Ann Coulter..

  • Thread starter Thread starter distracted
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So how do you explain conservative advocacy of death?

Conservatives generally seem much happier advocating death than liberals. That’s the main obstacle the prolife cause faces. The defense of the unborn (and of those at the end of life) seems usually to be maintained most loudly by those who don’t seem to care about any other kind of life. And thus, people not already convinced of the prolife and anti-euthanasia cases are likely to dismiss them as cynical ploys by people who do not otherwise seem overly concerned with human life.

Ms. Coulter is one of the prime offenders in this regard.

Edwin
hmmm… I’m not detecting any ad hominem so maybe i can answer this… :hmmm::coffeeread:

Now if i could only figure out what you are saying or trying to say or trying to imply… (other than, uh… say, Distracted is stupid and can’t think straight and is probably gay, etc… :D)

pro-lifers are in favor of death…

seems to be what you are saying…

well, even though this doesn’t appear to be ad hominem… i still can’t answer it because i haven’t a clue what you are talking about…

If you could just give me some examples… That might help…

What, they believe the unborn should live but not… uh… say people who lean to the left???

well, they might have a poi… oh never mind…
 
Perhaps you could point to the post in which I have advocated socialism. Admittedly I’ve raised questions about broad accusations of “socialism.” But I do not consider myself a socialist–or even, for that matter, a liberal. If anything, I’m a Distributist.

Edwin
Sorry but the semantic use of Distributist in place of Socialist does not register with me. They are but one and the same.:slapfight:
 
Sorry but the semantic use of Distributist in place of Socialist does not register with me. They are but one and the same.:slapfight:
same here…

I’m “poor” but strangely, i am Republican…

i don’t care if someone wants to rise to the top, $ wise… he should be able to do that, just as i am able to be choose “poverty” (though i don’t consider myself poor, just not … “overly comfortable”…

I don’t want $ taken from some rich guy and given to me… I want the choice to make more $ or not make more $…

i don’t like the implication made by many that being poor is… a disease…
 
I’m bored… :sleep:

for the 1000th time:

Jesus said that there are few who find the narrow road to eternal life… (st Mt 7:13, 20, st Lk 13:24)

This explains why there are so many so-called liberal Catholics.

Actually there’s no such hting… You can’t be liberal (pro-birth control, pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia, Communistic) and be Catholic…
You are probably bored because you ceased all thought long ago.

Of course, I am not a Catholic because I don’t subscribe to your political ideology.

Who knew? 🤷
 
A moderator should lock out this thread.

What a terrible conversation it has been along the way.
 
Tell me about it. The thread was supposed to be about Ann Coulter, with most people saying that they didn’t like her outspoken tone because it was not Christ-like. Then those people who say that have their morals questioned and are told that because they don’t like ann coulter, the must not think abortion is the pure evil that it truly is.
 
The population of Catholics that post on this message board do not appear to be representative of the body of Catholics that I have met and interacted with in my time. I have rarely encountered a Catholic that supports wars, does not support health care reform or, importantly, would be self described as conservative.

I have lived in both Oregon and Massachusetts and this is where the majority of my interactions have come. Perhaps this has something to do with. None the less, it is disconcerting for me to hear some of the political arguments that get put forth by Catholics on this board.
I suspect the kind of “Catholics” you hang around with consitently vote for pro-abortion canidates. Why ill bet they even went against the clear teachings of the Church and voted for Obama.
 
A moderator should lock out this thread.

What a terrible conversation it has been along the way.
It seems that whenever anyone reminds another that to be Catholic means also to be a protector of life the conversation is deemed ‘terrible’. I consider it hypocrisy to stand up and tell the world one is Catholic and then go down to a voting booth and vote for someone who advocates or supports abortion. Do I believe many Catholics do just that? Yes I do. Do I believe many Catholics are socialists? Yes I do. Do I believe many Catholics are hypocrites as well? Yes I do. Now that is TERRIBLE.

Yes, it is a terrible conversation just as is talk of abortion and those who oppose it (LIKE ANN COULTER) being attacked not because of her anti-abortion stance but in the way she expresses those beliefs. Why not just admit you would prefer we forget the messenger who obviously reminds us that abortion is murder and just tell us you would prefer we all sit on the fence as if we are somehow above the fray. :stretcher:

Take the example just these last two days of the town meeting with Barney Frank, the active homosexual loudmouth and big supporter of abortion, who lambasted a lady at the meeting and he is somehow ok with his foul remarks with no real mention in the media while Ann who is a rather feisty lady in the private sector is torn apart by those who attack her for her LOUD anti abortion rhetoric. :slapfight:

Who do we stand with… those who are against abortion or those who support it? With Ann and others like her or Barney types? Your choice! I know where I stand and it is with Jesus who took the children upon his lap and chastised all who would do otherwise.:gopray2:
 
I suspect the kind of “Catholics” you hang around with consitently vote for pro-abortion canidates. Why ill bet they even went against the clear teachings of the Church and voted for Obama.
I bet alot of the “Catholics” you hang around with vote for pro death candidates. Why ill bet they even went against the clear teachings of the Church and voted for Obama.

I personally went with the clear teachings of the Church and voted for the candidate that I thought had the best chance of increasing access to health care, improving the economic situation especially for the poor and, eventually, bringing more peace and stability to our nation.

The idea that some whacky right-wing Catholics can sit around and tell those of us on the left that we are somehow “less Catholic” than they are because we voted for a pro-choice candidate is laughable. I think abortion is evil. Just as the poster I quoted here. However, I do not believe that an outright ban is the solution. How do your boy Bush do in banning abortion?

And let us talk about Barney Frank. Frank is a good congressman. He put that loud mouthed ignorant woman in her place. Let us not forget that she was comparing increasing access to healthcare to a level that is more in line with the rest of the world to a policy that waged war on all civilization and exterminated 6 million people. I applaud Frank for not being harsher with her.
 
I think I can speak on behalf of the folks who dislike Ann Coulter by giving this example. The guy who murdered George Tiller was obviously anti-abortion. He probably despised abortion, thought it was a horrible thing. But do I like the guy? NO! He killed a guy! That sin far outweighs his views on abortion.

Am I comparing Coulter to a murderer? No. She hasn’t done anything horrible like that. But just because she is pro-life doesn’t mean that I have to agree with her or support what she does. She speaks hatefully and discredits many pro-life people.

By your logic, we should all be applauding Tiller’s murderer. After all, he’s “pro-life!” He’s against abortion! Let’s stand behind him no matter what else he does!
 
BUT WE DO KNOW ONE THING ABOUT GOD. HE IS PRO-LIFE!

I would not dare to speak as if I knew what is in the thoughts of God but I do know that if you kill one of His children in the womb and use that as a lesser reason behind your other cares and interests then you are the lesser person.
Personally I doubt I could accept anyone as being Catholic in faith at least should they think other matters are more important than stopping the murders of infants in the womb. Not an attack upon any particular individual but a truth to be known to all.
There are too many CINO (Catholic In Name Only) and it truly disgusts me.
 
pro-lifers are in favor of death…

seems to be what you are saying…

well, even though this doesn’t appear to be ad hominem… i still can’t answer it because i haven’t a clue what you are talking about…

If you could just give me some examples… That might help…

What, they believe the unborn should live but not… uh… say people who lean to the left???

well, they might have a poi… oh never mind…
I don’t know why you are having trouble understanding me. It’s not as if I and several others haven’t been harping on Coulter’s call for mass murder (carpet bombing Muslim countries) for much of this thread. This is not atypical. American “conservatives” typically support the death penalty, are quick to support for just about any war the government chooses to engage in (unless it has a clearly humanitarian objective and doesn’t promote American self-interest–then they’re a bit more dubious about it) and to promote the use of ruthless means to win the war, and more broadly tend to take a “tough” approach to issues surrounding human welfare, expecting people to take care of themselves and look out for no. 1. (For instance, “conservatives” typically oppose any amnesty for illegal aliens, arguing that the sanctity of human law is far more important than the desire of poor Mexicans and other immigrants to take care of their families.) You yourself were quick to say of torture that “it’s war” and therefore any means necessary are OK. Conservatives also tend to have little regard for nonhuman life.

Given this broad pattern of comfort with violence, callous disregard for human (and animal) suffering, and promotion of individual and national self-interest, it’s understandable that many Americans are unimpressed when *these same people *oppose abortion and euthanasia and pose *with regard to these issues *as the noble champions of human life and the rights of the weak and helpless. It just doesn’t fly. Something stinks. So many liberals argue that these are false issues–that in fact promoting the rights of the unborn and those nearing the end of life is a distraction from the real issues threatening human life and dignity. This is also a bogus argument. We don’t need to pick the places where we are prolife. There is absolutely no reason why we can’t just defend human (and even nonhuman) life and dignity across the board. But for some reason the political machinery of this country seems deeply invested in preventing us from taking such a position. And those of you who promote one or another partisan vision of what it means to be “prolife” are just contributing to the problem. You are giving an excuse to your opponents on the other side of the spectrum to continue their own callous disregard for human life.

Edwin
 
Sorry but the semantic use of Distributist in place of Socialist does not register with me. They are but one and the same.:slapfight:
Maybe to you because both question your god, capitalism. But they are deeply opposed on the question of government control. Distributists don’t want the central government to control the economy or dictate questions of human welfare. Neither do we want these things to be left up to the “invisible hand” of individual self-interest. That is a pagan superstition.

Edwin
 
There are too many CINO (Catholic In Name Only) and it truly disgusts me.
Would you please go back and re-read our posts? Our dislike for Ann Coulter DOES NOT MEAN WE ARE PRO-DEATH! That has NEVER COME UP! For some stupid reason, you are equating a dislike for Ann Coulter and her hate speech as not taking the abortion cause seriously.

That’s so far from the truth that it’s pretty sad and pathetic on your end to twist our views into something far different than what they really are…

Let’s start from the beginning. Despite the fact that we share many of the same convictions, Ann Coulter says uncharitable things about others that we as Catholics should refrain from saying or endorsing because hateful speech is not Christlike.
 
**
More Ann Coulter, Folks!!! **

***These days, new religions are barely up and running before they seize upon the worst aspects of the God-based religions.

First, there’s the hypocrisy and corruption. At the 1992 Democratic Convention in New York, Al Gore said: “The central organizing principle of governments everywhere must be the environment.” The environment would not, however, be the central organizing principle of Gore’s own life.

The only place Al Gore conserves energy these days is on the treadmill. I don’t want to suggest that Al’s getting big, but the last time I saw him on TV I thought, “That reminds me — we have to do something about saving the polar bears.”

But I digress. As has been widely reported, Gore’s Tennessee mansion consumes 20 times the energy of the average home in that state. But it’s OK, according to the priests of global warming. Gore has purchased “carbon offsets.”

It took the Catholic Church hundreds of years to develop corrupt practices such as papal indulgences. The global warming religion has barely been around for 20 years, and yet its devotees are allowed to pollute by the simple expedient of paying for papal indulgences called “carbon offsets.”

Americans spend an extra $2.2 billion on gas a year because they’re overweight, requiring more fuel in cars to carry the extra pounds. So even with all those papal indulgences, Gore may have a small carbon footprint, but he has a huge carbon butt-print.

Further proving that liberalism is a religion, its practitioners respond with the zeal of Torquemada to any dissent from the faith in global warming.

A few years ago, Danish statistician Bjorn Lomborg wrote a book titled “The Skeptical Environmentalist,” disputing the hysteria surrounding global warming and other environmentalist scares. Lomborg is a Greenpeace anti-war protester — or, as he is described on liberal Web sites, he is a “young, gay vegetarian Dane with tight T-shirts.” His book was cited favorably in The New York Times.

But for questioning the “science” behind global warming, Lomborg was brought up on charges of “scientific misconduct” by Denmark’s Inquisition Court, called the “Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.” I take it Denmark’s Ministry of Truth was booked solid that day.

The moment anyone diverges from official church doctrine on global warming, he is threatened with destruction. Heretics would be burnt at the stake if liberals could figure out how to do it in a “carbon neutral” way.

Climatologist Dr. Timothy Ball is featured in the new documentary debunking global warming, titled “The Great Global Warming Swindle.” For this heresy, Ball has received hate mail with such messages as, “If you continue to speak out, you won’t live to see further global warming.”

… Global warming is supposed to be “science.” It’s hard to imagine Niels Bohr responding to Albert Einstein’s letter questioning quantum mechanics with a statement like: “If you continue to speak out, you won’t live to see further quantum mechanics.”

Come to think of it, one can’t imagine the pope writing a letter to Jerry Falwell saying, “If you continue to speak out, you won’t live to see further infallibility.”

If this is how global warming devotees defend their scientific theory, it may be a few tweaks short of a scientific theory. Scientific facts are not subject to liberal bullying — which, by the way, is precisely why liberals hate science.

A few years ago, The New York Times ran an article about the continuing furious debates among physicists about quantum mechanics, which differs from global warming in the sense that it is supported by physical evidence and it doesn’t make you feel good inside to “do something” about quantum mechanics. It is, in short, science.

Though he helped develop the theory of quantum mechanics, Einstein immediately set to work attacking it. MIT cosmologist Max Tegmark called the constant testing and arguing about quantum mechanics “a 75-year war.”

That’s how a real scientific theory operates. That’s even how a real religion operates. Only a false religion needs hate mail, threats, courts of inquisition and Hollywood movies to sustain it.***

:rotfl::rotfl:

See, i can even laugh with her when she seems to be making fun of the Catholic Church… 🙂

it’s more to the point to say that she doesn’t u/stand the Church (Indulgences)… but hey, that’s virtually everyone!!
 
It seems that whenever anyone reminds another that to be Catholic means also to be a protector of life the conversation is deemed ‘terrible’. I consider it hypocrisy to stand up and tell the world one is Catholic and then go down to a voting booth and vote for someone who advocates or supports abortion. Do I believe many Catholics do just that? Yes I do. Do I believe many Catholics are socialists? Yes I do. Do I believe many Catholics are hypocrites as well? Yes I do. Now that is TERRIBLE.

Yes, it is a terrible conversation just as is talk of abortion and those who oppose it (LIKE ANN COULTER) being attacked not because of her anti-abortion stance but in the way she expresses those beliefs. Why not just admit you would prefer we forget the messenger who obviously reminds us that abortion is murder and just tell us you would prefer we all sit on the fence as if we are somehow above the fray. :stretcher:

Take the example just these last two days of the town meeting with Barney Frank, the active homosexual loudmouth and big supporter of abortion, who lambasted a lady at the meeting and he is somehow ok with his foul remarks with no real mention in the media while Ann who is a rather feisty lady in the private sector is torn apart by those who attack her for her LOUD anti abortion rhetoric. :slapfight:

Who do we stand with… those who are against abortion or those who support it? With Ann and others like her or Barney types? Your choice! I know where I stand and it is with Jesus who took the children upon his lap and chastised all who would do otherwise.:gopray2:
Very good!! :clapping::clapping:

yes, we are to even BECOME like little children… and i would say, the younger the child we attempt to be like, the better… How much younger can one be than UNBORN???

the unborn (& other young children) are the only humans who do not sin… They are just themselves… living peacefully in a dark, warm, comfortable womb, their God-given home… until evil comes to rip them apart… 😦

The thought to do evil does not enter the minds of babies/young children… They would never themselves think to kill someone…(unless that thoiught is put into their heads by some stupid adult) and yet… we “adults” legalize the murder of innocents… and promote it… etc, e tc… (hate saying “we” because i hate abortion… but anyhow…)

we refuse to become children… Instead, we choose the “mature” way… Satan… :rolleyes:
 
Do not try and filter what God is through the lenses of [your own fallible] view…

you did the same thing you accused me of doing…

(I’m so surprised):rolleyes:
 
I I personally went with the clear teachings of the Church and voted for the candidate that I thought had the best chance of increasing access to health care, improving the economic situation especially for the poor and, eventually, bringing more peace and stability to our nation.

.
yes, $$ is all-important…
 
I

By your logic, we should all be applauding Tiller’s murderer. After all, he’s “pro-life!” He’s against abortion! Let’s stand behind him no matter what else he does!
applauding? well, that’s somewhat debatable (i suppose)

or do I?? :hmmm:

since he did take the capital punishment law into his own hands… but hey, the state wouldn’t do it… The state would kill Ted Bundy because he killed adult women (and a few younger than adult)… but the state would not free society of one who mutiliated and murdered younger people…

so i guess Roeder figured someone should…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top