Are you pro-life or Republican first?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LCMS_No_More
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
stinkcat_14 said:
Under what criteria is the tax unjust? Nobody is harmed by the estate tax because nobody is entitled to anyone else’s money. The dead guy certainly isn’t harmed, because the money is of no use to him now.
Click to expand...
Just how many times do you think it is fair to tax the earnings of others? The money and property that a man accumulates has already been taxed once. Do you really think it is fair to tax it again?
 
ALLGIRLS said:
What is the Democractic party so afraid of? Oh yeah, PP, NOW, NARAL Moveon.org, Human Rights Watch, etc., taking away all their money. 😦 . The traditional pro-life Democracts really need to split off and form a new party, and then all Catholics could vote w/ a totally clear conscience.

In Christ,

Ellen
Click to expand...
Those organizations sound so familiar… I remember a list from wikipedia…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_projects_supported_by_George_Soros

And I remember this remark you made:
Bill Clinton proudly had Timothy McVeigh executed!), but I’m more mad at the Dem’s for selling their soul to PP, NOW, and NARAL so completely as to refuse to even let a pro-life candidate run in a national election. How can they claim to be the party of the poor and vulnerable (yeah, George Soros, Bill Gates, Alec Baldwin, Dave Letterman and the rest of the Hollywood gang are SO poor and vulnerable ) when they refuse to protect the MOST vulnerable in our society, the unborn and the poor, scared women caught up in a crisis pregnancy ?
Click to expand...
Emphasis mine… I do not appreciate your sentiment for him.
 
mary_bobo said:
Just how many times do you think it is fair to tax the earnings of others? The money and property that a man accumulates has already been taxed once. Do you really think it is fair to tax it again?
Click to expand...
How is it unfair. How is he being harmed? There is nothing in church teaching that would suggest that it is unfair.
 
Orionthehunter said:
Because I believe that the “preferential option for the poor” social teaching extends beyond our borders, I am more concerned about the poverty of God’s children in Asia, Mexico, etc., I think that the movement of jobs to these areas lifts the economic boat of people all over the world. I don’t consider just the effect on Americans whose poorest are “richer” than 80% of the rest of the world. The standard of living in these countries is rising faster than anywhere in the World. Praise be to God!
Bravo, a point many do not see or understand. Brilliant as usual Orion. thank you Lord, for all the benefits I have in my life.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
what i think is when you say your pro life it means you value all life, so when you support the war in Iraq or the death penalty you’re saying you are pro choice you’re choosing who dies. any ways the republican party had 8 years to make abortion illegal and they haven’t
 
lurdes said:
what i think is when you say your pro life it means you value all life, so when you support the war in Iraq or the death penalty you’re saying you are pro choice
Click to expand...
Yes, but that’s not what the Catholic Churches teaches. You are using a label in a way to define your own beliefs. That’s unfair use of the term
 
the_phoenix said:
Wow, this has got to be the most confusing poll I’ve ever seen! 😃

Short answer:

I’m pro-life first … Would definitely vote Democrat if the Democrat candidate was in favor of protecting the unborn, and if he/she were running against a liberal Republican who was not pro-life. 🙂

Normally though, I’m a Republican. :cool:

~~ the phoenix
Click to expand...
I second that. Although if all the candidates were pro-abortion and the only one who wasn’t was a moron i might have to make a sacrifice for the good of the nation.
 
LCMS_No_More said:
What role, … except as a construction contractor?

Yes, primarily construction, but already much of the design and maintenance of state and federal highways is being contracted out. The gvmt has not truly down sized even as they contract out the work. And when they discuss FTE emplymnt levels you cannot trust the #'s because they hire temp. people from temp. agencies [not get incld in their #'s] I know as I worked for a state hwy depart and a county agency.

… this organization is going be getting a lot more clients in the near future.

They successfully move people into perm. housing … they do this no matter who is in office & successfully … the gvnmt programs cannot match their success …

… I the best way to fix poverty is to create an economy that is conducive to an expanding middle class. … Americans are forced to compete with $1.00 a day labor…

Most [not all] of the regulations that impact manufacturing some from the democratic side of the aisle… BUt manufacturing is not the back bone of the US economy … big employers make for big headlines. It is the small businesses who create the most jobs.

Not 1 of my employees makes minimum wage. All have 100% paid health insurance [not family coverage - it can be purchased thru my company]. I have a Simple IRA Plan w/ a 3% match.

…the best solution for poverty is a good union job with benefits and a pension.

Unless of course the unions bankrupt the company, … if my 4 employees unionize, I would be out of business & they would be looking for new employment … I am already providing all of the benefits that I can afford … and my salary is $20K below what the public sector pays & $30k to $40K less than ifa large firm. Money is not everything.

…I am for Medicare for All, which is NOT socialized medicine, …

Medicare for all is socialized medicine, I do not need anyone to tell me that a gvnmt paid “insurance program” is socialized …Once you get this “medicare” for all then you will have to subsidize the ‘supplemental insurance’ that is its companion. Cost control is part of the Medicare package … When I go to the doctor I am charged a higher price to compensate for the Medicare limits & the indigent care. If a person has no insurance then they are charged to compnsate for the Insurance negotiated caps in charges …

You display an excellent skill at memorizing radio and cable tv talking points…

I rarely have time to listen to radio and/or TV [cable or otherwise … I volunteer at my church 4 evenings ea. week [most times driving there straight from my office. I earned a masters in pastoral ministry a few yrs back … Family, work & volunteering does not leave me much time for memorization thank you very much. Follow me around a week, perhaps you might learn a few things about the economy, government intrusion into business, my family life & social justice in action — [/COLOR]

…my understanding, Social Security has all but eliminated poverty among the elderly (11.9% as of 1997). That makes it one of the most successful non-military government programs…

SS has been a source of retirement for the elderly The fact is that FICA and Medicare payroll taxes were never collected from you [and your employer] and placed into an acct from which you would then draw upon in your retirement. When it was instituted & began to pay out the first beneifts there were appr. 8 workers paying per 1 receiving benefits … the surplus revenue was placed in the general fund & spent. Now there are appr. 3 employees for every 1 person on SS… Soon it will be 2 or less. The amt of money collected will not cover the amount paid out.

When the program was created it was not to guarantee dependent child benefits to age 23 if in college **

It was & is a pyramid program like AmWay. You need more at the bottom to support the top

…predators of all stripes, including unscrupulous businesses. …

There are unscrupulous employees, too. The unions work very hard to protect them from being held responsible for their actions…

…if the Democrats became anti-abortion, anti-gay “marriage,” anti-research on stem cells taken form unborn children, anti-euthanasia and anti-human cloning AND the Republicans became pro-choice-on-abortion or euthanasia, pro gay-marriage, pro-research on stem cells taken from unborn children, and pro-human cloning…would you still vote Republican or would you change to Democrat?

I always vote for the person **not the party. **I cannot register as a democrat because the Democrat Party stands & fights for the right to kill unborn children. Not til the democratic party has a change of purpose & renounces the racist eugenics of Margaret Sanger’s Planned Parenthood and NARAL et al …

Now given any indivdual candidate who is against abortion, euthanasia, embyonic stem cell research & cloning, Who is Pro family, supports economic development & limited government. Is tough on crime * then I will vote for the person regardless of party affiliation* … that is what I do now & what I will continue to do!
Click to expand...
 
ribozyme said:
Those organizations sound so familiar… I remember a list from wikipedia…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_projects_supported_by_George_Soros

And I remember this remark you made:

Emphasis mine… I do not appreciate your sentiment for him.
Click to expand...
Are you arguing that George Soros (the incredibly influential billionaire) is poor and vulnerable? You don’t appreciate my sentiment for him? I’m sorry, I didn’t know CAF changed it’s rules so everyone has to totally agree with you now. Who died and made you Karl Keating? 😛

In Christ,

Ellen
 
lurdes said:
any ways the republican party had 8 years to make abortion illegal and they haven’t
Click to expand...
I always love this canard…
  1. A narrow majority in Congress and the presidency is not enough, we need a strong majority.
  2. While the Republican Party has a pro-life stance in its plank, not all Republicans are pro-life. There has not been a pro-life majority for the “8 years.”
  3. I put the “8 years” in parenthesis, because the president hasn’t been in office 8 years and the narrow majority in Congress was only there for 6 years of his presidency.
As I said in my first point, what we need is a strong majority of pro-lifers, and I could care less which party they come from. However, I think you will be hard pressed to show me any pro-life progress at all from the Democrats now that they have the slim majority.
 
lurdes said:
what i think is when you say your pro life it means you value all life, so when you support the war in Iraq or the death penalty you’re saying you are pro choice you’re choosing who dies. any ways the republican party had 8 years to make abortion illegal and they haven’t
Click to expand...
Republicans have not been a majority for 8 years … but they have passed a partial birth abortion ban [passed by congress] that was signed by president Bush [Bill Clinton vetoed an earlier bill]

Ditto for the infants born alive act …

We have two supreme court justices [Roberts and Alito] who * will be strong advocates for life …

What have the democrats done on the abortion front? … They block legislation to limit abortions, block judges who are likely to uphold life [and the dems have declared a pro-abortion litmus test] and promote abortion upon demand at every turn. When legislation is passed it is vetoed and/or fought in the court system …*
 
rlg94086 said:
I always love this canard…
  1. A narrow majority in Congress and the presidency is not enough, we need a strong majority.
  2. While the Republican Party has a pro-life stance in its plank, not all Republicans are pro-life. There has not been a pro-life majority for the “8 years.”
  3. I put the “8 years” in parenthesis, because the president hasn’t been in office 8 years and the narrow majority in Congress was only there for 6 years of his presidency.
As I said in my first point, what we need is a strong majority of pro-lifers, and I could care less which party they come from. However, I think you will be hard pressed to show me any pro-life progress at all from the Democrats now that they have the slim majority.
Click to expand...
What is needed is a veto-proof Senate and we have not had one in a long time.
 
ALLGIRLS said:
Are you arguing that George Soros (the incredibly influential billionaire) is poor and vulnerable? You don’t appreciate my sentiment for him? I’m sorry, I didn’t know CAF changed it’s rules so everyone has to totally agree with you now. Who died and made you Karl Keating? 😛

In Christ,

Ellen
Click to expand...
No, I didn’t argue he was poor or vulnerable. I wanted to say that I did not appreciate your dislike of George Soros because I lionize him for his work. (BTW, figure out what my religion is now)
Bill Clinton proudly had Timothy McVeigh executed!), but I’m more mad at the Dem’s for selling their soul to PP, NOW, and NARAL so completely as to refuse to even let a pro-life candidate run in a national election. How can they claim to be the party of the poor and vulnerable (yeah, George Soros, Bill Gates, Alec Baldwin, Dave Letterman and the rest of the Hollywood gang are SO poor and vulnerable ) when they refuse to protect the MOST vulnerable in our society, the unborn and the poor, scared women caught up in a crisis pregnancy ?
Click to expand...
You also rail on the Democratic Party (I do not want to call myself a “Democrat” as I see my own views as a “techno-progressive”). But the Democracy Alliance (a group of wealthy liberal political donors [including Soros] I sincerely hope I could join) does not found those aforementioned organizations. However, they do fund policy institutes that care about the interests of low income people such as the Economic Policy Institute, Center for American Progress, and Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

(But they do fund EMILY’s list.) I suppose the other groups are solvent, but the latter groups need their money to compete with Heritage, Cato, and the American Enterprise Institute.

But I am willing to support pro-life causes if it would undermine Grover Norquist’s agenda and the Club for Growth.
 
ribozyme said:
No, I didn’t argue he was poor or vulnerable. I wanted to say that I did not appreciate your dislike of George Soros because I lionize him for his work. (BTW, figure out what my religion is now)

You also rail on the Democratic Party (I do not want to call myself a “Democrat” as I see my own views as a “techno-progressive”). But the Democracy Alliance (a group of wealthy liberal political donors [including Soros] I sincerely hope I could join) does not found those aforementioned organizations. However, they do fund policy institutes that care about the interests of low income people such as the Economic Policy Institute, Center for American Progress, and Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

(But they do fund EMILY’s list.) I suppose the other groups are solvent, but the latter groups need their money to compete with Heritage, Cato, and the American Enterprise Institute.

But I am willing to support pro-life causes if it would undermine Grover Norquist’s agenda and the Club for Growth.
Click to expand...
Well, we can’t all agree on everything, can we? If so, we’d all be drones, not human’s w/ different personalities. I’m sure there are even things I disagree w/ Karl Keathing about, although I “lionize” him for what he’s done w/ this organization, and I’m sure there are plenty of other people I like that would send you into cardiac arrest, I’ll mention just one: Bill O’Reilly.

And I can’t even fanthom your religion at this point, but I’ll put a question out there for you, not knowing how you feel about this particular person: How do you think Pope Benedict XVI feels about Soros and his “causes” (in other words, how do Soros’ organizations and causes line up w/ Catholic doctrine)?

In Christ,

Ellen
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top