Many years have passed since the Democratic Party was as much a part of American Catholic identity as weekly Mass and parochial school. But it still came as a shock to many Democrats to lose the Catholic vote, a key group in must-win states like Ohio, in the 2004 presidential election.
It is an experience they are determined not to repeat.
The presidential candidates are in the middle of an escalating battle for Catholic voters ”” most immediately between Senators Barack Obama of Illinois and Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary, but also between the two parties as they look ahead to the general election. This struggle is an important part of the backdrop for Pope Benedict XVI’s trip to the United States starting Tuesday, which has drawn gestures of respect from all of the presidential contenders.
There is widespread agreement that American Catholic voters are far more diverse than monolithic. Even so, both the Clinton and the Obama campaigns have hired Catholic outreach directors, deployed an army of prominent Catholic surrogates testifying on their behalf and created mailings that highlight their commitment to Catholic social teachings on economic justice and the common good.
Dismayed at losing so many Catholic and other religious voters to the Republicans in 2004, Democrats talk far more often, and more comfortably, about their values and the importance of their own faith these days.
I am not convinced by any candidate who embraces both Catholic social teachings and unlimited abortion on demand.
For any faithful Catholic the choice is plain. One can not vote for a candidate who will promote abortion either by action or lack of same.
If the choose is between two candidates who both support abortion. The catholic may vote for one of them only if
the candidate’s support for abortion is specific to the circumstances in which it should be permitted. An example would be one who supports abortion on demand and one who would restrict it to cases of danger of maternal death. The candidate will support or propose legislation that will restrict access to some if not all abortion and place other barriers to unfettered abortion. A candidate who supports parental consent, stricter clinic licensing laws, mandatory ultra sounds, fully informed medical consent and the like is to be favored over one who supports unrestricted accesss to abortion for all females regardless of age.
But it must be added that a Catholic can never, ever vote for a candidate who favors abortion even in the limited sense when there is a candidate running who opposes abortion in any circumstance and is prolife. The above example is only to illustrate what to consider when there are no pro life candidates.
But first and foremost for Catholic voters must be a candidate’s stand on life issues.
Catholics and Orthodox Christians agree on life issues. We don’t have choices in this election, because we have allowed lies to direct political processes and we haven’t raised up candidates of our own.
Alice, I agree and the main reason I will be voting at all is because I truly believe the election of any one who is likely to appoint a Supreme Court justice in favor of unrestricted abortion makes my stomach churn.
I have refused, and will continue to do so, to vote for or against a person’s religious or non-religious. It is a lot more eye-opening if you look at the previous political records of the candidates. The local libraries of any city are a good source of finding out who did what and when??