Sunday, August 3, 2008


Father Ray Schroth, SJ, has written about some of the issues in this year's election regarding the Catholic vote, including the swing back to the Democratic Party this year by many Catholics, the relief of many progressive and pastorally oriented Catholics at Raymond Burke's transfer to a bureaucratic job in the Vatican in advance of the election season and the need for a public voice for social, economic and emotional aid to women in crisis pregnancies - something pro-life Republicans have been AWOL about.

Father also writes about the great enthusiasm shown for Senator Obama when he spoke at St. Peter's College.


Brian said...


Thank you for this blog. I was part of my diocesan committee for Obama here in Pennsylvania and now we are starting a parish group of Catholics for Obama so we can better get out the vote on election day. Your blog is a very helpful resource for us.


Trad Tom said...

Why am I not surprised that a Jesuit said these things? That said, I would simply like to point out that "Catholics for Obama" is, in literary terms, an oxymoron. You cannot be a true Roman Catholic and support (N)Obama. It's that simple: If you do, you have set yourself outside the Church, you have chosen to sin, and your soul is in danger. This is not a difficult concept -- why would you want to do this to yourself?

The rationalization that so many of you use is entertaining, too. But it remains just that: rationalization; but rationalizing something -- especially sin -- doesn't make it go away. Your conscience bothers you, and it will continue to bother you as long as your support for this candidate continues.

I will pray for all of you.

Anonymous said...

If you a ready to give up on Obama and truly return to the Catholic faith, I suggest you visit here:

Mattheus Mei said...

Thank you Pope Tom for clearing that up for us, is there anything else you have for us direct from Jesus? Any other message you have been so blessed to receive and need to impart.

I love it when the Pharisees pronounce damnation on us because only THEY know what it means to be Catholic.

Castellanus said...

Why is it that President Bush is criticized for doing nothing to stop abortions when in reality there is little he can do since Presidents don't make legislation? Why is it that in my state, and many others, the Republicans designate funding for crisis pregnancy centers, frequently Catholic affiliated, and every one of the Catholic Democrats votes to eliminate that funding? Yet they gladly earmark large sums to planned parenthood. Fr. also states that the Supreme Court is unlikely to overturn Roe v. Wade. Of course he is correct since at least two of the justices appointed by Pres. Clinton would never ever be opposed to restricting abortion. Do you think that a President Obama will appoint a justice that would by any measure limit abortion?

Anonymous said...

Seven out of nine justices were appointed by Republicans yet the Court has kept Roe. John McCain says that Clinton made good appointments to the Court. No one has to believe McCain would change anything.

Anonymous said...

Seven out of nine justices were appointed by Republicans yet the Court has kept Roe.

Some of those chosen by Republicans turned out to be poor choices yet they seemed promising at the time. McCain might or might not make good selections. We do know for a fact however that Obama would never ever pick a justice that would overturn RvW. I would rather take my chances with McCain than the sure bet of another Ginsburg.

Katherine said...

I would rather take my chances with McCain

That is certainly your perogative. Everyone can make their own discernment here.

Castellanus said...

the need for a public voice for social, economic and emotional aid to women in crisis pregnancies - something pro-life Republicans have been AWOL about.

I have to laugh at this statement as I am on the Board of one of these crisis pregnancy centers as are many of my pro-life friends at this and other centers who support Republican candidates. Ironically our worst enemies are Catholic Democrats who as I said would rather fund Planned Parenthood than us.

You will also find that poverty is not the main reason for the choice to abort but rather the lack of support if not strong encouragement from the father and/or other family members. There are many resources available for poor women who find themselves in an unplanned pregnancy which most never get to hear about since they are encouraged by the likes of Planned Parenthood to simply abort.

Rustler45 said...

Brian said...
"...the vote on election day. Your blog is a very helpful resource for us."


Brian, you're an idiot!

Katherine, rename this blog "Idiots for Obama."

Very Possum

Castellanus said...

Apparently my original post didn't make it so I will redo it.

the need for a public voice for social, economic and emotional aid to women in crisis pregnancies - something pro-life Republicans have been AWOL about.

That is a ridiculous statement! I am on the board for a crisis pregnancy center and I vote for pro-life Republican candidates as do the rest of the members of our Board. In fact our biggest obstacle in providing social, economic and emotional aid to these inner city poor women comes from Catholic Democrats in our legislature who have refused to providing funding to our pro-life centers meanwhile making sure that Planned Parenthood is well funded.

Castellanus said...

Catholic pro-life Democrats are ready to make the argument, supported by legislation, that social and economic reforms which deal with the issues that prompt women to resort to abortion are more effective in reducing abortion that efforts to criminalize it. Republican presidents have done nothing to reduce abortions;

Washington, DC ( -- The nation's Catholic bishops are urging Congress to support a plan put together by the Bush administration to help doctors who don't want to participate in abortions avoid employment discrimination. The plan also protects health centers that don't want abortions done on site.

Responding to objections from abortion advocates, Cardinal Justin Rigali, chairman of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities, sent a letter to members of Congress.

He said the bishops support the proposed HHS regulations protecting health care providers’ fundamental rights of conscience.

Cardinal Rigali called them wrote to all members of Congress defending “efforts to reaffirm and implement laws on conscience protection.”

Pro-abortion organizations and some members of Congress have already attacked the as-yet-unpublished regulations, saying they are unwarranted and could limit “access” to abortion and birth control.

So yet again, despite the oft asserted claim, it is the Bush administration that proposes something pro-life and Congress that is opposing it.

Katherine said...

where is the Republican support for the Pregnant Women Support Act? where is the GOP support for the Reducing Abortion and Supporting Parents Act? Where is Bush other than busy saluting the nation of forced abortions?

Castellanus said...


There were in fact a number of Republicans who supported the RASPA legislation you mention. However, the US Bishops opposed it because of the provision of increased funding of artificial birth control. Not surprisingly Catholics for a Free Choice supported it.

The Pregnant Women Support Act was endorsed by the Bishops. Further Kristen Day, executive director of Democrats for Life, hailed the latest measure at the press conference, saying it unites Democrats and Republicans in an effort to support pregnant women. I noticed a number of Republicans co-sponsored the bill which at this point is still stuck in committees.

Where is Bush other than busy saluting the nation of forced abortions?

I'm not sure, in the newspapers it said he made statements critical of the Chinese which they did not like.

Castellanus said...

Now how about the Sanctity of Human Life Act - Declares that: (1) the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution is vested in each human and is the person's paramount and most fundamental right; (2) each human life begins with fertilization, cloning, or its functional equivalent, at which time every human has all legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood; and (3) Congress, each state, the District of Columbia, and all U.S. territories have the authority to protect all human lives.
Sponsored by a Republican and co-sponsored by 55 other Republicans.

On the other hand we have the Freedom of Choice Act sponsored by a Democrat and co-sponsored by 108 others 106 Dems 2 Reps.
Freedom of Choice Act - Declares that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to: (1) bear a child; (2) terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or (3) terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to protect her life or her health.

Castellanus said...

I see now that NARAL is opposing President Bush's plan to restrict contraceptives. Now that would be closer to the Catholic position or not?

Oppose the Bush Administration’s Attack on Birth Control
The Bush administration is proposing a new regulation that could discourage doctors and health-care clinics from providing birth control to women who need it. This proposed regulation deliberately confuses the definitions of contraception and abortion.

This regulation could undermine good state laws that require hospitals to provide emergency contraception to rape survivors and ensure that pharmacies fill women’s prescriptions for birth control.
The proposal could allow health-care corporations (hospitals, HMOs, and health plans) to refuse to provide services or make referrals for birth control.
The proposed regulation could affect Medicaid and the Title X family-planning program. For instance, staff at clinics or health-care plans that contract for Medicaid services could refuse to provide contraception.

Castellanus said...

So much for the arguement that President Bush and the Republicans have done nothing to help the pro-life cause.


Congress has voted 54 times on choice-related issues since President Bush took office in 2001. Pro-choice Americans have lost all but 10 of those votes.
Since 2003, Congress has acted on five separate anti-choice free-standing bills. Three – the Federal Abortion Ban, the "Unborn Victims of Violence Act," and the Federal Refusal Clause - were signed into law by President Bush.

Katherine said...

How about the Sanctity of Human Life Act?

Which McCain does not support.

Katherine said...


You mention three bills (two have to do with abortion) that Bush got entacted into law. The number of unborn lives protected by those laws pales compared to the number of abortions avoided if the steep decline in abortions under Clinton had continued.

I admire what Bush has done, even if it is mostly crumbs to the pro-life movement. However, his actions regarding Iraq have undermined any growing Culture of Life in this country.

Castellanus said...

However, his {Pres Bush}actions regarding Iraq have undermined any growing Culture of Life in this country.

That is one opinion and as your quote of JPII states, there is room for legitimate differences of opinion. The ultimate failure or success of the war in Iraq will be judged in history but cannot be judged while it is still ongoing.

Katherine said...

It is an opinion. But if a particular voter is convinced it is true, then he or she is obligated to act accordingly.

Castellanus said...

But if a particular voter is convinced it is true, then he or she is obligated to act accordingly.

That presupposes a properly formed conscience, not a conviction based on emotions or feelings.

Abortion is murder and therefore illegal and any human laws to the contrary must be overturned. Whatever the causes or circumstances that place one in a position of seeking an abortion they are secondary to the fact it is still murder. Unlike poverty there is nothing I can do for the innocent life that is wiped out in abortion. As in the example of the Good Samaritan it is primarily my responsibility to take care of my neighbor in need, not that of a disinterested social worker for some government bureaucracy.

You speak of the economic circumstances that lead women to abortion. But if the billions spent to pay for abortions were instead used to help with poverty wouldn't that be better?

Anonymous said...

Why do you even still call yourselves Catholic?

Thanks for this blog said...

Thank you so much for having this blog. This is an important blog.

The war in Iraq is an unjust war -- see
for more on what I mean here by unjust war.

Afghanistan's another story.

And yes, I'm Catholic, and no, I don't let other Catholics tell me I'm not "really" Catholic, not informed, not reasoned, etc. So once again, to the blog owner, thanks for this blog!

Anonymous said...

Looks like you are an expert in this field, you really got some great points there, thanks.

- Robson