I don't intend for this to be a discussion on religion, just to get a feel of how important the dictates of religious leaders (if indeed posters acknowledge them) are in their consideration of who they are going to vote for in the upcoming election.

(I am a Catholic, and according to what some bishops say, if I vote for John Kerry, I should be denied communion.)

Comments are welcome as long as posters follow this forum's rules.

I couldn't vote. The choice I would vote for is not there. It would be.

I would consider his/her stance, yet still vote for what I knew was right. I suspect that is what most would say.

Red

Sorry about that, Red. Those were the only choices I could think of at the time.

I have thought seriously about what the leaders in my religion have had to say. I cannot vote the way they say without, in my opinion, neglecting a lot of issues (like the invasion of Iraq) that also have negative consequences not only here but world-wide.

If it was an issue that I was unsure about - then I might take religious guidance. Some moral issues can become very complex - and it helps to have advice from someone who deals with morality on a daily basis.

I have to say that, even were I religious (which I'm not) I would have to take any political view expressed by a churchman (and let's be honest, they usually are men) with a pinch of salt.

Within Christianity, there are extreme left- and right- wing views, both of whose proponents aren't afraid to use God as the justification for their position. Either one is right and the other is wrong, or God doesn't much care about politics. And in the Bible itself, Jesus appears to be something of a liberal, where Saul of Tarsus and the Old Testament tends more to the right, so who is one supposed to believe?

Other religions have similar breadths of interpretation - one man's "eye for an eye" trumps another man's "love thy neighbour", or vice versa, every time.

In my opinion, religion is most often used in politics as a kind of appeal to higher authority, which, as we know, is a classic of logical fallacy that almost automatically allows us to ignore the person giving the opinion. If the best reason to do, or not do, something is that "God tells us to do so", then there are no good reasons to comply in the real world.

Many religious leaders have crossed paths with me in this life. Although I respect most of them for their choices to make spirit their focus, this life isn't all spirit. In fact, it isn't even close to spirit other than a manifestation of some kind of energy we term God or Goddess or whatever name we have chosen to give.

So, when a religious leader tells me to do something, it's taken with a good shaking of salt. Personally, although I'll listen, the choice to take the advice is always my choice. When it comes down to it, everything in this life is my choice -- even possibly where I was born, to whom, and when. But that's just one belief some religious leaders have among many.

Some Catholic leaders have decided to make politics a religious matter, and that's fine. These people apparently cannot discern between spirit and physical reality, and that's fine. There's a god up there ready to punish anyone who doesn't follow these directives, at least in these religious leaders' minds.

Um, sorry, can't accept that theology for myself. Maybe others can, and so be it.

The sticking point has to do with keeping abortion legal, or so that's my impression. If one votes for a politician who supports legalized abortion, is that the same as having an abortion? Killing a fetus?

Ah, and here's a real problem area I have with this theology. Even the thought of doing a sin is the same as doing the sin. Now apparently the thought of keeping a sin legal for others is a sin, even if the thought has nothing to do with me thinking about doing the sin.

It's a pretty darn slippery slope, eh? So does that mean that every sin should be illegal? Should we vote only for politicians who want to make every sin illegal? And how might God take this situation?

My understanding is that God granted us free will. This has led to all kinds of grief for God as humans exercise free will not to His liking, at least so it goes in the Old Testament.

It is also my understanding that this free will has not been revoked. We are free to love God or to not love God, and even to have no opinion on the matter.

But are we free to force others to this situation through civil and criminal laws? Good question. We have tried by making things like murder illegal. Should abortion be treated the same way?

Aye, these are tough questions each of us has to measure within ourselves and come to some kind of resolution for action. So how to vote?

Follow a religious leader's directive or choose our own?

What would God want you to do?

I dare say He would want you to have the guts to make your own choices, stand by those choices, and not depend on the directives of others. Depending on others to do this is, in my way of thinking about spirit, a monumental abandonment of the free will that God has put up with over the eons.

Because, well, that's just the way things are. We can choose to be led or choose to lead ourselves. If leading ourselves brings us to God, I do believe that's what this is all about. I'm doubtful we can be led to God through the directives of religious leaders.

This leadership seems to always bring us to something less than God. But that's just me again -- you probably have other ideas, and so be it.

Not being religious, I think its pretty obvious that I would ignore any religous leader who tried to tell me how to vote. People in positions of authority who try to 'tell' you how to vote extends beyond religion - union leaders, for example, may demand that all their members vote the way the union decides. And its all nonsense; I would always vote for who I thought was the best candidate.

If I were religious, I can see how it would become more complex. Maybe not for the faith I would have been (Church of Scotland) if I had stuck with it, as it isn't a religion with a dominant hierarchy of power. Many faiths do have powerful and authoritative leaders, and I can't really say what I would do if I were a member of one of those religions. Knowing who I am, I would probably rebel against it.

At the end of the day, it is my belief that religion has no place in politics (although there are some cases that don't seem to work any other way, particularly in the Islamic world). There are far too many areas of conflict, and it will always serve to exclude minority religions, atheists and agnostics.

I always feel uneasy when politics comes at me from the pulpit. It really ruins Sunday service for me, and I will choose a new church based on this fact. I'm not Catholic, but it seems that this sect may do this more than others, probably the hierarchical nature as Robin points out.

I think that what got to the Catholic leaders was not that John Kerry and others want to keep abortion legal, but that they are being so militant about it, appearing at pro-abortion fundraisers and rallies. Keeping it legal is one thing (even Bill Clinton said 'legal, safe and rare') but the appearances at these functions almost seems to advocate abortion. If sanctity of life is such a central tenet of Catholicism, I could see where leaders of that faith would want to make a point about values that you should hold communing with that faith. They no doubt just want to remind people that there are core beliefs, and that your secular day job is a good place to demonstrate them.

Personally, I would feel really awkward at a NARAL rally, for instance. It would just feel creepy to me, even though I think abortion should be legal I just can't celebrate it the way that they do. Just my 2¢, since we're in 'casual conversation'

I would be really curious if Catholicism took a stand on the death penalty in the USA.

I Voted...
I really don't care what any religious leader recommends

I would like to take this a step further and if my Vicar were to
If you were told that voting for one candidate was violating your faith
aside of Hitler being the candidate he referenced I would be so utterly offended that I might just get right up in the middle of his sermon, collect my children and find myself a new Church. It is very much his place to guide me in the interpretation of my faith, it is not his place to make the choices relating to the application what I have learned in my day to day life. I would view any such encroachment on my liberty down right unacceptable.

Every time a convict on death row is about to be executed, the Pope issues an appeal for clemency.

Pope John Paul II also urged Bush Jr. not to invade Iraq, and in fact he scolded him about it when the President visited him recently.

Perhaps you can see why I do not like the Church taking a stand on the sanctity of life regarding the unborn, but not sticking to its guns, so to speak, regarding the sanctity of life of the "already born." It is inconsistent.

I am against abortion. I am also against the invasion of Iraq (and I still am) and against capital punishment. Who is more in need of redemption and the time to change for the better than a convicted murderer? That's my church's stance.

In addition, the Roman Church has taken a stance against stem cell research. Now there are Congressmen who oppose abortion and yet advocate stem cell research. In that case, does a good Catholic vote for them or against them?

The bishops are making things pretty sticky for those of us who feel that retaining Bush for another four years is tantamount to having the fox in charge of guarding the hen house.

Seems that the Catholic Church makes it impossible to vote. A vote for Kerry is a vote for abortion, while a vote for Bush is a vote for war and capital punishment.

I'll bet the Church has problems with literally every actual and potential candidate out there.

So what's the solution? Write in the Pope's name? He can't serve. How about a bishop's name? Priest? Nun?

It's certainly a big problem the way the Church has put it across. It could force people to either go with the Church or with civic duty, but not both.

It also seems that the mechanism of confession isn't able to handle this situation. Is it proper to confess for voting? Don't think I could do it with a straight face. Besides, acting in defiance of the Church isn't exactly covered by the Ten Commandments.

For PE this is a real dilemma. Good Catholic or good citizen -- what's more important?

I say curses on those who invented this dilemma. From what I can see, there's more spirituality in a slug than this pontificating polity. And that's why I'm not a Catholic, good or bad. However, I do sympathize with those who strive to be good Catholics. It's definately not an easy path.

Nor is the path of the yellow robes, but oh well. Seems that some need those difficult paths.

I voted for the last option "I really don't care what any religious leader recommends".

First and foremost because I'm agnostic and therefore follow no religious leader. But secondly because I don't like the idea of bending to the will of someone else, simply because they held a position of respect. I am perfectly capable of forming my own thoughts and opinions for a given topic.

Wow PE, from reading both yours and Author's posts... for the first time I grasp what a predicament the Roman Catholic Church has subjected their flock to. I certainly sympathize, having been raised Anglo-Catholic, I too would find it very hard to break from the traditions of my faith. I never realized how stuck in my ways I was until I moved to NJ and had to find a new Parish. The NJ Arch Diocese is notoriously radical and I come from a very conservative community and upbringing. The one thing I have always been blessed with is to never have been subjected to Politics from the Pulpit. Be it a Conservative or Liberal Episcopal Diocese the Mass always stayed true to the faith and spoke only to matters of faith. My heart goes out to you and I can only say that if I were in your shoes, I would vote what my conscience deems a priority and trust God with the rest. Good luck

Thank you, AuthorMusician and Piper Plexed, for your understanding.

The issue has bothered me to the point that I have not attended a mass since this Bishop Michael Sheridan and others started admonishing the faithful against voting for those who flunk their litmus test. I am torn, but not so torn that I am going to throw my vote away or grit my teeth and cast a vote that screams opposition to everything I viscerally know to be right.

The Roman Catholic church has committed acts of courage and great kindness throughout its history. As a human institution and at times with popes who were more interested in amassing power or wealth, however, it has done great disservices to its followers and to those outside the fold. Virtually any churchman you might talk to would say that despite all of its mistakes, particularly the most recent one of concealing the misdeeds of pedophile priests and letting them continue to pastor, the Church is still a great institution that has benefitted and continues to benefit many.

And yet, these same churchmen would not extend to otherwise well-intentioned candidates who have faithfully served the American people for many years the same clemency and support that they ask and indeed, expect to receive.

I have to resolve this. Sometime ago in one of the many "fun" quizzes in the Casual Conversation forum on this thread, I scored closest to Orthodox Quakers in my ideology. I looked up once where the closest Society of Friends met; I can look it up again.

I do not want to leave the Catholic Church. But I am beginning to believe that I am not welcome there if my ideals do not strictly fall in line with the dictates of the American Catholic prelates.

I voted: "I really don't care what any religious leader recommends."

Paladin Elspeth of course knows that is how I feel. I joined the Unitarian-Universalist religion in Midland around the mid to late '60's. At that point in its history, the Midland Fellowship had never had a regular minister, relying instead on guest speakers. They were routinely told to expect cross-examination following their sermons. Members were expected to form independent religious beliefs, and to rely on speaker's knowledge as a resource, rather than as an authority figure. Arguments were more likely to be presented from one of Harry Kemelman's Rabbi novels or The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy than from the Bible.

We were once told by a visiting Baptist minister that our primary "communion beverage" appeared to be coffee. He was invited back annually!

There was an interesting article in a UU World magazine earlier this year. Unfortunately I can't seem to recall enough of the title to reference it, and I can't seem to find the article at the moment. The basic premise of the article was that research into fundamentalist religions showed that all religious fundamentalists tried to put control of daily life into the hands of men and the church, claim to be the one true religion, and suppress the role of women in society. The research reached the some conclusion whether that fundamentalist religion was Christian, Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, etc. It was not a description of a lifestyle I would wish to be a part of.

It is far easier for me to sustain a belief in religious and philosophical tenets I have developed myself, than to memorize and recite back scripture and verse that may actually be meaningless to me. As a child for instance, I learned that God had told us, "Thou shalt not kill." It is far easier for me to interpret that to mean that war and executions are as immoral as murder. I have heard a lot of tortured arguments to support the tenet that all wars are justified, and will always be with us. "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." "The only good (insert pejorative term here) is a dead one." Yes, living in peace is a harder path to follow. If however, we continue this "War on Terror," a day will come when more Americans will have died fighting it than died on 9-11; and they will have died on foreign soil. We are killing, one estimate put it, about 14 Iraqi's for every American death. With 800 Americans dead in Iraq, that's about 11,000 Iraqi deaths. I have no estimate of the death toll in Afghanistan. We are fighting religious fundamentalists who know doubt are asking their followers to avenge those thousands of deaths with an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

I will be voting for new political leadership this November. If I was attending a church where a religious leader tried to tell me that I needed to cast my vote for a "War President" who firmly believes in capital punishment in order to belong... I would leave the church, and I would do it quite vocally. I've had thirty plus years of experience standing up in church and saying, I disagree with what you're saying.

I would wish to see myself as a citizen of this little blob in space called EARTH on which we are trapped.

I do not see myself better than others who live here and I am willing to share myself unconditionately with those who share with me.
I will say sorry when wrong and will expect the same from others.

I will do what my concience guides me and no-one tells me otherwise.

Regards.......Alan

I am a Southern Baptist and I respect my religious leaders and their opinions (I.E pastors/elders), but his does not mean I can't disagree with them. I'm actual good friends with them, and we went with other men of the church on a men's retreat . It was quite enjoyable. One thing I noticed is that my church leaders are human and fallible, and they admit it. If my religious leader tells me how to vote, I would CONSIDER it as advice and vote my conscience.

Just curious.

How is this different then when union members openly support a Republican and find themselves black balled?

Or people that belong to social organizations support the wrong politics ad find themselves on the outs with their "friends"?

Seems to be everyone with a bully pulpit will use it to .... well .... bully on occasion.

The answer is that the unions do not tell you your salvation is or might be in jeopardy; neither do social organizations. Clergymen may tell you that you are sinning against the deity you worship if you compromise or worse yet, do not follow what they dictate that a good believer is to do.

Do you honestly think that churches, unions and social organizations are that similar?

Similar as a whole? not really, similar in the power the wield and have the ability to abuse? definitely.

If you "work out of the hall" in a union, the union holds ALOT of power over you. For those that don't know, to "work out of the hall" is to be a union tradesman who has usually completed their apprenticship (sometimes as long as 5 years) and does not work for just one employer but rather is a member of the union that is assigned work by the union when various contractors ask for tradesmen of your trade. If you work "out of the hall" and you get black balled because of your political leanings (which happens frequently) then you will almost never get work from the hall. When you do it will be limited to lovely jobs like changing the light bulbs on the light posts of the NJ Jersey Parkway in the middle of winter. My father lived that life and had to leave electrical construction despite 10 years experiece because he could no longer feed us, simply because he dared to question the leadership openly at a meeting. The union has the ability to make it so that you can't earn a living at you trade and are forced to abandon it to work somewhere else.

I think being able to make it so that you can not earn a living to feed your family is QUITE powerful.

And for some, their social standing is the most important thing it the world to them. To be outcasts from their group, be it the local society club, the environmental movement, or their volunteer fire department is extremely painful to them. For that to happen simply because they disagreed with the leadership on something is terrible.

Many people in the country do not follow a religion. Many do not go to church and many more only go to church because they feel it is expected of them but they ignore almost all that is taught or said.

For all but the truly devout of a church, the power of other groups over their lives is just as powerful.

Politically, a lady in a town outside of St. Louis here went against the local mayor publicly. The lady lives in a dense urban area and has a severely disabled child. She had a handicapped parking space on the street in front of here house. After she opposed the Mayor, the handicapped parking sign was removed. With a wheel chair bound child, living on a hill having to park a block or more away is a severely difficult position to be in, especially when you have your own back and knee problems. It was a position she was put is solely because of here politics. Thankfully, a local advocate / reporter put the story on the air and took the issue to the state. After almost 2 years the lady finally had her handicaped parking space and her life back.

To suggest that only the leadership of a church can abuse the pulpit is really naive. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely", and many political activist groups, social groups, volunteer organizations, Unions and local governments abuse their power daily.

This issue is not new. The Catholic church tried this years ago suggesting that politicians members who supported abortion would be excommunicated. That fell flat on it's face.

However, if you are a member of a church and do not believe in much of what the church stands for then you really should not be a member of THAT church, Temple, Masque, etc. Find a church whose interpretation of your God is similar to your own. Or like me, choose not to follow any church as they are all created and run by man and are thus fallible and subject to abuse as in this scenario. Worship God in your own way.

There are those who would abolish churches AND unions for that very reason.

Not everything in this world boils down to the power to make or not to make money. There is a spiritual dimension to life. To those who refuse to acknowledge the spiritual dimension or those institutions that foster particular beliefs in the spiritual realm, this whole quandary seems like someone making a mountain out of a mole hill. I understand that.

To those who do care what their spiritual directors think, however, this represents a true conflict, a conflict similiar to those conflicts that prompted a certain priest named Martin Luther to post those famous 95 theses, and ultimately caused a religious revolution. He was not seeking to separate from his Church; he was seeking, as a good Catholic, to point out serious problems that needed to be addressed and rectified.

I will be sure to pass that on to my daughter if my union ever discovers my politics and I find myself unable to feed her. I'm sure it will make her feel better (not meant as a fame, just trying to illistrate the point).

And I am sure all those people that used to feel good about donating their time to local volunteer fire departments, neighborhood watch groups or the like really feel the loss of no longer being able to give of themselves to their community in the way they like the best simply because they dared to question someones little pocket empire.

Different people put different levels of worth on different things. As the sole bread winner of my family the WORST thing that can happen is for someone to take away my ability to earn a living and feed my family, as meager as that living is.

I take great pride in my volunteer service to my community. It is a big part of who I am. If someone kept me from being able to do this because they didn't like my politics I would be very hurt and in some ways quite lost as a person.

My relationship with God is just that. MY relationship with God. I do not feel the need to be directed by a priest / pastor / Rabbi / etc. My discussions with other God fearing people and my own reading of the bible is how I determine my faith. My confessions and prayers are for God alone to hear. I see no reason to subject my relationship with God to men, who, being human, are susceptible to mistakes, pride, envy, etc. No one stands between me and God except my conscience.

Bottom line, ANY organization can bully you. The fact that a church is doing it with "your salvation" in the future is really not very different from a union doing it to your financial solvency in the present. It is painful and puts people in terrible positions.

The solution is rather simple. There are many different groups within the major faiths. There are dozens and dozens of Christian churches, all with different takes on various issues. If you do not believe as your church believes then you really don't belong in that church. In general most Churches are not democracies.

Catholic Church: Opposes Birth Control, Opposes Abortion, Opposes the Death Penalty, Opposes Gay Marriage. They Oppose these things based of the tenets of the Catholic church. If you support any or all of them the you really don't belong in the Catholic church.

The argument can be made that their positions are based on the overall positions of the church which that church believes is the only way to salvation. I bet they believe they are doing the FOR YOU to keep you on the righteous path to salvation.



And the church created by man and run by man decided that their policies were right and he was wrong and thus he was excommunicated. He followers eventually created the Lutheran church which was the beginning of protestant faiths to come.

I know the story, I was raised a Lutheran. A church is NOT a democracy. At least the Catholic church is not. If your views vary drastically from those of your church then you simply don't belong in that church. There are many other churches with VERY similar overall doctrines but differences that you might feel more comfortable with. The Lutheran church is not all that different from the catholic church overall Raise Lutheran, but went to Catholic grade school), but it might be a better fit for someone whos views differ from the Catholic church. If not, a multitude of other protestant churches exist, there is surely one to fit about everyone.

I voted "I really don't care what any religious leader recommends." One of my first pastors had a fifth grade education. One fine Sunday morning he alleged wives should let husbands take care of finances because women lack the mental capacity to perform complicated calculations. I couldn't convince my parents to look into another church. Recently I haven't attended church since the Baptist pastor's strong suggestion to vote Republican. I respect religious wo/men's decision to help mankind as they deem best, but spiritual respect and political respect are not one in the same for me. While bishops are within their rights to refuse communion to pro-abortion, pro-gay, pro-taboo-du-jour voters regardless of the circumstances using non-profit status to get away with things other organizations couldn't dream of, whether it's tax evasion or freezing the religious electorate, is not fair.

OLS,

You've brought up unions here and this thread. I've never belonged to a union and don't see why I need one to support myself. For the most part I view them as organizations that filled a void in wages, job safety, and worker's rights in our economic history but with a few exceptions the fat lady's done and their usefulness, for now, is spent.

A year ago, on a different message board, people were talking about the economy, wages, and unemployment. The conservatives' unanimous solution, perhaps in defense of a majority in D.C. and a desire to sound pro-American, was curt: move if prospects are as bleak as you make them out to be. Their simplified, one-size-fits-all answer rubbed me the wrong way. I know firsthand your chances for a better life may improve if you change your zip code but a hop, skip and ride away in a U-Haul truck isn't an end all, be all solution to complex problems. Their rational was/is you only have yourself to blame if you don't improve your quality of life, and flimsy explanations like emotional attachments to places and people doesn't validate a refusal to relocate or cash unemployment checks.

For all I know conditions at your job may be as bad as you claim. You could very well be black balled for voting against union interests and favoritism runs rampant. If church is just a place of worship and work is just a place to earn a living, and finding a new house of worship works for a believer, why couldn't finding non-union employment work for you (if you aren't doing so already)?

Please don't confuse me with a union booster. I am far from one I would gladly seek non-union employment in my field if I could find it in my area. The problem we have is that the majority of our work in the low voltage industry is on new construction. In my neck of the woods, new construction is solidly union. If you are a none union high or low voltage electrician, communcations specialist, etc and show up on a job site that is union you will be "walked-off" the site.

It is difficult at best to find work in my field outside of unions because unions have alot of power locally.

That being said I am still considering my options.

Just this week I called a non-union company in the same business to seek employment. The guy is interested in me. Funny thing was, he asked be about union organizing as he has hand alot of problems with his guys being "walked-off" jobs. The EMPLOYER was inquiring about organizing. That is the environment I am in. Could i move? sure, just show another area in the country with a fair employment situation and good schools and a 2 bedroom house I can buy for 25,000 (what I paid for our house) and low property taxes and I will look into it. Though being a Reservist, and living next door to my inlaws (great support for my wife when I am gone) would still make it very hard to consider a move, even if the impossible above was found.

As for me, I left the Lutheran church I was growing up in because as a kid, the only answer I ever got from my paster to any serious religious question was a pat on the head and something similar to "go away kid you bother me". In my young adult life I tried dozens and dozens of churches only to find I didn't feel I belonged in any of them. So, seeing human failings in all the churches I tried, I decided to simply follow God on my own. It works for me.

Leaders that have influence over groups, be they churches, union locals, community programs or whatever, all have the ability to abuse that relationship. It is unfortunate but that abuse is frequent.

In the case of churches, if a religious leader holds his congregation responsible for the ideas, programs and people they support when they conflict with the church doctrine then to me it looks like he/she is doing their job. Now if they would hold their congregation to an equally high standard in regard to personal actions (like adultery for example) then I would see their actions as even handed and would not have a problem with them.

Here is a new link regarding the Catholics trying to influence the election:

http://kevxml2adsl.verizon.net/_1_2LUDTO10...=&feed=ap&top=1

So at least they're looking at the negative consequences of taking such a hard line.

Judge not, eh? For religious leaders, these are sure ignorant people with very little understanding of human nature. McCarrick has a good handle on it, and so the drum beating Catholics stuck in their hierarchy need to take a good look at the core teachings of Christianity. A certain measure of humility is in order.

My religous leader tells me to not do alot of things, even some that could 'condem me to hell', but i do it anyways.

I will be voting for John Kerry, and I will also be receiving communion.

There is a priest whom I like and trust (he was an instructor in my karate class) and with whom I can discuss pretty much anything. I talked with him today about feeling obligated to vote against George W. Bush even though I am pro-Life.

I assured him that if Kerry becomes the next President, I will be bugging him about the abortion issue.

He said essentially to be at peace about it, to do the best I can, and to continue to receive communion (I haven't for months now, and I miss it).

I am so happy for you your Priest sounds like a fabulous guy, Don't loose his number!

Thank you, Piper Plexed, and everyone who expressed understanding.

Compared to a lot of issues in the world, this one seems relatively small, I know. But we all need to be as clear-minded as possible as this election approaches, and vote with the best informed intentions.

There are people still being injured and/or losing their lives daily in this not-really-called-occupied-but-still-filled-with-foreign-especially-American-troops country in the Middle East. I plan on kicking up a lot of sand with Kerry, too, should he make it to the White House. This so-called war on terror is just plain bad policy and should be scrapped for a better plan.