Biden picks Kamala Harris as running mate

  • Thread starter Thread starter RidgeSprinter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
jeannetherese said:
The right to life undergirds all other rights
Click to expand...
Pope Francis disagrees with that opinion
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Now let me bullet point this:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Equally sacred, however, are
  1. the lives of the poor,
  2. those already born,
  3. the destitute,
  4. the abandoned
  5. the underprivileged,
  6. the vulnerable infirm and elderly exposed to covert euthanasia,
  7. the victims of human trafficking,
  8. new forms of slavery,
  9. and every form of rejection.
The drafting committee, chaired by Gomez, accepted the “equally sacred” language, but it refused

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

"The preeminent quote will be used to undermine the point Pope Francis is making in that paragraph,

give the pope a fighting chance with his view and keep that whole paragraph because that is where he articulates his vision of this very controversial question

"It is not Catholic teaching that abortion is the preeminent issue that we face as a world."
is a grave disservice to our people if we are trying to communicate to them what the magisterium teaches."

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia responded by denying that “our saying that it (abortion) is preeminent is contrary to the teaching of the pope.” Such talk, he said, “sets up an artificial battle between the bishops’ conference of the United States and the Holy Father.”
 
Last edited:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

The 143-69 vote not to include a longer quote from Francis that would have better balanced the preeminence of abortion indicates that abortion really is the top priority for the bishops — which is precisely why the change was wrong-headed.

www.ncronline.org

US bishops are not really that interested in forming consciences

Distinctly Catholic: There are deeper problems with the "Faithful Citizenship" document, problems that demand the bishops start from scratch, and not just that the text does not reflect the papal magisterium.
www.ncronline.org www.ncronline.org
 
Thbolt said:
The law does not define morality.
Click to expand...
For most people, I’m afraid it does.
Thbolt said:
the number of abortions went down when it became legal.
Click to expand...
Went up. Read it again.
Thbolt said:
I would think the goal would be to minimize the number of abortions, but you have presented no evidence that simply making it illegal will do anything to reduce the number of abortions.
Click to expand...
Actually I did, but you chose to invent a contrary version of it. here’s another. I think, though, that people who support abortion will always come up with some excuse for supporting and promoting it. It also needs to be remembered that before Roe, abortion was legal in 17 states, so Roe wasn’t the whole story of this depravity.

https://www.grtl.org/docs/roevwade.pdf

. In 1996, 1,365,730 abortions were recorded, an increase of well over 100% since 1973, when the annual figure was 615,831, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
 
National Catholic Reporter is more a Democrat mouthpiece than it is a Catholic publication, and has always been.

Its political partisanship cannot be denied by anyone who reads the cited article. They did have to admit one truth, however, and that is that the bishops voted overwhelmingly to cite abortion as the preeminent issue in this election. They couldn’t resist misstating what Pope Francis said, however, as Bishop Chaput points out.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Its political partisanship cannot be denied by anyone who reads the cited article.
Click to expand...
That is highly debatable. Considering in the first link the reporter is only reporting what was being said by the Bishops.
Ridgerunner said:
They did have to admit one truth, however, and that is that the bishops voted overwhelmingly to cite abortion as the preeminent issue in this election.
Click to expand...
They did not have to admit anything. No, they only reported the facts. Honest Journalism is at hand here.
Ridgerunner said:
They couldn’t resist misstating what Pope Francis said, however, as Bishop Chaput points out.
Click to expand...
Did they? 1/3 of the Bishops voted in support of the inclusion.
 
Last edited:
RidgeSprinter said:
That is highly debatable. Considering in the first link the reporter is only reporting what was being said by the Bishops.
Click to expand...
C’mon. You can’t believe that. Here’s from the NCR article:

“Donald Trump may supply pro-life judges, but he is a vile and vulgar man, who knows no history and is uninterested in data, who disgraces the office of the presidency daily.”

Even Michelle Obama wasn’t that harsh. NCR ought to remove “Catholic” from its name, as bishops of KC have demanded that it do.
 
Ridgerunner said:
C’mon. You can’t believe that. Here’s from the NCR article:

“Donald Trump may supply pro-life judges, but he is a vile and vulgar man, who knows no history and is uninterested in data, who disgraces the office of the presidency daily.”
Click to expand...
What a perfect description of the “very stable genius”. It should add that he is only interested in fulfilling his narcissistic desires, without regard to everyone else.
 
Ridgerunner said:
C’mon. You can’t believe that. Here’s from the NCR article:

“Donald Trump may supply pro-life judges, but he is a vile and vulgar man, who knows no history and is uninterested in data, who disgraces the office of the presidency daily.”

Even Michelle Obama wasn’t that harsh. NCR ought to remove “Catholic” from its name, as bishops of KC have demanded that it do.
Click to expand...
See the first article:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

The quotes are from the second link.

Granted in the first link the reporter Thomas Reesedoes provide 4 paragraphs of commentary at the very end, but in no way negates what the 2 Bishops said.

Second link are authored by Michael Sean Winters
 
Last edited:
Abrosz said:
What a perfect description of the “very stable genius”. It should add that he is only interested in fulfilling his narcissistic desires, without regard to everyone else.
Click to expand...
It does demonstrate the political nature of NCR.
 
Thbolt said:
The number of abortions in 1991 was 1.42 million. In the last year with data (2016), it was 0.62 million. So the number of abortions has dropped off considerably negating the argument made in tis work.
Click to expand...
And the abortion rate ( abortions per 1000 women capita ) has dropped off even more considerably. But those statistics are generally outright ignored. “An Inconvenient Truth”.
 
Last edited:
The post-Roe 1991 abortion number of 1.4 million is more than double the pre-Roe number of about 600,000. Abortions skyrocketed after Roe.

Abortion statistics in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Reporting varies a lot, and isn’t mandatory. So nobody knows for sure how many abortions there are, particularly since abortifacients are on the increase. Guttmacher estimated 800,000+ in 2017. CDC reported about 600,000 for the same period. Probably both are underestimates.

One thing is for sure, the population is aging rapidly and is considerably older than it was in 1973.

www.prb.org

The U.S. Population Is Growing Older, and the Gender Gap in Life Expectancy Is Narrowing

Informing a Smarter World
www.prb.org www.prb.org
 
Thbolt said:
The law doesn’t define morality, especially in a multicultural society such as America.
Click to expand...
Nope, that is the express purpose of law

It doesn’t define all morality, but it does set the outer limits that society has agreed upon (passed legislation).

Being multicultural makes no difference on whether you are charged with murder or theft, etc.
 
Ridgerunner said:
It does demonstrate the political nature of NCR.
Click to expand...
If the truth has political aspect, there is nothing wrong with it. Funny that the principle of “you cannot do evil even if something good comes out of it” is so selectively applied. You are not supposed to use birth control, even if it decreases the abortions. But it is proper to support Trump, just because he would nominate anti-abortionist judges even if he is extremely immoral.

Consistency, anyone?
 
Birth control increases abortion. Abortion is always needed as a backstop.
 
Thbolt said:
Isn’t that the ‘legal’ abortions number?
Click to expand...
A little help?
Roe vs Wade was decided Jan 1973.
Abortion Rate in 1972 was 13.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Abortion Rate in 2016 was 11.6
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
RidgeSprinter said:
Equally sacred, however, are
Click to expand...
There lives are equally sacred, but at this point we do not kill poor people for being poor. The danger to them is not equal. Abortion, according to the USCCB, is unique in the United States. At this point, for a Catholic, it is a tremendous weight in the scale of who one should vote for. I do not think you gain anything by downplaying this problem for voters.

You speak of the wording of the document and the objection of Chaput. I will point out that he lost that particular argument. I do not think there is disagreement in theology though. His concern is valid, but remember the battle (disagreement) with the Pope is artificial.

Also, do not forget that the National Catholic Reporter is the website that is not Catholic.
RidgeSprinter said:
Posts a link to a wiki source and ignores the obvious graph of inconvenient truth.
Click to expand...
This argument though, that reducing abortion is the goal, even above legislating it, is better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top