Rick Santorum is showing surprising support from evangelicals, despite making no bones about diligently practicing his Catholic faith.
The former Pennsylvania senator is tenaciously maintaining second place in the campaign to be the Republican Party’s presidential candidate, especially following primary victories in Alabama and Mississippi this week.
Even more surprising, perhaps, is his relatively poor showing among Catholic Republicans, who are demonstrating a distinct preference for front-running Mitt Romney, a Mormon and former governor of Massachusetts.
Does it mean the wish expressed by the only Catholic ever elected president in his pre-election speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association in 1960 — that religion should be irrelevant to politics — has come true?
Or does it show that religion has become relevant in a way unimagined 50 years ago?
John F. Kennedy’s advocacy of an “absolute separation of church and state” has certainly not been embraced by the American electorate, noted Greg Smith. He is the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion and Public Life senior researcher. “I have seen no data to suggest religion is irrelevant,” Smith said. “Religion has been a powerful predictor of voting trends in recent general elections.”
Over the past few national elections, he said, the general rule has been that “the more committed people are to their religion, regardless of which religion that is, the more likely they are to vote Republican.” Ethnicity, however, tends to trump religion; thus, black evangelicals and Hispanic Catholics vote more Democratic, regardless of their level of commitment.
Exit polling conducted during the March 13 Mississippi and Alabama primaries, and during the so-called “Super Tuesday” primaries on March 6, questioned voters about their religion, but not about their level of commitment. However, the data confirm trends from previous primaries, showing that Santorum appealed more to evangelical Protestants than to Catholics.
In four Super Tuesday states where exit polls tracked Catholics, Santorum managed to tie Romney for Catholics in only one contest. Romney won decisively in two states and tied with Newt Gingrich (also Catholic) in the third.
In Alabama and Mississippi, Romney continued to do better with white, non-evangelicals, while both Santorum and Gingrich narrowly outpolled Romney with evangelicals. As well, Santorum continued to lead with those who say it “matters a great deal” that their choice for president shares their religious beliefs — a signal that evangelicals consider Santorum one of their own.
In the seven Super Tuesday states, among white evangelicals, Santorum outpolled Romney in four. Romney won in Massachusetts and Vermont. In Virginia, Santorum was not on the ballot. At the beginning of the primaries, Romney and Santorum were even in terms of their appeal to evangelicals.
According to John Green, political science director at the Ray C. Bliss Institute of Applied Politics at the University of Akron, there are several theories about why Santorum has appealed more to evangelicals than to his fellow Catholics, though no polling has asked the right questions to prove any of them. “They could all be true,” he said.
One explanation is that evangelicals are generally more conservative on social issues than most Catholics, as is Santorum himself. The former Pennsylvania senator may well be outpolling Romney among a minority of Catholics who are traditional in their moral theology, while Romney is doing better with more secularized Catholics or those who are Republican because of their economic rather than their social views.
Since Romney does better among big-city Republicans, whose views tend to be more moderate on social issues, and who are more exposed to Romney’s vast advertising budget, some Catholic preference for Romney may be the result of the Catholic concentration in urban areas.
Finally, proposed Green, some Catholics who may well share Santorum’s values may support Romney anyway because they believe he is more electable in the general election against President Obama. Evangelicals tend to vote ideologically rather than strategically.
Impossible 50 Years Ago
“One interesting thing about Santorum’s appeal to evangelicals is that it is something that couldn’t have happened 50 years ago,” said Green. “There was so much tension between them and Catholics.” In the meantime, “evangelicals have discovered they are closer to traditional Catholics than they are to other Protestants on many social issues, and traditional Catholics have found the same thing.”
Green added that at the same time issues such as abortion were coming to the fore in the U.S., in the 1970s, Pope John Paul II was making a positive impression on evangelicals internationally.
But in 1960, the papacy loomed large in evangelical propaganda aimed at defeating candidate Kennedy. According to a March 1 CNN story by Michael Wolraich, the Justice Department had counted 144 publishers of anti-Catholic literature during the campaign. Much of it warned that Kennedy would follow the Pope’s orders and establish Catholic schools across the country, and much of it came from evangelicals.
For his part, Santorum has won the endorsement of several evangelical groups. One pastor with a Web ministry, Rev. Steven Andrew of USAChristianMinistries.com, told the Register, “I ask Catholics and Protestants to vote Exodus 18:21 in every election, which is to vote for Rick Santorum, because Santorum includes God in government, as our Founding Fathers say to do, and will bring God’s blessings to the U.S.A. by being pro-life and supporting God’s [definition of] marriage of one man and one woman.”
One of the reasons why some Republicans may prefer Romney is that Santorum makes public pronouncements in an unguarded way, according to David Mills, executive editor of First Things magazine. A typical example was his reaction after reading Kennedy’s 1960 speech about the separation of church and state. He said it made him “want to throw up.”
“I don’t like what Kennedy had to say either,” Mills said. “But couldn’t Santorum have found a different way to say it? I just wish Santorum would speak from a more presidential, a more considered, place.”
Kennedy’s speech, said Christopher Shannon, an associate professor of history at Christendom College in Virginia, was made with the view of minimizing the damage being done to Kennedy’s run for the presidency by anti-Catholic propaganda. His intent was laudable, said Shannon. “But it was how he made the argument that Santorum objected to — and I have trouble with it, too. He was saying: ‘Don’t discriminate against me on the basis of my religion because my religion doesn’t matter.’” And it didn’t matter, Kennedy argued, because the separation of church and state renders religion irrelevant: “No Catholic prelate” should tell a politician what to do; nor should any Protestant minister ever tell his congregants how to vote. In fact, no religious organization should ever try to influence public policy at all, went the argument.
Secularization Trend
According to Shannon, the Kennedy speech marked the beginning of the secularization movement within American Democrats. They “were for religion up till then, even if they didn’t believe in it themselves.”
Two decades later, New York Catholic Gov. Mario Cuomo’s 1984 landmark speech at the University of Notre Dame, entrenched this new approach among some Catholic politicians. Said Shannon: “He said that while he personally was opposed to abortion, he wouldn’t impose his views on others. At the same time, he credited his concern for social justice on the social teachings of the Catholic Church; so I guess he thought it was okay to impose those on others.”
Santorum has followed up his comment on Kennedy’s speech with considered explanations, which do not, however, make the same headlines. “That was a radical statement,” he told a Boston newspaper. “We’re seeing how Catholic politicians, following the first Catholic president, have followed his lead and have divorced faith not just from the public square, but from their own decision-making process.”
But Santorum also made it clear that he does not “believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute. “The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country,” he stated.
View of the Constitution
Richard Thompson, the president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, based in Ann Arbor, Mich., said Santorum, not Kennedy, is correct on the Constitution. He cited a 1984 Supreme Court case, Lynch v. Donnelly, in which the court declared, “It has not been thought either possible or desirable to enforce a regime of total separation.”
Thompson is not surprised at Santorum’s evangelical support. His own organization, though staffed largely by Catholics, defends many evangelicals in their battles for religious liberty and Christian values.
“Traditional Catholics, for want of a better phrase, and evangelicals share the same patriotism, the same desire to keep America true to its founding Christian values,” he said.
Thompson was raised Protestant but converted to Catholicism through a process that began when he served as a district attorney, and prosecuted Jack Kevorkian, the infamous “Dr. Death,” for assisting people to commit suicide. “When I went looking for arguments to explain why it was a good thing to prosecute, while public opinion was all on his side, I found the Catholic Church had been making those arguments for 1,500 years; that Augustine had been arguing against assisted suicide,” Thompson recalled.
First Things’ Mills suggested that the same phenomenon helped bring evangelicals and Catholics together politically. “When it came to making a case against same-sex ‘marriage’ or abortion, all evangelicals could do is quote the Bible; and when it comes to abortion, there isn’t much beyond ‘Thou shalt not kill’ in the Bible,” said Mills.
When they looked for universal principles that were usable in public-policy debate, evangelicals found that the Catholic Church had already worked that out using natural law.
At a more grassroots level, said Mills, the same fraternity was established during prayer vigils and protests outside abortion businesses. “Once they got past the fact that the other guy was praying with a rosary or Bible, they formed friendships based on fighting a mutual enemy.”
Register correspondent Steve Weatherbe writes from Victoria, British Columbia.
Comments
Post a Comment
Well, for one thing, polling shows that a major percentage of the Evangelical voters don’t even KNOW that Santorum is Catholic!
And a lot of the Catholic voters have done research on Santorum, and have found out that he has done things like:
- vote to fund Planned Parenthood
- vote for the FACE (Freedom of Access to Abortion Clinics) law, which has been used to persecute pro-lifers
- endorsed pro-abortion candidates over pro-life ones
- pays no attention to Church teaching on just war or torture
- is NOT a limited government candidate. He’s a big government lover.
Check out this article:
http://ohnimus.wordpress.com/2012/03/05/why-i-dont-like-rick-santorum/
Santorum explained why some of his votes went to planned parenthood—because PP was thrown into a bill that provided other needs. It was a catch 22 and did what he thought was best at the time.
At least he admits mistakes and says he’s regretted things he voted on that didn’t go as planned. You really think Obama would be man enough to do something like that. Admitted your mistakes or going around like you’re perfect is a trait of a good leader to me!
Mitt Romney—I don’t trust him. He’s got that corporate, convincing BS grin so many poeple get suckered by. His mentality is one of a used car salesman. He’s too CEO for my likings and a Trump-Wanna-be. He flip flops between political parties just for the sake of getting into office.
At least Santorum is sincere. I think Newt is the best choice out of all of them—His record and experience speaks for itself….I wouldn’t mind to see santorum as president and newt as VP!
I choose, at this point in the race, Santorum over Romney—Yet ANYONE over Obama!
Vote Straight ticket republican in 2012!!!
Very simple. Evangelical voters consider Mormonism a cult and therefore reject Governor Romney; Catholics are not threatened by Mormonism, hence we vote for the man’s history and potential.
teddy beare,
Yes, he explained. That doesn’t mean it’s a good explanation. If one is truly pro-life, IN MY OPINION, you don’t vote for a bill which is funding Planned Parenthood, no matter how much other good stuff it has in it.
Besides, when on mainstream media interviews, he trumpets the fact that he voted to fund Planned Parenthood as a reason not to fear his personal views.
I’m not going to vote for someone who has an opposite message depending on his audience. And no, I’m not voting for Romney either. He’s even worse. Newt has too much personal and political baggage to have a chance.
“The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country.” I agree with Santorum here . . . now I just wish he’d abide by his own words and change his policies regarding war and torture to align with his own faith. Instead, he drifts away from Catholic Teaching on issues inconvenient to his party’s platform.
IMO, Santorum tries to have it both ways on the PP issue. He says it was a mistake sometimes, but other times, he’s proudly crowed about it.
I don’t really care who wins anymore, because in the long run, they’re all the same but for the makeup they wear & the details of their lies.
There wasn’t a dimes worth of difference between Republicans & Democrats 30 years ago, & even less now, given the ratchet effect of government action.
I have come to the point of voting ideologically, because when I vote my conscience instead of voting based on Las Vegas style gambling predictions, at least I don’t need to take an hour long shower when I get home from the polls.
I’ll tell you why he doesn’t appeal to me: his stance on war is at odds with the Catholic Church.
That’s a pretty big deal to me.
If he wins the nomination, I will vote for him over Obama, but I will have qualms about it, no doubt.
It’s nice that Evangelicals and Catholics have formed alliances in defense of life and the family and now religious freedom. However, I don’t trust Evangelicals too much. As much as they have become a bit more accepting of us they still proselytize Catholics and consider us less than real Christians. Those people in that picture with him in Puerto Rico were probably all born Catholic. Now they’ve turned Puerto Rico into one of anti-Catholic Fundamentalism’s bastions in Latin America. Surely this is mostly our own fault. Catechesis has been lacking for decades and bishops have not defended the faith against the onslaught of American Evangelical missionaries. I just think we’ve become too nicey-nicey with Evangelicals without asking the same kind of respect back.
I’m Catholic and I am voting for Rick.
- Blessings, Greg.
Touche Teddy! Your comments about Romney are spot on. Any cadidate that can ‘own up’ to having made some bad choices during their administration is an honorable person to me. Let’s not forget that Mormon’s are NOT Christians. If ever we needed a God fearing leader for this contry, it’s now. However ‘Catholic’ Senator Santorium is, is between him and his confessor. We just need a Christian, not a Muslim, nor a Mormon living on Pennsylvania Avenue. Vote straight party Republican ticket.
The generic Protestant, like the generic Catholic, has a decided liberal bent. Qualifying Protestant with evangelical is the same as qualifying Catholic with faithful. In both cases you get the conservative wing. Therefore, comparing evangelical Protestants to generic Catholics is comparing apples and oranges and explains why the former supports Santorum while the later do not.
Very Easy Answer ... by an accident of history JFK was the 2nd Catholic to run for the Presidency and all the hopes and dreams of Catholics who had witnessed the discrimination against Al Smith were invested in JFK; as anyone who follows history knows JFK was not the caliber of Catholic that Al Smith was. It is sad but it is a fact. No one knew this at the time however and Kennedy got 84% of the Catholic vote and the Democrat Party “captured” and has “owned” the Catholic vote ever since 1960.
If that was all that happened it would be self correcting. But that was not all that happened. For essentially the last 50 years Catholic Universities, Catholic News Outlets, the whole of what might be termed the “Intelligentsia” of the American Catholic Church has remained attached in an increasingly unhealthy way to the Democrat Party. Members of this “Intelligentsia” are unable to recognize that a relatively small number of hard core Alinskyites whose sacrament is Abortion, now wholly control the Democrat Party. Other than it’s name the Democrat Party of today now bears no resemblance to the Old Party of decent God Fearing Politicians with real hearts like Hubert Humphrey (who no doubt is in Heaven praying for JFK in Purgatory.
Alas the overwhelming numbers of the baby boomer apparatchiks in the Catholic “Intelligentsia” ... the folks who write for and print the Diocesan Papers; the folks who literally write the Agendas placed before the Bishops when they meet etc. despite Abortion, Planned Parenthood, Homosexual “marriage” etc. etc. etc. these “gate keepers” of the Church seem to have greater loyalty to a transmogrified Democrat Party than to Holy Mother Church. As a result few Catholics have been exposed in a favorable way to anything other that the likes of a decent Al Smith like Catholic like Rick Santorum. For Pete’s sake, because it was on the Agenda the Bishops even gave $7 Million Dollars to ACORN! Blessed Fulton Sheen recognized the danger that this 5th Column “Intelligentsia” represented to the Faith when he said in 1967:
“You are better off going to a State school where you will have the chance to fight for your faith, than going to a modern Catholic University where you will have the new watered-down, modernist version of the faith spoon-fed to your unsuspecting minds.”
Evangelicals on the other hand have not had to surmount this “scandal” or “stumbling block”. Because they lack and thus can not be misled by in house in-bred Democrat Party “money changers” in the “Temple” who keep covering for these Charnel house Democrats. Hence the Evangelicals are actually thus more able to hear and thus to recognize the Truth.
That is why Santorum appeals more to Evangelicals than to Catholics.
Could it be that Evangelicals more ardently practice their faith than do Catholics? Let’s remember that Catholics contracept and divorce at about the same rate as do other non-Catholic Christians. Maybe it’s not Santorum’s Catholicism that’s in question here. After all, he has 7 children (not indicative of contraceptive practices), a Down’s Syndrome baby that obviously went un-aborted, and is still married to the same woman. How many Catholics can say the same?
I’m a Catholic woman and I have supported Rick Santorum since he was still at the furthest podium on the stage during debates. He’s the right man and I think there are lots of Catholics out here who want him in. We will just have to wait and see, but regardless of who is the Republican candidate, I will vote to get Obama and his evildoers out…God be with us!!
@Dave: Santorum’s career has the most consistent prolife record over decades vs. all the candidates. The accusations you are making are complete lies and falsehoods. The source you are quoting is biased. Please troll somewhere else.
My two cents:
The guy, like most politicians has overlaps with the Catholic faith, but isn’t fully consistent with it. The right wing political takeover of evangelicals, etc. fits republican needs, but clearly ignores much of Christ’s own work of taking care of the poor, hungry, naked, etc. and replaced tht with take care of capitalism and corporations. I support free market, but not greed. Yet most people, Santorum included, have no desire to build that into rhos dial responsibility declarations well understood by Catholics.
If you make a Venn diagram of the two major parties and Catholicism, you will find it looks like a standard diagram with areas of overlap for each and for all groups. The problem is neither overlaps well with our faith and so our faith gets diluted and pulled apart…much like obama is trying to do with the healthcare issue.
Perhaps Catholics think that sincerely invading Iran resulting in tens of thousands in civilian casualties as well as thousands of American troops dead or injured would require more than a “sorry about that,” to make it better.
Besides being put off by Santorum’s belligerence, most Americans, including Catholics, don’t want a president who intends to codify as much of his religion into law as he can get away with.
Most Catholics view economic issues as more important than social or religious issues. Evangelicals are likely less worldly and more religious.
Because Santorum is willing to demonize Gays
Santorum gets an Amen from evangelicals and a cold shoulder from many Catholics on the issue on homosexuality
Rick is the best thing that has happened to this political process in YEARS! He is a great Catholic, family man, and lawmaker. Honest and speaks form the heart.
I would also be in favor of a Santorum/Gingrich ticket come November!
Go RICK!
I pick (1st) the party, (2nd) the most winnable and (3rd) most near my beliefs - in that order. What ever name comes up that is it. This year it comes up Romney so far. All 3 decisions are subjective and the truth about a candidate is not easily determined. We are usually offered the runts of the litter because the best are not often in politics or do not want to subject themselves to the national political process. Politics is a sad, sloppy way to govern (government) our lives. To rebut in advance: I know, I know; it’s all we have. I know, I know; Faith should govern our lives.
Newt is my man because he intends to dramatically reduce the ways in which the government has taken over our society. This is more important than simply having someone who shares some particular view of mine. In addition, Newt would not get chewed up by the press but RS will - RS does not have the sharp mind of Newt. The likelihood of Newt getting the nomination is very small so my next choice is Romney. He has a better chance of getting elected than either of them because, alas, America has a screwed up electorate. How else did we get Bill Clinton for 8 years, a popular majority for Al Gore, and this empty suit called Obama. Romney is electable because he is not threatening.
The answer is simple; it is by engaging with your audience. It could be said that they like a little knowledge of everything that life has to offer, rather than complete knowledge about few things. In the wake of technology and the internet, the way we communicate has completely transformed. Encompassing various objects, this art form has focused on important characters and personalities too. Here are a few tips to help you deal effectively with adoption paperwork:Try to start your day an hour earlier than usual or stay up an hour later. tyer
Its no longer possible for Evangelicals not to notice Rick is a Catholic and a faithful one, as he proudly professes his moral convictions in the public eye. I think they just believe he is a man who speaks,lives and votes according to his conscience.
I think of a speech Bill Donohue of the Catholic League made to Catholic Social Scientists in New York; he said that orthodox believers, whether they are Evangelical, Catholic or Jewish, have more in common with one another (pro-life, pro-traditional marriage) than they do with their co-religionists. The Culture of Death has made comrades of us across religious boundaries, and separated Catholics from one another, along the fault line of moral issues.
@ Dave,
Here in TX, it’s the Buckle of the Bible Belt. Yes, people are aware he’s Catholic…they like him anyway. No one’s perfect. He IS the single-most pro-life/pro-family candidate. His record (and life) reflects that fact. Not perfect…but the closest to my values. I’m a very orthodox Catholic - FWIW. I don’t vote straight “Republican,” and I’m waiting for the day someone OTHER than the GOP stands for God’s truth. I seriously look at each individual candidate, and mostly choose the lesser of 2 evils, unfortunately. Democrats by and large are part and parcel of the culture of death. His economic plan is sound, and I believe his judgement is also sound. I do not agree on everything, but I do in fact trust him more than the others. I like Newt, he makes me laugh. But he’s a loose cannon under fire. Romney scares me. He’s a chameleon. Who else then??
I am a Catholic, and also a Pennsylvanian, and I won’t vote for Santorum for the same reason as a lot of other Pennsylvanians - we remember what a lousy Senator he was. The man was a windsock. Pronouncements made on Friday revised over the weekend - this, you understand is a generalized memory, not a researched conclusion. But practically everybody I talk to feels the same about him. He has a strong case of Foot in Mouth Disease and the thought of him speaking ex tempore as president is simply frightening. Devout profession of ANY faith is not a guarantor of presidential ability. I am more impressed by Mr. Romney’s defense of the First Amendment than by Mr. Santorum’s (often tactless)proclamations of Catholic doctrine. He’s not running for Pope.
Santorum never voted for PP. Santorum is the most pro-life canidate in the history of American politics. In contrast Rommney was staunchly pro-abort in his early days of politics. Then Rommney realized that in order to advance in the GOP he had to pretend he was pro-life and flip-floped his postion. Make no mistake it was done only for GOP votes and not conviction. Santorum is the best canidate the Pro-life community will ever have. If we don’t vote for him now then it will go done in history that our movement failed because we did not support or canidates. Thus we will be blamed for any pro-death culture that happens in the USA, an American that will be worse that it is now. Vote for Rick Santorum in 2012.
dave, please pray tell just who you might possibly cast your vote for? As a active member of the Church, mine is , or would be for Santorum, if he is fortunate to make the cut. Going back and reading the post I agree with him on the constitution. After discussing the runners with other Catholics I find , in my area, many are informed only by the lay press, and influenced by the grandstanding of live TV, if that is where the next election is determined , may the good Lord help the United States, God Bless you. Jerry
There is doubt why Evangelicals are supporting Santorum and Catholics are not? The answer is obvious. Evangelical are morally serious about opposing abortion and demand and Catholics are not. Evidence of this is the intellectually unserious comments by poster “Dave”.
the canard that santroum voted to fund Planned Parenthood is absurd. Planned Parenthood gets its funding through Title X, and the actual funding is through the budget process. It was enacted in 1970 under Nixon. If you voted Yes on a federal budget since 1970 you voted to fund Planned Parenthood. Thus pro-life heroes like Henry Hyde voted to vote planned parenthood. I am sure this was not something any of them were thrilled about, it is because without the votes to have any possibility of defunding Planned Parenthood legislators who thought they had the “best possible budget” would vote yes. This is of course jsutified by the moral principle of the “Double effect” Some like Santorum tried to mitigate the dmage by supporting Title XX ( for funding for abstinence education). As for endorsing Sepctor over Toomey in the PA senate race in 2004 the thought was at the time with control of the Senate hanging in the balance, ( it was 51 to 49 at the time and hanging in the balance, there was a concern Toomey would lose the general election, while Specter would not. A loss of Senate control would have been a disaster as it would have placed the chairmanship of the judiciary committee in the hands of the vehemently pro-abortion Pat leahy. So to avoid this Santorum supported Toomey. Agree or disagree with the call, it was not a lack of principal. It made sense at the time, as at the end of the day Spector did not block Bush’s appointments of Alito and Roberts. The comments regarding supporting Freedom of Access to Clinics bill voting for HR 796 show Dave does not know what he is talking about or is working for the romeny campaign. HR 796 which Santorum and all the pro-lifers voted for was designed to modify the original FACE supported by Bill Clinton by including language that -“States that the act does not prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by the first article of amendment to the U.S. Constitution (Sec. 2)” See the project Vote smart web site. So Santorum, John Kyl and other pro-lifers voted for the bill to protect Pro-lifers and give them freedom to protest so long as they did not violate other trespassing laws. It was defeated by the pro-abortion forces.
Its obvious to anyone with any sense that Santorum is the more seriously pr0-life candidate. In fact Romney won the pro-abortion vote, probably recognizing that Romneys stance on abortion is, while no doubt better than Obama, to some extent a posture. In Alabama one group of voters that Romney won were those who called themselves pro-choice. For Gods sake Romney personally raised money on his own time for Planned Parenthood! see here http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2007/12/romney-attended/.
The bottom line here is that Evangelicals are more religiously serious than most Catholics. The actually take seriously the idea expressed by Vatican II that abortion is an “unspeakable crime” and think therefore that being right on this issue is key. They perhaps understand that turninig over all of Health Care to the Federal government via ObamaCare in this kind of political climate will lead to more assaults on life like this evil HHS contraception mandate. Santorum campaigns on ending Obamacare, Romney never or rarely mentions it. When it does its perfunctory, and how can it be otherwise given that Norm Coleman one of his advosors said it would not be repealed but merely modified. Moreover Romeny himself supported the central tennents of Obamacare in a USA today 2009 editorial. I think at the end of the day, sadly Evangelicals are more serious about the implications of Christianty than Catholics, and I say this as a Catholic
To reiterate
I voted for Santorum. I think that the marority of Catholics who voted for Romney did so for practical reasons. They see him as more “electable”. I would like to see them both on the ballot, Romney and Santorum, this November.
veritas - Excellent post, great synopsis of recent Catholic culture. I agree with you on all points except the tenor of the diocescan newspapers. Mine, at least, - the Boston Pilot - seems congruent to Catholic doctrine.
.
My life (and faith) has been enriched by the evangelical Protestants I know now, and we will hopefully march together in our quest to restore morality and faith to our increasingly debauched nation, removing the apostate Obama from the helm of this ship of state that he is hellbent on running aground.
I’m a practicing Roman Catholic, and my vote goes to Rick, too. Those in the Catholic Church who put that Communist Dictator in office should be ashamed of themselves. Money policy, race relations, immigration, heathcare, ect. should NEVER come before God’s laws. Abortion and same-sex “marriage” are intrinsically evil: straight from the mouth of Hell. Anybody, for any reason, cannot justify voting for a man who would agree to murder a baby after a botched abortion simply because it’s a woman’s “right.” The ill-informed electorate, due to the radical drive-by media, have kept the American public ignorant of that fact. I dare say, they have the blood of many babies’ on their hands, too…
Catholics have become to appethetic in their faith.The majority seems to feel that they’ve done their religious duty by showing up for mass every Sunday..yet half of those every Sunday churchgoers could’nt tell you why and what we believe as Catholics.Evangelicals for their part are very well versed in what they tend to believe.If Catholics ever wake up and learn their faith and become as fervent as the evangelicals then the world would change in a heartbeat.I hope Rick Santorum becomes the nominee..I plan to vote for him..but at this point..I’ll vote for anyone who is not Obama..I refuse to recognize him as our legitimate president,,he has too many secrets and seems to be hellbent on dragging our nation down into the pits.God help our nation.
Great article, may I also add by sum it up as: those Catholics who did not vote for Santorum simply because he is a practicing Catholic and they are NOT.
If anyone does not understand that the upcoming presidential election
is the most important of all, they have their head in the sand. NOT
most important to Catholics, NOT most important to Evangelicals, NOT
most important to all Christians, NOT most important to all people who
believe in God and especially NOT just important to everyone else!!!!!
Did I leave anyone out??? Are you listening??? The world is now
experiencing a great shift away from God, the Good, and toward Satan,
the Evil. God, our Creator, is being marginalized and Secularism is
becoming the new god. In some places Secularism is already god. I
appeal to all those who realize this and to all those who, in their
hearts and minds, realize this but continue to wear blinders. We must
remove from power the God-liars and replace them with the Godliers.
For those eligible to vote in the U.S.A. presidential election in
November, 2012, and WHO LOVE EVERYONE BUT NOT EVERYTHING THAT EVERYONE
DOES, and WHO PRAY THAT THOSE WHO HAVE TURNED FROM GOD WILL RETURN TO
GOD, I say simply but forcefully: We have the power to stop the shift
toward evil. Let us exercise that power. Please, God, enter under our
roof. Open our hearts and minds. Give us the courage to assist not
only the poor but the poor in Spirit, not only the weak but the weak in Spirit. To strengthen not only the just but those seeking Your Justice. And to transform those blind, deaf and dumb to Your Divine Love. We
trust that this assistance, strength and transformation will begin the
healing process. May the recovery continue in November. And may You
watch over us in the years ahead. We give You thanks.
I can’t speak for Dave above but I will be voting for Ron Paul over Santorum because, despite being Baptist and not Catholic, his policies are more in-line with the Catholic church. He is the most pro-life candidate out there at present because, in addition to opposing abortion, he adheres to just war doctrine, his views are in-line with the catechism regarding humane treatment of prisoners, and he opposes unjust assassinations like the car bombings that killed Iranian scientists. While abortion is the single most grave issue of our time, it constitutes only one facet of Church teaching. Even most radical Islamists oppose abortion and, according to Republicans, they are the pinnacle of evil today threatening America. So, obviously, more needs to be taken into account.
One last comment on this issue in response to Christian Ohnimus
If you think Ron Paul is more in line with Catholic teaching you are badly misinformed. Ron Paul would 1) cut off foreign aid to poor countries, so the millions of people who are getting fundign for HIV drugs, and ant-malaria treatment and prevention would be dumped 2)I am not sure he would help restructure third world debt as the Pope has suggested wealthy nations should. Santorum has lead on both these issues.
Obviously Santorum and in fact all the candidates would subscribe to he Jsut war doctrine. Good Lord is there someone who favors unjust wars. Whether the War in Iraq was just or not is not something the Catholic Church can determine. Nor has it. If the war was unjust then every soldier who participated would be guility of a mortal sin ( it is a volunteer army as you know) Is this something you believe? I have never heard any Bishops suggest this. In fact the determination of whether a war is Just or not in general is the responsibility of the political authority. Different people apply the facts differently. It is hardly that Ron Paul is more Catholic than Santorum.
Finally and most importantly voting for Ron Paul in the final analysis is a wasted vote. Ron Paul will not be the president of anything. He has yet to even win a caucus state. He has about 4% of the delegates. I am not sure what a vote for Paul accomplishes.
The primary is about who can beat Obama, not about our favorite candidate. We felt that Romney’s background in finance is the ticket because that will be swing voter main concern.
No practicing Catholic has ever been elected president. To say someone that claimed to be a Catholic without supporting evidence was elected president,is closer to the truth. The worst scandal in the last election was the 64-percent Catholic voter support given Obama at the risk of automatic excommunication and the loss of salvation. If they persist in their disbelief and reelect Obama, they will deserve the loss of religious freedom that will surely bring.
It’s just this simple. As much as I would absolutely love for Santorum to be president, Santorum cannot beat Obama. Period. End of story. If he really wants to do the right thing, he should get out of the race. I am a devout Catholic and am just sick of the evil that is perpetrated in this country under this administration. We have to fight the war with the tools that we have at our disposal and Romney, Mormon, Catholic or Zulu, is our best chance to get this country back into line with Catholic values. I wish the Catholic leaders would sit Rick down, explain to him that his own personal ambitions are not more important that the future of this country and then advise him to get the heck out of the race, to stop attempting to destroy Romney and to support the values that we hold dear.
Rick Santorum is my choice because he is the real thing—a truly prolife candidate—with sound opinions on other important issues as well, such as smaller government. Many Catholics do not take the prolife issue very seriously, possibly because they have been so poorly taught by their priests and bishops who don’t like to offend anyone. They seem to be embarrassed by a man who, in their opinion, takes the faith too seriously, especially when it comes to birth control, abortion, and homosexual marriage. Rick Santorum, by living his faith, makes them uneasy. Perhaps he also makes them feel guilty, for reasons they may not even fathom.
I am catholic and support Rick Santorum.I ve learned much with the debates
over the months such as the bills. I remember my sister watching that show that had a song ,I"m just a bill on capitol hill. Unfortunately in my ignorance I thought each bill had its own main heading,didn"t think of all the filler stuff.The Beauty of aging is wisdom.I ve turned into c- span as of late and there are the speaches and such in their entirety that you don"t get on the cable or thoses other stations.i have found as of late that the callers have said time and again Good Bye Mr Obama but they will only vote for Romney and no other. This takes some strong enlightment with the Holy Spirit Because I also have to say at this moment that I wouldn"t vote for Romney.Spiritual Battle within a Spiritual Battle. Rick Santorum is the Light On the Hill, I find him to hold firm in his convictions and his faith.He is an exellant example for
Fatherhood, Marriage.I’d like to close with saying I was away from the church for 20 years when I was younger and have been back since 1995.There
is something about the 2nd conversion you realize that being catholic is
the Fullness of the faith and this is what I see in Rick Santorum
NRC & EWTN are obviously attempting to discourage Catholic voters who do not want to see Rick S. as POTUS. These media both owned by the same entity are trying to sway the vote in accordance w/their agendas - their own political desires. Since that is so, they are in violation of trying to persuade our consciences to vote against what is best for this nation.
We have a teaching authority in Rome, namely Pope Benedict XVI, the Magisterium,All the Bishops and Theologians of the Catholic Church. Rick Santorum doesn’t belong to any of these categories - nor does NCR or EWTN. They are merely media organizations of individual Catholic voters who have their own opinion regarding who would best suit this nation as POTUS during these trying times.
Just because other Catholic voters do not agree w/them, does not make these Catholics less Catholic or wrong. Every Catholic has assess to Catholic teaching (unlike Evangelicals) and can readily form their own conscience regarding their choice. This is something even NCR or EWTN has no right to take away or discourage or worst denigrate because they themselves differ in choice. AS an active pro life Catholic in good standing w/the Church and in permanent vows, I protest against such bias and bigotry as displayed by EWTN and NCR who are obviously in the tank for either Catholic Rick or Newt. Both these men are absolutely unqualified to become the leader of this nation. Neither one has the experience of ever governing anything nor of working in the private sector to make a living. Both these men have spent their entire adult lives being on the tax payer dole in either fed government or worse lobbying this entity.
Mitt Romney is immensely qualified to be POTUS not only by his accomplishments in business, in governing at the state level, and international affairs (Olympics). His personal life is beyond reproach. Yes he is Mormon but didn’t Jesus applaud the faith of the pagan Centurion? Romney is pro life and has said he would defund PP.
There is absolutely no scandal attacked to Mitt or any or his family. This is remarkable in itself since he has 5 grown sons & 17 grandchildren. As Jesus says: “By their fruits you shall know them.” These things are Mitts fruits which are unmistakable. (Unlike the Catholic Kennedy family)
Many Catholics were/are politicians. Hitler, Mussolini, Pelosi, Kennedys, Biden, K Sebelius, Chavez, Castro, Dodd, to name but a few. They have not been a credit to the faith.
A crucial factor is that a person must WIN the general election before he can change anything including social issues. Rick/Newt can’t win because many people of good conscience will not vote for either of them and they know that. They are fooling themselves to remain in the race and/or being spiteful - something which is abhorrent to all people of faith. Mitt on the other hand doesn’t have a spiteful bone in his body. Check any speech or action of his and you will discover the truth about this JUST man.
I agree with Joan Collins. I know Cardinal Dolin agrees with her assessment of faulty teaching as well.
Rick Santorum is the canidate this nation needs. Rick Sanotrum is what the culture of life needs. Please vote for Rick Santorum.
What the polls should ask is do the Catholics that go to Mass every Sunday vote more for Santorum or for Romney. Most Catholics are CINOs (Catholic In Name Only) so the question is no more relevent than any other group. Evangelical Protestants tend, as a group, to be more devout.
Pardon me for getting off track, but I keep seeing references made to Evangelicals and evangelicals: What is a Evangelical? Aren’t all Christians evangelicals? Is there a Evangelical church, religion? Are Evangelicals non-Catholics, non-main line Protestants and considered “community churches.”? “Unchurched,”? and what does that mean?
When I heard him debate Calif. Senator Barbara Boxer on late term abortion on the senate floor, as the Senator from Pennsylvania, I thought
“WOW!!!!!!” Santorum was amazing.
I was surprised he was Catholic - but happy too! Boxer made being a senator look easy - (yes, she was that clueless).
Further, Santorum has been a guest on MANY non-Catholic, Christian radio programs whose purpose it is to strengthen families, marriages, and to ensure Religious Freedom in the US continues, with our US Constitution upheld, and not Sharia Law. I loved how he thinks. Catholics? Evangelicals? Non-Catholic Christians? We are all in the Body of Christ.
A member of the Body of Christ, a Christian, ought not have a “label” such as Catholic, non-Catholic, etc., as long as his life shows the integrity of his faith.
What I like about Sen. Santorum is he’s identified as Catholic, but he is trustworthy based on what I’ve seen him do in his political life and in his family life. The man has integrity.
Jesus was NOT Roman Catholic, by the way. I support Sen. Santorum. He can do w/ Pres. Obama what he did with Barbara Boxer. I’d love to see that. Evangelicals know a good thing, when they see it!!!!!!!! Go Rick!
We need a God-honoring, Bible-believing leader in the White House, for a change.
We Pick Rick! He’s pro-life! He’s pro-family! He’s pro-America! Thank, God, for Rick Santorum. Keep praying for him and his family.
Get the facts at: http://www.RickSantorum.com
Are the “Catholics” polled truly Catholic in Faith, or merely in name? If you polled truly faithful Catholics—those that accept the authority of the Magisterium and its teachings, those that believe our Holy Father is the Vicar of Christ, and those that accept all Church teachings, the results would be totally different. Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden and Kathy Sebelius consider themselves “Catholic.” Enough said.
Why ? Because he thinks like a Fundamentalist Protestant, and not like a Catholic. The same is true of many Catholics.
According to the teachings of the Catholic Church Santorum is not allowed to pray together with protestants. The Church explanation is: If you pray with unbelievers, you are an unbeliever!!!Go ask your Bishop!!
I’m another Catholic for Santorum. Win or loose the general election, with Santorum it will be a fight worth having. Romney’s a looser; he even looks and sounds like George Herbert Walker Bush.
Some of the comments here, are well meaning but off track.I think the real point is that, those of us that like Santorum, it is because of his values, not necessarily his choice of faith. There is no reason why Evangelicals should not like him if they agree with his values. We Catholic Christians and all Protestant Christians are brothers and sisters in our beliefs. Jesus said,“They will know you are Christians by your love for one another.” That’s what Christianity is all about. Yes, we have different ways of worshiping, but we are all worshiping Jesus.
What precisely is the evidence for the following statement?
“Santorum cannot beat Obama. Period. End of story.” It is time to stop repeating what “everyone” “knows”. I do not think any pundit predicted Santorum would be one of the principal challengers at the this stage in the nomination. Given this lack of predictive capacity of the pundit class why should I care about their opinion. So lets look at objective evidence. Santorum seems to have enough political skill that on the a very low budget campaign, with none of the establishment support, and many of the major media outlets against him, he is managing to stay alive. This to me makes him a formidable candidate. what is the evidence that Romney is a likely to win. Romney is only viable in so far as he is not Obama. The very fact that he is struggling shows the inherent weakness in his campaign. In any case there are a number of commentators who have argued that we really do not know who is more likely to beat Obama. The simple fact is this. The most reliable predictor of how one will vote is Party affiliation. Most independents it has been shown, actually “lean towards one Party or another, and will vote indistinguishable from members of that Party. So we have over the last 4 months by the Gallup poll, this has averaged 44% Republicans, and 46% Democrats. This only leaves a very small 10% who truly are unpredictable. The 10% of true Independents ( as opposed to those who say they are independent but vote like Republicans or Democrats) tend to be very ill informed and not particularly politically engaged. Their vote is essentially a crap shoot and their participation is low, as such there is no clear reason to know whether or not Romney or Santorum gets their vote. That means in reality you are battling over the large number of voters whose behavior is already predetermined, even before the nominee is selected. They are close to evenly divided with a slight edge to the Democrats, but this is balanced by the electoral college advantages the Republicans hold. ( Much of the Democratic vote is in states like NY or California) So the issue becomes turnout in the battleground states. It has been alleged that Santorum will turn off moderates because of his strong social conservatism. That is his views that are consistent with what we are supposed to believe as Catholics! Yet One could just as easily argue that some social conservatives will be turned off and not vote because they do not perceive a large enough difference between Romney and Obama. I am not saying this is the correct stance, but speaking in terms of evidence, there is nothing to suggest one theory is more valid then another. IT is all merely speculative. However in the states that Romney has one, turnout has been down. So this theory that Only Romney can beat Obama… is based on ...... what exactly.
I don’t know who other Catholics are voting for, but I’ve been hoping Santorum would run for years and years. Now, I’m hoping he’ll win the primary, so my eldest of five can cast her first vote with a clean conscience. He is someone we can be proud of…which would be refreshing after the past four years.
Many Catholics voted for Obama. I wonder if they are strict party-line voters who vote Democrat no matter what. If so, I guess they see Romney as the candidate that most resembles a Democrat. Maybe being a Catholic doesn’t mean anything to them when the candidate is a Republican. Go figure.
I agree, that they’re probably not practicing Catholics, but in name only, which doesn’t mean a thing.
That’s an easy one: Because his politics are more evangelical than catholic. Case and Point- The Middle East in general and Israel in particular, torture, the “one size fits all” of lowering taxes as the only solution to the economy. I bet he even believes in the rapture that by putting pressure on Iran or actually attacking Iran, will speed up Christ’s return.
As a devout Catholic, I think that no Catholic should hold public office as it does not mix with our religious destiny…which is perfection. We are called to be saints. Called to imitate Christ. Called to carry our cross and suffer persecution. These aspirations/goals don’t mix with political office. Let Caesar run the government and give unto him what is his, while we give unto the Father what is his…namely our whole mind, body, and soul! JFK threw his religion under the bus to get into the white house and once he got there, was as secular as any other president. Water and oil don’t mix…neither do Catholics and public office!!!
Rick Santorum was the man of the hour for giving a public voice to Church teaching after the HHS mandate came down.
.
But his hour is up. Santorum does not have the temperament or the experience to be President. He is a career politician and as Mary Elizabeth Williams said, a lousy one at that. He lost to Bob Casey by 18 points the last time he was on the ballot and he will lose to Obama by double-digits in November if he is the nominee.
.
Newt Gingrich has interesting ideas, but not only he is another career politician, he is a career politician with a history of corruption and ethical lapses. Newt Gingrich consistently does what is best for Newt Gingrich, which is a big reason why he is still in the race.
.
On May 8, I will be voting for Mitt Romney in the North Carolina primary. Is Mitt perfect? Far from it. But he’s good enough, and I’ll take that. He understands the private sector and he spent four years as a chief executive in Massachusetts. He has the character that Newt lacks and the leadership experience that Santorum lacks. As for the life issues, Mitt is not perfect, but he will sign pro-life legislation and appoint conservative justices, which is all you can ask of a President.
.
Most importantly, Romney can win. Anecdotally, I know plenty of people who will absolutely not vote for either Santorum or Gingrich, but will consider Romney. Better an imperfect Romney than another four years of Obama.
I’m a practicing Catholic and a registered Republican. I support Rick Santorum and I pray he is the republican nominee.
Unfortunately, most Catholics are only Catholic in name, they are not practicing Christians, which is what counts. Anyone can call themselves, Catholic…as Jesus told the Scribes, when they told him they were children of Abraham and not slaves, and Jesus retorted, that God can raise up children of Abraham from “these” stones!” Meaning that being a son of Abraham did not mean that they did the will of God. So the same is true of Catholics, anyone can be Catholic, but do they do the will of God.
Catholics have historically voted for Catholic Democrats and (Democrats in general) paying little or no attention to their social positions. All you have to do is look at liberal Catholic governors and the Catholics in the House and Senate right now—Democrats. The reality is, however, it’s not really a political party problem. It’s more than that. Santorum connects with Evangelicals because he knows (as do Evangelicals) that our problems are not economic but are rooted deeper in the societal decline we have fallen. Much of the culture has become compromised in terms of morality, personal integrity and by our failing to live by biblical and gospel principles. When the Lord is honored by how we live and treat our families and others, He takes care of our provision. The question is whether you really trust Him to do this? Mark 8 speaks of yielding our will to His by denying “self” —-for “Where you heart is there will also be your treasure.” We are now under chastisement and discipline (as was Israel) when they, too, fell away. The Lord, though, is merciful The “Me” generation yielded gen x and now y. Romney doesn’t get it. He thinks it’s the economy. Evangelicals and Santorum know it’s MORE than the ecomony. “If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.” That’s 2 Chronicles 7:14. I haven’t heard any parish priests at mass preaching this passage since ....... never. Perhaps it’s time? Romney doesn’t know this passage since it’s not part of LDS theology.
Anita: I do not agree with your comment. Especially the therm Catholic Christians/Protestant Christians.The only Christian is a Traditional Catholic one. Protestant are not Christians, As they left the Church founded by Christ in protest. We are not brothers or sisters They reject the Papacy and the magisteriums the authority to teach the truth.
@truth truth: You should be embarrassed by the ignorance of your statement “We are not brothers or sisters.” The fact is, all who follow Christ are “Christian.” While Evangelicals are not denominational and are more closely tied to the Bible and are highly opposed to liberal mainline denominations, the Vatican has repeatedly referred to Protestants as our “separated brethren.” Furthermore, the Vatican has continually expressed (since Vatican II) a desire for our Protestant brothers and sisters to come into “full communion” with the Catholic church. Truth truth, people with an attitude like yours are harmful to body of Christ and only sow seeds of discord.
My theory is that Catholics take a more nuanced view of the candidates than do the Evangelicals. The latter might support a candidate on pure principle, and the election be damned. The former might be looking at things in a more practical way, namely that Santorum can not win the presidency, but Romney can, and defeating Obama is paramount.
I admire Mr. Santorum’s Catholic faith, but to be blunt:
He has no charisma;
He always seems grumpy and angry;
He could not even win re-election to the Senate from PA (he lost badly), and PA is a key state to win in the general election.
This is simple. People may identify themselves as “Catholic”, but rarley, if ever, attend Mass. So you have many “Catholics” out there who really don’t care too much for religion in general and don’t agree with the church’s positions on social issues. Yet, if asked, they say they’re “Catholic”.
Pat Toomey was running against Arlen Specter for the Republican Senatorial nomination in PA.
Pat Toomey = strong anti-abortion,
Specter = pro-abortion.
The Republican big-wigs asked Santorum to endorse Spector because they didn’t think Toomey could win the general election (of course Toomey is now in the Senate!).
Santorum record:
Preserve lives of the unborn, or curry favor with the political party? Santorum chose the party over our babies.
There is no debate - that’s his record.
I found Rick Santorum’s proud boast of supporting Title 10 absolutely devastating and under no circumstances could I support any such politician. Same thing for George H W Bush. George W Bush is a better Catholic than most Catholics.
Posted by Dave on Thursday, Mar 15, 2012 3:02 PM (EST):teddy beare,
Yes, he explained. That doesn’t mean it’s a good explanation. If one is truly pro-life, IN MY OPINION, you don’t vote for a bill which is funding Planned Parenthood, no matter how much other good stuff it has in it.
Besides, when on mainstream media interviews, he trumpets the fact that he voted to fund Planned Parenthood as a reason not to fear his personal views.
I’m not going to vote for someone who has an opposite message depending on his audience. And no, I’m not voting for Romney either. He’s even worse. Newt has too much personal and political baggage to have a chance.
—Well, then, I guess you won’t be at the polls voting, huh? So you would rather have Obama for another 4 years? That’s great! Thanks for putting America further into a black hole…..
Posted by Carol Hucklebridge on Thursday, Mar 15, 2012 10:25 PM (EST):Touche Teddy! Your comments about Romney are spot on. Any cadidate that can ‘own up’ to having made some bad choices during their administration is an honorable person to me. Let’s not forget that Mormon’s are NOT Christians. If ever we needed a God fearing leader for this contry, it’s now. However ‘Catholic’ Senator Santorium is, is between him and his confessor. We just need a Christian, not a Muslim, nor a Mormon living on Pennsylvania Avenue. Vote straight party Republican ticket.
—-Thank you for your comments on my posting!
Posted by chuck on Friday, Mar 16, 2012 8:52 AM (EST):Rick is the best thing that has happened to this political process in YEARS! He is a great Catholic, family man, and lawmaker. Honest and speaks form the heart.
I would also be in favor of a Santorum/Gingrich ticket come November!
Go RICK!
——Think if Newt stepped down from the primaries and went to Rick and said—let’s join forces—I’ll endorse you and have me be your vp running mate—This would be the best thing to crush the chances of Mitt….
Posted by Carl on Saturday, Mar 17, 2012 2:49 PM (EST):Unfortunately, most Catholics are only Catholic in name, they are not practicing Christians, which is what counts.
—Rightly so—and the ones that do not at least try to follow their faith make the ones who do try to follow the church teachings look like either hypocrites and, how the liberals like to describe poeple that don’t agree with them “hateful”. The ironic thing is liberals will say we are “hateful” because we may disagree with things like gay marriage, yet, what is more hateful to others?—Not agreeing with two men getting married or Killing babies?
I plan to vote for Rick Santorum. In my opinion, he is the most balanced well-grounded, experienced candidate for office. Although not perfect, like the rest of us, he does his best to live what he believes as a Catholic/Christian, a husband, a family man and an honest servant of God for others. He loves his God, his family, all people and his nation. He is also very intelligent and knowledgeable about the government and the economy. He is proud to be an American and proud of our U.S. troops. He knows what is best for the people of our country; and I believe that, if he becomes President of the U.S., he will work hard to build up our country and economy, protect us with his policies and provide for us what we need in healthcare, not just what we want. My hope and prayer is that he will be our next president; however, if Santorum loses and if Romney wins the right to be the Republican candidate, I will vote for Romney over Obama in the general election. To do otherwise would be to aid and abet the enemies of our nation and would help to bring disaster upon our country and its people. God help us in this critical election.
@Loretta Hoffman - you write that Santorum will “....protect us with his policies and provide for us what we need in healthcare, not just what we want.”
Really? So you’re saying you want the government to decide for us what we need in health care??? Isn’t that what Obamacare does???
No thanks…..and by the way, what is this “experience” you claim he has? Is it the years he spent as a politician getting nothing done, or his years as a lobbyist making millions while peddling influence to protect special interests?
I’m Catholic and I like Santorum, but I think Romney is the best person for the job. I like his business history, I believe his pro-life conversion, I admire his marriage and his family life, and I think his ability to lead…in an executive fashion as opposed to a congressional fashion…is exactly what this country needs.
Senator Santorum, however, is continually saying things that make me groan…like his comment about Romney being so close to being Obama we might as well stick with Obama. What??! That’s indigenous at best. At worst it is tearing down his party for the sake of his own presidential run. Not Good.
Finally, I don’t believe that he is capable of being elected president in a general election because of those comments and his general attitude. He really stepped in it with the contraception issue. The press would have a field day with him as the Republican nominee. And I for one think it is crucial for this country that Obama not see a second term so that we can overturn Obamacare.
So there ya go.
To Veritas March 15. Al Smith and JFK were not the only Catholics to run for the office of President. Ronald Reagan was a born and practicing, married Catholic. Second Marriage changed that, he also changed his political party from Democratic to Republican.
I am Catholic and voting for Rick.
People get off of this so-called torture accusation. The Church has not declared waterboarding or any other enhanced interrogation technique to be an intrinsic evil like they have on the issue of abortion. That is a prudential issue. You can make leaps from vague non-binding documents but no binding documents specifically denote waterboarding or any other enhanced interrogation technique as being illicit, immoral, or intrinsically evil. These are used to save lives, not to mutilate innocent human beings. Plus, at least with regards to waterboarding it was only used on three terrorists who had information corroborating knowledge known about future attacks on the United States. If some tragic 9/11 type of event happened again because these techniques weren’t used the same people crying wolf on ethics and morality would be clamoring from the rooftops how we should have done something more to prevent these attacks. To me, it is immoral to allow innocents to die when there is a way to prevent them. Saints have used torture upon themselves and Seals have been waterboarded so this is further evidence that waterboarding and other coercive techniques are not intrinsically evil. Now are they not nice, bad, or inflict great discomfort upon the person? Yes.
Voting for a budget amendment that happens to fund PP does mean the person voted to fund Planned Parenthood. If there weren’t pro-abortion Democrats, specifically pro-abortion Catholycs, then Santorum wouldn’t have been put in the pickle of whether or not to vote for a budget with abortion funding. If cardinals, bishops, and priests actually stood up for the faith and against the scandal that Pelosi et al. cause the Faith then we wouldn’t have nearly as many Catholics who are pro-abortion/pro-choice.
All these guys have baggage. Romney supporters might want to check out his record in Massachusetts: http://massresistance.org/romney/ Santorum might actually be right in that Romney may only be a marginal improvement over Obama. Once you see his record in MA, you might agree as well. If we don’t straighten out the moral decay in this country, nothing else will matter. If you want to see our future, just look at Greece where decades of low birth rates due to artificial contraception and abortion has left them so short of young people they cannot sustain their social programs. The good life has caught up with them and it will catch up with us as well.
@patricia cala - Reagan was never a Catholic because he was never baptized a Catholic.
“Voting for a budget amendment that happens to fund PP does mean the person voted to fund Planned Parenthood.”
This should say does not.
Pray, fast, do penance…ask the Holy Spirit to guide us, Saint Michael the Archangel to defend us…The Blessed Mother to protect us….
I m not voting for anyone who boasts of support for Title 10. Never.
John, I agree totally with your comments. I will vote for Rick or anyone other than Obama. I will not vote for anyone unless they are pro-life.
Romney’s record on Homosexual marriage and Birth Control-abortion as Gov. of Mass. is distinctly Non Christian. Sad to say as Gov. Romney tried to force Catholic Hospitals in Mass. to dispense Plan B. abortifacient drugs and this is far worse than anything Mr. Santorum has done. Romney came up with Obamacare in Mass. long before Obama modeled his program on Romneycare in Mass..Then Gov. Romney tried to force justices of the peace under the threat of losing their jobs to perform Homosexual marriage -so called ceremonies. Many alleged Catholics in the North like Collins the Sen. from Maine have never followed the teachings of the Catholic faith on abortion or anything else.I would supect that the majority of so called Catholics who support Romney seldom attend mass and like Collins of Maine seldom follow the moral faith teachings of the Catholic faith in any manner shape or form.
The only candidate, out of the four, that has shown consistent integrity throughout his career as an OB Gyn and as a Congressman is Ron Paul. The others are all phonies. Unfortunately the majority of people don’t want a man of integrity elected because he sets a high standard that most people can’t or won’t live up to themselves. They’d rather have a President who is wanting in virtue, because they can feel better about themselves in comparison.
We all know that Jesus Christ would have gotten the same treatment in America that he got in Palestine. Human nature is the same the world over. Therefore Ron Paul will be rejected by the majority of people.
Why does Santorum appeal nore to Evangelicals than Catholics??? Could it be he act more like an Evangelical than a Catholic????
Rick tried to act Catholic,,,thanked God instead of “His Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” on the evening Rick Perry said he would no longer run. Sara Palin endorsed Rick Perry to stay in and the rest is history.
The only use Evangelical Politicians have for Catholics is for the to carry their water every election cycle,,,after than under the bus again.
There is quite a bit of overlap between the Evangelicals and Catholics who know their faith. By this, I am referring to the pro-life stance of the Catholic Church and Evangelicals. Evangelicals saw Santorum as a strong pro-life candidate. It is shameful that we have so many weak Catholics out there who discard the church’s teachings and vote for pro-abortion candidates. Maybe those Catholics have something to learn from the Evangelicals?
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.