Social conservatives, what's the end game? (Page 6)

Uh Oh I may be in trouble!!

IF that's what Don's point is then I agree 100%. If you don't agree with the Catholic church and it's teachings, don't claim to be Catholic. It's not the same as having the right to disagreeing with your government. From my point of view there really is no wiggle room when it comes to the Catholic church, unless the church itself wiggles (Vatican reforms). That's part of why I haven't identified as Catholic since my teens. I don't buy what they are selling, but have way more respect for Don than I do for "cafeteria Catholics." 

How would the Vatican ever reform anything if not prompted by the disagreement of it's members?

A. Abortion only in the case of Rape/Incest/ Health of mother with Dr panel approval.  I for one do not in this day and age undertsand abortion as birth control, so I redirect the question back as why do we need abortion as birth control??? AND too add complete BAN of partial birth abortion please tell mehow anyone can be for that???

B. I do not care who marries whom even though Im against gay marriage, what I am against is that it leads to infrnging on my religious freedom because of lawsuits brought to FORCE churches/Pastors to marry people against their beliefs or be sued to bankruptcy, do NOT say it hasnt/wont happen its already happening!! In the let everyone be toleratant why does it feel like its the pot calling the kettle black here?

Thats being said I do not think these are nearly as big an issue other than the Media makes them that, outside of that influence I believe most people would put many things above these when worrying about where the country is going.

Joe Biden is a Catholic sacramentally. He's received all of the sacraments of initiation:
baptism, the eucharist (communion) and confirmation.

From what I can tell, he is mostly Catholic theologically:
he assents to the Nicene Creed, ect.

However, he is in dissent regarding a defined teaching; he does not believe in the teaching on abortion.
When he goes to receive communion and the priest says, "The body of Christ",
Biden's "Amen" means among other things that he is assenting to all the teachings.
However, his public stance proves that this is not true.

It's a heretical position to take.
As a public person he, and all such politicians, are misleading Catholics
into believing that you can have such a position as his.
You can't.

That's the problem.
The bishops are now seeing that they have to address this problem more forcefully
before even more people become confused about the teaching. 
One way to do this is through excommunication.
That would mean that Biden could no longer receive the sacraments, even though he would remain Catholic.

That's what's facing all such politicians down the line. 

In the short term, more and more bishops with individually refuse to give Biden other such politicians communion.

Not saying it was.  Just making a statement.  Mainly because there are some (not necessarily here) that think that if you ban them, they will just go away and people will stop having them. 

It will never reform core beliefs no matter the disagreement of the members

Don, there was a question earlier about how Ryan is a proponent of the death penalty.  Even though the church is staunchly against it.  How does that affect his standing in the church?  Does it?  I ask because I honestly don't know.

As to your first point, where are these lawsuits now?  Did you see straight non-Catholic couples suing the Catholic church for refusing to marry them?

As to your second point, you must not know many gay people.

GomesBolt addressed this earlier, generally.  They (abortion/death penalty) are on different "levels" (quotes used not as sarcasm, but because I don't remember the exact term).

I think those people are only a very small portion of the overall "Pro-Life" group.  Most people are more realistic than that.  Though it does seem the gun lobby thinks if you ban guns they will go away.

I do not know many gay people, but the ones I do know do not have the mindset to FORCE anyone to accept them, they live their lives and move on.

try getting married in a catholic church if you aren't a catholic.  it absolutely violates their faith.

This is America man, everyone should live in fear of a lawsuit.  Would it allay your concern if whatever granted gay couples the right to marry also made it clear that there was no cause of action against a church for refusing to marry a gay couple?

The government isn't forcing you or me to marry a woman.  So how is the government allowing gay marriage forcing anyone to do anything?

What would happen if the bishops did that? What would happen if the Church really had the balls to excommunicate everyone who by letter of the law should be excommunicated, or at the very least refused the sacraments? I think the church is in a precarious position. Frankly I'd like a harder line drawn. That would cause people to really search their souls and their conscience instead of just feigning agreement. I'd love for the Vatican to call everyone's bluff and force Catholics everywhere to either get in or get out. A modern day Inquisition, except without all the torture and killing and stuff like that there. Maybe then more people would actually think for themselves.

That's not good for business.

Well, exactly. 

Tru dat.

Too bad my awesome post will get lost at the bottom of a page....

But it seems you do.  You are using a hypothetical lawsuit to justify opposing an actual right/privilege/whatever.  I'm just not buying this rash of gays v. church lawsuits.  As you say, they'll just go to a church that will have them.

Alright, sorry if I've been missing the obvious.  Is your church being sued by a gay couple?

So that goes back to my original question. This isn't about where social conservatives stand on a list of issues... we already know that.

My question is, how much longer will social conservatives demand legislative stands on their beliefs by those they vote for, when it simply isn't going to happen?

I happen to think Romney was always pro life, but he had to be pro choice to get elected in Mass... in order to get the nomination from the GOP, the candidate has to go far right on social issues... yet in the mean time the country burns to the ground... not from legal abortions, but from fiscal iresponsibility and big government. Social conservatisim from a party platform stance is in direct conflict with small government and individual freedom.

So how much longer must this county have to choose between granting a fetus rights and not marrying gays, and complete socialisim and economic colapse???

Crowny, I don't know Ryan's position on the death penalty well enough to say.

I think Trinnas brought up the point that there's a difference between murder and killing. 
The 5th Commandment is, "Thou shalt not murder".

So abortion and the death penalty are on different levels.

Direct abortion, meaning that the primary act is the killing of the offspring
as opposed for example to an act to save the life of the mother,
always constitutes "grave matter" ie. is always evil. 

This is a defined teaching.
If you're Catholic, you must assent to this teaching if you are to receive the sacraments in good conscience. 
There is no way around it. 

The death penalty falls under an umbrella of considerations regarding how to treat criminals.
We must always keep the dignity of the human person as a primary concern.

So if the death penalty is to be administered it ought to be done only in the narrowest of circumstances.
The only justification seems to be one of self defense.
It can't be to exact revenge for example, or for deterrence. 

So for example, here in Pennsylvania, I'm satisfied that the penal system will keep my community, my family
and myself reasonably safe from further harm from a convicted murderer.
Therefore, I oppose the death penalty in Pennsylvania.
In my opinion, it is not necessary.

I remember there was a case in Texas a few years back where a prisoner on death row escaped.
Would it then be reasonable for a Catholic in Texas to support the death penalty because of
problems within the penal system that a put others at risk because of the escape?
I think it is reasonable, although I would disagree.

So regarding the death penalty, there is room for prudential judgement.
For a Catholic, the guidelines are that application of the death penalty needs to be only in cases 
of protecting innocents from further harm from the prisoner.