Catholic.com presidential poll

[Bataar]

What does Trump have to do with abortion? It is not one of his priority positions, and prior to this year, it was not even an issue for him.

But I disagree with you that he is without evil. He lacks the divinity. His bigotry and stereotyping of Mexicans is contrary to Catholic morality. His willingness to kill family members of terrorists is contrary to Catholic morality.

What did he say to stereotype Mexicans? Please don’t give me that drivel that he called them all rapists. Read the whole statement he gave and apply the context to which he was speaking and you’ll know that’s not what he said. His point was that the Mexican government was sending bad people here that include rapists. Now, it’s definitely open to debate if the Mexican government sends criminals and bad people here, but there’s definitely nothing racist about that kind of statement.

He also isn’t promoting the killing of family members of terrorists. He said that might be something to be considered, but as far as I’m aware, has said nothing stronger than that. It’s a negotiating tactic. Our enemies should believe that nothing is off the table in how we respond to them.

 

[estesbob]

What did he say to stereotype Mexicans? Please don’t give me that drivel that he called them all rapists. Read the whole statement he gave and apply the context to which he was speaking and you’ll know that’s not what he said. His point was that the Mexican government was sending bad people here that include rapists. Now, it’s definitely open to debate if the Mexican government sends criminals and bad people here, but there’s definitely nothing racist about that kind of statement.

He also isn’t promoting the killing of family members of terrorists. He said that might be something to be considered, but as far as I’m aware, has said nothing stronger than that. It’s a negotiating tactic. Our enemies should believe that nothing is off the table in how we respond to them.

At least he doesnt support killing Mexicans as his oopponents do

 

[Ridgerunner]

There are many diverse religious and theological perspectives on things such as the development of human life, and ensoulment, and when personhood begins.

Nobody questions that different people and religions have different views. Were that not the case, one wouldn’t be calling them “different”. This is a Catholic site, but I think Catholics are aware there are other religions, yes.

From the Catholic perspective, Church teaching is not diverse when it comes to elective abortion, and it isn’t based on “ensoulment” either. it’s considered a grave evil, period. No question about it.

 

[Joe_Pickett]

I am thinking 3rd Party presently. I am very interested in the American Solidarity Party. I’ll be keeping an eye on who they come up with. Their platform hits a lot of marks for me. Progressive and pro-life!

solidarity-party.org/

 

[pnewton]

What did he say to stereotype Mexicans? Please don’t give me that drivel that he called them all rapists…

No. I am not going to respond to one that calls the positions of others. I know what he said and I stand by my statement, but I will not respond to such.

Our enemies should believe that nothing is off the table in how we respond to them.

This is an immoral position. Abortion isn’t the only life issue for most Catholics.

 

[utah_rose]

I sometimes wonder what would have happened had the same-sex marriage ruling been handed down with LDS Romney as our President. I’m thinking he would have been asked about that ruling opening the door for plural marriages and what his response would have been.

Technically, the LDS church doesn’t approve of polygamy and members that are are excommunicated. But there may be some that still do covertly. If Romney had been president, he would lave questioned that ruling. The polygamists are not affiliated with the LDS church, and don’t approve of SS marriages either.

 

[Bataar]

No. I am not going to respond to one that calls the positions of others. I know what he said and I stand by my statement, but I will not respond to such.
This is an immoral position. Abortion isn’t the only life issue for most Catholics.

Ok. You can’t back up your statement. That’s fine, just as long as others are aware.

As to the second issue, it would be an immoral action, yes, but it’s not immoral just to imply it, especially if it saves lives.

 

[TMC]

Ok. You can’t back up your statement. That’s fine, just as long as others are aware.

As to the second issue, it would be an immoral action, yes, but it’s not immoral just to imply it, especially if it saves lives.

Is that the current position of Trump apologists, that he is lying about what he will do, and that somehow makes it OK?

 

[Bataar]

Is that the current position of Trump apologists, that he is lying about what he will do, and that somehow makes it OK?

To the best of my knowledge, he never said he would do it. He said it’s something to consider. And yes, in a time of war, I think that’s just fine. I think it’s a very poor strategy to let our enemies know what we will and won’t do.

 

[pnewton]

Ok. You can’t back up your statement. That’s fine, just as long as others are aware.

I figured you would say that. I do not doubt most are well aware of the two quotes I am not looking up for you. I have quoted them often enough myself here. I just will not do so for one who considers my opinions drivel.

If Trump is elected, it will be despite his supporters.

 

[TMC]

To the best of my knowledge, he never said he would do it. He said it’s something to consider. And yes, in a time of war, I think that’s just fine. I think it’s a very poor strategy to let our enemies know what we will and won’t do.

In a democracy, I think it is a very poor strategy to lie to the citizens about what you will or won’t do. Trump has said what he would do as commander in chief. If he is telling the truth, that is a problem. If he is lying, that is a different kind of problem.

 

[TMC]

BTW, most or all of the Trump supporters I know IRL use some form of the “he’s lying” argument. In other words, they make little or no attempt to defend his more extreme positions. They simply and unabashedly say that he is lying about his positions. “He won’t really deport 11M people,” “he won’t build an actual wall, that’s a metaphor,” “he doesn’t mean what he says about torture,” etc. His campaign manager has even admitted that Trump will “evolve”, “moderate” and “soften” his positions for the general election.

For Trump supporters - if you don’t think he means most of what he says, why support him? How do you know what he stands for, if you don’t think he is giving his real positions now?

 

[YADA]

There is no “hope to accomplish”, I will vote exactly as my Catholic teaching demands I do; No lying, pro-abortion candidates. If the rest of the Christian “Sheeple” did likewise we would toss both parties out on their ears.

Your Catholic faith does not dictate that you vote only for the purest of pure candidates when that vote means electing someone who will not only allow but advocate that innocent unborn children are executed with tax dollars too and without benefit of any defense.

And many Catholics do hide behind a third party vote hoping that the pro abortion party will win … they get plausible deniability …I have had some even admit to that …they tell me that can’t vote for the party but want them to prevail

 

[Ridgerunner]

BTW, most or all of the Trump supporters I know IRL use some form of the “he’s lying” argument. In other words, they make little or no attempt to defend his more extreme positions. They simply and unabashedly say that he is lying about his positions. “He won’t really deport 11M people,” “he won’t build an actual wall, that’s a metaphor,” “he doesn’t mean what he says about torture,” etc. His campaign manager has even admitted that Trump will “evolve”, “moderate” and “soften” his positions for the general election.

For Trump supporters - if you don’t think he means most of what he says, why support him? How do you know what he stands for, if you don’t think he is giving his real positions now?

I don’t much doubt he would “deport” 11 million people, in one way or another and over time. I believe he will at least try to do what he says he will do; require illegals here to return to their home countries and apply for admission, which he says he will expedite in the case of those with no criminal record. When it comes to 'deport", he didn’t say he would round them all up and put them on trains, but that he would enforce the law. And, of course, there are those who leave the country now and then and return.

I also believe he really will build a wall. Might not be a masonry wall along its entire length. But I believe he’ll do it.

I think he means what he says about waterboarding. He never did define what he thinks “torture” is, so we don’t know what he, or anybody else means by it since nobody, not even the Church, defines it. But harsh interrogation of one kind or another? I think he means that.

I also think he’ll really appoint supreme court justices of the sort he said he would. To me, that’s the most important thing in this election. A not-too-close second would be ending the reign of the Clintons and their influence peddling. Trump seems to be good at selling what belongs to him. Hillary Clinton sells what belongs to us and others in the world, which she does not own.

 

[JimG]

“Were” is your key word here. There is pretty much a consensus that Jews are not subhuman and that African Americans are not merely 60% human and that Native Americans are not savages. Again though no such consensus on the abortion issue. Not today. Far from it. Even among Christians. The mainline churches are not in agreement with the CC for instance on the issue of abortion rights. Although that doesn’t mean the mainline churches teach the slaughter of 1 million children.

No consensus. For a long time there was no consensus on slavery. I came upon an interesting article by Hadley Arkes about the abortion issue. Here is an excerpt:

Let’s suppose that we looked out and noticed a scene in which 1.2 million members of a minority group could be lynched or killed every year in this country without the restraint or reproach of the law. Where do you think that someone would place that matter within the overall rank of the issues before us in our politics? Would it be just below the question of interest rates or global warming, or the provision of health care?

Lincoln’s Teaching–And Our Politics

 

[TMC]

I don’t much doubt he would “deport” 11 million people, in one way or another and over time. I believe he will at least try to do what he says he will do; require illegals here to return to their home countries and apply for admission, which he says he will expedite in the case of those with no criminal record. When it comes to 'deport", he didn’t say he would round them all up and put them on trains, but that he would enforce the law. And, of course, there are those who leave the country now and then and return.

I also believe he really will build a wall. Might not be a masonry wall along its entire length. But I believe he’ll do it.

I think he means what he says about waterboarding. He never did define what he thinks “torture” is, so we don’t know what he, or anybody else means by it since nobody, not even the Church, defines it. But harsh interrogation of one kind or another? I think he means that.

I also think he’ll really appoint supreme court justices of the sort he said he would. To me, that’s the most important thing in this election. A not-too-close second would be ending the reign of the Clintons and their influence peddling. Trump seems to be good at selling what belongs to him. Hillary Clinton sells what belongs to us and others in the world, which she does not own.

OK, so you believe he will do what he says, but support him regardless. I get that. But most Trump supporters I know say the opposite. Any here want to explain why? Or are the Trump supporters I know exceptions, rather than the rule?

 

[Sy_Noe]

So? If not human life what is it in the Mothers womb?

The Catholic Church’s answer is that it is a human life. But someone else’s answer might be for example that an embryo is potential human life in the process of developing.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

The Catholic Church’s answer is that it is a human life. But someone else’s answer might be for example that an embryo is potential human life in the process of developing.

What’s the difference, genius?

 

[pnewton]

“Were” is your key word here. There is pretty much a consensus that Jews are not subhuman and that African Americans are not merely 60% human and that Native Americans are not savages.

But someone else’s answer might be for example that an embryo is potential human life in the process of developing.

These two ideas are incongruous. If one measure humanity by the potential one has, then abortion is the termination of something less than human, as it is has less potential. But this same logic means Hitler was right at least in killing of the mentally ill, the retarded and the disabled. Then by the same logic, it should a lesser crime killing someone in their sleep, as they are a lesser human at that time.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Nobody questions that different people and religions have different views. Were that not the case, one wouldn’t be calling them “different”. This is a Catholic site, but I think Catholics are aware there are other religions, yes.

From the Catholic perspective, Church teaching is not diverse when it comes to elective abortion, and it isn’t based on “ensoulment” either. it’s considered a grave evil, period. No question about it.

You just said nobody questions that different people and religions have different views. And that you think Catholics are aware there are other religions. I wasn’t the one who said “this is in no way shape or form a religious issue” and then went on to say it is totally irrelevant what some Christian denominations support.

Sure I understand it may be irrelevant to faithful Catholics. But it is not to those Christians whose denominations hold those different views.

And no one said a thing about Catholic Church teaching being diverse. What was said is there are diverse religious and theological perspectives. On that we agree. Your argument is not with me in that regard.