I don't get it? Are they really athiest? There are a lot of Catholic politicians who are for the following

Question

Not only pro-choice bu are for late term abortions, For morning after pill (aka plan b) and for laws that FORCE Catholic and other Christian pharmacist to sell "Plan B" pill even if the pharmacist is very against the pill for moral and religious reasons. For gay marriage.... Especially if being pro-choice prevents them from receiving communion they still stay strong with it....

ALL WHILE PARADING AROUND LIKE A DEVOUT CATHOLIC!!

And for those who try to use the "separation b/w church and st." card...

That's being totally ignorant to the fact of the matter... As much as Catholics hate/condemn abortion, to vote for legislation to kill fetus' at any point in pregnancy or even any abortion is ridiculous.

For a Catholic politician to be for allowing abortions is not like a vegetarian politician allowing other citizens to eat meat.. Its like a black politician voting for slavery.

OK if you consider yourself Catholic yet are pro choice you might as well be protestant. It's not a small issue with the Church. It's like being Catholic yet no disagreeing in confession of sins, significance of saints and/or the Virgin Mary. The church considers abortion as the new holocaust

Answer 1

Thou shalt not take the Lords name in vain.
Unfortunately the majority of those who profess to be Christians are not.

Answer 2

Someone can be a misguided Catholic and “pro-choice.”

This is especially harmful when they are people of influence like politicians, who because of their influence may unduly direct others toward "the culture of death" instead of the "consistent ethic of life."

Politically supporting abortion is not a offense for which one can be excommunicated although a change in this rule is being discussed.

The Church law involved is Canon 915: Those who are excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' statement "Catholics in Political Life" says:

Therefore, like every Catholic generation before us, we must be guided by the words of St. Paul, “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the Body and Blood of the Lord” (1 Cor 11:27).

And continues that it is up to each Bishop in their diocese and on a case by case basis to decide whether or not to deny Holy Communion to Catholic politicians because of their public support of abortion.

Here is the complete document: http://www.usccb.org/bishops/catholicsinpoliticallife.shtml

With love in Christ.

Answer 3

Contrary to what many have written here, I'm very glad to hear you are loyal to God over social mores and our government, if they indeed conflict. Why would anyone who says they believe in Jesus Christ think any differently? This is the kind of Catholic that I wouldn't mind going to church with; and I'm Protestant! Well, at least we can certainly support each other in lobbying groups and ministries that uphold the Judeo-Christian ethic upon which our great nation was founded and prospered for its first 200 years.

I totally empathize with you. Particular politicians are trying to have it both ways, claiming to profess Christ, but not support what he says when it is not popular. We are all like this to a degree, said to say. Just look at Peter before Pentecost when, due to the fear of man, he denied Jesus three times. I also like the historical parallels you make to elucidate your point. And, contrary to what some others here have written about them in their ignorance, they are well taken.

The one responder who believes that Paul was actually condoning slavery needs to read all of those verses again in their context, as well as some other verses not chosen by him on the subject matter. He quoted these verses from the Pauline prison epistles, meaning Paul was imprisoned while writing them. Now, does this responder honestly believe that Paul was condoning his own imprisonment, while he made sure, as a witness for Christ, that he obeyed everything that his captors commanded him to do? Well, of course not! It was in spite of this fact that he obeyed. To think otherwise would be ludicrous. It's the same for the issue of slavery and being called to obedience to God while being in this SE state.

In fact, to prove my point, he conveniently missed one Pauline verse that would have cleared up this matter, if he indeed is truly interested in seeking the truth. "Were you a slave when you were called? Don't let that trouble you - although if you can gain your freedom, do so. For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord's freedman; similarly, he who was a free man when he was called is Christ's slave. You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men." (1 Corinthians 7:21-23)

The points here are twofold: 1) Slavery in Paul's time was nothing like antebellum slavery in America. It was a much more temporary socio-economic state and condition, and one could much more easily buy their way out of it. 2) Paul states that being free from man's law and ways and devoted to God is much more important than his or her SE status, (although he indeed encouraged being a free man if at all possible, in verse 21b.) And, this second point, the primacy of being free from the ways of men, is the very issue that the questioner was making about particular Catholic politicians! Too bad that he missed this very important point, which was why the questioner even posed the question in the first place. :-(

Answer 4

Perhaps they, unlike you, understand that anyone who holds public office takes an oath to "preserve, protect, and defend" the U.S. Constitution, not their religion. Only those who are unethical ignore their fiduciary responsibility. That's not the kind of people I want working for us, although it seems that you might have no problem with it.

(Edit)

"For a Catholic politician to be for allowing abortions is not like a vegetarian politician allowing other citizens to eat meat.. Its like a black politician voting for slavery."

Actually, no. Even a catholic is supposed to put their country before their religion. If they can't do that, they don't deserve to be elected. Again, they take a Constitutional oath. Just as no one should become a pharmacist if they put their religion before their job, so, too, should a person abstain from public office if they put their religion before their oath of office.

In fact, the christian bible was used to justify slavery, so you're wrong there, as well.

http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/bible/slavery.stm
http://www.religioustolerance.org/slavery.htm

A few quotations from the christian bible:

Exodus 21:20-21 – "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property."

Colossians 3:22-24 – "Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men, since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving."

Ephesians 6:5 - "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ."

1 Peter 2:18 - "Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh."

1 Timothy 6:1 - "1 All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God's name and our teaching may not be slandered."

---

Considering the above quotations re slavery, one might suggest that a "good" christian would want to reinstate slavery. Fortunately, most christians realize that their bible contains a lot of nonsense.

Answer 5

I have seen many people ask on this forum about the difference between spirituality and religion. I think this question points the way.

Answer 6

Perhaps they realize that not all other people share their religious views, and should therefore not be subject to them.

Believe how you like, and live how you like, but when it comes to laws that affect the lives of all, those laws should be based on reason and not unevidenced beliefs.

Answer 7

.To me they are false Catholic Christians, they will do and say anything to get a vote

Answer 8

i'm not perfect either, but they are hipocritical. They are accepting the world's way of life instead of following God's way of life. God bless.

Answer 9

oh no! they put the law before their religion! gasp!

*sarcasm is just oozing from this one*

Answer 10

Perhaps there is hope for them. I'm not so sure about you though.