Do Catholics still support Trump

  • Thread starter Thread starter MamasBoy33
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And His Father did. Jesus was raised on the third day and now sits at the right hand of the Father.
 
There’s more than one way to skin an animal.

Either let the gov give or let nature provide. Either way, God is involved.
 
Not in the least! But I am saying, as others have, that most people in the West support legalized abortion to at least some extent, and that’s not likely to change for a long time. So it’s not going away. But if pro-life Catholics were to broaden their scope a little, and really support all life issues instead of just being against abortion, they might gain support from many who want to be pro-life but who don’t understand the evils of abortion. And as a cherry on the sundae, they could make more people more open to receiving salvation. Not to mention doing a lot of good for a lot of people. This, as opposed to supporting vulgar immoralists who give scandal to everything remotely Christian, only for the few crumbs of encouragement they give their base to keep them placated.
 
TheAmazingGrace said:
In other words, let them eat cake.
Click to expand...
Is that your reading of Jesus,’ “You will have the poor with you always?”

Why would you suppose a vow of poverty is an aspect of many religious vocations?

Is it the Church saying, “Let them eat cake!” to those in religious vocations?
 
This thread is extremely uncharitable on both sides.

Today’s New Democratic Party leaders are starting to push more & more socialism, which is against Church teaching. Plus, can their stance on abortion, same sex marriage, etc.

The Republicans are more aligned with Catholic teaching, but do have some faults. However, if the Republicans can accept distributionism as an economic model then they would be 100% in line with Catholic teaching. Distributionism was created by Pope Leo to be in line with Catholic teaching.

Many Catholic Republicans already like distributionism and now more and more conservative think tanks are starting to support it.

But the problem the Republicans have is that they are less united than Democrats. The Republicans have many more factions that disagree with on another and plus a growing number of libertarians in the party.

If more Catholics would join the Republican Party, we could finally get them to accept distributionism and have a party that is 98% aligned with Catholic teaching.

NOTE: the immagration issue is an issue that BOTH parties fail on because neither party is willing to pass common sense reforms. Democrats are happy to simply ignore current laws, while Republicans feel they can’t change the law until they can first enforce new laws.
 
What if the government doesn’t do good even if it has the means and means well? What if it doesn’t work?
 
Buddy he generalized Mexicans as rapist, and don’t give me this illegal or legal context, that was not in his speech. He also banned Muslims from coming for awhile. Trust me, he IS racist, and if you don’t see that it means you’re privledge.
 
What was his intent regarding his generalization?
 
Last edited:
billsannie said:
But if pro-life Catholics were to broaden their scope a little, and really support all life issues instead of just being against abortion, they might gain support from many who want to be pro-life but who don’t understand the evils of abortion.
Click to expand...
It appears that there is quite a bit of presumption here on your part. What makes you think pro-life Catholics are not involved in a broad scope of endeavors in support of life? It is very difficult to do really effective work even in one area without a solid expertise with regard to the issues relative to that area. Why not have individuals specializing in anti-abortion work, while others specialize in other areas? Why the need to “broaden” work out in that way? Would you expect a doctor specializing in cardiology to likewise “broaden” their efforts? That doesn’t make sense to me – which is why I think it is another liberal talking point that too many have swallowed without thinking it through. Taking that advice seriously would only serve to lessen the effectiveness of pro-life activities generally, which is why I think it is a terrible idea.
 
I suggest we be careful in smearing others with rumor and gossip, including political leaders. I can’t say I’m innocent.
 
phil19034 said:
The Republicans are more aligned with Catholic teaching, but do have some faults.
Click to expand...
I will agree with that, but just barely. It is sort of a 55%/45%, maybe 60%/40% sort of thing. So I almost always vote for a Republican, except when it came to Donald Trump. I have to let character count for something, even if I over look his lack of experience and intelligence. I cannot ignore lack of character.
 
I honestly don’t think you know what you are talking about.
For instance, Muslims were never banned from America. It was people from like 7 countries.
 
I think we can do a lot better than just deferring to Jesus all of the time. We have the means, let’s use it.
 
Knowingly involving oneself in scandal is not a Corporal Work of Mercy.

Try to incorporate a little depth perception here, please.
 
The list of countries chosen were also taken directly from an Obama administration document that identified the riskiest countries. No more, no less. Trump is demonized for everything he does.
 
The mainstream media, the vast left wing conspiracy to “delegitamjze” Trump had no affect on me as a pro-life Catholic voter.

Trump’s demonstrated incompetence throughout the campaign did it all for me.
 
Johntitor9 said:
Buddy he generalized Mexicans as rapist, and don’t give me this illegal or legal context, that was not in his speech. He also banned Muslims from coming for awhile. Trust me, he IS racist, and if you don’t see that it means you’re privledge.
Click to expand...
If you read and think clearly about what he actually said, you will find that it is his detractors who are guilty of generalizing and of racism.

No, he didn’t ban “Muslims,” he banned all visitors from countries which cannot properly vet who they are permitting to travel to the US. The fact that you read this ban the way you do tells me you have a difficult time making logical distinctions. It isn’t clear what the reason for that might be, but the shortcoming is clear.

No, I don’t trust you. At least not until you move beyond simplistic statements into more substantial and supported claims.
 
Johntitor9 said:
Buddy he generalized Mexicans as rapist, and don’t give me this illegal or legal context, that was not in his speech.
Click to expand...
No he did not.
Johntitor9 said:
He also banned Muslims from coming for awhile.
Click to expand...
Actually, the ban was thrown by the courts and was never a Muslim ban as it was by nation not religion and excluded the two most populous Muslim nations. Eventually, they wanted to add North Korea to the list.
Johntitor9 said:
Trust me, he IS racist, and if you don’t see that it means you’re privledge.
Click to expand...
I don’t trust people on the internet.

Also, would I be “privleged” if I said Trump wasn’t a racist and said I am part of at least one minority group?

BTW, I voted straight ticket GOP for the last several cycles.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top