Wednesday, March 2, 2016

Catholics who won't vote for Trump...

if Trump is the nominee,  are the same Catholics who gave us Obama.

I really, really don't like to be harsh (okay, once in awhile I do.)  But today, as I slithered around the blogosphere, I happened upon a number of  Catholic sites who stated if Trump was the nominee, they would refrain from voting for anyone.  Worse yet, some said they would actually vote for Hillary Clinton.

Are they insane or just misled?

So far, Evangelicals have been the focus in this race.  It is my practice to refrain from commenting on other religions.  It's none of my business what they do.

When Obama was running, the bishops were largely silent.  Now, many of them have come out and said that a "real" Catholic could not vote for Trump.  Why the concern all of a sudden?

Many of these are the same bishops who hid and defended their chicken hawk homosexual priests who were preying on young men.  And now they expect us to take their moral advice about an election?

Didn't our environmentalist Pope, who is more concerned about plastic bottles on the beach than the saving of souls say, "Who are we to judge?"  

And, please, above all, spare me your pious bleating about not being able to vote for someone you consider to be not as morally upright as you would wish.  It makes you look as silly as you sound.

Restore DC Catholicism posted Immorality Of Boycotting Election Day today, and they've stated exactly what I'm thinking:
[...]Shortly before the 2012 election, we heard the snortings from faithful but disgruntled Catholics who said they'd stay home (and many did).  I'll be frank again; in many if not most cases, these Catholics sounded like petulant two-year-olds who were mad because they didn't get their way during the primaries.  Their rancorous declarations of their intent to boycott the election really did resemble temper tantrums.  The same foot-stomping is beginning to happen, and the primaries aren't even over yet.

At that time, I made efforts to examine the "not going to vote" question by applying to it the Principle of Double Effect.  It is something that many mistake for the "lesser of two evils" mindset, but these two ideas are considerably different.  Here is one post.  This is a follow-up post.  Those were from August 2012.  These next two are from the following October - here and here.  Please read the comments in these posts; they can be quite telling.

This time I'm not hearing so much "third-party" talk as much as I'm hearing talk about not voting at all.  Let's look at that, shall we?  Again, we're going to examine this question rigorously, and attempt to apply traditional Catholic moral principles to it.  And yes, we really do have to take the time and effort to methodically work through these questions, as opposed to making these decisions on the basis of impulsive, "seat of the pants" emotions.  read the rest - it's very well done.
 There's a reason I don't access most Catholic sites anymore.  I'm tired of the holier than thou's who usually start off by saying Trump has been married three times.  Well, bully for you if you're still with your first husband or wife.  I'm on my third husband, and that doesn't make me immoral.  It simply means I was pretty dang stupid when I was younger - something Trump has also admitted to being.

People who make knee-jerk decisions based on faulty information, which is about all you're going to get from the MSM, and blogs who have already crowned their savior™, are the enemy.  It's as simple as that.

Keep it up all you good Catholics and you'll be spending the next four years under a Hillary Clinton presidency.

Newt Gingrich to GOP Elites: If You Remain Neutral You Will Endorse Hillary Clinton

Ted Cruz after Super Tuesday

Donald Trump Super Tuesday Press Conference


Vox Populi:   A Churchian sermon on politics

Roger Simon:   The #NeverTrump Crowd Should Get a Life

Jon Rappoport:  Trump: why the elite media were completely wrong about his chances

MOTUS:  Everybody Wants To Rule the World


No comments: