Donald wins: 'Deplorables' trump Clinton

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
RCinMT said:
Why don’t you take a peak at the republican party platform and the democrat party platform.
Click to expand...
I was talking about Trumps promises, not those of the Republican party. Besides, Trump found it necessary to list the other positions he’s taken despite the existence of the Republican Party platform, why not list his pro-life plan on there as well?
 
J_Peterson said:
This is getting really weird. Hillary wasn’t even on that email thread! It was Catholics complaining about conservative Catholics, much like this message board is Catholics complaining about liberal Catholics. Take a couple posts out of context here and you can manufacture a controversy about Catholic Answers being anti-Catholic.

It wasn’t about changing Catholicism, it was an attempt to move the conversation away from abortion and gay marriage and towards other social justice issues. It was in response to the words of Pope Francis (yes, some Catholics get inspired by him).
Click to expand...
No, it was not. It was calling Catholics committed to the current and unchanging teachings of the Church be medieval and backwards. It was members of the laity–doubtful that any would be called faithful laity–talking about overturning the teaching authority of the bishops and inserting what, their own understanding based on lifelong study of scripture? When did Pope Francis refer to the faithful as backwards? When did he ever say that we should embrace SSM, transgenderism and disregard the right to life?

Being pro-life and supporting traditional marriage isn’t “conservative” Catholicism. It’s Catholicism. There’s no amount of mental gymnastics that can change that. And these emails between her highest placed campaign staff most certainly reflect her thoughts, thoughts that were betrayed in the very speech in which she mentioned changing religious beliefs to suit her agenda.
 
RCinMT said:
There is no such thing as being protected by a Supreme Court Ruling. SCOTUS does not make laws, it interprets them. If the House and Senate pass a bill that is signed by the President which defines when life begins then it’s the job of the SCOTUS to uphold that law.
Click to expand...
Not exactly. First, abortion is currently protected as a Constitutional right as much as free speech and freedom of religion, and will be until SCOTUS rules otherwise. As for passing a law defining when life begins, that’s an interesting suggestion. On the other hand the court could rule that Congress has no more right to pass such a law than it has to pass one saying the sun revolves around the Earth. Nonetheless, I think that would be a commendable effort.

This, however, ignores the fact that such a bill can never be passed so long as Democrats can successfully carry on filibusters in the Senate.
Despite the extremely muddled mental gymnastics evinced in the majority opinion in Roe v. Wade, one item was made clear: if ever life was to be defined then Roe v Wade would have to be reconsidered. So let the legislative and executive branch define life and see what happens.
Click to expand...
Has a state tried this? Even though the US congress cannot pass such a law it would be interesting to see how the Supreme Court would react to such a bill coming from one of the states, but don’t discount the very real possibility that the court would simply rationalize whatever response it preferred. If the Obergefell decision showed anything it is that the court is out of control and utterly disconnected from the law.

Ender
 
phil19034 said:
I voted straight pro-life too. However, the only issue is that the Ginsburg & Breyer would have most likely retired under a Hillary administration. But I don’t think they will under Trump, they will most likely stay in office until they die, get too sick, or another Democrat is elected President.

Kennedy on the other hand could still retire.
Click to expand...
Here are the justices and their current ages, and their ages in 4 years

Ginsburg - 83 - 87
Kennedy - 80 - 84
Breyer - 78 - 82
Thomas - 68 - 72
Alito - 66 - 70
Sotomayor 62 - 66
Roberts - 61 - 65
Kagan - 56 - 60

With one spot already to be filled, there’s a high probability Trump will have at least one more to fill. If it is Kennedy, he might find an actual conservative to replace him and make the Court reliably conservative. If it is Ginsburg or Breyer, then he could fundamentally shift the balance somewhat (Kennedy would waffle enough just b/c he likes being in the middle). If he nominates 3 justices, all conservative, he could lock in the SC for a decade. But that’s a BIG assumption.

First, he needs two justices to retire. Second, he has to actually nominate conservative justices, which is up for debate. We’ll have to see.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Well, generally that doesn’t happen when one state is at war with another. We might not think of ourselves as at war with Iran, but the ruling clerics of Iran do.

Next time you take a Bayer aspirin, for example, remember that the American assets and patents of the German Bayer company were seized by this country, and never given back.

That money was in this country when Iran vowed to destroy the “Great Satan”. We owe them nothing. American courts ruled that victims of Iran have a claim to it. But the government paid them with taxpayer money instead.
Click to expand...
It is also important to remember that Iran is not monolithic. There is a strong component of the population (not the ones in power) that is very sympathetic to American views and culture - much more so than, say, the Iraqi population. Treating the whole nation of Iran with a continuous hard line policy tends to play into the hands of the rulers and disillusions that component of the population that is kind of on our side. Ultimately the forces from within the nation are going to be more effective at changing the direction of Iran than our external pressures. I think gradual loosening of the sanctions is a smart move at this time.
 
This thread is an informative microcosm of political positions regarding Catholicism and America, and illustrates why those two topics are joined at the hip.

America’s exceptionalism (a term abhorred by some because they don’t understand it and by some because they do) stems from her divinely inspired Declaration of Independence, whereby the right to religious liberty comes from God, not the government.

“We hold these Truths to be self-evident,
that all Men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and
the pursuit of Happiness—That to secure these
Rights, Governments are instituted among Men,
deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the
Governed, that whenever any Form of Government
becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of
the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute
new Government…”

That in turn inspired the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, including: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

The Trump v. Clinton campaign would make a text-book study of Christianity and American politics today. Nevertheless, school students will never be permitted to learn from it–far too political. It’s too political because too many politicians and religious leaders no longer hold it self-evident that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Teachers must ignore our founding documents and walk on egg shells as though they lived in Canada.

But it seems prayer has changed things, just in the nick of time. Will Christians and Jews now take this opportunity to secure our right to alter or to abolish laws and political interpretations which have become destructive of our God-given rights?
 
Ender said:
Not exactly. First, abortion is currently protected as a Constitutional right as much as free speech and freedom of religion, and will be until SCOTUS rules otherwise. As for passing a law defining when life begins, that’s an interesting suggestion. On the other hand the court could rule that Congress has no more right to pass such a law than it has to pass one saying the sun revolves around the Earth. Nonetheless, I think that would be a commendable effort.

This, however, ignores the fact that such a bill can never be passed so long as Democrats can successfully carry on filibusters in the Senate.
Has a state tried this? Even though the US congress cannot pass such a law it would be interesting to see how the Supreme Court would react to such a bill coming from one of the states, but don’t discount the very real possibility that the court would simply rationalize whatever response it preferred. If the Obergefell decision showed anything it is that the court is out of control and utterly disconnected from the law.

Ender
Click to expand...
No because life pertains to the right life, liberty…that’s enshrined in the Constitution. The US congress could certainly pass a law that states as pertains to interpretation of the Constitution life shall defined as…
 
I have a question, a real honest non snarky question:

Why do I keep seeing ppl saying women, people of color, LGBQT, Muslims and marginalized groups are “afraid for their lives” because Trump was elected? That Trump wants to strip them of their rights, incite violence against them, and find there existence a threat. I’ve not seen him say anything of the sort.

Just so you know, I’m glad Hillary lost, but I’m still cautious about what a Trump presidency means. I agonized over my vote, so I don’t think I’m blinded by the glow of victory. I’m genuinely confused.
 
RCinMT said:
No because life pertains to the right life, liberty…that’s enshrined in the Constitution. The US congress could certainly pass a law that states as pertains to interpretation of the Constitution life shall defined as…
Click to expand...
And Congress has the right to then deny appellate jurisdiction to the Supreme Court regarding such new definition.
 
ForeverJoy said:
I have a question, a real honest non snarky question:

Why do I keep seeing ppl saying women, people of color, LGBQT, Muslims and marginalized groups are “afraid for their lives” because Trump was elected? That Trump wants to strip them of their rights, incite violence against them, and find there existence a threat. I’ve not seen him say anything of the sort.

Just so you know, I’m glad Hillary lost, but I’m still cautious about what a Trump presidency means. I agonized over my vote, so I don’t think I’m blinded by the glow of victory. I’m genuinely confused.
Click to expand...
Well immigrants are scared that their families will be split up-because it has only been a day, we don’t know if that will happen yet, but IMO it is a valid concern.

Muslims are probably afraid that the government and its people will continue to shun Islam and paint them all as terrorists? But what I’m seeing is that they are afraid of hate crimes by people who are suddenly confident now that Trump won (imo, hate crimes will happen by angry racists if clinton won as well). Some women are saying that they aren’t wearing their hijab today.

LGBT community are scared that they will be no longer allowed to marry, and if they are married, their marriages would be void, because republicans are ‘in power’. This would be a victory for the religious, but try to look at it from their POV. Pence was also known to support conversion therapy (not 100% sure), and I remember reading that he supported using taxpayer money for conversion therapy instead for HIV/aids??? I didn’t fact check yet but I remember both right and left wing websites reporting this

POC are probably afraid of the hate crimes that might happen, the logic is that people from the kkk liked trump= trump is president=something is wrong. Maybe the reform of the police, not sure.

Women are just exaggerating. They have always faced threats like sexual assault/workplace discrimination and trump/republicans won’t do anything that will legalize the discrimination of them. Abortions might be affected, but it is never about discrimination. The best I can come up with is that maybe the people who are already sexist will feel empowered by his victory-trump is seen as a red pill hero…or that if a guy can become president and is popular with the people after he degraded women, anyone can and clearly nobody cares about them and so on…

But the general idea is that if a mean person managed to rise to power, those people that helped him to areIt’s a broad generalisation, so there is obviously going to be childish knee jerk behavior because someone brought that up, but I feel sorry for them because america wasn’t really a great place for them either way
 
ForeverJoy said:
I have a question, a real honest non snarky question:

Why do I keep seeing ppl saying women, people of color, LGBQT, Muslims and marginalized groups are “afraid for their lives” because Trump was elected? That Trump wants to strip them of their rights, incite violence against them, and find there existence a threat. I’ve not seen him say anything of the sort.

Just so you know, I’m glad Hillary lost, but I’m still cautious about what a Trump presidency means. I agonized over my vote, so I don’t think I’m blinded by the glow of victory. I’m genuinely confused.
Click to expand...
Overactive imaginations fueled by oppression/identity politics.
 
BernadetteM said:
All praise and glory to Jesus Christ and His Blessed Mother.

Months ago I felt that the Lord was telling me that Trump would win, however, being a human I would at times worry that it was just my own wishes.

As I have said in other posts, that God has used sinners (we all are) as His instrument to bring glory to Him. Just as he used Paul/Saul who killed Christians, he became an apostle and saint.

I believe Trump will do everything he promised, if it is possible. He is not Obama who just did what he wanted without Congress or any support and some felt he was a dictator.

As Christians we must give Trump the time and support to bring back the U.S. I used to know.

I saw so much hatred on CAF from some posters and it is time now to stop and let us all wake up and remember we all have a Day when we will stand in judgment. I too need to follow what I say and show more love and understanding and be less judgmental towards others.

God Bless

Bernadette
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what you mean by your first sentence. Are you praising Jesus and Mary for the election result? If so, did you also do so when Barack Obama was elected and reelected?
 
Lea101 said:
Well immigrants are scared that their families will be split up-because it has only been a day, we don’t know if that will happen yet, but IMO it is a valid concern.

Muslims are probably afraid that the government and its people will continue to shun Islam and paint them all as terrorists? But what I’m seeing is that they are afraid of hate crimes by people who are suddenly confident now that Trump won (imo, hate crimes will happen by angry racists if clinton won as well). Some women are saying that they aren’t wearing their hijab today.

LGBT community are scared that they will be no longer allowed to marry, and if they are married, their marriages would be void, because republicans are ‘in power’. This would be a victory for the religious, but try to look at it from their POV. Pence was also known to support conversion therapy (not 100% sure), and I remember reading that he supported using taxpayer money for conversion therapy instead for HIV/aids??? I didn’t fact check yet but I remember both right and left wing websites reporting this

POC are probably afraid of the hate crimes that might happen, the logic is that people from the kkk liked trump= trump is president=something is wrong. Maybe the reform of the police, not sure.

Women are just exaggerating. They have always faced threats like sexual assault/workplace discrimination and trump/republicans won’t do anything that will legalize the discrimination of them. Abortions might be affected, but it is never about discrimination. The best I can come up with is that maybe the people who are already sexist will feel empowered by his victory-trump is seen as a red pill hero…or that if a guy can become president and is popular with the people after he degraded women, anyone can and clearly nobody cares about them and so on…

But the general idea is that if a mean person managed to rise to power, those people that helped him to areIt’s a broad generalisation, so there is obviously going to be childish knee jerk behavior because someone brought that up, but I feel sorry for them because america wasn’t really a great place for them either way
Click to expand...
Oh please.
Talk about broad generalizations.
Any anyway, we’re CATHOLIC.
May I remind you of the 5 Non-Negotiable’s for Catholics???
 
pianistclare said:
Oh please.
Talk about broad generalizations.
Any anyway, we’re CATHOLIC.
May I remind you of the 5 Non-Negotiable’s for Catholics???
Click to expand...
The Pope said he doesn’t count non-negotiables on the fingers of his hand.
 
Lea101 said:
But the general idea is that if a mean person managed to rise to power, those people that helped him to areIt’s a broad generalisation, so there is obviously going to be childish knee jerk behavior because someone brought that up, but I feel sorry for them because america wasn’t really a great place for them either way
Click to expand...
Really? Trump is mean?

America is not really a great place for who? America is the most generous, innovative, creative, hardworking country in the world. I am having a hard time understanding your post. Aside from a lot of opinions, it doesn’t really answer the question that was asked.

God bless America.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top