise up against the unjust system because since they have the basic necessities of life, they will be content in their slavery. Chesterton and Belloc wrote WELL before the Welfare state. History has proven them to be right, but this is not because they were psychic. It is because they understood, with the Church, the correct nature of man.

As for my alleged hypocrisy, you still have yet to prove it. Of course I live and work in this country, because I must at this point. I fail to see how earning a paycheck in American dollars makes one a hypocrite (of course, i would much rather be paid in gold, but that's illegal in this country). I disagree with the way our country is run, and the way our governing officials are governing for the special interest groups and corporations, not for the people. That does not make me a hypocrite. It just means that I am not blinded by false patriotism like you are.

Thomas also said:
"Your profile mentions moving to another country ... it is time for you to act, to put your body where your mouth is. Go see how things are in Ireland! Islam will rule Europe but don't worry the Irish (like they did with Hitler) will surely cut a deal."

I know how things are in Ireland. I'm well aware of the economy, the political structure, and the way of life. Please don't pretend to educate me on areas in which you have absolutely no knowledge. And that last bit just proves you know nothing whatsoever about the goings on in Ireland, let alone Europe. Ireland's position in WWII was that of "Armed Neutrality". This is fairly similar to George Washington's advice given in his Farewell Address (ie: stay the heck out of Europe's wars). Ireland's position in WWII was very clear. If the Germans attacked Ireland, they would fight with England. If the English attacked Ireland, they would fight with Germany. In other words, they wanted to be left alone. This saved the Irish economy and country from the devastation that every other European country that took sides in the war found themselves in at the end of the war. Their boys killed, their countryside destroyed, and their economy in ridiculous amounts of debt. Needless to say, the Irish had no grounds according to the principles of a just war, to enter into the war on either side. But of course, as an Americanist, I assume you reject the Church's teachings on just war and subscribe to the Machiavellian principle that the ends justify the means.


Anonymous said...

Heather, your comment was too long to read and too emotional to take seriously. The minute people start telling me to look around and decide what percentage of the people are in Mortal sin I either fall asleep because I've heard that a million times and have had it disproven to me even more times than that by realizing how many hidden saints God has put among us confused, desperate people who are making a mess of trying to get to Heaven but trying anyway. Also, I think that you are basing your argument off of a misunderstanding of what Americanism is. I could recommend a few books to you but as soon as people to that it just serves as a deflection to state that I can't explain it so read a book that I didn't understand either and you'll have to agree with me. And, I would critique the rest of your comment but who has time? It was like a book!

Petrus said...


What's wrong with voting for the lesser of two evils? That's the state of the world.

I'm not saying that McCain is the best candidate, but the best choice among the two candidates

izzarina said...

Kath said:
" And, I would critique the rest of your comment but who has time? It was like a book!"

???? Why did you bother to critique anything at all? It's not like you have an idea of what I said, or what I was trying to say, past the second sentence. Wouldn't it have been far better for you just to say nothing at all? Everything you did say was worthless, because you were basing your comments on one item in which you had no idea of the context of. I don't understand people who do things like this.

Another thing that our Capitalist/consumerist society has destroyed is attention spans. The average American can read 250-350 words per minute, so it would have taken between 3-4 minutes to read my 947 word posting. I don't consider 3-4 minutes an unreasonable amount of time in order to answer Thomas' statements. You're using a typically Protestant apologetic argument. For example, a Protestant will say "Where in the Bible does it show Mary was immaculately conceived?". When you try to answer, they'll yell at you for writing too much, for their question was very simple...only 11 words long. Of course, this is a false argument, just like yours. But I guess I should end this now, because I'm approaching the one minute mark with this post, and I don't want to tax your attention span too greatly ;)

Anonymous said...

Mary what have you started? LOL. Kath I do understand your thought process and think that you have a point. But I think that the state you live in it won't metter to much anyway if you don't vote anyway. However for those of us in a swing state I think that we do need to vote to at least stem the tide of evil. Sure I wish that we had a better chooice but we don;t and we can only trust in the lord that we are doing the right thing.
Heather! really you have a dizzying intellect.

Petrus said...

"What I said does absolutely fall under Americanism. You're just too much of an Americanist to realise it. Capitalism is not Catholic...our system of free market consumerism is absolutely evil (not to mention condemned)"

First of all, capitalism has not been summarily condemned, although the dangers and pitfalls of it have been. We are fallen, and so are our systems - that's life.

This whole idea of "Americanism" is fairly new to me, and I have only really heard it used in the past year. It is a new-fangled "ism" that people want to fight against because the typical evils of oppression, misogyny, poverty, racism and genocide are too far away in distant countries to really deal with. So, yes, by all means, let us fight against the best thing that we have close at hand - Americanism.

It doesn't matter that the Catholic Church, with all of its faults and failings is still an influential instituation in America. It doesn't matter that there is no place on earth, including Rome herself where a citizen has more civil or religious freedoms.

Mind you, America was founded on the idea of freedom, not liberty like France. The idea of American was a place where men were free to choose the good. Liberty is that so called virtue where men can do whatever suits their individual tastes and conscience.

From its earliest critics, America has been warned that its citizens must know and love virtue in order for it to be a success. I'm committed to bringing about that idea, and I refuse to throw away my vote because the fight has gotten too hard.

What is a Catholic economic system then? What country of the world can we move to where a Catholic economy exists today? The socialist countries of Europe certainly do not encourage Catholicism, the socialist countries of South America don't seem to be Catholic.

Show me, where on earth can you enjoy the freedoms and responsibilities that Americans have?

Remember, freedom is about being responsible, and I believe that that responsibility involves my vote in the political sphere. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, which is about political responsibility.

Just because you write something in Latin doesn't mean that the Church said it. To use the term "aedificat" is not a very strong term. It means aids, it does not mean "send" or condemn. You must realize, of course, that one's conscience is only as good as its own formation. Appealing to one's own conscience is like appealing to an emotion. It is fine for personal decision-making, but not necessarily helpful in a public and fairly anonymous discussion.

With that said, I would like to see the context.

Anonymous said...

Heather, I guess I should have just focussed on the over emotionalism of your comment and that would have made it simpler for you to curtail the drama of the second post. Do you think Americanism ruined my attention span or is the fourteen children I am raising? Maybe it's all the books I am currently reading or my brilliant sense of humor that needs to be entertained. (The last two reasons were jokes.) I've read Chesterton and Belloc and for one thing they were writing in response to the immanent threat of socialism and Communism not out of some deep understanding of the nature of man per se but out of the signs of the times. I encourage you to live the life that they have outlined particularly as stated in Servile State and Restoration of Property or move to another country that is a welfare state such as Ireland, I lived there for eight years so we can compare notes (Oh, you already know everything about Ireland,)and get back to me while I thank God that He made me an American.
If you can try to personally insult me by mocking my attention span because I didn't want to read your super long post then why are you giving Mary a hard time about her making a general statement about people's moral superiority? Doesn't make sense.
How would you define Americanism then?

Anonymous said...

Petrus, as I've said before the thing that is wrong with it is committing an evil is always wrong. i think that I keep saying it hoping someone will give me a good reason to vote for McCain and not have it go against my conscience or show how it isn't an evil to vote for someone who supports embryonic stem cell research.

Petrus said...


You have to do what you can to stop evil from flourishing in the world.

People have accussed the Missionaries of Charity of not helping people because they don't train them for jobs, or they take in people who are living immoral lives, or they allow the Hindus to do their practices in their homes for the sick and dying. If you phrase the question cleverly enough, then you can say that they are cooperating with evil.

However, their approach is really much more simple than that. They love and care for the person in front of them, who is Jesus. FOCA is in front of me right now - and this bill would overturn every single pro-life law in every state - parental consent, partial-birth, etc. I must do everything in my power to stop it from happening, and God will take care of the rest.

I'm not a theologian, I know that my limited understanding will never be convincing, but I do know that I can't allow this bill to go through.

John F. Triolo said...

Mary, I hope you can admit that there are those for whom voting for McCain (a strong supporter of ESCR) against their own conscience would be a sin. It is a scandal to advise any man of good will and sound principles to act against the dictates of a well-formed conscience in a matter that is at all doubtfull (not that I claim that this is what you are doing, but as for some of you commentors...).

I think Cardinal Newman is instructive here:
"The Church holds that it were better for the sun and moon to drop from heaven, for the earth to fail, and all the millions who are upon it to die of starvation in the extremest agony, so far as temporal affliction goes, than that one soul, I will not say be lost, but should commit one venial sin, tell one wilful untruth, steal one poor farthing without excuse."

Petrus said...


What is the difference between leaving this vote to one's individual conscience and saying that "personally, I would not have an abortion, but I can't tell anyone else not to."

Talk about relativism!

M. Alexander said...

Well this has just been gobs of fun now hasn't it!

I hope that people don't go away with hurt feelings. I think sometimes things are said from passion that may be a little too strong and naturally I am including myself in this.

For the record, there was no one on this list I was specifically thinking of when I wrote this- just my general frustration with those who will criticize McCain and Palin but have no alternatives. Everyone wants to vote "Third Party" but do not produce their candidate for the rest of us to pick apart and exploit the chinks in their armor.

There are people here who have maintained that:

1. It is not a sin to vote 3rd Party.
2. It may be a sin to vote for John McCain.

So it sounds like you may be disagreeing with my position and that is fine and does not offend me and I believe you have every right to say it. It bothers me that some people think I do not have the right to state my opinion.

Of course McCain's position on stem cell research is wrong. I'm sure he has other positions on things that I do not agree with. But he is running against Barack Obama. And Obama appears to be winning. God chose King David as the ruler of Israel in spite the serious moral failings that God knew he would fall into: adultery and murder, no small matters and yet God chose him.

If good, strong, committed Catholics reach the conclusion to vote Third Party there is certainly nothing I can do about that except express my disagreement with that position. And my disagreement with that position has not changed.

I continue to hold the position that the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing (thank you Edmund Burke) and voting Third Party is akin to that in my mind.

John F. Triolo said...

Sorry make another comment but Petrus' near-slander makes it necessary.


Please learn:

1) What relativism is.--It isn't just a catch-all that applies to anyone who disagrees with you or feels that there are issues where men must be left to use their best moral judgement. Saying that two people of good will can disagree over whether it would be sinful to cast a vote in favor of a candidate who supports ESCR is not relativism. Further, it is not relativism to say that acting against the dictates of a well-formed conscience in a dubious matter can be a sin--it is, in fact, a little thing I like to call basic Christian moral philosophy. Catholics are fortunate to be given some firm guidelines for how to apply God's law in certain situations. Where we do not have those specific guidelines we must do what men in all times and places have been forced to do, and act in the manner we legitimately believe to be most upright and pleasing to God. If this sounds like relativism to you, you probably, in the interest of honesty, ought to formalize your apostasy or at least stop posting under that name.

2)To read.-- I wrote that it gives scandal to advise someone to act against a WELL FORMED conscience in what is a DUBIOUS MATTER. No one who is in favor of legal abortion out of real belief can be said to have a well formed conscience nor is the question of legal abortion a doubtful matter from a standpoint of faith or of reason. In fact, I would go as far as to say that to be unable to distinguish my statement from the one cited by you shows that your reasoning has been tainted by relativism--not mine.

A vote for Obama is objectively sinful formal cooperation in evil. The question of McCain is open to discussion and no specific guidelines have been given to us. We are then obligated, under pain of sin, to follow our conscience when deciding whether to vote for him.

Further I would add that to publicly accuse someone of Relativism, that is, heretical thought, without sufficient proof is a very grave and imprudent thing to do.

Petrus said...


I don't expect that anyone just assumes that I have a well-formed conscience. Why should we think so well of ourselves just because we know that abortion is wrong?

Martin Luther was appealing to his conscience which was so well formed that he was scrupulous.

I don't think that people are being relativistic because they disagree with me, but because their point of reference is subjective. All that I'm asking is that you choose a point of reference that is not malleable.

John F. Triolo said...

"Martin Luther was appealing to his conscience which was so well formed that he was scrupulous."

Everyone should read this statement and think about it very carefully. Then, decided whether Petrus has the slightest idea of that about which he speaks when he talks about conscience and its formation.

I won't spell it out any more than that. As Hereclitus wrote, "be persuaded no by me, but by reason."

izzarina said...

Very quickly here...I'll respond to more when I actually have time.

Kath, I still fail to see the "emotionalism" that was rampant in my posting to Thomas, other than the parts where I tended toward being rude (for which I do apologise...those comments were uncalled for as well, and I shouldn't have said them). But other than those, I see nothing. I merely responded to his post, which, I might add WAS highly emotional.

I do take issue with someone critiquing a post without having read it. If you are going to disagree with something I've said, then at least give ME the courtesy to read what it is I've said. How else can you truly take issue, if you don't even know what was said? And if you still felt a need to say something, you could have just said that you don't really have time to read the whole thing, but could I please explain such and such, without delving into YOUR insulting emotionalism. But in the end, if you don't like my posts, then don't read them. Easy.

Ireland....I have NEVER said that I "know it all" (talk about emotionalism here...). But I do know quite a bit, because it is something that interests me and I actually read up on it as well as actively speak to people who live there. But I have never said I am an expert, let alone that I know it all. To say otherwise is just ridiculous, not to mention an outright lie.

Mary, I am not offended. You should know me well enough by now to know that I couldn't care less about what people think of me in these areas. ;-) My reasoning for even saying anything was more for those that would be offended. You know as well as I that many people take offense to comments such as that, and I really don't think that's what you want in the end. Many people are trying to do what they personally feel is right, and to many people a vote for McCain isn't the right thing. Also, I don't think I have ever said that voting for McCain is a sin. I do believe that we all have to make our choice, according to our own consciences. For ME, and ME alone, I cannot vote for him without guilt. Nor do I feel that a 3rd party vote is perfect....heck, I've said many things about Ron Paul that I didn't like. I just felt he was the best choice out of the ones I was given. But there are quite a few issues that I disagree with him on.

So, go on and state your opinion. But don't alienate those that are trying to fight the good fight as you are, despite their disagreement on HOW.


M. Alexander said...

Thanks for your response Heather, though it was a bit long ;). I appreciate your point of view even though there are things that I do not agree with. You always have interesting and heartfelt opinions.

Karen said...

Mary wrote: "Third Party Voters- keep those feelings of moral superiority coming. It may be all you have to hold on to if you get your way."

I guess the problem I am having with this statement is that I considered you a close friend, and I believe that you know that I read your blog (especially since I have quoted it twice in recent days on my facebook), so how could I not believe the comment is directed at me (and others-not JUST me, lol) since you know I am not on the same page as you re: this election? It IS a somewhat hurtful thing to say - and I am not an easily hurt person, as you should know from having known me for many yrs via MK's. Can you see my point at all? You can have your opinion, but so can I, and I don't have to be acting MORALLY SUPERIOR to hold it.

izzarina said...

Mary said:
"Thanks for your response Heather, though it was a bit long ;)."

I must admit that when one offers adjectives to describe me, conciseness isn't usually one of them ;)

M. Alexander said...


Then I apologize and hope you will believe me when I say that I wasn't thinking about you. And I guess b/c you are someone that is not easily offended and we usually speak our minds to one another it never occur to me that you would be offended by something like that.

I don't really want to get specific about who I was thinking of but it is someone who is becoming a "famous blogger" and I think by selling out and parroting the mainstream media who I thought was "the common enemy". It is a person that I used to link to and no longer do b/c I have been so offended (and said so) about comments made about both Sarah Palin and McCain.

I have all the respect for you in the world and admire you very much though I do disagree with some things that you believe and I know you disagree with things that I believe.

Petrus said...

Hasn't the purpose of Mary's post gotten a little sidetracked - i.e. whether or not an American Catholic has an obligation to consider that not-voting for a candidate will unleash a barrage of evil into the political system.

Just a thought.

Lillian said...

I believe some are not capable of looking beyond the absolute in terms of prolife. But for those who are consider the following. If Obama is elected and signs the FOCA Act, everyone who works will be funding abortions with their tax dollars. All Medicare Tax is given for those on public assistance to pay for medical care. Everyone who is on payroll pays this tax. The FOCA Act WILL provide abortions for these individuals. It will come from the Medicare Tax. Federal Income Tax will most likely be used to fund clinics, other abortions, etc. This is something to consider. Baldwin, third party candidate of the Constitution Party, has the greatest reach, but it is limited to 37 states in which he is on the ballot. He is not on the ballot in CA or NY. These carry large electoral votes. Given his lack of media coverage and available dollars to get out his message, many will not give him consideration in the voting booth. Even if he got some votes, it is unlikely the delegates will place their votes for him. Essentially, there is no way for a third party candidate to win. When we are confronted with such great evil, and choices could lead to the use of our money, although under duress to pay for such evil. I would suggest that people try to look beyond, and perhaps consider this practical case for not voting third party for the presidency.

Lillian said...

Many things regarding our Faith are simply beyond reason. For some of us like myself, pray and fasting has brought a sense a peace in my decision to vote for McCain and Palin. However, it wasn't until I found this blog a few days ago that this sense of peace really took hold.

I have watched McCain modify his position on abortion and embryonic stem cell research. And I wondered and doubted that he was sincere. However, something really grabbed me here. A true reminder that there are no coincidences in life. The greatness in the power of pray and promises made by Our Blessed Mother. I have found a mission to pray for McCain, his family, and the Palins. For those of you believe in the possiblity of miracles please read and reread the blog entry posted. For you skeptics, there is a reason the media turned on McCain. It has to with life and the appointment of judges. He said repeatedly that he would appoint a justice that would interpret the constitution as the founding fathers intended. The media has lashed out at him ever since. His choice in Palin simply added more fuel to the fire. If you search, you will find the tapes and soundbites to back this up.

Thomas Shawn said...

For the record, I know a thing or two about Ireland, my family comes from there and I'm contact with relatives.

I make no statement about the states of other people's souls. Not even a 500 word post enables me to do that.

What a funny post. To go from "a horribly evil way of life, to a defense of anti-Americanism, to accusing me of Americanism." How Stalinist.

This is about the murder of children, born alive and left to die. You can act to stop it or vote for Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney, Ralph Nader or Barack Obama. We already have a multiparty system. It's just that only two are popular.

Christ came to sow discord, by exposing the truth. He did not come to sing KUM BA YAH. I've accordingly named one of my blogs Overturning the Tables.

But for those of you overly engrossed with Chesterton or silly poetry, you might not get those Biblical references. Resume your normally scheduled programming, go back to sleep.

izzarina said...

Thomas, you really are far too emotional. But I'll forgive you for that. And just to prove it, I posted a lovely little entry on my blog, just for you.


Thomas Shawn said...

B(ack) T(o) T(he) T(op)
Obama's Civilian National security Force is blocking entrances to polling places and intimidating voters and reporters.

It's starting.

Petrus said...

The proof is in the pudding, as they say. I guess we will see what third party voting gets us.

izzarina said...

Petrus said:
"The proof is in the pudding, as they say. I guess we will see what third party voting gets us."

Meaning what?

Madeline said...

Did all of you third party and non voters wake up this morning, and think... "Well, thank God John McCain isn't our next president!" I guess you can console yourselves with that thought when Obama signs the FOCA. Am I bitter? You betcha!

izzarina said...

And you weren't bitter when Bush (whom of which I was told would SAVE innocent lives, and I NEEDED to vote for HIM the last time around) gave 2.2 BILLION dollars to Planned Parenthood in his last budget, much of which was used to build brand spanking new abortion mills? I'll bet those babies murdered in those new abortion mills are much more bitter than you are right now.

I find it ridiculous to blame those that could not vote for either of the two evils. If your candidate did not win, it is no more their fault as it is yours. We live in a democracy, after all, and the people have spoken...quite loudly it seems.

Madeline said...


You make a few illogical assumptions or statements in your post:

1. That I don't resent the money given to Planned Parenthood by Bush. (I do)
2. That we live in a democracy. (We live in a Republic)
3. That the election was between Obama or Bush. (which assumption, I find ridiculous)

However, since you seem to be harping on the GB factor, there are two things that he accomplished, for which I am grateful; appointing Sam Alito and John Roberts to the US Supreme Court. Similar appointments are what I would have expected from JM.

If not overturning R.vs W., then I would have expected strict constitutionist judges, such as the ones mentioned above, to preserve what little is left of the Constitution.

Of course, that would have just preserved our "horribly evil American way of life;" which I know you oppose. For me, the "horribly evil American way of life" that I live entails having the freedom to work hard to pay for the necessities of life and to enjoy the fruits of my labor, giving what I can to those in need, practicing my faith, speaking freely about what I believe, and opposing immorality and evil in our society.

I believe B.O. when he says he will bring change. You should feel gratified. At least my "horribly evil American way of life" will come to a screeching halt, now.

izzarina said...

Actually your horribly evil American way of life won't change all that much. In the end there really are no differences between Mr McCain and Mr Obama...neither of them had any inclination to overturn Roe, and no matter which justices are placed in the SC, nothing new is going to happen on the abortion front. In fact, even as it stands now, if the Human Life Amendment were to be presented, it would fail completely, for no one would be for it's passage (which is why Bishop Chaput was against it, for it would hurt the pro-life cause exceedingly).

My problem here, and has always been, that despite what you all seem to think, there really are no differences at all between the Democratic and Republican parties. They are all run by the same corporate interest groups; they are all bought and paid for by the lobbyists and the rich; they really aren't out for the little guy at all...they are out for their own re-elections and for the interests of those that fund those elections. That is why I cannot, in good conscience, vote for what you consider to be the "lesser evil". For me it was a choice between Stalin and Hitler...and even if pressed, I wouldn't vote for either of them either.

Madeline said...

Izzarina; Thank you for completely ignoring the point of my last post; for showing your true colors in agreeing that the life I live is evil; and especially for your final rant against... oh, everybody! Duped by the MSM message of "class envy," much? I restate, you should be gratified.

Karen said...

Does anyone have a tally of the TOTAL 3rd party votes? I think I heard 1% on foxnews this morning... can anyone provide a link to dispute this? Seems to me it doesn't take more than simple addition to figure out that MCCAIN WOULD NOT HAVE WON ANYWAY! Perhaps it has never occurred to anyone that just MAYBE McCain is not (was not) the man for the job? The job being to save America from the evil democrats (and republicans). Izzarina and I are not necessarily on the same page regarding politics (I am not 100% with her re: the war) with the exception that McCain and Obama are pretty much cut form the same cloth. With Obama, we will just most likely see the end result quicker. And really, is that such a bad thing? Kinda like being in labor... you know the pain is coming, would you rather get it over with sooner or later? lol ;-) I, for one, voted for a third party candidate with a CLEAR conscience. Just because someone else doesn't agree with that, doesn't mean I was wrong.

Karen said...

Obama: 64,241,128 votes
McCain: 56,629,958 votes
TOTAL 3rd Party votes: 1,423,595

The difference between Obama and McCain is 7,611,170 votes

Fact: Third party voters made NO DIFFERENCE to the final tally!


Madeline said...

Oh Karen;

Yet again, actual facts are conveniently ignored in defense of your position. The third party tally you cited does NOT include write-ins, and non-voters. I don't know why you are so anxious to claim that the outcome of the election is not your fault or the fault of anyone else who chose to vote "present" during the past election. Aren't you pleased at the outcome?

What? You're NOT glad that Barrack Obama is president-elect? Too bad you didn't do anything to stop it. I guess your "CLEAR conscience" will also be a consolation to you when BO signs the FOCA.

I conscientously believe that in addition to FOCA, BOs other policies will, in fact, affect not only the killing of more unborn children, but also the destruction of countless more lives and souls than if JM had been elected. Only one example of which is when parents will lose the right to teach their children because BO has promised to seek ratification of the UN's Convention on the Rights of the Child. You can read all about this on Eagle Forum's web-site: or at Christian News Wire:

It may be possible that JM would lead us down the same path, eventually and that "With Obama, we will just most likely see the end result quicker" but by that token with JM we would have had more time to save even one life. Your fatalistic "... you know the pain is coming, would you rather get it over with sooner or later?" stance is like wishing that Hitler could have killed all of the Christians, Jews and Gypsies at once; or that all the abortions could just be over and done with, or that all of the children could be educated and corrupted by state already. Sorry if the rest of us just aren't ready to throw in the towel.

What it comes down to is this: You, and people like you, are willing to sacrifice individual live and souls for the sake of your ideals, and your pristine consciences. While people like me understand that when the ideal isn't immediately achievable, we will accomplish what we can, saving as many as we can, while continuing to strive towards the ideal (and we can do this with CLEAR consciences).

Karen said...

Madeline, did you practice that in the mirror? *spare me, drama queen*

Madeline said...

I'm just so much cooler online.