DO YOU KNOW WHERE THE PARTIES STAND ON THE ISSUES FOR ELECTION 2020?

WHAT IS AT STAKE IN THE UPCOMING 2020 ELECTION

AS REGARDS NON-NEGOTIABLE MORAL ISSUES

(summarized from the document produced by EWTN:  2020 General Election of the United States: Major Party Platforms in Comparison with Catholic Teaching on the Non-Negotiable Moral Issues and the Negotiable Policy Issues”)

 

  1. DIGNITY OF HUMAN LIFE FROM CONCEPTION TO NATURAL DEATH

 

WHERE THE CHURCH STANDS ON THE RIGHT TO LIFE & SACREDNESS OF ALL LIFE

Pope St. John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles Laici 38. [T]he common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights – for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture – is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with the maximum determination.

Encyclical Evangelium Vitae 58. Among all the crimes which can be committed against life, procured abortion has characteristics making it particularly serious and deplorable. The Second Vatican Council defines abortion, together with infanticide, as an ‘unspeakable crime’.

U.S.C.C.B. Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, 2019 Introductory letter. The threat of abortion remains our preeminent priority because it directly attacks life itself, because it takes place within the sanctuary of the family, and because of the number of lives destroyed. At the same time, we cannot dismiss or ignore other serious threats to human life and dignity such as racism, the environmental crisis, poverty and the death penalty.

Our efforts to protect the unborn remain as important as ever, for just as the Supreme Court may allow greater latitude for state laws restricting abortion, state legislators have passed statutes not only keeping abortion legal through all nine months of pregnancy but opening the door to infanticide. Additionally, abortion contaminates many other important issues by being inserted into legislation regarding immigration, care for the poor, and health care reform.

 

THE ISSUES AT STAKE

ABORTION aka MURDER OF INFANTS IN THE WOMB (or of those born in a botched attempt at abortion)

  • the right to take the life of the unborn child, against the law of nature and the law of God, (freedom of choice, reproductive rights, reproductive health, family planning)
  • state laws which set restrictions on that “right”
  • the abortion pill (chemical abortion), the future of readily available abortion
  • tax-payer funding of abortion, prohibited under the Hyde Amendment since 1976
  • the Title X rule, family planning organizations which receive federal funding (e.g. Planned Parenthood) cannot refer for abortion
  • legal oversight of the abortion industry, such as laws setting medical emergency obligations which bind abortion providers as they do any other surgical centers [abortion is always fatal for the child, and often enough fatal for the mother, as well]
  • the Mexico City Policy, which forbids promotion of abortion abroad with federal funding [Reagan, Bush and Trump instituted; Clinton and Obama suspended]
  • “ideological colonialism”, promoting abortion and “reproductive health” diplomatically through American and international abortion promoters, with federal funding, and without regard for the religions and cultures of the countries being “helped”

CLINICAL PRODUCTION AND EXPERIMENTATION ON HUMAN EMBRYOS

  • scientific research on human embryos, which involves artificial fertilization and ultimately destruction, and government funding of such research

HELPING PEOPLE COMMIT SUICIDE

  • euthanasia, sometimes referred to as mercy killing, medically assisted suicide or the right-to-die

 

IN A NUTSHELL: REPUBLICAN PARTY AGAINST THE ABOVE ISSUES; DEMOCRATIC PARTY FOR THEM – USE THE LINKS BELOW TO READTHE COMPLETE PLATFORMS OF 5 POLITICAL PARTIES

Democratic Party Platform

Republican Party Platform (adopts 2016 Platform as 2020)

American Solidarity Party

Libertarian Party Platform

Green Party Platform

 

 

  1. DIGNITY OF NATURAL MARRIAGE & FAMILY

 

WHERE THE CHURCH STANDS ON NATURAL MARRIAGE AND FAMILY LIFE

Pope Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in Veritate 44. It is thus becoming a social and even economic necessity once more to hold up to future generations the beauty of marriage and the family, and the fact that these institutions correspond to the deepest needs and dignity of the person. In view of this, States are called to enact policies promoting the centrality and the integrity of the family founded on marriage between a man and a woman, the primary vital cell of society, and to assume responsibility for its economic and fiscal needs, while respecting its essentially relational character.

Pope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia 251. In discussing the dignity and mission of the family, the Synod Fathers observed that, ‘as for proposals to place unions between homosexual persons on the same level as marriage, there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family.’ It is unacceptable ‘that local Churches should be subjected to pressure in this matter and that international bodies should make financial aid to poor countries dependent on the introduction of laws to establish marriage between persons of the same sex.’

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship 70. The family founded upon marriage is the basic cell of human society. The role, responsibilities, and needs of families should be central national priorities. Marriage must be defined, recognized, and protected as a lifelong exclusive commitment between a man and a woman, and as the source of the next generation and the protective haven for children. The institution of marriage is undermined by the ideology of “gender” that dismisses sexual difference and the complementarity of the sexes and falsely presents “gender” as nothing more than a social construct or psychological reality, which a person may choose at variance with his or her biological reality (see Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, no. 224). As Pope Francis has taught, “the removal of [sexual] difference creates a problem, not a solution” (General Audience, April 15, 2015). “Thus the Church reaffirms . . . her no to ‘gender’ philosophies, because the reciprocity between male and female is an expression of the beauty of nature willed by the Creator” (Pope Benedict XVI Address to the Pontifical Council Cor Unum, Jan. 19, 2013). This affirmation in no way compromises the Church’s opposition to unjust discrimination against those who experience “deep-seated homosexual tendencies,” who “must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2358).

 

THE ISSUES AT STAKE

REDEFINITION OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY TO INCLUDE POLYGAMOUS & HOMOSEXUAL UNIONS

  • whether laws should foster the authentic nature of marriage, or approve as its equal other kinds of relationships (as Obergefell v. Hodges did of same sex relationships)
  • the definitions of marriage and family in adoption and other laws
  • the legal battle, already engaged as a result of the logic of the Obergefell case, as to whether polyamorous relationships, in which multiple men and/or women form a group sexual relationship, should be legally recognized

OUR CHILDREN BEING EDUCATED IN “GENDER IDEOLOGY”

  • gender ideology, in which the historical natural and philosophical understanding of human nature and sexuality is replaced by a largely psychological sense of sexual identity

OUR TAX MONEY BEING USED TO SPREAD “GENDER IDEOLOGY” AROUND THE WORLD

  • “ideological colonialism,” promoting gender ideology diplomatically through American and international organizations, with federal funding

 

IN A NUTSHELL: REPUBLICAN PARTY AGAINST THE ABOVE ISSUES; DEMOCRATIC PARTY FOR THEM – USE THE LINKS BELOW TO READTHE COMPLETE PLATFORMS OF 5 POLITICAL PARTIES

Democratic Party Platform

Republican Party Platform (adopts 2016 Platform as 2020)

American Solidarity Party

Libertarian Party Platform

Green Party Platform

 

 

  1. FREEDOM OF RELIGION

 

WHERE THE CHURCH STANDS ON THE RIGHT TO WORSHIP & TO LIVE ACCORDING TO ONE’S RELIGIOUS BELIEFS PUBLICLY AND PRIVATELY

U.S.C.C.B., Forming Consciences 72. US policy should promote religious liberty vigorously, both at home and abroad: our first and most cherished freedom is rooted in the very dignity of the human person, a fundamental human right that knows no geographical boundaries. In all contexts, its basic contours are the same: it is the “immun[ity] from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.” (Dignitatis Humanae, no. 2). In the United States, religious freedom generally enjoys strong protection in our law and culture, but those protections are now in doubt. For example, the longstanding tax exemption of the Church has been explicitly called into question at the highest levels of government, precisely because of her teachings on marriage. Catholics have a particular duty to make sure that protections like these do not weaken but instead grow in strength. This is not only to secure the just freedom of the Church and the faithful here but also to offer hope and an encouraging witness to those who suffer direct and even violent religious persecution in countries where the protection is far weaker.

  1. 80. . . . Employers, including religious groups and family-owned businesses, should be able to provide health care without compromising their moral or religious convictions, and individuals should be able to purchase health care that accords with their faith.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The free exercise of religion is not just a freedom of conscience, therefore, but the freedom to act in accordance with one’s conscience. This is not a license to do anything, justified by a religious claim, but that which itself morally lawful, known as the natural law. This requires, as John Adams put it, “a moral and religious people.” For example, our nature rules out human sacrifice justified as the exercise of religious conscience, just as it does abortion justified as a choice. It likewise defends freedom in the raising one’s children, without justifying child abuse.

Today in the name of pluralism, however, a new moral law, proclaimed by progressivism has displaced not just the divine law, which believers accept, but also the natural law. This latter “law”, based on a reasoned appreciation of the common purposes of human nature and life, naturally and spiritually, has accompanied human beings since our beginning, and has been recognized in some form for 2300 years, though often with huge defects in understanding and practice (e.g. slavery, religious, ethnic and racial persecution and discrimination, etc.). Together with divine revelation given to Israel through Moses and to the Church through Jesus Christ, this natural and supernatural view has driven the progress of civilization during those many centuries.

Following philosophers of “rights,” and more recently “identity,” this view of human life and law has quickly been swept away in favor of an individualistic collection of personal “rights,” founded upon individual choice, rather than a common human nature. However, rather than leaving others free to exercise their own natural and supernatural views, like all ideologies it must assert its supremacy and orthodoxy over anyone and any institution which opposes its view of “rights”. Beyond the rhetoric, the differences in the political positions of the parties and the candidates generally reflect one or the other view of the basis of law and freedom.

Pope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia 84. At the same time I feel it important to reiterate that the overall education of children is a ‘most serious duty’ and at the same time a ‘primary right’ of parents. This is not just a task or a burden, but an essential and inalienable right that parents are called to defend and of which no one may claim to deprive them. The State offers educational programmes in a subsidiary way, supporting the parents in their indeclinable role; parents themselves enjoy the right to choose freely the kind of education – accessible and of good quality – which they wish to give their children in accordance with their convictions. Schools do not replace parents, but complement them. This is a basic principle: ‘all other participants in the process of education are only able to carry out their responsibilities in the name of the parents, with their consent and, to a certain degree, with their authorization.’

 

THE ISSUES AT STAKE

NOT BEING ABLE TO LIVE OUR LIFE FREELY ACCORDING TO OUR RELIGIOUS TEACHINGS

  • the right not just to worship according to one’s beliefs, but also to exercise one’s religious beliefs in concrete acts without the intrusion of government

OUR CHILDREN BEING EDUCATED ACCORDING TO A SECULAR, GODLESS AGENDA

  • the freedom of parents to educate their children in their religious beliefs and values
  • whether public schools will respect the rights of parents in conscience formation, and not usurp it, by 1) indoctrination in progressive ideology on life, human sexuality and marriage, and freedom (i.e. the essential goods of a healthy and free society); nor, 2) dispense contraception, refer for abortion or for transgender therapy

NEEDING TO TRAITOR OUR RIGHTLY-FORMED CONSCIENCE TO OBTAIN A JOB OR PROVIDE A SERVICE TO SOCIETY

  • the right that there be no “religious test” for public office, for a business license, or other participation in the benefits of society, that requires surrendering the conscience to the state and adherence to progressive ideology
  • the right, not to affirm any value, or to perform any act, which violates one’s conscience (especially in the home, in religious schools, and in employment)

[e.g. the Little Sisters of the Poor and EWTN with respect to the Contraceptive Mandate of the Affordable Care Act; Catholic doctors and hospitals with respect to other morally objectionable surgeries, such as sterilization and sex-change surgery]

  • similarly, the ability of charitable organizations to provide their services (e.g. adoption, immigrant care) in keeping with their religious conscience (e.g. abortion and contraception referrals, adoption placements etc.)
  • the appointment of judges who will respect and defend the essential common good, as established by the natural law, as affirmed in the Constitution authentically understood

IN A NUTSHELL: REPUBLICAN PARTY AGAINST THE ABOVE ISSUES; DEMOCRATIC PARTY FOR THEM – USE THE LINKS BELOW TO READTHE COMPLETE PLATFORMS OF 5 POLITICAL PARTIES

Democratic Party Platform

Republican Party Platform (adopts 2016 Platform as 2020)

American Solidarity Party

Libertarian Party Platform

Green Party Platform

 

 

AS REGARDS THE FOLLOWING NEGOTIABLE (POLICY) ISSUES, PLEASE SEE THE COMPLETE DOCUMENT FOR AN EXPLANATION OF CHURCH TEACHING IN THEIR REGARD

  1. War and Peace
  2. Capital Punishment
  3. Health Care
  4. Economic Policy
  5. Immigration
  6. Environmental Policy

Submit a Comment

Please Login to post a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.