During these 40 Days for Life coming up to the Election, Please vote for Pro-Life and Pro-Family candidates and also attempt to be tireless in mentioning there Pro-Life candidates as well as consider donating your time or treasure to this is eminently a worthwhile cause of re-building a Culture of Life in Massachusetts and the USA.
Help elect John McCain President and Sarah Palin Vice President – volunteer at 149 Highland St, Worcester; make calls, hold signs, make a Pro-Life difference. 7 days a week.
MFI voter guide
Please vote for pro-life candidate Jeff Beatty for US Senator from Massachusetts. Jeff is a former Army Delta Forces (Grenada), FBI and CIA, as well as successful business owner and Pro-Life candidate Jeff Beatty. No Catholic of conscience could reasonably vote for John Kerry given his absolute defense of abortion on demand, as well as his fame as Planned Parenthood’s pocket warmer. But Jeff Beatty is not simply the other, he brings not only a Pro-Life attitude, but a can-do common sense sadly needed in our government, and he brings it at a time when John Kerry is vulnerable. Jeff Beatty needs money and volunteers. Please help and please vote for Pro-Life candidate Jeff Beatty over Planned Parenthood’s pocket warmer John Kerry.
Please vote for Nathan Bech for US Congress 1st District, who is a veteran (Afghanistan and Iraq) and Pro-Life candidate, over Planned Parenthood’s other pocket warmer (100% NARAL rating) John Olver.
Please vote for Southbridge Town Council Chairman, leader in the fight against higher property taxes, and pro-life candidate Ron Cherninsky, for MA State Rep in Southbridge, Charlton and Brookfields over neophyte darling of the abortion and homosexual lobbies, Geraldo Alicea (back stabber on Traditional marriage too).
MA State Rep in Uxbridge, Webster Please vote for Kevin Kuros over double-speaking (even when sober) current rep Paul Kujawski, who also pulled a Brutus move on Traditional Marriage supporters. Kuros accuses Kujawski of becoming an "insider."
"What is comes down to is this: Is he really in touch with his district anymore?" ask Kuros. "All signs point to his being an insider." Kuros specifically cites Kujawski's votes to not return $450 million promised to local cities and downs, to expand the buffer zone around abortion clinics, to support same-sex marriage and his vote against a Republican amendment that would have prohibited funding of "clone and kill" embryonic stem cell research. Please vote for Kevin Kuros
Please vote for Pro-Life Republican Stephen Comtois MA State Rep in 5th Worc (Brookfield, Barre, Hardwick)
Please vote for pro-family Republican Kurt Hayes for state representative in the 37th Middlesex district in Acton and Lunenburg over political insider Jen Benson, who was recently found guilty of breaking the campaign finance law.
Please vote for Paul Avella. He is a Marriage Amendment supporter, Littleton School Committee and former Air Force pilot. His opponent is Political insider, longtime Beacon Hill staffer and probable Democratic nominee from Westford.
Please vote for Sandi Martinez as a Candidate for the State Senate in the 3rd Middlesex District
Please vote for Marlborough Republican and city councilor Steven Levy for the Middlesex and Worcester state Senate seat over Jamie Eldridge (D-Acton). Levy is a supporter of traditional marriage and opponent of abortion for Senate in this district that covers Littleton, Shirley and Maynard.
Please vote for Pro-Life, marriage amendment supporter Jeff Perry of Sandwich, MA for State Representative.
Please vote for Rep.Lew Evangelidis (R-Holden) who is Pro-Life and voted to defend Traditional Marriage.
For once a good choice: Pro-Family Independent Clare Freda is running for Representative against Pro-family Dennis Rosa up in Leominster.
Please Vote Mike Franco (R East Longmeadow) for Governor’s Council
Pro-Life Republican Arthur Vigeant in 4th Middlesex Marlborough, has been endorsed by Marlboro Democratic Mayor Nancy Stevens, over either of the two Democrats; "No one is more dedicated, committed and knowledgeable of our community than Arthur Vigeant. His passion for our city is unsurpassed. I look forward as mayor (to) having Arthur represent this city on Beacon Hill."
Please vote for Pro-Marriage candidate John Dwyer
Please vote for pro-marriage Rep. William Lantigua (D-Lawrence)
Vote marriage supporter incumbent Rep. Mike Rush (D-West Roxbury)
Vote Rep. Paul Donato (D-Medford)
Vote Pro-Marriage Sen. Scott Brown
Please vote for Pro-Family candidate Rep. Vinny deMacedo (R-1st Plymouth)
Please vote for Pro-Family, Pro-Life Candidate for State Rep Lonnie Brennan in 18th Essex
5 comments :
Buying the election: Obama's campaign-financing scandal:
From Michael Isikoff at Newsweek:
The Obama campaign has shattered all fund-raising records, raking in $458 million so far, with about half the bounty coming from donors who contribute $200 or less. Aides say that's an illustration of a truly democratic campaign. To critics, though, it can be an invitation for fraud and illegal foreign cash because donors giving individual sums of $200 or less don't have to be publicly reported. Consider the cases of Obama donors "Doodad Pro" of Nunda, N.Y., who gave $17,130, and "Good Will" of Austin, Texas, who gave more than $11,000—both in excess of the $2,300-per-person federal limit. In two recent letters to the Obama campaign, Federal Election Commission auditors flagged those (and other) donors and informed the campaign that the sums had to be returned. Neither name had ever been publicly reported because both individuals made online donations in $10 and $25 increments. "Good Will" listed his employer as "Loving" and his occupation as "You," while supplying as his address 1015 Norwood Park Boulevard, which is shared by the Austin nonprofit Goodwill Industries. Suzanha Burmeister, marketing director for Goodwill, said the group had "no clue" who the donor was. She added, however, that the group had received five puzzling thank-you letters from the Obama campaign this year, prompting it to send the campaign an e-mail in September pointing out the apparent fraudulent use of its name.
"Doodad Pro" listed no occupation or employer; the contributor's listed address is shared by Lloyd and Lynn's Liquor Store in Nunda. "I have never heard of such an individual," says Diane Beardsley, who works at the store and is the mother of one of the owners. "Nobody at this store has that much money to contribute." (She added that a Doodad's Boutique, located next door, had closed a year ago, before the donations were made.)
Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt said the campaign has no idea who the individuals are and has returned all the donations, using the credit-card numbers they gave to the campaign. (In a similar case earlier this year, the campaign returned $33,000 to two Palestinian brothers in the Gaza Strip who had bought T shirts in bulk from the campaign's online store. They had listed their address as "Ga.," which the campaign took to mean Georgia rather than Gaza.) "While no organization is completely protected from Internet fraud, we will continue to review our fund-raising procedures," LaBolt said. Some critics say the campaign hasn't done enough. This summer, watchdog groups asked both campaigns to share more information about its small donors. The McCain campaign agreed; the Obama campaign did not. "They could've done themselves a service" by heeding the suggestions, said Massie Ritsch of the Center for Responsive Politics.
Massachusetts Catholic Conference
statement of 10/1/2008:
Citizenship and the Well-Informed Conscience:
An Introduction to “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship”
How is a Catholic to fulfill his or her role as a citizen? The Roman Catholic Bishops in the United States addressed this important question in their 2007 statement entitled “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship.” All Catholics are urged to read and reflect on this document, which is summarized here. References to the full statement include the title’s initials, “FCFC,” and the relevant paragraph numbers.
1.) Why does the Catholic Church speak out on the moral aspects of political life?
The teaching role of the Catholic Church is rooted in the reality that every person has a conscience, and assumes that citizens want to act conscientiously, especially when justice and human rights are at stake (FCFC 17). Forming one’s conscience “begins with a willingness and openness to seek the truth and what is right” (FCFC 18). Catholic social teaching is based on “fundamental ethical principles that are common to all people” (FCFC 55). Thus, by proposing answers touching on the moral dimensions of citizenship that appeal to human reason, the Church is not imposing its religion but instead is responding to every person’s innate desire to uphold the good, including in the public arena. A moral concern for the inviolable dignity of every human being is at the core of the Church’s social teaching (FCFC 10).
2.) But shouldn’t morality be separated from law and public policy?
Law and public policy involve questions of social justice. Justice is concerned about what is right and good, and thus has an objective moral dimension that the Catholic Church is equipped to address (FCFC 9-10). The Church sees its function not as a power broker that replaces the state, but as a source of wisdom providing “greater insight into the authentic requirements of justice” (FCFC 14, quoting Pope Benedict XVI). Besides, “our nation’s tradition of pluralism is enhanced, not threatened, when religious groups and people of faith bring their convictions and concerns into public life” (FCFC 11). The different functions of church and state do not dictate a divorce between law and morality or the exclusion of moral persuasion from the public arena, especially when the dignity of the human person is at stake. The Church is not demanding that government adopt Catholic teachings, but it is insisting that society must defend human rights.
3.) Is the Church telling me whom to vote for in the next election?
No, because that question involves all kinds of personal considerations that “take into account a candidate’s commitments, character, integrity, and ability to influence a given issue” that are best left to the individual voter (FCFC 37). Besides, citizenship covers more than just voting. It includes campaigning for candidates for elective office as well as getting involved in ballot questions, entering government service itself, and otherwise working at the grassroots, regional, and national levels to influence public policy. Being an active citizen, engaged in the political life of one’s own town, state, and country, fulfills the moral duty to promote the common good (FCFC 2). Rather than telling Catholics which candidates to support or oppose, the Church offers basic guidelines for making civic choices in and outside the voting booth consistent with moral principles.
4.) What are the key moral principles of concern to the Church?
There are certain “universal moral truths” about the human person that citizens should always seek to uphold in their civic actions (FCFC 33). Politics must always abide by “fundamental values, such as respect for human life, its defense from conception to natural death, the family built upon marriage between a man and a woman, the freedom to educate one’s children, and the promotion of the common good in all its forms” (FCFC 14, quoting Pope Benedict XVI). Though politics may involve the art of compromise, these goods are non-negotiable. To interfere with them is always and everywhere wrong. “There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society because they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor” (FCFC 22). While not every moral principle can be enshrined in law, “it is important to recognize that not all possible courses of action are morally acceptable” (FCFC 20).
5.) Are there some wrongs that are more serious than others?
Yes. It is wrong always and everywhere, for example, to intentionally destroy innocent human life, promote racism, recognize same-sex marriage, or abandon the poor and the vulnerable by preferring the rich and the powerful (FCFC 22, 29, 46, 50-51, 86). Such actions are “always opposed to the authentic good of persons” and are therefore called “intrinsically evil” (FCFC 22). Additionally, there is a “moral imperative to respond to the needs of our neighbors—basic needs such as food, shelter, health care, education, and meaningful work—[that is] universally binding on our consciences” (FCFC 25). Moreover, the Church’s consistent ethic of life “neither treats all issues as morally equivalent nor reduces Catholic teaching to one or two issues” (FCFC 40).
6.) But aren’t there legitimate differences of opinion for Catholics on issues of public policy?
The Church insists that “those who knowingly, willingly, and directly support public policies or legislation that undermine fundamental moral principles cooperate with evil” (FCFC 31). A well-informed conscience will never support intrinsically evil actions (FCFC 18). But “the judgments and recommendations” issued by Church leaders in other areas such as “the war in Iraq, housing, health care, and immigration . . . do not carry the same moral authority as statements of universal moral teachings” (FCFC 33). Thus, for example, while a “well formed conscience aided by prudence . . . begins with outright opposition to laws and other policies that violate human life or weaken its protection” (FCFC 31), the affirmative duty to respond to the needs of others “may be legitimately fulfilled by a variety of means” (FCFC 25). In determining how these affirmative obligations should be met, prudential judgments may legitimately differ and there is greater freedom in the exercise of one’s conscience. But even for these issues, not all choices may be equally valid, and the guidance of the Bishops should be carefully considered (FCFC 33).
7.) What does Church teaching say about voting, especially when there is no perfect candidate?
Voting in good conscience depends on the ability to “perceive the proper relationship among moral goods” (FCFC 34). Not all the reasons that a particular candidate may offer for his or her election will “carry the same moral weight” (FCFC 37). If one’s vote is based on an endorsement of a candidate’s position favoring abortion rights or racism, for example, then no matter how good the candidate may be on other issues, the “voter will be guilty of formal cooperation in a grave moral evil” (FCFC 34). In addition, a voter legitimately may vote against an otherwise suitable candidate based on “a single issue that involves an intrinsic evil” (FCFC 42). This is because “the moral obligation to oppose intrinsically evil acts has a special claim on our consciences and our actions” (FCFC 37). The Church cautions such voters however not to be indifferent or inattentive to other important moral issues (FCFC 34).
8.) May a Catholic ever vote for a candidate who favors abortion access or other intrinsic evils?
Yes, a voter “who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position” favoring an intrinsic evil nonetheless may vote in good conscience for that candidate despite his or her wrong position, but only if there is no better alternative on the ballot and one’s vote is based on “truly grave moral reasons” (FCFC 35). The U.S. Bishops’ 2007 statement does not describe what sort of serious reasons may justify voting for a candidate that, for example, backs abortion access, but it does reject a voter’s desire to “advance narrow interests,” further “partisan preferences,” or otherwise “ignore a fundamental moral evil” as insufficiently grave (FCFC 35). One’s political engagement should be “focused on the dignity of every human being, the pursuit of the common good, and the protection of the weak and the vulnerable” and thus “as Catholics, we should be guided more by our moral convictions than by our attachment to a political party or interest group” (FCFC 14).
9.) Where can I obtain the U.S. Bishops’ 2007 statement?
The full text of “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” can be found on the website for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops at http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/FCStatement.pdf. Booklet copies can be ordered online at http://www.usccbpublishing.org or by calling 1-800-235-8722.
Consider the possibilities:
www.share-international.org/maitreya/
Ma_main.htm
Obama 2008.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OowxMcVTjTE
Another bishop "chimes in."
Phoenix Bishop Publishes "Catholics in the Public Square" in Time for the Election Season
By Kathleen Gilbert
PHOENIX, AZ, October 9, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix has published the second edition of his "Catholics in the Public Square," a booklet available nationwide outlining the privilege and duty of Catholics to engage the social and political sphere in light of their Catholic faith.
The booklet, part of the Shepherd's Voice series and published by Basilica Press, was originally written in 2006. Parishes througout the diocese of Phoenix will receive over 100,000 copies of the booklet, including 7,500 Spanish copies.
In the booklet, Bishop Olmsted helps lay Catholics recognize their unique call to holiness in the public forum. He warns that the infamous, "'I am a Catholic but...' syndrome" cannot interfere with the integrity of life lived according to faith.
"If one's faith does not impact on one's whole life, including one's political and social responsibilities," writes the bishop, "then it is not authentic faith; it is a sham, a counterfeit."
Bishop Olmsted also addresses the areas of political discussion that are non-negotiable for Catholics, and reminds the faithful of how cooperation with grave evils such as abortion can cause Catholics to be banned from Holy Communion.
"If a politician is actively supporting and furthering the culture of death, he is not only causing scandal; he is sinning," writes the bishop.
In an interview with ZENIT about the booklet, Bishop Olmsted answered the question, "Why is the Catholic voice struggling to make itself heard in the public square?"
He answered, "With the influence of modernity and Enlightenment philosophies, many voices in secular society today contend that religion is pure subjectivism and has a role only in people's private lives.
"If we let our faith impact on the way we practice a profession, engage the culture, or become involved in political struggles," said Olmsted, "then we are accused of imposing our faith on others. ... These contentions are often based on false understandings of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which in fact protects the practice of religion from coercion by the state, rather than limiting the religious voice."
When asked how this attitude could affect the faith of practicing Catholics, Olmsted responded by quoting St. James: "Faith without works is dead."
"When Catholics are afraid to express their beliefs in public, they begin to travel down the path that divides faith from life. Faith begins to be purely spiritual, with no impact on other dimension of their lives.
"Then, it becomes impossible to live a life of integrity. For faith needs to express itself, as Jesus makes clear. ...
"Notice how often Jesus tells his followers: 'Be not afraid,'" said the bishop. "It takes both courage and wisdom to engage our culture and be involved in the public square. We are called to exercise both faith and reason, being careful to inform our conscience on the basis of objective truth."
The Phoenix bishop has earned a solid reputation since his appointment in 2004 for his leadership in advocating pro-life and pro-family values.
Post a Comment