Cruz Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Peter_J
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Peter_J said:
This wasn’t directed at me, but if you mean the other two other than Donald Trump, then I would say right on. If we don’t nominate one of them (Cruz or Kasich) then we’ll be looking at Trump, Clinton, or Sanders being president, which I consider an unacceptable choice to be faced with.
Click to expand...
No, I meant Kasich and Trump. Cruz is the only one that fully agrees with the Republican platform on abortion.
 
sallybutler said:
No, I meant Kasich and Trump. Cruz is the only one that fully agrees with the Republican platform on abortion.
Click to expand...
Any of them would be better than a full-blown abortion promoter; particularly one who knew all about the sale of body parts and still promoted them, and wants all of us to underwrite the body parts market.

One recalls the story of the third Punic War, when the Roman soldiers ran across the shrine to Moloch, wherein children were sacrificed by “passing through the fire” (burned alive). At that time, Roman soldiers were still citizen soldiers, mostly farmers, and had a reverence for family and children. They were so infuriated at the Carthaginians that even their own generals couldn’t stop them from slaughtering the Carthaginians for their crimes.

Those soldiers were, of course, pagans. As Catholic Christians, we are supposed to be even more sensitive to the wanton destruction of children. And yet, so many of us do not so much as bat an eye at it. Worse, some of us promote the worship of Moloch by promoting and supporting the leaders who act as the “high priests” of the slaughter.

Hard to imagine it has come to this.
 
chero23 said:
But people here will support him bc he has a (R) in front of his name.

Don’t you dare attack a Republican on these forums they will say.

Oh oh they will attack a Republican when they try to do some immigration reform, but everything else, the Republicans are just caught up bc of the “liberal system”.

Please guys, Cry me a River
Click to expand...
This ^. And maybe that’s why Rubio didn’t fly in the primaries as well as somoone like Cruz has. He was attacked when he was working alongside the bipartisan group of senators on immigration reform until he no longer was. But by then the damage to him had been done.
 
sallybutler said:
No, I meant Kasich and Trump. Cruz is the only one that fully agrees with the Republican platform on abortion.
Click to expand...
Before responding to this I want to ask, is this what you are referring to:

Faithful to the “self-evident” truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion or fund organizations which perform or advocate it and will not fund or subsidize health care which includes abortion coverage. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life. We oppose the non-consensual withholding or withdrawal of care or treatment, including food and water, from people with disabilities, including newborns, as well as the elderly and infirm, just as we oppose active and passive euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Republican leadership has led the effort to prohibit the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion and permitted States to extend health care coverage to children before birth. We urge Congress to strengthen the Born Alive Infant Protection Act by enacting appropriate civil and criminal penalties on healthcare providers who fail to provide treatment and care to an infant who survives an abortion, including early induction delivery where the death of the infant is intended. We call for legislation to ban sex-selective abortions – gender discrimination in its most lethal form – and to protect from abortion unborn children who are capable of feeling pain; and we applaud U.S. House Republicans for leading the effort to protect the lives of pain-capable unborn children in the District of Columbia. We call for a ban on the use of body parts from aborted fetuses for research. We support and applaud adult stem cell research to develop lifesaving therapies, and we oppose the killing of embryos for their stem cells. We oppose federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.

We also salute the many States that have passed laws for informed consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health-protective clinic regulation. We seek to protect young girls from exploitation through a parental consent requirement; and we affirm our moral obligation to assist, rather than penalize, women challenged by an unplanned pregnancy. We salute those who provide them with counseling and adoption alternatives and empower them to choose life, and we take comfort in the tremendous increase in adoptions that has followed Republican legislative initiatives.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
We’ve been over this 100 times on these threads.

We wouldn’t need a voting guide if we had to vote for an anti-abortion candidate only. All we’d need would be, “You can only vote for an anti-abortion candidate.” No one has ever said that.
Click to expand...
You still have not provided a single quote from any member if the magestrium to back up you personal interpretation of a document issued by an organization that has no teaching authority
 
estesbob said:
You still have not provided a single quote from any member if the magestrium to back up you personal interpretation of a document issued by an organization that has no teaching authority
Click to expand...
Sy has. I’m not going to repeat him.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
We’ve been over this 100 times on these threads.

We wouldn’t need a voting guide if we had to vote for an anti-abortion candidate only. All we’d need would be, “You can only vote for an anti-abortion candidate.” No one has ever said that.
Click to expand...
The error in your reasoning is that all races have a pro abortion and a pro life canidate That of course is not true When candidates have the same view on abortion we look to other issues Earlier in this thread I posted quotes from Bishops who explIned this in great detail-one even directly stateing why a Catholic could not have voted for John Kerry

As a theology professor I assume you are aware that Bishops Conferences have no teaching authority?
 
Peter_J said:
Before responding to this I want to ask, is this what you are referring to:

Faithful to the “self-evident” truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion or fund organizations which perform or advocate it and will not fund or subsidize health care which includes abortion coverage. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life. We oppose the non-consensual withholding or withdrawal of care or treatment, including food and water, from people with disabilities, including newborns, as well as the elderly and infirm, just as we oppose active and passive euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Republican leadership has led the effort to prohibit the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion and permitted States to extend health care coverage to children before birth. We urge Congress to strengthen the Born Alive Infant Protection Act by enacting appropriate civil and criminal penalties on healthcare providers who fail to provide treatment and care to an infant who survives an abortion, including early induction delivery where the death of the infant is intended. We call for legislation to ban sex-selective abortions – gender discrimination in its most lethal form – and to protect from abortion unborn children who are capable of feeling pain; and we applaud U.S. House Republicans for leading the effort to protect the lives of pain-capable unborn children in the District of Columbia. We call for a ban on the use of body parts from aborted fetuses for research. We support and applaud adult stem cell research to develop lifesaving therapies, and we oppose the killing of embryos for their stem cells. We oppose federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.

We also salute the many States that have passed laws for informed consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health-protective clinic regulation. We seek to protect young girls from exploitation through a parental consent requirement; and we affirm our moral obligation to assist, rather than penalize, women challenged by an unplanned pregnancy. We salute those who provide them with counseling and adoption alternatives and empower them to choose life, and we take comfort in the tremendous increase in adoptions that has followed Republican legislative initiatives.
Click to expand...
If this means no abortions under any circumstances, than yes. If this means there is wiggle room for incest, rape, and health of the mother, than no, as that would only mean the Republicans were less pro-abortion not anti-abortion.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Any of them would be better than a full-blown abortion promoter; particularly one who knew all about the sale of body parts and still promoted them, and wants all of us to underwrite the body parts market.

One recalls the story of the third Punic War, when the Roman soldiers ran across the shrine to Moloch, wherein children were sacrificed by “passing through the fire” (burned alive). At that time, Roman soldiers were still citizen soldiers, mostly farmers, and had a reverence for family and children. They were so infuriated at the Carthaginians that even their own generals couldn’t stop them from slaughtering the Carthaginians for their crimes.

Those soldiers were, of course, pagans. As Catholic Christians, we are supposed to be even more sensitive to the wanton destruction of children. And yet, so many of us do not so much as bat an eye at it. Worse, some of us promote the worship of Moloch by promoting and supporting the leaders who act as the “high priests” of the slaughter.

Hard to imagine it has come to this.
Click to expand...
It’s hard to put into words how atrocious and terrible it is to see Catholics who support such evil. But there are many.
 
sallybutler said:
If this means no abortions under any circumstances, than yes. If this means there is wiggle room for incest, rape, and health of the mother, than no, as that would only mean the Republicans were less pro-abortion not anti-abortion.
Click to expand...
Well, you said “Cruz is the only one that fully agrees with the Republican platform on abortion”, (post #1128) and what I quoted is the Republican platform on abortion (see gop.com/platform/we-the-people/). Unless there’s some secret platform that is different from what the GOP insiders reveal to the rank-and-file. 😉 :rolleyes:
 
Peter_J said:
Well, you said “Cruz is the only one that fully agrees with the Republican platform on abortion”, (post #1128) and what I quoted is the Republican platform on abortion (see gop.com/platform/we-the-people/). Unless there’s some secret platform that is different from what the GOP insiders reveal to the rank-and-file. 😉 :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
That is because everyone keeps saying the Republican platform is against abortion period. Do you disagree that Cruz is one of the few prominent Republicans that agrees and most other prominent Republican politicians believe in exceptions?
 
Peter_J said:
But the thing is, not all disagreements are equal. E.g. I imagine there are many things I could find on which I disagree with John Kasich, but none of them are comparable to someone like HRC who supports a abortion on demand.
Click to expand...
As important as it is, abortion is not the only life issue. And more importantly, political decisions such as voting can be guided by, besides positions on issues, prudential judgment as to whether those stands will translate into action. As one who has followed politics for 40 years, it is my prudential judgment that the abortion issue is far down on the Republican list of priorities. Republican administrations rarely, if ever, accomplish anything on the abortion issue. On the other hand, they are very effective with other items on their agenda, many of which I find odious.

I am not necessarily going to vote for Hillary Clinton, but I am not going to be told I am morally obligated to believe in the Republicans’ sincerity on the life issue.
 
Expatreprocedit said:
As important as it is, abortion is not the only life issue. And more importantly, political decisions such as voting can be guided by, besides positions on issues, prudential judgment as to whether those stands will translate into action. As one who has followed politics for 40 years, it is my prudential judgment that the abortion issue is far down on the Republican list of priorities.** Republican administrations rarely, if ever, accomplish anything on the abortion issue. **On the other hand, they are very effective with other items on their agenda, many of which I find odious.

I am not necessarily going to vote for Hillary Clinton, but I am not going to be told I am morally obligated to believe in the Republicans’ sincerity on the life issue.
Click to expand...
Not all republicans have sincerity on pro-life issues, we do not often get the opportunity to vote for any candidate who is as sincerely pro-life as Cruz is.
National Right to Life believes Sen. Cruz is the only candidate for president who has always been pro-life, who has a 100% pro-life voting record with National Right to Life, who can win the Republican nomination, and who can defeat pro-abortion Hillary Clinton in November…nrlpac.org/

Cruz has actively fought against planned infanticide…I mean parenthood: breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/28/ted-cruz-blasts-gop-leaders-funding-planned-parenthood/
theslot.jezebel.com/ted-cruz-calls-planned-parenthood-a-criminal-enterprise-1761225835
usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/08/20/ted-cruz-planned-parenthood-video-funding-column/32054115/
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiv0uShnJzMAhUKQSYKHQ0nBmEQFggrMAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Ftranscript%2F2015%2F07%2F22%2Fted-cruz-need-to-prosecute-planned-parenthood%2F&usg=AFQjCNHjjOT7ZDV_KrE6veKchIb1fFAx6w&bvm=bv.119745492,d.eWE
hillary was endorsed by planned infanticide: nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/planned-parenthood-backs-hillary-clinton-primary-race-n493646
 
carpenter383 said:
Not all republicans have sincerity on pro-life issues, we do not often get the opportunity to vote for any candidate who is as sincerely pro-life as Cruz is.
National Right to Life believes Sen. Cruz is the only candidate for president who has always been pro-life, who has a 100% pro-life voting record with National Right to Life, who can win the Republican nomination, and who can defeat pro-abortion Hillary Clinton in November…nrlpac.org/

Cruz has actively fought against planned infanticide…I mean parenthood: breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/28/ted-cruz-blasts-gop-leaders-funding-planned-parenthood/
theslot.jezebel.com/ted-cruz-calls-planned-parenthood-a-criminal-enterprise-1761225835
usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/08/20/ted-cruz-planned-parenthood-video-funding-column/32054115/
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiv0uShnJzMAhUKQSYKHQ0nBmEQFggrMAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Ftranscript%2F2015%2F07%2F22%2Fted-cruz-need-to-prosecute-planned-parenthood%2F&usg=AFQjCNHjjOT7ZDV_KrE6veKchIb1fFAx6w&bvm=bv.119745492,d.eWE
hillary was endorsed by planned infanticide: nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/planned-parenthood-backs-hillary-clinton-primary-race-n493646
Click to expand...
I believe Cruz is probably sincere on being against abortion rights. Almost anything on abortion he could get through Congress would be struck down by the Supreme Court. OTOH, he would probably be successful in blocking any Congressional action to limit access to guns, e.g. background checks. With the Presidential powers he could also get the US involved in an unjust military action very easily. That is the analysis I would have to go through were he the GOP nominee, which I don’t think is going to happen.
 
Ted Cruz is the only choice for me at least right now.
He is by far the most pro-life candidate running, and has the record to prove it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top