Exactly. I wish I could get a leader who accurately teaches how the Catholic social teaching ought to be applied, but I would be happy with a president who brings about the exact same ends rather than one who would work for neither of the two. We ought to realize we live on Earth and not HeavenIt’s hard to take that claim seriously after Mr. Cain already came out and clarified exactly what he thinks a Pro-Life president ought to (and ought not to) do. Giving me Pro-Life justices and vetoing Federal funding for abortion is what I’m looking for in a president.
Oh no not at all Bob. My time on CAF amidst so many “states righters” shows me even if you are for “states rights” it doesn’t mean you are actually going to support what the state’s ultimate decision is under such rights. Which of course makes me wonder if Roe had not been decided upon as it was and abortion was still illegal, if the “states rights” people would be crying for abortion to be decided by the states now.You seem to operating under the false assumption that “states rights” means once the State has pased a law everyone has to support it. Thats not true.
You still dont get it. just because someon is for “states rights” doesnt mean they support whatever the State decides. I dont wanted abortion decided by the States-I want it banned NOW- but haveng it decided by the state is preferable to what we have now. Unrestricted slaughter by judical fiat.Oh no not at all Bob. My time on CAF amidst so many “states righters” shows me even if you are for “states rights” it doesn’t mean you are actually going to support what the state’s ultimate decision is under such rights. Which of course makes me wonder if Roe had not been decided upon on as it was and abortion was illegal, if the “states rights” people would be wanting abortion decided by the ststes.
I think the biggest problem here is that everyone is not on the same page. Most pro-lifers (both on various polls and in real life) aren’t as extreme was the ones I’ve encountered on some online forums, and make exception in cases of rape and when the woman’s life is in danger. I’ve only ever encountered people on online Catholic forums that consider people pro-choice (and even pro-death) under these exceptions. Cain considers himself pro-life despite these exceptions, and so do most people.Exactly the problem I have with the so called “states rights” crowd who say they just want Roe overturned and suggest they simply want the abortion debate returned to the states. When of course they want abortion banned nationally and to take away a woman’s right to choose even in cases of rape and incest or to save her own life. And won’t stop at anything less if a state settles the issue to their dislike.
You make a good point Rence. For sure the criteria differs. And you’re correct one can be pro life with exceptions for rape, incest, and to protect the life of the mother. Thank you for pointing this out.I think the biggest problem here is that everyone is not on the same page. Most pro-lifers (both on various polls and in real life) aren’t as extreme was the ones I’ve encountered on some online forums, and make exception in cases of rape and when the woman’s life is in danger. I’ve only ever encountered people on online Catholic forums that consider people pro-choice (and even pro-death) under these exceptions. Cain considers himself pro-life despite these exceptions, and so do most people.
Also, most people (both on polls and in real life) don’t consider contraceptives and even plan B as “abortions”. So you’ll find a difference in “criteria” for “pro-life” here too. In fact, years ago I would get into arguments with a pro-choice friend (I was pro-life) who made (what I thought were) these outrageous claims that pro-lifers were trying to have everyone’s birth control pills outlawed. I laughed her off as an extremist at the time. After being on CAF, I realized what she said was true - in part. Because most pro-lifers don’t include contraception.
Never a doubt in my mind Bob that is what you want.I dont wanted abortion decided by the States-I want it banned NOW.
And once a state has passed a bad law we can work to overturn it - with a greater chance of changing it than if it were “settled” by 9 men in robes. It is a simplistic world that pro-abortion rights christians inhabit.You seem to operating under the false assumption that “states rights” means once the State has pased a law everyone has to support it. Thats not true.
It’s not a DNC it’s a D&C. It stands for dilation and curettage, and it is an abortion if you are pregnant. Dilation is opening the cervix and curettage is scraping of the lining and removal of the contents of the uterus. There are also suction D&Cs.As you may or may not know, if a woman is raped, there is always the option of having a DNC. This is a different procedure from abortion, which usually occurs later in the process. Without speaking for him, I think that this is the point Mr. Cain was trying to make when he said that he favored the government staying out of this very personal decision.
The reason is that most people aren’t informed, but many people on CAF tend to take their faith a bit more seriously than the average person and thus do more reasearch (there is a reason they spend some of their free time on a Catholic forum after all).Also, most people (both on polls and in real life) don’t consider contraceptives and even plan B as “abortions”. So you’ll find a difference in “criteria” for “pro-life” here too. In fact, years ago I would get into arguments with a pro-choice friend (I was pro-life) who made (what I thought were) these outrageous claims that pro-lifers were trying to have everyone’s birth control pills outlawed. I laughed her off as an extremist at the time. After being on CAF, I realized what she said was true - in part. Because most pro-lifers don’t include contraception.
Hence, he will definitely not get my vote regardless of how much he tries to recant what he basically said. [/QUOT E]I don’t trust Romney, He conveniently was pro-choice when he was governor of MA. I think he’s an opportunist who will say what ever to get to the presidency. Cain is a total disappointment and will likely say and do similar things to cater to his audience. While no candidate is perfect, the most catholic thinking of the group may be Santorum or even Gingrich.
Ronald Reagan was pro choice too and passed an abortion law that made abortions increase, but his position on abortion changed and he became pro life. I bet most candidates have changed positions on issues.Hence, he will definitely not get my vote regardless of how much he tries to recant what he basically said. [/QUOT E]I don’t trust Romney, He conveniently was pro-choice when he was governor of MA. I think he’s an opportunist who will say what ever to get to the presidency. Cain is a total disappointment and will likely say and do similar things to cater to his audience. While no candidate is perfect, the most catholic thinking of the group may be Santorum or even Gingrich.
It clarifies that he seems a mite confused about what he believes but he should take heart: he may not be alone. In a recent discussion thread (on this forum) where people’s beliefs about abortion were compared to the actual number of abortions, it appeared to me that there was contradiction between the rising number of people professing to be anti-abortion and the lack of a corresponding decrease in the number of people seeking abortion.Ok Mr. Cain came on the Shawn Hannidy radio show and clarified his stance, his words are,
“I am 100% Pro- Life, I will elect Judges that are Pro-Life, I will veto any bill that comes to me that provides funding for abortion, and I will work to completely de-fund planned parenthood.”
He lamented about how his words came out poorly but stated firmly that he was not in any way condoning abortion. Anyways hope that clairifys this some.
That is extremely speculative. He never said anything of the sort, and all of his more clear comments put him firmly as a pro-life candidate even if his own talks suffer from the typical loose words on rape and incest. I beg you friend, do not be so easily cast aside from supporting the candidates we need by the slightest tinge of doubt, for the devil will provide plenty of that (if not the candidates themselves at time). Cain will most certainly appoint judges that would overturn Roe.To me, this is also basically saying that he would not sign any pro-life laws that restrict or eliminate abortion. Hence, he will definitely not get my vote regardless of how much he tries to recant what he basically said.
I agree. While I respect and believe him when he said later that he is 100% pro-life, we need a candidate who can think on his/her feet and answer the tough questions without making a fool of themselves. So far, the only ones who can do that are Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum.Whatever, he needs to get his story straight.