Catholics React to Biden's Kamala Harris VP Selection: ‘Deeply Flawed’

  • Thread starter Thread starter StudentMI
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Pretty much 100% cafeteria Catholism.
Pretty much rash judgment.
I don’t quite buy the spin as it is making the claim that women are incapable of making a moral decision.
I think you would have to hear them talk about it, as I have. That’s not to say that ALL abortions are decided under pressure, but a whole lot of them are. That’s why Catholic Charities of Southern Missouri is very big on security for the women. It’s a constant threat.
 
Eh, my life won’t change all that much. Probably pay more in taxes is about it. Washington doesn’t have a lot of influence in the area around Harlan Kentucky.
No influence? Isn’t Harlan near Owsley county, the county #6 in the nation as to percentage of welfare recipients? That’s a lot of federal attention (and money)!
 
Racial tensions increased under Obama.
I think racial tension that was there became more overt when Obama ran for president. He did not have a campaign to ‘throw those whites out’; yet we saw some pretty stark racist rhetoric against him during his candidacy.
 
Abortion is constitutional no matter how much people don’t like it. I can’ think of anyone who is ‘pro abortion’. If it becomes illegal the incidence will surely drop but it will not disappear. I was fully grown before 1973 and I can assure you that abortion happened then. As a Democrat said, let’s make it “rare and safe”. I’m not into bombing clinics and shooting doctors.
 
One of my favorite charities is a Catholic home for women in danger of abortion. They are provided food, clothing, shelter, medical, psych if needed, detox if needed, education, job training and job placement. But most important of all, they say, is SAFETY. That’s safety from all kinds of people; parents, boyfriends, pimps, pushers, even “friends”.
At the home where I volunteer, the moms tell me they are pressured by their boyfriends and families. At six months, they are told it’s a “lump of cells.” Then they see the ultrasounds and they are flabbergasted.
 
So what do you do when a woman tries to procure an abortion? How are they a victim in this? And I’m not talking about the rare cases of pressure, but the 99% of the cases where they darn well know what they are doing and it is of their own free will.
Charge them with attempted homicide in the first degree. That is the only moral and logically consistent position.
 
Last edited:
Well, except for that unjust war thingy that Bush started that Pope John Paul II warned us against.
Ask the Kurds if they thought it was unjust.
Maybe unwise. It’s justness is in the eye of the oppressed under Saddam.
 
Last edited:
They choose it because it is legal and perceived as morally acceptable. Changing the law solves the first problem and helps with the second.
 
Last edited:
It may send a frisson of delight up people’s spines and allow them to pat themselves on the back but it does little to solve the underlying issues of why rape is something some men would choose.

See how ludicrous your reasoning sounds when applied to anything else?
 
They do. Why didn’t that happen under Bush and why did Trump throw them under the bus?
Obama was in office for 8 years, too.
We’re too busy worrying about what thugs like Putin, Erdogan, and Assad think of us. Next to Israel, the Kurds have been our most reliable ally in that region.
 
For the love of mike why do we bear the burden of creating a state in the middle east? We should get out of the region and stop favoring any side. They’re all dysfunctional remnants of colonialism.
 
So which of these statements do you disagree with then?
  1. Women are moral agents.
  2. Abortion is murder.
  3. Murder committed by a moral agent should be punished.
 
Last edited:
Good, so we agree that women who attempt to procure an abortion should be subject to charges of attempted murder.
 
The main opportunity to create a state was during or at the end of either Gulf War.
I thought Obama had a pen and a phone. He had no problem attacking Libya.
Both Bushes failed to do so. To somehow blame Obama when the region was there were no seismic changes happening (like Iraq losing a war) during his Presidency is a partisan attack.
I blame all of them, although Bush the elder did save Kuwait (unless you think that was unjust, too).
Your entire string of posts on the matter has been one long and blatant partisan attack. No surprise there, but I’m perfectly willing to hold Bush the younger, Obama and Trump accountable on the issue.
Well, not anymore with the Trump betrayal.
More partisan attacks (something about pot and kettle comes to mind).
That said, Trump actions were precisely because of his concerns about the three thugs I mentioned.
 
Last edited:
Ah huh. That wasn’t much of an attack compared to what the two Iraq Wars and did not happen over the land that the Kurds occupieed.
So, since Obama did it it must be okay?
Not really seeing how it’s Obama’s fault, but your entire strings of posts on the matter have been one long and blatant partisan attack. No surprise there.
lol. I’m the one holding presidents of both parties accountable. I think it’s obvious who the blatant partisan is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top