You are mistaken that Jesus was trying to provide “free health care”. Jesus was gathering a following with his healing ministry and other miracles. If it is the governments job to provide evryone with health care…how about food…homes…cars…TV sets??Oh, but it does. Jesus provided free health care and we are obligated to follow him. I’m not saying that the government is necessarily the best way to go, and you may legitimately disagree with that kind of solution. But your religion has everything to do with the concept of free health care in that Jesus’ two main activities were preaching the gospel and healing the sick, and you are called to follow him.
Exactly. It is just a cynical ploy by the Republicans to keep single-issue voters, among them naive and fundamentalist Catholics, in line with their Party. It is generally overlooked that Roe vs. Wade was decided in a Supreme Court with mostly Republican-appointed judges under a Republican president. Oh, but Republicans had a change of heart since then – yeah yeah.LOL, that is really funny. Abortion did not become a law on his watch, nor did Bush even TALK about trying to pass a law to ban abortion.
What you fail to see is that the worst thing that could ever happen to the Republicans in this country is if abortion was ever outlawed, and don’t think the higher ups in the party do not know this. IF abortion was outlawed tomorrow, they would lose a large chunk of voters who are single issue voters but who are socially liberal, as the Church herself clearly is. They have NO interest in changing the law, they give it lip service, and do small token things to look good (like Bush cutting funding to stem cell research), but they are NEVER going to do anything about it, even if we voted them in to every office.
Anything over £400 a year is going to make you relatively better of than somebody earning that amount. Of course somebody is going to be happy on minimum wage if they are coming from that kind of world. Anythings better than that. This does not however demonstrate or justify the argument that if you live in America or the UK that you are therefore receiving a just and dignified wage or being treated the way you ought to be treated; since how you ought to be treated is objective not subjective. This is just a fallacious attempt to excuse the rich and the wealthy from their moral responsibility towards the community they feel free to exploit. Its called blaming the victim. But such illusions do not fool everybody in to excepting their economic oppression. And you were right to to speak of the local people in Detroit as living in “poverty”, since to say otherwise would be a shameful lie. Its a sad state of affairs that some countries are living worse than we do in the 3rd world, but its a sign of moral indifference and ignorance when in one of the richest countries in the world there is such a thing as poverty or homelessness. No wonder you didn’t even have anything to say on what i said about private property. You are not really interested in the truth; only in weaving illusions in-order to justify why you shouldn’t have to contribute towards somebodies health care.But if you make over £400 a year.
That’s such a disrespectful thing to say. That’s a very naive statement. The Church cannot help everyone, and passing the buck does not justify the rich. The church already doing enough as it is.Not true, that is what the Church is for.
Obama isn’t directly killing the babies. He is, however, complicit with abortion supporters and providers in the legislation he signs and the judges he selects.Exactly. It is just a cynical ploy by the Republicans to keep single-issue voters, among them naive and fundamentalist Catholics, in line with their Party. It is generally overlooked that Roe vs. Wade was decided in a Supreme Court with mostly Republican-appointed judges under a Republican president. Oh, but Republicans had a change of heart since then – yeah yeah.
But some of the posters on this board don’t get it. They even have compared Obama with Hitler – as if Obama was killing all those babies. :banghead:
Well you’ll notice I mentioned preaching the gospel too. And when he sent out his disciples two by two, he did tell them to heal the sick. What’s more, Jesus did indeed spend a great deal of his time providing free health care, and he provided it to whoever asked for it.Interesting that Jesus did not take the time to provide free healing to every person in Galilee or Judea or all of Palestine. He could have devoted all his time to providing free health care, yet did not. And when he sent for the disciples, he didn’t instruct them to go therefore and heal all nations. His mission may have been somewhat different than simply providing for our health care needs.
Maybe the term “health care” scares you, but Jesus was indeed healing the sick, and you will notice the relationship between the words “heal” and “health.” And his healing ministry wasn’t part of a PR campaign; indeed, he often told those he healed not to tell anyone about it. It was an expression of his compassion.You are mistaken that Jesus was trying to provide “free health care”. Jesus was gathering a following with his healing ministry and other miracles. If it is the governments job to provide evryone with health care…how about food…homes…cars…TV sets??
Go to a communist state if you want it this way.This is a red-herring, and is misdirection as i explained in my previous post.
The fact that the Government participates in what we understand as Catholics to be morally wrong, is not relevant to the fact that everybody needs sufficient health-care regardless of whether they can afford it or not. I’m not against taxing to that moral end, simply because we cannot wait for wicked people to be charitable, and since they are participating in the function of a state, they should economically participate to the function of a state so that a particular Government can help those in need and pay for services such as police, health care, and other necessities that cannot be left to the whim of the market place. The private Market place alone is not sufficient to provide for every-bodies needs, and human need in general. Tax is necessary if everybody is to receive what they need. Some people in America clearly suffer from the delusion that a governments only function is to help them economically exploit human needs and wants.
Not to derail the thread, but it seems to me that the Dems have been far more single-issue with regard to abortion-rights than the GOP has been with respect to pro-life. Just looke at their platform. Being pro-abortion is the one sine-qua-non for Democrats. That’s why they are losing Catholics.Exactly. It is just a cynical ploy by the Republicans to keep single-issue voters, among them naive and fundamentalist Catholics, in line with their Party. It is generally overlooked that Roe vs. Wade was decided in a Supreme Court with mostly Republican-appointed judges under a Republican president. Oh, but Republicans had a change of heart since then – yeah yeah.
But some of the posters on this board don’t get it. They even have compared Obama with Hitler – as if Obama was killing all those babies. :banghead:
I think it is very sad that they are not losing Catholics. Which proves the point that those Catholics are married more to their party than church.Not to derail the thread, but it seems to me that the Dems have been far more single-issue with regard to abortion-rights than the GOP has been with respect to pro-life. Just looke at their platform. Being pro-abortion is the one sine-qua-non for Democrats. That’s why they are losing Catholics.
Nice try to twist the subject at hand. First, abortion is by far not the only issue on the Democratic agenda, and secondly, I was talking about single-issue voters.Not to derail the thread, but it seems to me that the Dems have been far more single-issue with regard to abortion-rights than the GOP has been with respect to pro-life. Just looke at their platform. Being pro-abortion is the one sine-qua-non for Democrats. That’s why they are losing Catholics.
Right, and voters like you fall for the cynical Republican ploy that was mentioned.Which proves the point that those Catholics are married more to their party than church.
I study each candidate. Many things come into play as I do so. How they view killing a human being is at the top of it.Right, and voters like you fall for the cynical Republican ploy that was mentioned.
Obviously you don’t get my point. If you want, re-read my posts. I’ll not again explain it to you.Are you saying that Obama is not cynical because he openly supports abortion?
Are you saying that Obama is not cynical because he argued the infants born alive act?
Are you saying that Obama would consider appointing a pro life judge?
I got your point. I made mine on posters married to their party, you obviously missed my point.Obviously you don’t get my point. If you want, re-read my posts. I’ll not again explain it to you.
…sigh…I got your point. I made mine on posters married to their party, you obviously missed my point.
It takes a lot of twisting to ignore the facts.
There are many differences between the two parties and I agree with many lies on both sides. I think everyone would agree that the democratic party is not lying when it says it is pro abortion.Let me try this one last time: I DO NOT, repeat, DO NOT, believe that the Republican Party (By which I mean the leaders of the party) WANT to end abortion. I think that they WANT to keep abortion around in order to TRICK people (like you it seems, sadly enough) into voting for them. I think they give it lip service, and THAT IS ALL.
What would happen if abortion ended tomorrow? Are you telling me that you do not believe that there would be a major shift to the Democrats? OF COURSE THERE WOULD BE, AND THE REPUBLICANS KNOW IT.
And why do people keep saying I am “married to a party” because if I am, I would love to know what that party is! I only SEEM to be defending the DEMOCRATS here because you keep saying the tired old line that Republican=pro-life. I think the Democrats are just as bad on other issues, like the whole hand out, not a hand up problem. I don’t think the Democrats WANT to see the poor do better, they want us running to them with our hands out because as long as we are doing that, they control us, and they know it!
I DO NOT trust either party as far as I can throw them. I think BOTH of them are filled with LYING SLIME. So please stop trying to fit me into a box, because I am not going to fit in any very well. Also please stop telling others how to vote. I DO NOT HAVE TO VOTE FOR SOMEBODY WHO SAYS HE IS PRO-LIFE IF I KNOW HE IS LYING. And how can we tell if a politician is lying? HIS MOUTH IS MOVING!
Obama: I will get us out of Iraq in 6 months… LIE!
Bush Jr.: They have TONS of WMDs over in Iraq… LIE!
Clinton:I did not have sexual relations with that woman… LIE!
Bush Sr.: READ MY LIPS, NO NEW TAXES… LIE!
Reagan: I don’t know anything about this Iran/Contra affair… LIE!
And I could keep going all night with the list…
So let me see if I follow you here, you are saying that a person who takes bribes and lies about it is somehow BETTER then a person who takes bribes and admits it?There are many differences between the two parties and I agree with many lies on both sides. I think everyone would agree that the democratic party is not lying when it says it is pro abortion.