On the campaign trail this past week, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton once again played the woman card by trying to depict women - once again - as victims. This time she pulled out the tired and untrue claim that women are systematically paid less than men. But let's look at it more closely in the hopes of bringing some truth to the issue.
Though there is a widespread perception that women are paid less than men on average, the perception goes wrong in thinking that such pay disparity is about cases when a woman doing the exact same job as a man for the same hours, in the same company or industry is paid less than her male co-worker. That is not, however, where the disparity lies. The "pay gap" simply looks at the median earnings of all men and women who are full-time workers, and because the average of men's earnings skew higher, feminists cry discrimination. But were they to take a closer look at the facts, they'd have to recant their accusation.
The fact is, men and women make different career choices for different reasons. A U.S. Department of Labor study found the average full-time working man works 8.14 hours a day, compared to 7.75 hours for the full-time working woman. Naturally, this would result in the man making more money.
Even more to the point, the natural differences between men and women result in different priorities, and therefore, different job ambitions. Women in general tend to seek jobs that offer comfortable and safe working conditions. In particular, women with children tend to choose lower paying jobs in return for companies that offer work-life balance packages that allow them to be more available for their children. Fathers, on the other hand, tend to seek work that can best support their families, which often means longer hours.
Men also are much more likely to take on dangerous or physically demanding jobs that most women simply don't want to do. You don't see many women working on oil rigs, construction sites, coal mines or the like. These jobs pay more because it's difficult to find people who are able and willing to do them. People crying discrimination need to understand that the oft-repeated statistic that women make on average "70 cents on the dollar compared to men" simply reflects an overall average of all pay for all jobs across the board.
But what do facts matter when Hillary can exploit an issue, using false premises, to score political points?
Friday, October 28, 2016
Tuesday, October 25, 2016
Another awesome homily on voting from the Catholic perspective
This has to be one of the best homilies about the upcoming election I have heard - and I've heard some wonderful ones.
This homily, delivered by Fr. John Lankeit of the Archdiocese of Phoenix, needs to be shared with everyone and anyone who is voting in this coming election in the USA. Either read it below or watch it here. Either way, please share this with everyone you know.
*****
1
27th Sunday OT (Year C) – October 2, 2016
HAB 1:2-3; 2:2-4; PS 95:1-2, 6-7, 8-9; 2 TM 1:6-8, 13-14; LK 17:5-10
Fr. John Lankeit:
"The Devil is a divider who will use almost any tactic to separate Christians from
Christ...except for one. He doesn’t typically come right out and say, “Deny Jesus
Christ!” because he knows that someone who loves Jesus would immediately reject
the suggestion.
So, he tends to use more subtle means and subtle words. But more
on that later...
For now, let’s deal with something closer to home, and very much in the forefront of
many people’s minds: the 2016 presidential election.
But let’s do so from a
Catholic perspective. Let’s consider the intersection of the practice of our Catholic
faith and the exercise of our civic duty, especially when it comes to voting.
Let’s first acknowledge that there has never been a political party in the United
States that is perfectly aligned with Catholic teaching on every issue.
That does not
mean, however, that we are therefore automatically free to vote for either major
party, because one party can be much further from Catholic principles on the
most important issues than the other party.
As a result of that, we are often faced
with the task of discerning which party and which policies are most in line with
Catholic teaching, and which ones aren’t.
So many issues are subject to the prudential judgment of Catholic voters.
What
does that mean? It means that Catholics can legitimately disagree, for example, on
the best way to address issues such as racial injustice, education, the economy,
immigration and healthcare and still remain in good standing in the Church.
There are other issues, however, which touch on matters of intrinsic evil—actions
that can never, at any time, under any circumstances be committed, promoted or
even enabled by a faithful Catholic.
But setting aside issues of intrinsic evil for
now, let’s consider some of the more common issues for which Catholics can
legitimately exercise prudential judgment.
One such issue is Affirmative Action. This program aims to eliminate perceived
disadvantages that minorities face when competing, for example, for admission to
college.
In our nation, one party favors Affirmative Action to bring justice and
balance in our multiracial society. The other party holds that it penalizes high
achievers by giving limited spots in the college classroom to less qualified
2
candidates, while denying more qualified students access.
One party sees affirmative
action as a matter of justice...while the other party sees it as injustice.
But, suppose a candidate for president promoted a policy that would make it legal
for someone to kill a black person if that black person created a hardship for them
getting the education they desired.
How many of you would be comfortable voting for that candidate?
Another issue that falls under the category of prudential judgment is immigration.
One of the major political parties seeks to allow immigration with very little
restriction. The other party is concerned that unrestricted immigration leads to,
among other things, non-citizens taking jobs that could be worked by citizens.
One party favors open borders—the other favors “law and order”.
Now, suppose a candidate for president promoted a policy that would make it legal
for someone to kill a Hispanic person if the presence of that Hispanic person made
it more difficult to pursue one’s career of choice.
How many of you would be comfortable voting for that candidate?
Thank God we don’t have a candidate from either party who says that they condone
such policies. Nobody in their right mind would say such a thing—that we could kill
blacks or Hispanics—or anyone else—just for the sake of protecting personal
economic or educational interests.
Nobody would say it, but, as you’ll see in a moment...
There is a candidate, in this 2016 race for president, who along with that candidate’s
political party does, in fact, sanction the killing of blacks and Hispanics in the
situations previously described...under one...particular...condition:
That the black person or the Hispanic person is still in his or her mother’s womb.
Now, this candidate and party certainly won’t say it that way, not publicly
anyway. Instead, they use words like “choice” or “reproductive rights” or
“women’s health” or other sanitized statements in order to cover up what abortion
is and what abortion does.
Now, before we go any further in discussing the extremely sensitive issue of
abortion...
I want to say a word to any woman in this congregation here today—or among
those watching or listening on TV or radio—who has chosen abortion:
God’s mercy is bigger than your sin and your pain. In ten years of priesthood, I have
often been blessed to welcome a woman back to the merciful embrace of God the
Father after she has admitted to, and repented of, her abortion in the Sacrament of
Confession.
A priest in such a situation has the privilege of assuring the woman that
she has never lost the love of God the Father, nor her dignity as his beloved
daughter, no matter what she did. And so I say to these women today: You do not
have to hide from God any longer. I know it’s exhausting to pretend that your pain
is not real, that your loss is not immense and that your choice was not
devastating. But when you experience God’s loving mercy even after the abortion,
you will really come to know and experience that God’s love in forgiving our most
serious sins is even greater than His love in creating us. Your Father has been
waiting for you for a very long time. It’s time for you to come home!
So, now, having shared that important word with grieving mothers let’s return to
the subject of our duty as Catholics in the public square.
When we consider that a woman can walk into Planned Parenthood and have her
baby put to death because she doesn’t want to jeopardize her education or career,
we must acknowledge that the shocking scenarios described previously are not only
possible...not only real...but also among the most common reasons for abortion in
America.
Even the word “abortion” has been drained of its meaning—we treat it like nothing
more than a term that starts a heated debate rather than a procedure that stops a
heartbeat. Many want to treat abortion as merely one issue among many—but that
requires that a person pretend not to know what abortion is and what abortion does.
So let’s stop beating around the bush with regard to the current presidential race: Do you know which candidate and party in this election promotes abortion and
even promises to expand its availability here at home as well as abroad? Do you know that this candidate and party intend to make you and me pay for
other people’s abortions with our tax dollars—something that has always been
illegal? Are you aware that this candidate and party, which until recently, said that
abortion should be “safe, legal and rare” no longer even bothers to say that it
should be rare—but rather, that it must be available any time, any place, even up
to the last moment that the fully formed, full-term baby remains in the womb?
If you do not know which candidate and party I’m referring to, then you should not
even consider voting until you do know! Ignorance in this area is unacceptable,
because ignorance in this area costs millions of babies their lives and jeopardizes the
souls of many Catholics voters.
On the other hand, if you DO know which candidate and party want to promote and
expand abortion, and you still intend to enable them to continue their war on the
unborn with the help of your vote, then it is my duty as a priest to tell you that
your soul will be in grave danger, especially if you present yourself for Holy
Communion after casting such a vote with the full knowledge of what you’re
doing.
Every election season, when a priest addresses such topics from the pulpit, a certain
portion of the population complains that he’s preaching politics:
“A priest has no business discussing politics in church!”
That’s what some people say.
But what does God say to the priest whom He has designated to be spiritual father for
the people entrusted to his care?
The same thing he said to the Prophet Ezekiel: “...I have made [you] a watchman
for the house of Israel; whenever you hear a word from my mouth, you shall give
them warning from me. If I say to the wicked, O wicked man, you shall surely die,
and you do not speak to warn the wicked to turn from his way, that wicked man
shall die in his [sin], but his blood I will require at your hand. But if you warn the
wicked to turn from his way, and he does not turn from his way; he shall die in his
[sin], but you will have saved your life. (Ez 33:7-9)
Another of the Devil’s tactics is to encourage us to make excuses for our
participation in really bad things by appealing to other good things that we support,
which we try to convince ourselves somehow “cancel out” the grave evil we enable.
Take capital punishment, for example. If you bring up abortion, some people will
say, “I’m against capital punishment...and if you’re against abortion, then you
should be against capital punishment!” Fair enough. What is the biggest
objection to capital punishment? That innocent people might be mistakenly put to
death. And it must be acknowledged that innocent people very well could be
unjustly executed due to the many flaws in our legal system.
And this very reason for opposing capital punishment is precisely the reason that
Catholics must never willingly support or even enable abortion with their vote.
Because, while some innocent people have no doubt been put to death mistakenly
through capital punishment, in abortion an innocent person is always put to death,
and never by mistake. It’s always chosen...always intended.
If a person is against capital punishment, then, they necessarily must be against
abortion because the intention of abortion is to knowingly and deliberately kill an
innocent boy or girl—each and every time.
What about war? People who vigorously oppose the wars in the Middle East, for
example, often quote statistics on the great number of innocent people accidently
killed in the crossfire. “Collateral damage”—the innocent people killed in war—is,
perhaps the greatest tragedy of war. But if a person opposes the accidental killing
of innocent people in war, while enabling the intentional killing of the most
innocent human beings on the planet with their vote—well...this is hypocrisy of the
most extreme kind.
If a person opposes war because of the accidental, unintended deaths of innocent
people, they necessarily must oppose abortion because the killing in abortion is
neither accidental nor unintended, but always directly willed.
Sometimes we hear the stupendously deceptive claim that a candidate or party will
reduce abortions by improving economic or social conditions, while simultaneously
promoting abortion as a right worth protecting. But let’s face facts: Abortion is not caused by economics or social conditions.
Economic and social factors are, no doubt, circumstances that affect a mother’s
decision in some cases, but they are not causes.
After all, if eliminating abortion were merely a matter of economics, or access to
healthcare, or other socioeconomic factors, then why do wealthy mothers also
abort their babies?
There are plenty of Catholics who, quite rightly, have criticized bishops and priests
in recent years for not having spoken out more forcefully against the sexual abuse
of children by priests.
Why, then, do many of these same Catholics want to silence bishops and priests
who speak out forcefully against killing innocent children?
Why is opposing sexual abuse of children a matter of justice, but opposing the
murder of children a matter of “preaching politics”?
Regardless of the resistance, a priest must follow the example of Peter and John in
the Acts of the Apostles when it comes to preaching difficult truths. To those who
sought to silence their proclamation of the Gospel these Apostles boldly responded:
“Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you
must judge; for [I] cannot but speak of what [I] have seen and heard.” (Acts 4:19-
20)
A priest is not only protected by the 1st Amendment (at least for now).
He is also bound by the 5th Commandment—Thou Shalt Not Kill.
If a priest doesn’t speak up for those most vulnerable in our society, and if the
Catholic faithful don’t actively protect the most vulnerable in our society by
refusing to enable their deliberate destruction with their vote, then such Catholics
are condoning the killing by their cowardice.
And what did St. Paul say to Timothy about cowardice in today’s 2nd Reading? God did not give us a spirit of cowardice but rather of power and love and self-control.
So do not be ashamed of your testimony to our Lord...but bear your share
of hardship for the gospel with the strength that comes from God. (2 Tim 1:7-8)
Part of every Catholic’s share in the hardship for the Gospel is that we must repent
of our actions that are offensive to God and destructive to our brothers and
sisters. And we must oppose the threats to innocent life that are most real and most
urgent. Make no mistake! There is no single issue that threatens innocent human life
more directly, consistently and urgently than the deliberate killing of baby boys
and baby girls in their mother’s womb. No issue!
In the time since this homily started, at least 30 children have been deliberately
executed in the womb in the United States—and that’s just the ones that are
reported.
Let me sum up with some very challenging words:
“We have a serious obligation to protect human life, and especially the lives of
the most innocent and vulnerable among us. Whoever fails to do this, when
otherwise able to do so, commits a serious sin of omission. They jeopardize their
own spiritual well-being and they are a source of scandal for others. Should they
be Catholics, they should not receive Holy Communion.” (Catholics in the Public Square, 4th Ed., p. 25)
Now, I hope you realize that it takes a lot of courage for a priest to communicate
such challenging words as these—reminding his people that some actions are so
gravely sinful that they render a Catholic unworthy to receive Holy Communion
until there is complete repentance.
A priest who is more concerned about the state of his people’s souls than they are
themselves, deserves the esteem of his people for his willingness to speak such
difficult truth to them with genuine love—to put the welfare of his people’s souls
ahead of his own reputation, popularity or comfort.
Such a priest should receive
respect, admiration and support, rather than their resistance or criticism.
So please pray for, thank and encourage the spiritual father that God has appointed
for you and who loves you enough to tell you the truth.
Because the priest who said these particular words...is your bishop...and mine."
Sunday, October 23, 2016
A vote for Trump is a vote to save America
To those who have said they’d stop supporting Donald Trump
following revelations of gross comments he made about women 11 years ago, I
ask, what kind of country do you want?
Do you want Trump’s vision for America of secure borders, a strong
military, empowered individuals who are free to achieve their dreams, and a
solid commitment to our fundamental freedoms of religion, speech and
self-defense? Or do you want Hillary Clinton’s godless vision of a borderless,
vulnerable America that empowers big government at the expense of individual
liberty? Because make no mistake: every non-vote for Trump puts Hillary one foot closer
to the White House and the end of America as we know it.
It’s understandable to find Trump’s vulgar comments a major turnoff.
But less understandable is Christians unwilling to forgive Trump for his
un-Christian-like comments, but willing to ignore the greater sin of Hillary
Clinton’s blatant anti-Christian views and corruption that endanger us all.
A non-vote for Trump would make president a woman who has
repeatedly stated her profound aversion to gun rights. It would grant the honor
of the presidency to a woman who put our national security and citizens at risk
through her use of a private server for classified information, who lied about
it, and then destroyed 33,000 emails after being subpoenaed for them. It would
empower Hillary, who is under federal investigation, who has been fired in the past for unethical behavior, and who has publicly declared her “dream” for open borders,
despite the criminals, disease, Columbian drug cartel and other evils that such
a dream would invite.
A non-vote for Trump would in essence be a thumb’s up for Hillary’s
actions as Secretary of State, which were instrumental in destabilizing the
Middle East, giving rise to ISIS and other Islamic terrorism around the world. Abandoning Trump would give power to the
woman who, in return for favors, accepted millions of dollars to the Clinton foundation from countries
who permit “honor killings” of women and outright murder of homosexuals, two
groups she claims to defend. Saying no to Trump says yes to the woman awash in
constant scandal, lies and corruption, who refused to send help to Americans under attack in Benghazi, who mislead family members about what caused
their murders, and who, when questioned about it,
testily hissed, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”
Scrapping Trump would make Hillary president, who promises higher
taxes, more job-killing regulations, billions of dollars for bogus “climate change”
programs despite our staggering debt, expanded Obamacare, amnesty for illegal
immigrants, and the importation of thousands of unvetted refugees from countries like Syria.
But most confounding are those citing moral indignation as their reason for rejecting Trump, when Hillary crudely spurns the most vital moral issues of humanity itself.
But most confounding are those citing moral indignation as their reason for rejecting Trump, when Hillary crudely spurns the most vital moral issues of humanity itself.
Hillary is rabidly pro-abortion, including partial birth abortion up
through the ninth month, and, of course, embraces the Democratic Party
platform, which has adopted the most pro-abortion platform in its history,
including promises to fund abortion nationwide
and globally by overturning the Hyde Amendment, repeal state and federal
restrictions on abortion, and to crackdown on pro-life sidewalk counselors.
Hillary has mentioned no intention to overturn laws that force nuns helping the elderly poor
to violate their religious convictions by providing for mandated contraception
and abortifacients. Hillary embraces tyrannical LGBT politics, same-sex "marriage", and fails to condemn the snuffing out of private businesses whose
proprietors refuse to partake in the celebration of what God teaches is sin.
Christian expressions in the public square are fundamental to
American liberty, but Hillary has said “religious views need to change”
regarding moral issues, and said in a 2015 speech that "religious views would not be grounds for objection" to reprehensible things like abortion.
In Hillary's view, on what grounds would doctors be able to decline committing abortions because of their religious beliefs? This dovetails seamlessly with Hillary's frequent references to her support for our “freedom to worship”, which means nothing more than our right to go to church, but not to practice our faith outside the walls of that church. If that doesn’t give you chills, it should. While Trump may not be the poster boy for Christian morals, he, at least, promises no threats to our Christian freedoms.
In Hillary's view, on what grounds would doctors be able to decline committing abortions because of their religious beliefs? This dovetails seamlessly with Hillary's frequent references to her support for our “freedom to worship”, which means nothing more than our right to go to church, but not to practice our faith outside the walls of that church. If that doesn’t give you chills, it should. While Trump may not be the poster boy for Christian morals, he, at least, promises no threats to our Christian freedoms.
Achieving a liberal social agenda requires the demolishing of these
Christian freedoms, and how Hillary could accomplish this was made clear in the
second presidential debate when she declared she would nominate only Supreme
Court justices who uphold her radical leftist ideology. Not once did she mention the
Constitution and the Supreme Court’s duty to uphold it. In contrast, Trump’s potential
nominees are all committed constitutionalists.
It’s imperative to see the bigger picture. Beyond just Supreme
Court justices, the president we elect will select Cabinet members, staff and
other high ranking officials to move us toward that candidate’s vision for
America. Who do you think will make the better selections? Tuesday's vote is not for merely a presidential candidate. It is for the broader political platform of that candidate's party. We cannot afford to overlook that.
We are all obligated to be good stewards of God’s gifts, and one
of the greatest gifts ever bestowed by God is the USA, which has been the
greatest force for good and the greatest experiment of individual liberty and
prosperity the world has ever known. So we need to decide: Do we want to be
good stewards of our country and preserve America, or do we want to relinquish it because we
cannot get past the boorish comments of a candidate?
Thursday, October 13, 2016
Beware of Hillary's contempt for Christians
On the Yahoo homepage as of 11:35 am, Oct. 13, 2016 (click on images to enlarge if necessary):
Expanded view when you click on the headline:
And the notice you get when you click on “Read more”:
I suppose I give HuffPo credit for running it in the first
place, but am not surprised that they had second thoughts on exposing the truth
about Hillary Clinton.
The original post is in reference to the leaked emails between Hillary Clinton and her campaign adviser, John Podesta, who talks about instigating a revolution among Catholics to protest the Pope by calling for a "Catholic Spring", and which refers to Christians and evangelicals as people who should be attacked. Following Hillary's previous public comments that religious beliefs would not be valid grounds for moral objection to things like abortion and euthanasia under her administration, is there any doubt as to what in the works for America?
The original post is in reference to the leaked emails between Hillary Clinton and her campaign adviser, John Podesta, who talks about instigating a revolution among Catholics to protest the Pope by calling for a "Catholic Spring", and which refers to Christians and evangelicals as people who should be attacked. Following Hillary's previous public comments that religious beliefs would not be valid grounds for moral objection to things like abortion and euthanasia under her administration, is there any doubt as to what in the works for America?
Look past the Hillary-friendly soundbites on tv. Please know what is truly at stake here for America. This is not about me, a Catholic Christian being offended. This is about a woman who wants to be president and who promises to use her power to undermine the most fundamental freedom of religion, a freedom that is the cornerstone of America. A freedom under serious, threat -- a threat that would impact all of us, no matter what your personal politics are. Don't be fooled by the spin that would gladly bury the truth about Hillary.
Take an honest look at what's really at stake and put America, not personal feelings, first.
Monday, October 10, 2016
Voting as a Catholic in 2016*
*This is a column from The Most Rev. Samuel J. Aquila, Archbishop of Denver. Even for those who are not Catholic, I thought this contained profoundly relevant points and wanted to share.
From Archbishop Aquila:
From Archbishop Aquila:
I have voted in every presidential election since 1972 and I
have never experienced an election like this year’s. Both candidates are
disliked, lack credibility, and have made comments that make the hair on the
back of your neck stand up. The American public is fed up with politics as
usual and with the establishment in both parties. So, what should Catholics do
when we vote in November?
That question is one that I have been asked by the faithful
more this year than in any previous election. Recently in a dinner discussion
with a group of Catholics, the conversation turned to politics and became
vigorous, as some at the table supported Clinton and some Trump. All eyes
turned to me and one of them asked, “Archbishop, what do you think?”
First, I shared my aversion for both candidates. Then I said
that they need to reflect on the platforms of both parties, with an emphasis on
the human life issues. Everyone at the table knew well the teaching of the
Church on life and the dignity of life. They knew that Catholics in good
conscience cannot support candidates who will advance abortion. All pretty much agreed that, when it comes to
life issues, Catholic politicians on both sides of the aisle have put party
ideology before their faith and living their faith in the public square.
This is the most important guidance I can give: allow your
ongoing personal encounter with Jesus Christ and the Church to guide your
political decisions. I say this because we believe that the truth about
ourselves and the world we live in is revealed in and through him. Our society
suffers and has suffered for quite some time because too few people live an
integrated life – one that does not divide “the personal” from “the public.”
This year there are some critical changes to the two major
parties’ platforms that some at the dinner were not aware of. Most important is that this year the
Democratic party platform calls for the overturning of the Hyde Amendment, a
provision that both parties have voted to include in the federal budget and on
other spending bills for 40 years. The Hyde Amendment prohibits federal
taxpayer money from being used for abortion. The platform is aggressively
pro-abortion, not only in funding matters, but in the appointment of only those
judges who will support abortion and the repealing of the Helms Amendment,
which prevents the U.S. from supporting abortion availability overseas.
Conversely, the Republican party platform is supportive of the Hyde Amendment
and just this year strengthened its support for life by calling for the
defunding of Planned Parenthood, banning dismemberment abortion and opposing
assisted suicide.
Our conversation then turned to the understanding of the
freedom of religion, the freedom of conscience, and the ability for faith-based
organizations like the Church to provide charity through shelters, hospitals,
homes for the elderly, etc., without fear of government interference and the
existence of a respect for religious values.
In that vein, the subject was raised of the Health and Human
Services mandate. This regulation requires the provision of contraceptives,
sterilizations and some abortifacients through employer’s health plans. Most
surprising to me was that all at the table were practicing Catholics who are
involved in their faith, and a couple of them had neither heard of the
difficulty the Obama Administration has created for the Little Sisters of the
Poor, nor the litigation that has occurred trying to force them to violate
their consciences.
Catholic voters must make themselves aware of where the
parties stand on these essential issues. The right to life is the most
important and fundamental right, since life is necessary for any of the other
rights to matter. There are some issues that can legitimately be debated by
Christians, such as which policies are the most effective in caring for the
poor, but the direct killing of innocent human life must be opposed at all
times by every follower of Jesus Christ. There are no legitimate exceptions to
this teaching.
The health of our nation depends on a deep respect for human
life from the moment of conception until natural death, and the future of our
society depends on how we protect that right. If we don’t, eventually we will
go the way of Rome and Greece and other great civilizations that have risen and
fallen.
Some, both in politics and in the Church, have stated that
it is the Church that needs to change her teaching to include abortion,
same-sex unions, and even euthanasia. Yet, in faithfulness to Jesus Christ, to
the Gospel and to Sacred Tradition, the Church cannot change her teaching on
these issues without denying Christ. She would cut herself from the vine and
only wither away, as promised by Christ. The further we move away from Jesus
Christ and his teachings, the more will our churches empty.
We are where we are today because too many Catholics and
other people of faith have embraced the ways of the world and not the ways of
Christ. They have not served as leaven that transforms society, but rather have
condoned evil and the throw-away culture that Pope Francis frequently reminds
us to reject.
When we fail to do this, the government will step in to fill
the void. Indeed, the government will become “god” and impose its beliefs on
the citizens. One only needs to look to the Health and Human Service
contraceptive mandate, or the attempt by President Obama to force a transgender
agenda onto public schools. We may even soon see the federal funding of
abortion and the approval of physician-assisted suicide in Colorado. We are
witnessing the dictatorship of relativism and the erosion of true freedom. And
as Pope Francis often preaches, the devil gets in the mix quickly, especially
when people no longer believe in God.
So my advice to Catholics in voting in this presidential
election is to first look at who forms you and your conscience. Is it your
personal encounter with Jesus Christ and the Church, the voice of God which
cannot contradict the truth or revelation, or is it the ideology of some
political party? Secondly, look at how you have been a leaven in society. How
have you sought the common good and the values of the Gospel, especially by
serving the poor, the needy, the unborn and the dying. If you truly live your
Catholic faith, you will not find complete alignment with any political party,
and that is okay. Thirdly, look at how
each party platform supports human life from conception through natural death,
the freedom of religion and the freedom of conscience, the family, and the
poor. Finally, do vote, as every Catholic has an obligation to participate in
the political process.
For many, the presidential election will involve a choice
between the lesser of two evils. On the Colorado ballot, we will also face the
evil of physician-assisted suicide, known as Proposition 106. In conforming our
hearts and minds with the Gospel and its clear teaching on life, all Catholics
are called to vote “no” on this issue. A “yes” vote only furthers the
throw-away society, and the culture of death. You will be hearing much more on
this in the days and weeks ahead. Let us keep our country and state in our
daily prayers, praying for God’s protection and blessings in these challenging,
difficult times in which we live. And let us in charity pray for the conversion
of those who support a throw-away culture of death!
I did not write the above content, nor do I intend any copyright infringements. This is solely for sharing purposes only.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)