The Catholic Voting Project Quiz

[ckerr4]

http://www.votingcatholic.org/quiz_start.php

Welcome to the Catholic Voting Project Quiz, where you can find out how your own political beliefs match up with those of George Bush, John Kerry, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops

Taking the quiz is easy. Just rate to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the statements listed below. Click View Results to see where you fit in.

I posted the main site on another thread, but the quiz itself is worth taking. The results will show how much in agreement you are with the two main candidates, and then the U.S. Bishops, with regards to the major issues in the election. Interesting. ;)

[janelle]

I already know I would agree with the Republican side. They do not condone the culture of death on abortions.

Also, on the Democrat web site they said John Kerry's spiritual advisor is a woman Rev. I forgot her name but she is famous for going to court to support an atheist's right not to have Under God in the Pledge of Alegence. Just something I disagree with. I want more of God in our lives not less.

[ckerr4]

I also find the culture of death surrounding the death penalty and war (both of which the Church has condemned) to be equally as disturbing.

I couldn't find anything about this spiritual advisor. If you have a link, I would like to read more.

[janelle]

The church does condemn the death penalty but agrees it has to be used in some cases for self defense. As a deterrent for that person to ever get out of prison. Many do.

On war they condemn it but agree there are just wars like WWll. It saved many people from extermination. The aggressors died but only in self defense. You would understand if it was our country that was occupied by a murderous dictator. Pope John Paul knows about that since he was in Poland during the war when it was occupied. He stood up to Stalin who had all the churches closed. He had the people meet in the fields and said Mass there. He was a very brave man and still is.

[ckerr4]

From the Cathechism:

2267 The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.
"If, instead, bloodless means are sufficient to defend against the aggressor and to protect the safety of persons, public authority should limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
"Today, in fact, given the means at the State's disposal to effectively repress crime by rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself, cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender 'today ... are very rare, if not practically non-existent.'[John Paul II, Evangelium vitae 56.]

It sounds to me like it's more a case of "if there is no other recourse, and only in the most dire of circumstances." Still, the Church would prefer to see other means used, such as prison sentences, I would imagine. Here in Texas, they will execute just about anyone - juveniles, mentally retarded people - until the courts stop them. This is under G.W. Bush and his successor. Not much fostering of a culture of life. Not much of a consideration of "absolute necessity" or other "bloodless means" of dealing with offenders. Certainly not in keeping with the actual teachings of the Church, if you take a look at the cases.

Also:

2327 Because of the evils and injustices that all war brings with it, we must do everything reasonably possible to avoid it. the Church prays: "From famine, pestilence, and war, O Lord, deliver us."

2328 The Church and human reason assert the permanent validity of the moral law during armed conflicts. Practices deliberately contrary to the law of nations and to its universal principles are crimes.

2329 "The arms race is one of the greatest curses on the human race and the harm it inflicts on the poor is more than can be endured" (GS 81 # 3).


His Holiness the Pope: "I shall merely say that every civilization worthy of the name presupposes the categorical rejection of violent relations.
...
If we believe that every human person has received a unique dignity from the Creator, that each one of us is the subject of inalienable rights and freedoms, that serving others means growing in humanity, especially when we claim to be disciples of the One who said: "By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another" (Jn 13: 35), we can easily understand the innate value of communities of believers in the building of a pacified and peaceful world.

As for the Catholic Church, she makes available to all the example of her unity and universality, the witness of so many saints who were able to love their enemies, of so many politicians who found in the Gospel the courage to live charity in war. Everywhere that peace is at stake there are Christians to attest in words and actions that peace is possible. As you well know, this is the reason behind the interventions of the Holy See at international debates."

He did try to intervene. He visited Iraq, he visited with the President; I'm not talking about WWII - obviously, the Pope does know about the horrors of war, and stood up to the powers of that time. He did it again at the beginning of this war in Iraq, only nobody listened to him, including many Catholics. He has said, with the Church's authority behind him, that war is wrong. He has said that the war in Iraq is wrong, and he did not support President Bush's war efforts. There's no way to spin that.

I might agree if it were our country that were occupied, but it's not, is it? It's actually Iraq that's occupied, by us. This war, according to the Vatican, did not and does not meet the criteria for a just war. This is the Vatican's position on the issue. That's why this post is here, and not in FYI -this is a religious issue, and I think it's important for Catholics to remember that abortion and gay marriage are not the only issues on which to judge a candidate (and that includes not only presidential candidates, but senators and representatives as well).

[Zoobee]

wow


Your Results




Overall


Bishops 45%

Bush -32%

Kerry 68%


Protecting Human Life

Bishops 38%

Bush -50%

Kerry 100%



Promoting Family Life (A yes to gay marriage automatically gets you a -100% with the bishops lol)

Bishops -100%

Bush -100%

Kerry 100%


Pursuing Social Justice

Bishops 70%

Bush 10%

Kerry 30%



Practicing Global Solidarity

Bishops 100%

Bush -100%

Kerry 100%



If you take out the gay marriage thing, the Bishops agree with me 70% of the time!

:p :cool: :)

[ckerr4]

http://www.freep.com/voices/columnists/egumb20_20041020.htm

LOCAL COMMENT: President's policies are in opposition to a culture of life

October 20, 2004





BY BISHOP THOMAS J. GUMBLETON





President George W. Bush has visited Michigan many times during the campaign, including a recent visit to Farmington Hills, but he has never stopped in Detroit's inner city. If he did, he would meet firsthand many men, women and children who have dramatically experienced the effects of his policies.

When Bush travels the country, he often says that he stands "for a culture of life in which every person counts and every being matters." These words resonate deeply with Catholics. But is Bush's agenda really the Catholic agenda? Does he really stand for a "culture of life" that recognizes and celebrates the worth of every human being?

The United States Catholic Bishops have written that "any politics of human life must work to resist the violence of war and the scandal of capital punishment. Any politics of human dignity must address issues of racism, poverty, hunger, employment, education, housing and health care." Applying this agenda as the guide, it is clear that the president's words have not translated into action.

War: In a "culture of life," we are called to be peacemakers. Bush, however, chose to pursue a war over the moral objections of hundreds of religious leaders, including Pope John Paul II, the U.S. Catholic Bishops and the leaders of the president's own Methodist Church. The report released on Oct. 6 by chief weapons searcher Charles Duelfer definitively proves that Saddam Hussein did not possess weapons of mass destruction. The evidence is now clear that the Bush administration misled the American people into the war in Iraq.

Speaking at the United Nations this month, Vatican official Archbishop Giovanni Lajolo said, "Everyone can see that (the war) did not lead to a safer world either inside or outside Iraq."

Now, more than 1,000 American soldiers have been killed and upward of 7,000 have been injured. The sinful and systematic abuses committed in Iraqi prisons have rocked the moral conscience of our nation and soiled our credibility in the international community. An estimated 13,000 innocent Iraqis have died as the result of the invasion. All the while, the Bush administration refuses even to tally Iraqi civilian casualties.

Capital punishment: In a "culture of life," we are called to be merciful. As the governor of Texas, however, Bush approved the execution of 152 people. In one infamous incident, he publicly mocked a woman as she awaited execution on death row. The president's attorney general has ordered a federal prosecutor to seek the death penalty despite the prosecutor's own recommendation of a life sentence in at least 12 cases. In other words, current U.S. policy is that some human life does not matter.

Human dignity:In a "culture of life," we are called to care for the least among us, including human life in the womb. One proven way to reduce abortions is to reduce the numbers of people living in poverty. Unfortunately, under Bush, statistics show that the abortion rate has gone up. Since he took office, the number of Americans living in poverty has risen by 4.3 million, to a total of 35.9 million. I see these real people and hear their stories at the doorstep of St. Leo's every day. One of every three people living in poverty is a child. During the Bush presidency, the number of Americans without health insurance has risen by 5.2 million. Our economy has lost over 1 million jobs, and the wages that our families depend on have become stagnant. Meanwhile, the richest 1 percent received a tax break 70 times greater than the tax cut for the middle class.

How are Catholics to deal with this split between rhetoric and reality? Ours must be a prophetic voice. We must call on Bush to account for a deeply troubling record. And we must also challenge Democrats to embrace the entire culture of life, not just a selective economic and social agenda. The sad reality of American political life is that no candidate or party embraces and advances a "culture of life" in the fullest sense of the term.

Yet responsible citizenship calls us to cast our vote Nov. 2. How do we choose amongst imperfect candidates? We must each consult our conscience and consider the entirety of church teaching. And, as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' voter guide, Faithful Citizenship, encourages, we should measure "all candidates, policies, parties and platforms by how they protect or undermine the life, dignity, and rights of the human person, whether they protect the poor and vulnerable and advance the common good."

What we will not do is vote for a candidate just because he uses words that we like to hear; remembering, as scripture tells us, that we must be "doers of the Word and not hearers only."




BISHOP THOMAS J. GUMBLETON is an auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Detroit and pastor at St. Leo Parish in Detroit. Write to him in care of the Free Press Editorial Page, 600 W. Fort St., Detroit, MI 48226.

[ckerr4]

Mind you, that doesn't mean that I think Kerry is the answer to all the problems, only that I'm tired of hearing that Bush is the perfect Catholic candidate because he is against abortion! Catholicism has so much more to offer, and teaches so much more - why aren't we asking more of our candidates? We look for social justice, in according with the teachings of Christ, or are suppose to, and should be giving equal weight to many different issues as they affect all our brothers and sisters around the world.

http://www.paxchristiusa.org/flyer.pdf

[ckerr4]

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpkee144005436oct14,0,2606426.story?coll=ny-viewpoints-headlines

Will a Kerry vote send faithful straight to hell?



BY BOB KEELER
Bob Keeler is a Newsday editorial writer and former religion reporter.

October 14, 2004


Karl Keating says I'm going to hell. And we haven't even met.

Keating runs "Catholic Answers," a conservative lay group based in San Diego. Its Web site, catholic.com, offers a voter's guide to this election, with five "non-negotiable" issues: abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning and gay marriage.

In a published interview about the guide, Keating has said: "It's a serious sin to vote for moral evils, especially those that are so clearly opposed to the church's teachings."

In other words, vote for a candidate with the wrong views on these issues, and you're well on your way to hell. Since I plan to vote for John Kerry for president, Keating's argument presents me - and millions of Catholics like me - a pretty bleak prognosis for the life to come.

Catholic Answers doesn't actually mention President George W. Bush or Sen. John Kerry, but you'd have to be pretty obtuse not to get the idea. Other interest groups aren't so delicate. For one example, check out the nasty Kerry cartoon on the National Rifle Association's Political Victory Fund site, which brags about defeating Al Gore in 2000 and slobbers over the chance to bury Kerry.

Or take a look at the Natural Resources Defense Council site, which isn't a voter's guide, but offers an overwhelmingly negative assessment of Bush's polluter-friendly record on the environment.

Not everyone, of course, has the resources of the NRA or the NRDC. Take the folks who created the votingcatholic.org site. Though I've never exchanged a word with Karl Keating, I do know some of these smart and committed young people, through the College of the Holy Cross and Pax Christi, the international Catholic peace movement.

These are not crazies or heretics. They take their lead, in fact, from this quote from the nation's Catholic bishops: "The Christian faith is an integral unity, and thus it is incoherent to isolate some particular element to the detriment of the whole of Catholic doctrine. A political commitment to a single isolated aspect of the Church's social doctrine does not exhaust one's responsibility towards the common good."

Right near the top of the Web site is a link to the bishops' full document, a long, thoughtful treatise on this election, "Faithful Citizenship: A Catholic Call to Political Responsibility."

The Voting Catholic site presents the issues and the positions of Bush, Kerry and the bishops. It lets you take a quiz, to see how close your positions are to those of the candidates and the church. And it examines a far broader swath of issues than Keating's site.

Under the heading of life, for example, Voting Catholic includes abortion, assisted suicide and stem-cell research, just as Keating does. But it also includes the death penalty, avoidance of war, nuclear weapons, the global arms trade, land mines and others. And it examines issues under the headings of family, justice and solidarity. It's an excellent site to help Catholics decide.

In this election, which many consider the most defining since 1932, voters should not make up their minds on only one issue.

To be fair to Keating, his voter's guide does offer an exception: "In some political races, each candidate takes a wrong position on one or more issues involving non-negotiable moral principles. In such a case you may vote for the candidate who takes the fewest such positions or who seems least likely to be able to advance immoral legislation, or you may choose to vote for no one."

Keating would argue that only his five issues are truly non-negotiable, but many Catholics also include such matters as war and peace, the slaughter of civilians, the death penalty, and caring for the poor.

So, even by Keating's standards, I feel comfortable that Kerry is far less dangerous to human life than Bush. Even Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the church's chief doctrinal officer, gives comfort to Catholics like me, who don't like Kerry's pro-choice stand: He says Catholics can vote for pro-choice candidates, if they vote despite that position, not because of it, and if there are "proportionate reasons." My reasons: Bush has averted few, if any, abortions, but killed thousands of Iraqi civilians.

Bottom line: There are plenty of one-issue voter's guides, but Catholics and non-Catholics alike should devote the time to studying a wider array of issues before voting.

[Zoobee]

Catholics and non-Catholics alike should devote the time to studying a wider array of issues before voting.

Amen to that.

:cool: