Elections and the Five Non-Negotiables

[Catholic Crusader]

THE FIVE NON-NEGOTIABLES
Are you prepared to vote according to your Faith this election year?
Make sure you learn about the five non-negotiables.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

1. Abortion

The Church teaches that, regarding a law permitting abortions, it is "never licit to obey it, or to take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or to vote for it" (EV 73). Abortion is the intentional and direct killing of an innocent human being, and therefore it is a form of homicide. The unborn child is always an innocent party, and no law may permit the taking of his life. Even when a child is conceived through rape or incest, the fault is not the child's, who should not suffer death for others' sins.

Another sub-set issue within this subject area that is non-negotiable pertains to Human Reproductive Technologies, which includes the Church’s position against Contraception, In-Vitro Fertilization and Sterilization.

2. Euthanasia

Often disguised by the name "mercy killing;' euthanasia is also a form of homicide. No person has a right to take his own life, and no one has the right to take the life of any innocent person. In euthanasia, the ill or elderly are killed, by action or omission, out of a misplaced sense of compassion, but true compassion cannot include intentionally doing something intrinsically evil to another person (cf. EV 73).

3. Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Human embryos are human beings. "Respect for the dignity of the human being excludes all experimental manipulation or exploitation of the human embryo" (CRF 4b). Recent scientific advances show that medical treatments that researchers hope to develop from experimentation on embryonic stem cells can often be developed by using adult stem cells instead. Adult stem cells can be obtained without doing harm to the adults from whom they come. Thus there is no valid medical argument in favor of using embryonic stem cells. And even if there were benefits to be had from such experiments, they would not justify destroying innocent embryonic humans.

4. Human Cloning

"Attempts ... for obtaining a human being without any connection with sexuality through ‘twin fission,’ cloning, or parthenogenesis are to be considered contrary to the moral law, since they are in opposition to the dignity both of human procreation and of the conjugal union" (RHL 1:6). Human cloning also involves abortion because the "rejected" or "unsuccessful" embryonic clones are destroyed, yet each clone is a human being.

5. Homosexual "Marriage"

True marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Legal recognition of any other union as "marriage" undermines true marriage, and legal recognition of homosexual unions actually does homosexual persons a disfavor by encouraging them to persist in what is an objectively immoral arrangement. "When legislation in favor of the recognition of homosexual unions is proposed for the first time ina legislative assembly, the Catholic lawmaker has a moral duty to express his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it. To vote in favor of a law so harmful to the common good is gravely immoral" (UHP 10).

 

[Catholic Crusader]

 

[annabenedetti]

And then there's the principle of double effect.

From 2016:

Three ways to vote on Tuesday with a clean conscience

Father Matthew Schneider L.C.Nov 3, 2016
SPECIAL TO CRUX​

If I can’t vote for anyone, can I vote against someone?

The current U.S. election seems to be a race to the bottom. In the past, usually I could see a good argument to vote for one candidate based on character and issues, despite a few imperfections; in this election, the argument to vote against each one of the candidates seems stronger than the argument to vote for either.

Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia summarized the Catholic conundrum: “One candidate - in the view of a lot of people - is an eccentric businessman of defective ethics whose bombast and buffoonery make him inconceivable as president. And the other - in the view of a lot of people - should be under criminal indictment. The fact that she’s not - again, in the view of a lot of people - proves Orwell’s Animal Farm principle that ‘all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.’”

In that quote, Chaput is only talking about character, yet it seems both major candidates are seriously at odds with Catholicism on certain issues too. I won’t do an in-depth analysis, as I don’t want to beat a horse that’s already been killed three times over.

In such a situation, what is a good Catholic to do? I find it very hard to argue that you should vote for either of the two major candidates. I find many of my friends in a similar position, feeling they can’t vote for either candidate.

Nonetheless, in a democratic society, a Catholic has a duty to vote. I want to present three ways Catholics can vote with a morally clean conscience: they can vote against someone, they can vote for a minor candidate, or they can ruin their ballot.

Voting Against

Voting against someone would follow from the Catholic principle of double effect.

The opening scene of the movie Vertical Limit displays this principle graphically: a dad and his two kids are hanging perilously off a rock cliff by a single contact point and it’s slipping, so the dad instructs his son above him to cut the rope. Cutting the rope saves the boy and his sister, because they’re able to hang there until help comes, but it also causes the father’s fall and death.

This can often get confused with “choosing the lesser evil,” but in Catholic moral theology we can never choose evil. This is choosing the good which is realizable, or preventing evil when not all good is realizable.

To vote against someone technically requires placing a vote for another person, but to qualify as a voter against rather than a vote for, several principles need to be respected.


​

• First, there needs to be no other way to prevent the dreaded result we are avoiding. If millions of Americans got together, a third party could win, but as an individual, it is a fair judgment to assume your vote for a third party won’t make it win.​
• Second, the person we mark our ballot for when voting against someone else needs to be less problematic from a Catholic moral perspective.​
• Third, our intention needs to be to prevent one person from taking the office and not to give it to the other person.​
• Fourth, we must fulfill the norm that our action is not intrinsically evil, because voting is good and we are explicitly trying to prevent the greatest evil from happening.​
• Fifth, there is a complicated point of means and ends: the means (voting for X) of achieving the end (preventing Y from being president) cannot be evil in themselves. Participating in politics to the degree it is possible is in itself good, and, if you are voting for someone with some redeeming qualities (which every candidate I know of has), you can be voting positively for those redeeming qualities. Thus, casting a vote for one of the two major candidates can be moral if it is done in order to prevent the other from taking the office.​

A summary of this view was stated by a moral theologian, whose opening paragraph on who they were voting for was, “I am voting for [X] because they are not [Y].”


​

Knowing and using the principle of double effect, I voted against Trump.

The other two options (third party vote, no vote/write in) follow at the link.

 

[Rusha]

​

Knowing and using the principle of double effect, I voted against Trump.

The other two options (third party vote, no vote/write in) follow at the link.

Same here. Had Kasich been the candidate, I would have voted for him ... and as long as he continues to restrain from participating in the behavior of the GOP (by supporting them), I might still consider voting for him.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Well Anna, you have done a fine job justifying voting for baby-killers and perverts. You must have graduated from Nancy Pelosi U, a disgusting excuse for a Catholic if there ever was one. You're too clever by half.

Your problem is that all the hate you have for Trump is based on lies. The Trump you hate does not exist. The real Trump is a great conservative president. He is the first sitting president to support the March for Life people LIVE as it happened.

Oh, and then there's this, which I know you just hate:

Pres. Donald Trump Named Operation Rescue’s 2017 Pro-Life Person of the Year
https://www.operationrescue.org/arc...ion-rescues-2017-pro-life-person-of-the-year/

Washington, DC — Operation Rescue is pleased to announce that the recipient of the 2017 Pro-Life Person of the Year Malachi Award is Pres. Donald J. Trump.

The Malachi Award is given by Operation Rescue every year to recognize individuals who sacrificially work to advance the cause of protecting the pre-born.

“Operation Rescue is grateful Pres. Trump for having the courage to keep promises made during the campaign that provide greater protections for the pre-born and deny Federal funds from those who commit abortions,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “He has proven to be the most pro-life president we have had in modern history and has backed up his pro-life rhetoric with action like no other before him.”

Since Trump took office, he has accomplished more for the pro-life agenda than any other president.

• Trump appointed conservative, pro-life Justice Neil Gorsuch to the U.S, Supreme Court.
• He has effectively denied public money to those who commit and promote abortions around the world.
• The Trump Administration Department of Justice has launched a formal investigation into Planned Parenthood’s illegal baby parts trafficking scheme.
• He has actively supported pro-life legislation, such as the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which is currently held up in the U.S. Senate.
• He supports legislation to defund Planned Parenthood in the U.S., and removed an Obama-era mandate that forced states to continue funding Planned Parenthood.
• He has worked to fill his administration with pro-life people and put them in places where they can do the most good.
• Trump’s administration has taken active steps within the Health and Human Services and other agencies to establish pro-life policies that protect the pre-born.
• He has provided protections for those of religious and moral convictions from paying for abortifacient drugs through Obamacare, and continues to work to repeal and replace it.

“We are proud of President Trump and his bold willingness to advance the cause of life. There are more battles ahead, but under the Trump administration, we can now finally see progress within our government toward restoring the sanctity of life and the protections of personhood to the pre-born,” said Newman. “This makes Pres. Trump a deserving recipient of the 2017 Pro-Life Person of the Year Malachi Award.”