Church v. Trump on Women

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mexico City Policy - every Republican re-instates it. Full of loopholes, in fact all it does is prevent federally funded international groups from doing an abortion (unless the loopholes are there, so if child won’t be perfect or the right gender - among other things - the group can still do the abortion). These groups are still free to give women instructions about where they can go to get an abortion.

UNPFA is difficult to find the language. Will keep reading.

Supreme Court, Justice Garosuch stated clearly that RvW is established law and that he would have walked out of the room had President Trump asked him to reverse RvW. I did appreciate Garosuch’s book on euthanasia.

Title X, gave States the option. Did not pull the federal funding from PP

CONSCIENCE PROTECTION These laws are made at the State level.

No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act (H.R. 7) contains standard loopholes, considered “symbolic”, did not even go to the Senate.

Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 36) contains standard loopholes, failed to break filibuster

All bark and no bite.
 
He said women let him grab them. He wasn’t describing sexual assault.
 
FloridaCatholic said:
He said women let him grab them. He wasn’t describing sexual assault.
Click to expand...
“I just start kissing them…I don’t even wait.”

Also, “letting” someone grab you =/= consent. If someone famous walked up to you, grabbed you by the crotch, and you didn’t automatically tell them off out of fear/confusion/shock, does that count as “letting” them touch you?
 
Last edited:
DignumEtJustum said:
Not hearing much women bashing. Idiot bashing yes, and if a particular idiot he knocks happens to be female again who cares?
Click to expand...
I care. Because he’s using very gender-specific language in order to degrade these “idiots.”
DignumEtJustum said:
Plenty of idiots in both sexes and they all deserve to be called out regardless of which sex they happen to be.
Click to expand...
The Gospels tell us quite the contrary.

I’m only mentioning this because your profile indicates that you’re Catholic . . .
 
Last edited:
blackforest said:
So a sexually degrading view of half of the populace are A-OK so long as one isn’t Catholic? Duly noted.

On that note, our Church also opposes human trafficking, prostitution, and - oh, yea - abortion. Good thing that most people doing those things aren’t Catholic, either, right?
Click to expand...
You’re really being ridiculous. Let’s proceed on and talk about the clintons and obamas and how much they conformed to the teachings of the Catholic Church.
 
blackforest said:
think President Trump might have a silent desire to be a Catholic.
Click to expand...
You made a STATEMENT:
7h

“Trump’s “pro-life” position came out of political expedience and self-serving convenience.”

Whereas I made a suggestion:

“I think President Trump might have a silent desire to be a Catholic.”

You seriously can’t see the difference in telling people what someone else thinks, and suggesting to people what someone MIGHT be thinking? :roll_eyes:
Click to expand...
 
Canvas said:
I was reading the Bob Woodward book, and early on it explained how Trump became “pro-life”. He was meeting with Steve Bannon and someone else, and they were thinking of recruiting him to run in 2012. Someone mentioned you have to be pro-life nowadays to get the GOP nomination. Trump was like “then I’m pro-life”. It was simply like that. “I’ll be pro-life then”.
Click to expand...
Since his first public acknowledgement of being pro-life was in a Republican debate and prior to that he had declared himself Pro-choice “in every way” this was apparent. He talks about fake news every day yet he’s the biggest fake news there is.

If Obama had the history Trump has been exposed for with women, Republican heads would have exploded.
 
Last edited:
58df12cddd3a27f6d96ed748a3451d268135182a.gif
 
We vote for people to represent us. If one was to vote for a Democrat (Might as well just say Democrat, as all of them are rabidly pro-abortion) knowing that they were pro child butchering and pro sodomite marriage, one would in effect be voting for that. Those are intrinsic evils.
 
Not sure that applies to political degenerates and all they do otherwise we’d have to let them rule the world unchecked which there is totally no precedent for ever. A pretty modern interpretation of the gospel if you ask me.
 
I didn’t tell you what Trump thought. Trump did. In interviews. In which he delivered a half-hearted and suspiciously inconsistent “pro-life” case. I’m not linking it again.

One thing he did not mention was some innate desire to be Catholic.
 
It means what it says. Either way you’re still trying to hold Trump to standards that neither he nor really any politicians hold themselves to. Calling an idiot one to their face is wrong but being oblivious to the fact that idiots exist is perhaps worse. How is it possible today in politics for them not to be called out for their beliefs, actions, or lack of actions? Furthermore, there are some really unintelligent people in government and thank God some aren’t afraid to call them out. I won’t name anyone specific but there’s a particular insane senator from California and when one listens to her incoherent speach they should be amazed at how such an airhead could have ever obtained such a position. We’d be in real trouble if such realizations were deemed to be sinful!
 
Ultimately, OP, people tend to ditch their personal beliefs due to the whole group polarizing mess of an election (cognitive dissonance). Also, it’s an expected reaction because people seem to be incapable of thinking beyond two options (eg either support Trump or Clinton/support the right or left all the time or else you’re the opposition) unfortunately.

Also honestly, I don’t think many actually care about the whole “objectification of women” thing unless it’s somehow personal to them/they use it to support their beliefs. E.g. Someone being angry over a rape case when the perpetrator is of a certain demographic, or someone not caring about misogyny unless it’s directed towards someone they care about or if they’re women, themselves. That’s just my opinion based on observations anyway. I don’t think most people are that against sexism in their day to day lives. Some even appear to support it because they think speaking against sexism lumps you in with the left. Sigh.

I’m not from the US, but I have an uncle who’s a Trump supporter. He kept going on about how great he is, and when I asked him about the recent scandals (stormy, the things he said about women etc), he simply said ‘I don’t care about his character!’. I think that more or less sums up politics. If someone you like is doing something you don’t like, you simply ignore it.
 
Lea101 said:
I think that more or less sums up politics. If someone you like is doing something you don’t like, you simply ignore it.
Click to expand...
I think that’s pretty accurate.

Remember this as well- the Clinton Family aren’t the pillars of virtue either, and that is who the man ran against in 2016, And that was a fact that the people saw. When the Media and the Bush Family decided to release the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape to try and sabotage Mr. Trump’s campaign by holding the tape until virtually election eve and releasing it as a surprise— Trump retaliated by bringing a group of the Clintons’ victims to sit at the next debate.

This is US politics at the highest level, no one was going to confuse the candidates with saintly individuals
 
Sedona said:
If you understand Jungian psychology, it’s pretty apparent how Trump happened. He’s a symptom, not the cause. Like the fascists of the 1930’s he doesn’t have a particularly nuanced or sophisticated message. He gets up in front of a crowd, belches out some inarticulate and visceral tirade from the bestial depths of the human soul that resonates with the lesser impulses within us. Then he reads the crowd’s reaction and adjusts from there. He feeds off the crowd’s reaction and the crowd feeds off of his reaction to them, creating a feedback loop. By doing this he becomes the personification of the American “Shadow.” There’s a “shadow” or dark side to every person and every culture. He appeals to America’s shadow of misogyny, racism and xenophobia. It has always been there below the surface. He reaches down into the depths of people’s despair and fears and gives it an expression. It’s not about what religion you belong to and how you reconcile him with what you profess to believe from a religious aperture. He appeals to a raw, unexplored and repressed region of the human psyche that lurks beneath the surface of every person, and just enough of us were unable to extricate ourselves from it in order to create a rupture in the thin membrane of decency that holds us together.

Couple that with the one issue voters who would vote for Pol Pot or Stalin if they promised to overturn Roe v Wade in the belief that God sometimes uses really bad people to do really good things. More often or not, a bad person is just that - a bad person. There’s a bad person in every one of us, and we simply have created an expression of it in this character. He’s not the cause. We are.

All the best!
Click to expand...
Excellently written, more than a probability true.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top