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

-- Joe Protestant (JoeProtestant10@excite.com), October 23, 2004

Answers

bump

and incorrect. reading the article the bishop does NOT support kerry. in fact, his arguement rings true against BOTH candidates. I even agree with him on the point that i'm not a fan of either candidate. What the bishop is advocating is voting for NIETHER candidate... which would be quite lovely if it weren't throwing a vote away. My choice in this matter must be made thus:

1) Bush has led us to a war where several thousand iraqi soldiers have died. (est 13,000 in the article). I don't consider these soldiers innocent since they defended an animal and carried out his sadistic orders against his own people.

2) kerry wants to expand abortion limits into the third trimester making partial birth abortion (one of the worst forms of baby murder) legal. The potential deaths this could enable numbers in the MILLIONS over the next four years and beyond.

Now the dilemma, i view niether candidate as acceptable for the job. if catholics all vote for someone who we know can't win, and kerry takes the office, can we not be held accountable for doing something which we knew would cause kerry to win? and therein lies the problem. the solution, to me, is simple. line up 43 million soldiers next to the 43 million babies that have been murdered since roe v wade, and i'll gladly trade the lives of the soldiers to have the babies back. before someone goes nuts about that... i'm in the forces, and if it were possible, i'd volunteer. simple as that. my vote goes to bush.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), October 23, 2004.

Denver Archbishop Says Catholics Refusing to Defend Morality "Demonstrating Cowardice" Indirectly slams Kerry citing "dishonest", "dangerous" avoidance phrases used by some Catholics DENVER, Colorado, October 22, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput has once again come out in the New York Times powerfully teaching the serious obligation and right of Catholics to defend moral principles during elections.

In his New York Times Op-ed article today, "Faith and Patriotism", the outspokenly faithful Denver archbishop responds to "lectures" that Roman Catholics must not "impose their beliefs on society" and "warnings about the need for 'the separation of church and state.'" Predictably, Presidential candidate John Kerry who claims to be Catholic, has emphasized his agreement with such statements.

Chaput responds, "These are two of the emptiest slogans in current American politics, intended to discourage serious debate. No one in mainstream American politics wants a theocracy. Nor does anyone doubt the importance of morality in public life. Therefore, we should recognize these slogans for what they are: frequently dishonest and ultimately dangerous sound bites."

The Denver Archbishop also condemns the silence of Catholics who know that abortion is the taking of a human life. He writes, "For anyone who sees this fact clearly, neutrality, silence or private disapproval are not options. They are evils almost as grave as abortion itself. If religious believers do not advance their convictions about public morality in public debate, they are demonstrating not tolerance but cowardice."

Archbishop Chaput concludes, "Words are cheap. Actions matter. If we believe in the sanctity of life from conception to natural death, we need to prove that by our actions, including our political choices. Anything less leads to the corruption of our integrity. Patriotism, which is a virtue for people of all faiths, requires that we fight, ethically and nonviolently, for what we believe. Claiming that 'we don't want to impose our beliefs on society' is not merely politically convenient; it is morally incoherent and irresponsible."

See the complete text of Chaput's article on LifeSiteNews.com at: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/oct/041 022a.html

See October LifeSiteNews.com story: Denver Archbishop: Voting for Known Pro-Abortion Candidates is a Sin Requiring Confession http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/oct/041 02003.html

-- - (David@excite.com), October 23, 2004.

To compare capital punishment with war deaths is not only to compare apples to oranges, it's also dishonest if the argument is to equate them on a morally equivalent plane by numbers alone.

According to the government's own figures a mere 65 people were executed last year (down 6 from 2002) out of a population of some 3000 on death row. Imagine that. 3000 prisoners convicted and sentenced but they're not being lined up and machine gunned. Ever wonder why? Because they have right to appeals! (cf. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/exe.htm)

Police kill approximately 600 criminals per year in the course of arresting them - and civilians kill about 1500 criminals (mainly would-be robbers and rapists).

Is our good bishop making a categorical moral argument that all those on the receiving end were morally innocent merely because they get killed and all those doing the shooting are evil merely because they pulled the trigger?

Or is he claiming that war (where in armed soldiers shoot at each other rather than unarmed civilians) and capital punishment (where the state executes a tried and convicted murderer who has chances to appeal) are EQUIVALENT to a doctor and mother allowing a completely defenseless and innocent human being to be killed?

No wonder Mother Theresa warned us in the 1990's that so long as we keep piling on abortion after abortion we as a nation would never find peace!

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), October 25, 2004.