Can Catholics be Democrats?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Victorygirl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
josh987654321 said:
40.png
Vonsalza:
No it doesn’t.
Click to expand...
Why would should I bother refuting this when you fall all over @htorres11 fallacies? Wasting my time.
Click to expand...
Masterful deployment of the “Ostrich Defense” while poisoning the well.
 
Vonsalza said:
Masterful deployment of the “Ostrich Defense” while poisoning the well.
Click to expand...
If you vote for pro-choice candidates, then you’ll never get this issue right, let alone many others.

“For the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.”
 
josh987654321 said:
40.png
Vonsalza:
Masterful deployment of the “Ostrich Defense” while poisoning the well.
Click to expand...
If you vote for pro-choice candidates, then you’ll never get this issue right, let alone many others.
Click to expand...
Would you like for me to point out the fallacies in that statement, since you’ve referenced fallacies?
 
Vonsalza said:
Would you like for me to point out the fallacies in that statement, since you’ve referenced fallacies?
Click to expand...
Simple, you cannot claim to be pro-life and then turn around and vote for a pro-choice candidate.

“For the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.”
 
Last edited:
josh987654321 said:
40.png
Vonsalza:
Would you like for me to point out the fallacies in that statement, since you’ve referenced fallacies?
Click to expand...
Simple, you cannot claim to be pro-life and then turn around and vote for a pro-choice candidate.

“For the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.”
Click to expand...
Yes you can.

If you think issues X Y and Z are important and candidate #1 agrees with you on all but abortion and candidate #2 only agrees with you only on abortion, then you might feel the other issues are more pertinent and require your vote more.

You commit the same fallacy as the single-issue voter - the bane of functioning democracy.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Just because a couple of men are living in sin does not mean one should not be allowed to visit the other in the hospital.
Click to expand...
My goodness, if that’s what you think this is about then you really are delusional. Nobody, absolutely nobody votes against same sex marriage because they want to prohibit something like that which is not even prohibited here anyway, since they are covered under ‘de facto’, great way to fool people and demonize me though.

They want the laws to change so they are seen as equal, and unless they can do the same with the Church, they will never be seen as equal. It will inevitably lead to persecution, the state may be democratic, but the truth and the Church is not.

“For the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.”
 
Last edited:
If you look at your maps Republicans won everywhere except the south in 1952 and 1960 and lost everywhere except the south in 1964. They then went to winning virtually everywhere in 1972. There doesn’t seem to be any pattern.

I urge you to listen to the 5 minute talk from Prager University addressing this very issue.

 
When did they change the map colors? Republicans used to be represented by the color blue, but now the map makers use red for Republicans.
 
josh987654321 said:
So yea, Catholics cannot be Democrats as they are today, only traitors, heretics and the seriously naïve can be.
Click to expand...
Or anyone who believes in equality, environmental protection, reduction in foreign entanglements, better wages for the working class, ect…
 
MonteRCMS said:
When did they change the map colors? Republicans used to be represented by the color blue, but now the map makers use red for Republicans.
Click to expand...
That is a fascinating observation. I never thought of it, but I do wonder the significance.
 
Vonsalza said:
Would you like for me to point out the fallacies in that statement, since you’ve referenced fallacies?
Click to expand...
The ad hominem seems clear enough with the reference that no one can be right who agrees with person X on any point. Am I missing another.
 
You want someone to take a University that is not a University seriously?
Prager University (often stylized as PragerU) is a 501(c)3 non-profit conservative digital media organization.

PragerU was founded in 2011 by radio talk show host Dennis Prager and radio producer and screenwriter Allen Estrin and is not an academic institution and does not offer certifications or diplomas.

Prager created Prager University with Estrin as his business partner[1] in order to present his conservative views and to offset what he regards as the undermining of college education by the left.[2][3][4] The videos usually feature a public intellectual who argues a particular side of a debate for about five minutes.
Click to expand...
 
What right do you have to “Force your Religious Beliefs and Practices on Others”?
One of the strengths of the faith Jesus taught was in its meekness. The faith he taught valued free will over compulsion – because that’s how love works. Compelling people to follow any religion, more or less your personal religion, stands over and against the way Jesus practiced his faith. If you are using the government to compel people to practice your spiritual beliefs, you might be the reason baby Jesus is crying. This does get tricky. There is a difference in letting your beliefs inform your political choices and letting your politics enforce your religion.
Click to expand...
Name a Religion you personally would not want to be Forced onto you by the Political System.

I could name a few. Satanism. Mormonism, Islamism…
 
Last edited:
JoshuaIsLord said:
You want someone to take a University that is not a University seriously?
Prager University (often stylized as PragerU) is a 501(c)3 non-profit conservative digital media organization.

PragerU was founded in 2011 by radio talk show host Dennis Prager and radio producer and screenwriter Allen Estrin and is not an academic institution and does not offer certifications or diplomas.

Prager created Prager University with Estrin as his business partner[1] in order to present his conservative views and to offset what he regards as the undermining of college education by the left.[2][3][4] The videos usually feature a public intellectual who argues a particular side of a debate for about five minutes.
Click to expand...
No kidding.

The article I cited broke down the vote on the Civil Rights Act.

Northern dems and reps overwhelmingly for it, especially northern dems.

Southern dems (read: failed Dixiecrats) and reps overwhelmingly against it.

It wasn’t a party issue. It was a revival of the north-south conflict over slavery and race.

The dems got it passed and the south abandoned the democratic party, on the whole, from that point going forward…
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I am sure you have heard it before, but if one is killed in the womb, the other issues are inconsequential to him/her.
 
And here are the voting results:

the voting tallies below for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by region:

The original House version:

Southern Democrats: 8-87 (7-93%)

Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0-100%)

Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94-6%)

Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85-15%)

The Senate version:

Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5-95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)

Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0-100%) (John Tower of Texas)

Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98-2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)

Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84-16%)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top