Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Should Christians Vote For Democrats?
Vanity | 10/27/2006 | pgyanke

Posted on 10/27/2006 8:12:49 PM PDT by pgyanke

Authors note: If you will forgive the vanity, I wrote this tonight to send to my friends and relatives. Your feedback would be much appreciated.

Dear Friends,

We are headed into a contentious and consequential election. Although we would all like to look at our elected representatives as individuals and not make decisions based on party affiliation, I feel the need to share some basic truths about the parties that you may have overlooked in your local focus. It is a fact that the victorious representatives will in all likelihood vote for their own party leadership in Congress. Therefore, a vote for a Republican is a vote for Republican leadership and a vote for a Democrat is a vote for Democratic leadership--Nancy Pelosi would be second in succession to the Presidency. Additionally, a vote for a Republican enables the GOP platform to find its way into public policy while a vote for a Democrat is a vote for their party platform to carry the day.

Please take a few minutes to read what I have compiled below. There are five moral issues enumerated in "The Voters Guide for Serious Catholics" that are considered non-negotiable by the book's researchers. The write-ups on the particular issues are taken from their guide--with embellishments in some cases. I'm sure that my Protestant friends will recognize that we don't have much disagreement on these issues. The additional work I have done is to research the party platforms in relation to these issues. Note that the party platforms change at the parties' national nominating conventions when they choose their presidential candidates. Therefore, the current platforms are from the 2004 election cycle.

When reading below, remember: a vote for a Democrat is a vote for their national platform...

1. Abortion

According to the Church, 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.

2004 National Democratic Party Platform:
Page 38, para 4: "Because we believe in the privacy and equality of women, we stand proudly for a woman's right to choose, consistent with Roe v. Wade, and regardless of her ability to pay. We stand firmly against Republican efforts to undermine that right. At the same time, we strongly support family planning and adoption incentives. Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare."

2004 National GOP Platform:
Page 84 (under the primary heading "Promoting a Culture of Life"): As a country, we must keep our pledge to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence. That is why we say the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and we endorse legislation to make it clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. Our purpose is to have legislative and judicial protection of that right against those who perform abortions. We oppose using public revenues for abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life."

Page 25: "Republicans continue to oppose the ideological campaign against participation by the Vatican in United Nations conferences and other activities. The United Nations was created to benefit all peoples and nations, not to promote a radical agenda of social engineering. Any effort to address global social problems must be firmly placed within a context of respect for the fundamental social institutions of marriage and family. We reject any treaty or convention that would contradict these values. For that reason, we support protecting the rights of families in international programs and oppose funding organizations involved in abortion."

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.

2004 National Democratic Party Platform is silent on this issue.

2004 National GOP Platform:
Page 84: "We oppose the non-consensual withholding of care or treatment because of disability, age, or infirmity, just as we oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide, which especially endanger the poor and those on the margins of society."

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". Recent scientific advances show that medical treatments that researchers hope to develop from experimentation on embryonic stem cells have not shown promise. Rather, scientific work with adult stem cells have shown promise in treating 72 conditions--without doing harm to another human being. There is no valid argument in favor of using embryonic stem cells. Even if there were, it would still not justify destroying one group of humans to cure another.

2004 National Democratic Party Platform:
Page 31, para 5: "President Bush has rejected the calls from Nancy Reagan, Christopher Reeve and Americans across the land for assistance with embryonic stem cell research. We will reverse his wrongheaded policy."

2004 National GOP Platform:
Page 67, para 1: "We strongly support the President’s policy that prevents taxpayer dollars from being used to encourage the future destruction of human embryos. In addition, we applaud the President’s call for a comprehensive ban on human cloning and on the creation of human embryos solely for experimentation."

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. Human cloning also involves abortion because the "rejected" or "unsuccessful" embryonic clones are destroyed, yet each clone is a human being.

The Democratic Platform is silent on this issue. The GOP Platform is not, as shown in the previous section.

5. Homosexual "Marriage"

True marriage, as ordained by God at our creation, 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.

2004 Democratic Party Platform:
Page 38, para 7: "We support full inclusion of gay and lesbian families in the life of our nation and seek equal responsibilities, benefits, and protections for these families."

2004 National GOP Platform:
Page 83: "We strongly support President Bush’s call for a Constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage, and we believe that neither federal nor state judges nor bureaucrats should force states to recognize other living arrangements as equivalent to marriage. We believe, and the social science confirms, that the well-being of children is best accomplished in the environment of the home, nurtured by their mother and father anchored by the bonds of marriage. We further believe that legal recognition and the accompanying benefits afforded couples should be preserved for that unique and special union of one man and one woman which has historically been called marriage.

"After more than two centuries of American jurisprudence, and millennia of human experience, a few judges and local authorities are presuming to change the most fundamental institution of civilization, the union of a man and a woman in marriage. Attempts to redefine marriage in a single state or city could have serious consequences throughout the country, and anything less than a Constitutional amendment, passed by the Congress and ratified by the states, is vulnerable to being overturned by activist judges. On a matter of such importance, the voice of the people must be heard. The Constitutional amendment process guarantees that the final decision will rest with the American people and their elected representatives. President Bush will also vigorously defend the Defense of Marriage Act, which was supported by both parties and passed by 85 votes in the Senate. This common sense law reaffirms the right of states not to recognize same-sex marriages licensed in other states."


Although the guide from which this information is culled extols its readers to not choose a candidate based on party affiliation, I think you can understand my reasons for using it in this way. This election is too important to the future of our country! The next Senate will either consent to President Bush's Constitutionalist judicial nominees or block them until the next administration is sworn. It will either promote our Christian values or oppose them.

In addition to what I have written here, I encourage you to review your state party platforms. Here is the contrast in North Carolina:

NC Democratic Party Platform includes the following: "We believe that we should focus on preventing unintended pregnancies and reducing the need for abortion through increasing access to family planning services, access to affordable birth control – including emergency contraception – and by providing comprehensive age-appropriate sex education. Furthermore, abortion must be safe, legal, accessible to all North Carolina women regardless of ability to pay; therefore, the State abortion fund should be fully funded and accessible to indigent women.

NC GOP Platform includes the following:
Article I: Family

2. The ideal environment for raising children is a two-parent family where a husband and wife live in harmony in one home. We support all reasonable efforts to help families remain intact. We praise the courageous efforts of single parents who work hard to provide stable homes. We recognize that single parents often succeed and that two-parent families sometimes fail.
3. We believe homosexual behavior is not normal and should not be taught as an acceptable "alternative" lifestyle either in public education or in public policy. We do not believe public schools should be used to teach children that homosexual behavior is normal. We do not believe that taxpayers should fund benefit plans for unmarried partners. We oppose special treatment by law based on homosexual behavior or identity. We support federal and state constitutional amendments to ensure that marriage is limited to the union of one man and one woman. We oppose attempts to legitimize homosexual relationships by placing such relationships on an equal footing with marriage. We oppose the adoption or foster parenting of children by same sex couples.

Article IV: Sanctity of Life

2. We believe unborn children have constitutional rights to life and liberty, and we therefore urge the Supreme Court to overturn its decision in Roe vs. Wade. We also support the adoption of a human life amendment to the constitution. We stand with the overwhelming majority of Americans who oppose efforts to mandate legalized abortion or to fund local, national, or international organizations that provide or promote abortion services. Abortion is never an acceptable method of birth control.

"The common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights--for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture--is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination" -- Pope John Paul II, "Christifideles Laici"

"While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia." -- Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (before he was Pope Benedict XVI)

Think... and pray... before you vote.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Politics/Elections; US: North Carolina; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last
I don't post many articles... hope I did this one right.
1 posted on 10/27/2006 8:12:50 PM PDT by pgyanke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: pgyanke

Great post!


2 posted on 10/27/2006 8:13:58 PM PDT by MaineVoter2002 (If you dont vote on election day, then who are you electing?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke

Hmmmm...


3 posted on 10/27/2006 8:14:34 PM PDT by kinoxi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MaineVoter2002

Thank you.


4 posted on 10/27/2006 8:17:42 PM PDT by pgyanke (We can't share the blessings of peace with those for whom violence is holy imperative. -andy58-in-nh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke

"Nancy Pelosi would be second in succession to the Presidency."

Really? There won't be a Vice President?


5 posted on 10/27/2006 8:19:44 PM PDT by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke

Excellent, I can never understand when the women I work with all say they are Christians but vote DUMMY.


6 posted on 10/27/2006 8:20:18 PM PDT by Dmitry Vukicevich (Vegetarian: Indian Lingo for lousy hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke
So ..... Why isn't the NATIONAL Cathoilic Church making the same points?

Do they believe the same lies that the democrats use to intimidate the NE Catholics? (That repubbies are killing he poor, hate minorities, and are cutting the poor's budget and failing to take care of the poor and oppressed?)
7 posted on 10/27/2006 8:20:35 PM PDT by Robert A. Cook, PE (I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; Howlin; american colleen

Your feedback, and that of your ping lists, would be appreciated.


8 posted on 10/27/2006 8:21:24 PM PDT by pgyanke (We can't share the blessings of peace with those for whom violence is holy imperative. -andy58-in-nh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke
2004 National GOP Platform: Page 84: "We oppose the non-consensual withholding of care or treatment because of disability, age, or infirmity, just as we oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide, which especially endanger the poor and those on the margins of society."

This makes no sense.

They say "euthanasia is also a form of homicide." but then turn around and claim "We oppose the non-consensual withholding of care or treatment because of disability".

Since when is "homicide" OK when it is CONSENSUAL?

9 posted on 10/27/2006 8:21:36 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke
Why Should Christians Vote For Democrats?

Because they haven't perfected that martyr complex?

10 posted on 10/27/2006 8:23:32 PM PDT by Tall_Texan ("Journalislam" - reporting about murderous extremists as if they are moral equivalents.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE
So ..... Why isn't the NATIONAL Cathoilic Church making the same points?

I think they are cowed as an organization by the IRS implications. The funny thing is, it's Democrat organizations that seek to nullify their tax exempt status. If they would educate the flock in this country... that problem could be put to rest...

11 posted on 10/27/2006 8:23:44 PM PDT by pgyanke (We can't share the blessings of peace with those for whom violence is holy imperative. -andy58-in-nh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Really? There won't be a Vice President?

They call him first in the line of succession...

12 posted on 10/27/2006 8:25:01 PM PDT by pgyanke (We can't share the blessings of peace with those for whom violence is holy imperative. -andy58-in-nh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Ping-a-ding. I value your insight...


13 posted on 10/27/2006 8:26:06 PM PDT by pgyanke (We can't share the blessings of peace with those for whom violence is holy imperative. -andy58-in-nh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke

Excellent essay, I am glad you posted it and are sending it to friends and relatives. People do need to understand what their vote means.

But just reading the title (as a lot of people do) people get the impression you are advocating that Christians should vote FOR Dems.

You might want to ask the Admin Moderator to add the NOT in your title, as in "Why should Christians NOT vote for Dems".

When you say it, you can convey by the emphasis what you mean, but when it's written, it gives the impression, which is clearly not what you had in mind.


14 posted on 10/27/2006 8:28:34 PM PDT by FairOpinion (Vote Republican. The life you save may be your own. This is not an exaggeration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke
Why Should Christians Vote For Democrats?

Simple answer: they should not.

I would even go so far as to say that any "Christian" who votes Democrat is either not really a Christian, or apostate.

15 posted on 10/27/2006 8:30:37 PM PDT by Disambiguator (If the Democrats were a stock, I would short them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

You don't think the question mark makes the point that it's an issue of contention in the article?


16 posted on 10/27/2006 8:31:08 PM PDT by pgyanke (We can't share the blessings of peace with those for whom violence is holy imperative. -andy58-in-nh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke

One more thing.

Since you've done such a good job with your points, you may also want to include that Dems are against religion, which they are. They want to take God and religion out of every aspect of our lives. Everything from taking "under God" out of the pledge of allegiance, to not allowing kids in school to pray privately, not allow Christmas displays, etc. They are strongly biased against Christians.

I didn't take time to research it and phrase it well,just mentioning the point, I think you can do a good job expanding it.


17 posted on 10/27/2006 8:32:05 PM PDT by FairOpinion (Vote Republican. The life you save may be your own. This is not an exaggeration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

I thought of that but it would have expanded the article beyond anyone's desire to sit through. I narrowed my focus to the party platforms and bias against Christianity is implied in what I wrote above. Their actions through proxies such as the ACLU and others would merit a book not an article. Actually, that book has been written... by David Limbaugh, I believe...


18 posted on 10/27/2006 8:34:10 PM PDT by pgyanke (We can't share the blessings of peace with those for whom violence is holy imperative. -andy58-in-nh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Really? There won't be a Vice President?

The Vice President in the first in line of Succession.
19 posted on 10/27/2006 8:34:54 PM PDT by msnimje (You simply cannot be Christian and Pro-Abortion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke

"You don't think the question mark makes the point that it's an issue of contention in the article?"

===

No, the question mark is not enough. As I said, when you would say it to someone, you could ask the question in a way to make it clear that you mean "Why should Christians bother to vote for Dems?".

But when you just read it as a stand alone, the question mark implies that you ask the question of why Christians SHOULD vote for Dems and you will give answers.

I really think it's better to make your major point right in the title, with the addition of the NOT.

In your e-mails, if you haven't sent them yet, I would even make it a statement: "Why Christians should not vote for Democrats". Remember, a lot of people really don't get much past the title, and this way you get the message to those too, then people can read the body of the message to understand your reasons.


20 posted on 10/27/2006 8:37:30 PM PDT by FairOpinion (Vote Republican. The life you save may be your own. This is not an exaggeration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson