Comments on: The thrill of rebellion http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/09/the-thrill-of-rebellion/ Unity in charity, diversity in truth Mon, 10 Oct 2011 03:49:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: JSP http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/09/the-thrill-of-rebellion/comment-page-1/#comment-66083 JSP Thu, 04 Sep 2008 16:16:27 +0000 http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/09/the-thrill-of-rebellion/#comment-66083 It's a mortal sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate. A mortal sin. The blood of innocents will be on your hands. It’s a mortal sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate.

A mortal sin.

The blood of innocents will be on your hands.

]]> By: Clara http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/09/the-thrill-of-rebellion/comment-page-1/#comment-65963 Clara Thu, 04 Sep 2008 01:48:39 +0000 http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/09/the-thrill-of-rebellion/#comment-65963 Yes, there was an ambiguity there, but I didn't want to stop and get all technical in the middle of the piece. Happy to clarify, however. I meant "deliberately" to signify that one intends to vote for a pro-choice candidate <i>qua</i> pro-choice candidate. Certainly that would apply to a person who liked a candidate <i>primarily because</i> of his stance on abortion, but I don't think it has to be quite that strong. If a favorable stance towards legalized abortion were <i>one of</i> the factors that one looked for in a political candidate, that still seems enough to invoke the <i>latae sententiae</i> excommunication. Voting for a pro-choice candidate <i>despite</i> his views on abortion still seems wrong to me in the great majority of cases, but I won't go out on a limb and say that it's necessarily wrong enough to exclude a person from Communion. Yes, there was an ambiguity there, but I didn’t want to stop and get all technical in the middle of the piece. Happy to clarify, however.

I meant “deliberately” to signify that one intends to vote for a pro-choice candidate qua pro-choice candidate. Certainly that would apply to a person who liked a candidate primarily because of his stance on abortion, but I don’t think it has to be quite that strong. If a favorable stance towards legalized abortion were one of the factors that one looked for in a political candidate, that still seems enough to invoke the latae sententiae excommunication. Voting for a pro-choice candidate despite his views on abortion still seems wrong to me in the great majority of cases, but I won’t go out on a limb and say that it’s necessarily wrong enough to exclude a person from Communion.

]]> By: Theologian Mom http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/09/the-thrill-of-rebellion/comment-page-1/#comment-65960 Theologian Mom Thu, 04 Sep 2008 01:11:20 +0000 http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/09/the-thrill-of-rebellion/#comment-65960 Just to be clear - did you just say that voting for a pro-choice candidate is supporting legalized abortion? And that this merits exclusion from communion? I'm not sure what your adjective "deliberately" signifies there - that you are voting for them because you support the pro-choice position? Or just that it's not accidental? Just to be clear – did you just say that voting for a pro-choice candidate is supporting legalized abortion? And that this merits exclusion from communion? I’m not sure what your adjective “deliberately” signifies there – that you are voting for them because you support the pro-choice position? Or just that it’s not accidental?

]]>