View Single Post
  #6  
Old 23rd August 2012, 12:38 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,586
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGiftOfLife View Post
How is #1 acceptable knowing that it would hurt the pro-life cause?

It would help the pro-life cause to have a pro-life party in power. So the good consequences outweigh the bad. How could you vote for a pro-life candidate, reasonably anticipating that your vote would put a pro-abortion party in power, causing more harm than good? It is always a sin to act, with the reasonable anticipation that your act will do more harm than good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGiftOfLife View Post
#4, how can the voter know what can and cant be done? All things are possible with God, and isnt being a pro-abort in itself really show the credibility of the moral compass of the person? How can they be trusted to care about any other humane issue if they support the brutal murder of innocent humans.

The moral teachings of the Church REQUIRE you to act based on the reasonably anticipated good and bad consequences of your action. It would be a sin for you to act in the reasonable anticipation that your act would do more harm than good. This is not an open question. This is the definitive teaching of the Church on morality. Three fonts of morality: if any one is bad, the act is a sin. If all three are good, the act is morally permissible.

You cannot commit an act with one or more bad fonts and then say that God will turn your sin into good. You cannot substitute your own version of ethics for what the Church teaches.

It is simply not true that all persons who support legalized abortion are bad people who cannot be trusted on any issue. It is also not true that all pro-life politicians can be trusted on all issues. Some persons who are pro-choice still do much good on other issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGiftOfLife View Post
And thanks for the examples, they really help in showing HOW to apply the concepts to real life and in my opinion, help guide the reader to better understand the limited situations where voting for a pro-abort is acceptable, rather then them walking away thinking they can just vote for a pro-abort for any reason...but I still think we need more clarification on "More Weighty Issues" - this needs to be defined better and not left up tp the subjectivity of the average Catholic who votes pro-abort.
It is not the weight of the issue in the abstract that matters, but the voter's reasonable anticipation of the consequences of an action. The Magisterium does in fact say that it must be left up to the voter to make a judgment of the prudential order on these matters. The faithful have a role to play in the world, in trying to make the world a better place. The Magisterium does not simply tell us what to do.
__________________
Ron Conte
Roman Catholic theologian
Reply With Quote