Climate Change Debate: Pope VS Trump Supporters?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TeenCatholicGuy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
But that isn’t true. I already shared the definition of “Social Security”. Many poor families would be happy to correct you.

They need support.
It’s really irrelevant to the argument IMO, since yes, there are people who need monetary support, there always will be and there will be legitimate differences of opinion on how much and how best to help those people, to imply that Trump and his administration wants people out on the streets and starving is wrong.

This is an issue where there can be legitimate differences of opinion, abortion however, there cannot, because without the right to life, all these other issues become moot.

We as Catholics cannot vote for a pro-choice or euthanasia platform, which is something that Trudeau in Canada, and Clinton in the USA are adamant supporters of.

I hope this has helped

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
It’s really irrelevant to the argument IMO, since yes, there are people who need monetary support, there always will be and there will be legitimate differences of opinion on how much and how best to help those people, to imply that Trump and his administration wants people out on the streets and starving is wrong.

This is an issue where there can be legitimate differences of opinion, abortion however, there cannot, because without the right to life, all these other issues become moot.

We as Catholics cannot vote for a pro-choice or euthanasia platform, which is something that Trudeau in Canada, and Clinton in the USA are adamant supporters of.

I hope this has helped

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh
That line of thinking is what will destroy our religion. It is already struggling to get Youth to Mass, and it’s only going to get worse.
 
We as Catholics need to get this debate over with.

What do we believe about Climate Change?

The Pope and the Vatican, as well as many Priests, Deacons and Bishops throughout the world have called Catholics to take a stand against Climate Change. It is clear that they believe it is 100% Real, and needs to be fought.

Sources: washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/06/01/vatican-leaders-dismayed-by-reports-that-united-states-will-leave-paris-climate-accord/?utm_term=.7486d4229a23

mediaite.com/trump/slap-in-the-face-vatican-slams-trumps-decision-to-pull-out-of-paris-climate-accord/

While on the other end of the coin, many Christians and Catholics who voted for Donald Trump, can be safely assumed to believe some variant of “Climate change is fake, a hoax” etc. Some people may have done it purely on a pro-life standpoint, but what is more important?

I have these questions for the Catholic Community:
  1. Is Climate Change Real?
    SNIP
climate change is real but the current hype is not. this video gives a good explanation

youtube.com/watch?v=SyUDGfCNC-k
 
That line of thinking is what will destroy our religion. It is already struggling to get Youth to Mass, and it’s only going to get worse.
Mathew 16:25:
25 For whoever would save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.
It doesn’t matter what someone thinks will destroy the Church or not, nor does it matter how many ‘youth’ are at Mass, the only thing that matters is whether we are true to Christ’s teachings or not. Get that right and the rest will follow. Aim at filling sits in a Church, you are sure to lose them, aim at being faithful to Christ even if that means people leave, you will surely gain more then you lose.

They have always said that if the Church doesn’t change it’s teachings to fit in with the secular world, the Church will die, and as always, it’s a test in the above passage, in fact the opposite happens, when the Church changes it’s teachings somewhere to fit in with the secular day, that Church dies since it shows to everyone that the Church changes their teachings as much as the secular world does, and thus cannot claim to be objectively true.

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
It doesn’t matter what someone thinks will destroy the Church or not, nor does it matter how many ‘youth’ are at Mass, the only thing that matters is whether we are true to Christ’s teachings or not. Get that right and the rest will follow. Aim at filling sits in a Church, you are sure to lose them, aim at being faithful to Christ even if that means people leave, you will surely gain more then you lose.

They have always said that if the Church doesn’t change it’s teachings to fit in with the secular world, the Church will die, and as always, it’s a test in the above passage, in fact the opposite happens, when the Church changes it’s teachings somewhere to fit in with the secular day, that Church dies since it shows to everyone that the Church changes their teachings as much as the secular world does, and thus cannot claim to be objectively true.

Why would one bother with Church if there is no difference between it and the secular world?

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh
I’m referring to your " your vote must go to prolife"
 
From what I have read, the temperature of the earth has increased by only 2/10ths of a degree in the last 30 yrs.
Global warming is a myth.
that’s why they had to change the focus to climate change because the warming isn’t happening.

see the video i posted
 
I find that a problem.
Catechism of the Catholic Church]
2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73
My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74
2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:
You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75
God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76
2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"77 "by the very commission of the offense,"78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.
2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:
"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being’s right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."80
"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child’s rights."81
2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.
Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, "if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual. . . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence."82
2275 "One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival."83
"It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material."84
"Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity"85 which are unique and unrepeatable.
Please continue to next post -
 
Just underneath this is Euthanasia too. Something which Trudeau also supports.
Catechism of the Catholic Church:
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm

**Euthanasia **

2276 Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible.

2277 Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable.

Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgment into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded.

2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of “over-zealous” treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one’s inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.

2279 Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable Palliative care is a special form of disinterested charity. As such it should be encouraged.
I hope this has helped

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
so i post a 36 minute video and 4 minutes later you post a response with 2 videos. you obviously did not watch the video but posted a reply

you are trolling
I’ve already seen that vid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top