Do Catholics still support Trump

  • Thread starter Thread starter MamasBoy33
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ridgerunner said:
This is the worst apology for abortion of all. The congress can’t ban abortion. Only the supreme court can do that. Obama appointed two abortion-supporting justices. Trump has had the opportunity to appoint only one justice, believed to be prolife. The only prolife justices are repub appointees. The Dem appointees in the partial birth abortion case all voted in favor of partial birth abortion. All Repub appointees voted to uphold state bans on it.
Click to expand...
And yet, Neil Gorsuch said that Roe was the law of the land.

What makes you think that a Republican-leaning Supreme would naturally think that, for the purposes of Constitutional rights, life begins at conception?
 
PaulinVA said:
I believe the women.
Click to expand...
Why? Still trying desperately to score points with the left and big government crowd up there in Northern VA?
Ridgerunner said:
Which Repub candidates supported racism in the last election?
Click to expand...
There were ZERO candidates on the GOP side who supported racism. If there is any bigotry in politics in America, it is anti-white, anti-male, anti-straight, anti-Christian liberals and their lackey “independent” and even conservative excuse-makers.
 
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but since the Supreme Court decided Roe v Wade, wouldn’t congress have to pass another law banning abortion and have it signed into law, and it be ran through the court system and then upheld as constitutional for Roe v Wade to be overturned?
 
SuperLuigi said:
I believe the women.

Why? Still trying desperately to score points with the left and big government crowd up there in Northern VA?
Click to expand...
Nope. It’s just common sense. He married a classmate of one the girls he’s accused of molesting/dating. There are many people who coororabate his behavior in that time period. Facts check out.
 
Ridgerunner said:
This is the worst apology for abortion of all. The congress can’t ban abortion. Only the supreme court can do that. Obama appointed two abortion-supporting justices. Trump has had the opportunity to appoint only one justice, believed to be prolife. The only prolife justices are repub appointees. The Dem appointees in the partial birth abortion case all voted in favor of partial birth abortion. All Repub appointees voted to uphold state bans on it.

But Trump did reinstate the Mexico City Policy, so at least this country is not supporting it abroad.

Which Repub candidates supported racism in the last election?

Which supported torture or unjust wars?
Click to expand...
So, it is the most important issue in determining who to vote for and then, when the party that is supposed to be the one that does something about it is in charge, you give them a free pass. And then you call it the worst apology for abortion ever? Give me a break. They don’t act; they have never acted and the Republican apologists make excuses, just like you are doing now.

Trump supported racism and continues to support racism.

Trump supported torture. Bush supported unjust wars. It remains to be seen if Trump will attempt to start an unjust war.
 
Afghanistan had a government that was literally allowing Al-Qaeda to train, recruit, and gather funds within their borders and attack the US and others, and Iraq, contrary to popular opinion, did in fact have chemical weapons in violation of UN resolutions.

What part of that doesn’t create justification?
 
Ridgerunner said:
Pope Benedict said one could vote for a pro-abortion candidate if there were “proportionate” reasons counterbalancing it. What, in your mind, is proportionate to killing 50 million children and counting?
Click to expand...
That is the wrong thing to consider for proportionate reasons. If it really were a choice between killing 50 million babies or some other issue, then you might have a point - such as a direct ballot initiative:
“Should we kill 50 million babies and raise the minimum wage, or leave the minimum wage where it is and not kill those babies?”
Click to expand...
If that were the choice on the ballot then you would have a point. Of course it is proportionately more important to save those 50 million babies. But that is not what is at stake. When you vote for a pro-life candidate you are voting for a chance that this candidate, if elected, will do something that will prevent those abortions.

When deciding on proportionate reasons to choose between two or more candidates, the proper thing to weigh is the value of the underlying issue together with the probability of that issue being positively affected by your candidate. Once you factor in that probability, it may very well turn out to be proportionately better to vote for the candidate that is not promising to ban abortion - even if the good that you hope to get out of that candidate is as plain and simple as better maintenance of national parks.
 
Last edited:
anon65111186 said:
40.png
pnewton:
Even outside of elections, an employee may try make a determination of a candidate for employment based on an interview, an essay, even social media.
Click to expand...
This is assuming a employer/ employee relationship is analagous to a voter / president relationship, which of course it is not.
Click to expand...
I guess that may be someone unique to me, or at least not universal. But for me it is as close an analogy as I can get. When I decide who to vote for, I look at it as an employer looking for who I want in a certain job. A political position is a job, after all. He does work for the electorate. Perhaps I should ask why you think it a poor analogy.
 
You like to make fun of Deaf people? You’re not the first to act dumb to us.
 
For me?

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

That’s all I need to know about Trump & GOP
 
JanSobieskiIII said:
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but since the Supreme Court decided Roe v Wade, wouldn’t congress have to pass another law banning abortion and have it signed into law, and it be ran through the court system and then upheld as constitutional for Roe v Wade to be overturned?
Click to expand...
This is a good question. I’m not totally familiar with all the case law, but another way could be that someone who is charged with 2 counts of murder for killing a mother and her unborn child could appeal a conviction based on unborn babies aren’t constitutionally-protected individuals. I know some states do this but am not sure if any determination about constitutionality has been made.
 
Can we get a citation on this? I’m leery of random images in bolded text on the internet.
 
I wasn’t making fun of anyone.

Stop acting like an SJW.

You don’t have it so rough.
 
Last edited:
Is Jharek Carnelian now responding to e-motes I write? 😂
 
Last edited:
Still doesn’t change the fact they were justified.

IMO the only thing that should have been different was the toppling of the House of Saud while we were at it.

But we all definitely know why that didn’t happen. Sometimes pragmatic decisions have to be made.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top