A Catholic Talks About Why She Left the Democrat Party

The Anchoress has a great post called When & why I left the Democrat party. I think it is a very good read. She really hits on the Clarence Thomas hearings way back in the early 90's. I remember those hearings quite vividly.

I was watching those confirmation hearings while hanging out drinking beer with some of my far more liberal college friends. I can remember late into the nite(when no one was watching) Thomas had his witnesses up. I can never forget this very big feminist woman that was one of that panel. Thomas had hired her in the past and she would have nothing to do with this "high tech lynching". I wished the country could have seen her as well as many others. I wonder if she was punished in years to come for being so brave.

Why I am not Democrat is on vast display now with all this "Lets Censure Limbaugh" madness in the US Senate. Have they lost their collective minds? I think most Americans look at that and get nervous. Yet it is BUSH that people claim is "crushing dissent" DO people remember the GOP convention in New York 3 years ago? The papers up there ran cruel and scathing pieces about how the "yahoos were coming to town.

Then there is the "life" issue and how the National Democrat party basically said to us pro-lifers get out. That attitude has finally caught up and damaged the Louisiana Democrat party. For years we were the last bastion of Pro-life Democrats. I can remember when the Congressional delegation was majority Democrat and PRO-life. No longer.

I had the fortune when I was in Louisiana Catholic College Students to meet a incredible woman and politician. That was former Congresswoman Lindy Boggs. What a great Catholic politician. She stayed pro-life till the end and is still today. However have no doubt it was not easy for to do so at the end. I was very pleased that at least Bill Clinton had the sense to make her the ambassador to the Vatican. I expect if a Democrat gets in that the next Ambassador to the Holy See will not be.

I am going to write a post on this very interesting PEW research survey that came out that polled on Islam, Mormonism and Pope Benedict. It is very interesting and deserves a post of its own. Look at this graph



The report says:
"There are substantial political differences in views on this issue, as in overall opinions about Pope Benedict. Conservative Republicans are the only political group in which a plurality believes the pope is doing an excellent or good job in promoting positive relations with other religions. Moderate and liberal Republicans are evenly divided over the pope's performance in this area, while roughly half of independents (51%) and conservative and moderate Democrats (47%), and 61% of liberal Democrats, say he is doing only a fair or poor job in dealing with other religions. There is a similar pattern in general views of Pope Benedict. By greater than five-to-one (84%-16%), conservative Republicans have a favorable opinion of the pope; substantial majorities of moderate and liberal Republicans (79%), independents (68%), and conservative and moderate Democrats (79%) also express highly positive views of Pope Benedict. But liberal Democrats have a less favorable view: 59% have a positive impression of the pope, compared with 41% who express an unfavorable opinion."

Why is this?

Now I guess it when one looks at Democrats and their views on such things as abortion, homosexuality/gay rights, other sexual issues, medical issues, and perhaps a distrust in religion in general that this negative rating would not come as a big shock.

However what about his views on the poor, his criticism of the shortcomings of globalization and capitalism, the fact that he was not a big fan of the Iraq war, his environmental statements etc etc. Why is that not getting him a Little bit more looks in the favorable direction

On the Republican side , I think many conservatives know that the Pope is not 100 percent on board with everything they like. We can add his opposition to state mandated execution and to some "conservatives" his stand(And the Catholic Church) view on the hot button issue of immigration.
Again I think this is indicative of views that perhaps tell us that we are far from wanted in the Democrat party.

Republicans need to be careful I got pretty upset with some conservatives with their over the top antics on the Dubai Port Deal and the emotional illegal immigration issue. Purity test can happen in both parties and we need to be on guard for that also.

I Agree with the Anchoress when she says

"Organized anger on either side leaves the masses ripe for manipulation. Matters are much too serious - throughout the world and in our country - to allow emotionalism to seize and carry the day. I think Abraham Lincoln said something like that, back in the day:
“The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country.” Lincoln’s Second Annual Message to Congress, December 1, 1862.
“We must disenthrall ourselves…” That means moving beyond all the sputtering rage, to clear thinking and problem-solving rendered with respectful tongues and open minds."

Amen

UPDATE-
I wanted to add the words of the Vatican Secretary of State to this post. HE visited this great nation and had this this to say in response to a question:

Question-
In 2004 there was a great debate in the United States about those politicians who support abortion and whether they should be denied communion. In the 2008 election we may also see Catholics running for office including those who support abortion is this a debate beyond the United States and is this something where the Vatican may wish to issue guidelines to guide the bishops?

Answer From the Vatican Cardinal Secretary of State-

I don’t think it is necessary to repeat new norms because the norms are well explained in the doctrine of the Church, and those norms which deal with the proper stance and stance of people who want to receive Communion.I’d like to underline one particular thing, especially here in the United States where the freedom of conscience is a major issue. On the basis of the Catholic identity, the man who is in public office or the man who is a politican, I can’t understand how a party whether it be an American party or an Italian party, how a particular political party can impose an ethical choice on the member of that particular political party.I am speaking here about the question of abortion, about homosexual marriage, about embryonic research, all the points that were dealt with so eloquently by the Supreme Knight Anderson yesterday.It’s exactly based on the question of this freedom of conscience that a party cannot impose a particular choice on an individual. I find this a great contradiction here in the United States but also in other places as well that these ideas can be imposed by a particular party.