Elected Catholic Democrats to release "Statement of Principles"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maranatha
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
frommi:
We need good leaders, but isn’t it a little strange that abortions have gone up in this country with a Republican government?
Click to expand...
Sorry, but this is false. Abortion rates have been going down since the Clinton years.

factcheck.org article

media matters article

Guttmacher institute article
 
40.png
frommi:
IAnd I still can’t figure out why anyone would base their vote solely on someones willingness to vote in a way that will be overturned by the supreme court.
Click to expand...
How about supporting Justices who advocate overturning RvW then? Can the Dems manage that at least?
For better or worse, it doesn’t seem all that possible for us to legislate abortion away.
Click to expand...
No, but we can but Justices on the bench that will eliminate abortion, can’t we.
And it is damaging to the political process for anyone to be a single issue voter.
Click to expand...
Why? If there was a canidate who wanted to nuke Austrailia as his first act as President.

Would that be enought to disqualify him from your vote, or would you inquire about his health care plan?
Particularly when you cast your vote in a way that leads to no progress on the issue you advocate so strongly for.
Click to expand...
Hmmm, Roberts and Alito are now on the bench, that is certainly progress 👍

Now if we can just get Stevens and maybe one other off the bench and replaced by pro-life justices, we can really make progress.
We need good leaders, but isn’t it a little strange that abortions have gone up in this country with a Republican government?
Click to expand...
They actually haven’t. see above
 
40.png
Brendan:
They actually haven’t. see above
Click to expand...
At first blush, I stand corrected on that point.

It still feels wrong to me to vote for something that you can’t change through legislation.

And exactly what happens when the supreme court doesn’t overturn Roe? What happens when they decline to take up this South Dakota law that is nothing more than legislative battle picking?

Then what…can we agree that would be a call for a reapproach to this issue?
 
40.png
Brendan:
If there was a canidate who wanted to nuke Austrailia as his first act as President.

Would that be enought to disqualify him from your vote, or would you inquire about his health care plan?
Click to expand...
:clapping:
 
40.png
frommi:
I don’t think they have a death agenda…that simply doesn’t make sense. You have to at least recognize that they aren’t running around advocating people have abortions.
Click to expand...
No–they just fight like heck to make sure nobody can limit them in any way shap or form.
And I still can’t figure out why anyone would base their vote solely on someones willingness to vote in a way that will be overturned by the supreme court.

For better or worse, it doesn’t seem all that possible for us to legislate abortion away.
Click to expand...
Well we wont if we throw our hands up and say we cant do it. we WILL legislate abortion away when Roe is overturned and the PEOPLE can vote on it.
And it is damaging to the political process for anyone to be a single issue voter. Particularly when you cast your vote in a way that leads to no progress on the issue you advocate so strongly for.
Click to expand...
And I find it damaging to the human race for anyone to vote for someone who supports killing the unborn for any reason. I am not a single issue voter-being pro-life is, however, the basic requirement for me to even consider voting for a candidiate.

And legislation is not the only way we are going to win this battle. Given the appointments of Alito and Roberts it is obvious if Kerry had been elected president Abortion would have been enshrined as a right for another generation. if Stephens retires you can stick a stake in Roe.
We need good leaders, but isn’t it a little strange that abortions have gone up in this country with a Republican government?
Click to expand...
That is not true. it is a fallacy out forth by the Democrat to try and hoodwink voters into ignoring their support of taxpayer funded abortions up to the point the child FULLY exits from the womb…
 
40.png
frommi:
.

And exactly what happens when the supreme court doesn’t overturn Roe? What happens when they decline to take up this South Dakota law that is nothing more than legislative battle picking?

Then what…can we agree that would be a call for a reapproach to this issue?
Click to expand...
We will NEVER concede defeat. if the SD law is overturned we will push for the passing of another and another until we finally get a court that will overturn this abomination. 47 MILLION DEAD!!!. WE WILL NEVER NEVER QUIT and we will NEVER VOTE FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT SUPPORT OUR CAUSE.

Is that clear enbough for you?
 
40.png
Maranatha:
I would characterize the decline in abortions as a result of the restrictions such as parental notification, waiting periods, etc… These were won by the pro-life lobby and not by the Clinton administration.
Click to expand...
And due in a large part to the growth of Crisis Preganancy Centers. In the late 80s early 90s we swiched our focus from Picketing abortion mills to counseling women in crisis pregaancy. We also adopted a strategy of incremenatl changes that highlighted the flaws of the abortion on demand culture. This included parental notification laws, the born alive act, informed consent and the banning of partial birth abortion.
 
40.png
itsjustdave1988:
Canon law clearly indicates that all Catholics are bound by law to give their submission to Catholic doctrines.

Canon law also implies that the Ordinary (eg. diocesan bishop) or Apostolic See (ie. Pope) will admonish public dissent with Catholic doctrine, and if they fail to retract their dissenting position after admonishment, they are to be punished with a just penalty.

I believe the bishops and the pope are blameworthy for not admonishing dissenting public figures such as these politicians. The pope and college of bishops have failed to exercise their authority and responsibility in accord with canon 1371.

By failing to admonish dissenting Catholics, the magisterium have created the environment of ambiguity and dissent in which we now suffer. Because they have not received specific public admonishment, these politicians have come to believe that they are not in violation of canon law and are Catholics in good standing. Only the bishops and the pope can correct this problem.

The Church must exercise their responsibility to admonish heretics in our midst otherwise this passage of Sacred Scripture is nonsensical:

Titus 3:10 “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition avoid”
Click to expand...
You have no right to tell the pope how to do his job. You have no way of knowing what the pope has instructed the bishops to do or not to do. However, it is true that there are Vatican officials that are as ‘political’ as they come. The pope has denounced abortion time and time again.
 
40.png
bones_IV:
You have no right to tell the pope how to do his job. You have no way of knowing what the pope has instructed the bishops to do or not to do. However, it is true that there are Vatican officials that are as ‘political’ as they come. The pope has denounced abortion time and time again.
Click to expand...
IIRC Correctely McCormick sat on a letter from Ratzinger until after the election, if not for the firm hand of the vatican i feel the American catholic Bishos would have led us to a church little different from todays episcopal Church
 
40.png
estesbob:
IIRC Correctely McCormick sat on a letter from Ratzinger until after the election, if not for the firm hand of the vatican i feel the American catholic Bishos would have led us to a church little different from todays episcopal Church
Click to expand...
You mean Cardinal McCarrick, right? What does IIRC mean? Not familiar with the phrase.
 
40.png
frommi:
At first blush, I stand corrected on that point.

It still feels wrong to me to vote for something that you can’t change through legislation.

And exactly what happens when the supreme court doesn’t overturn Roe? What happens when they decline to take up this South Dakota law that is nothing more than legislative battle picking?
Click to expand...
The we contine to elect Presidents who would appoint pro-life judges, and Senators who would confirm them.

Also Congressmen who would approve a Constitutional Ammendment to ban abortion.
Then what…can we agree that would be a call for a reapproach to this issue?
Click to expand...
NEVER!!!
 
40.png
bones_IV:
You mean Cardinal McCarrick, right? What does IIRC mean? Not familiar with the phrase.
Click to expand...
Yes mccarick. IIRC means If I Recall Correctly

McCarick, I beleive , was determined to give kerry and pro-abortion democrats cover. one could make the point that they shouldnt have made a sattement in 2004 as it would be seen as interfring with the Presidential election BUT WHAT IS STOPPING THEM NOW!!! The Church’s teaching could not be more clear.
 
40.png
estesbob:
Yes mccarick. IIRC means If I Recall Correctly

McCarick, I beleive , was determined to give kerry and pro-abortion democrats cover. one could make the point that they shouldnt have made a sattement in 2004 as it would be seen as interfring with the Presidential election BUT WHAT IS STOPPING THEM NOW!!! The Church’s teaching could not be more clear.
Click to expand...
But the beautiful Mother of God interceded for us. God refused to let Cardinal McCarrick get away with it. Boy how the truth comes out. Jesus really trully is Lord and Saviour of us all. Our Lord always has the last say in everything. Period!!! Cardinal McCarrick covering up for Kerry and the pro-abortionists just shows the REAL COLORS OF THE LIBERAL PROGRESSIVES WITHIN THE CHURCH! The Church still stood firm, and yet the main stream media continues to ignore it. Estesbob, I’ve asked myself, why do the main stream media, hedonistic Hollywood and the popculture continue to live in their sins and reject salvation?

In George W. Bush’s initial campaign in 2000 the vote was 50/50. And it wasn’t decided until Dec 12th, feast day of Our Lady of Guadalope!
 
40.png
bones_IV:
But the beautiful Mother of God interceded for us. God refused to let Cardinal McCarrick get away with it. Boy how the truth comes out. Jesus really trully is Lord and Saviour of us all. Our Lord always has the last say in everything. Period!!! Cardinal McCarrick covering up for Kerry and the pro-abortionists just shows the REAL COLORS OF THE LIBERAL PROGRESSIVES WITHIN THE CHURCH! The Church still stood firm, and yet the main stream media continues to ignore it. Estesbob, I’ve asked myself, why do the main stream media, hedonistic Hollywood and the popculture continue to live in their sins and reject salvation?

In George W. Bush’s initial campaign in 2000 the vote was 50/50. And it wasn’t decided until Dec 12th, feast day of Our Lady of Guadalope!
Click to expand...
This is quite misguided…I don’t think the virgin Mary has time to intervene in presidential elections in some bizzare mystical way.

Now…I love the solider-iffic way some people are talking in this thread.

Can someone please explain to me what your going to do with these politicians if this right is simply reaffirmed over and over?

When are we going to start changing minds instead of beating people over the head with our own intrepreations of doctrine?

There is good work to be done…I don’t know any catholics who are seeking abortions…so why don’t we start from there?

This violent and firey rhetoric isn’t doing anybody any good.

There are good democrat and republican legislators…many who never cast a vote for or against abortion legislation.

Stop assuming that there is evil in every democrat. sheesh.
 
40.png
frommi:
This is quite misguided…I don’t think the virgin Mary has time to When are we going to start changing minds instead of beating people over the head with our own intrepreations of doctrine?

.
Click to expand...
The only way we can change pro-abotion catholic politicians minds is to assure them that they wont get catholic votes unless they adhere to catholic teachings. The idea that we are beating people over the head with our own interperprations of doctine is nonsense. The Catholic Churchs teaching on this is clear-one can not be a catholic politican and vote in support of abortion. That some Catholics continue to vote for such politicans aids and abetts the death of 1.2 millon children a year. Shame on those who do.
 
40.png
estesbob:
The only way we can change pro-abotion catholic politicians minds is to assure them that they wont get catholic votes unless they adhere to catholic teachings. The idea that we are beating people over the head with our own interperprations of doctine is nonsense. The Catholic Churchs teaching on this is clear-one can not be a catholic politican and vote in support of abortion. That some Catholics continue to vote for such politicans aids and abetts the death of 1.2 millon children a year. Shame on those who do.
Click to expand...
You tell him estesbob.
 
40.png
frommi:
Can someone please explain to me what your going to do with these politicians if this right is simply reaffirmed over and over?
Click to expand...
All that this would demonstrate is that these politicians are continually wrong over and over. Although I do believe it will eventually be shown to not be a right. About 1 in 4 pregnancies are terminated, so statistically, one would assume that most abortions are from those that are pro-abortion (obviously a percentage may be obtained by those who would consider themselves pro-life, but out of fear, duress, coercion, or just plain mistake, they didn’t hold to their conviction). So while the pro-abortionist are killing off their offspring, more children are being born into families who choose life.

This one woman who has been at the march of life in Washington D.C. at the anniversary of Roe v. Wade for the past 18 years commented that she had never seen so many people, and in particular, youth and young adults. Makes sense to me.

In Christ,

Irenaeus
 
I wonder if John F. Kennedy would associate with the Democrats of today? He supported tax cuts for the wealthy, was strongly anti-communists and was not adverse to going to war over missiles in Cuba. The abortion debate was not an issue back then. He was the arch-typical old style Catholic Democrat.
 
40.png
estesbob:
The only way we can change pro-abotion catholic politicians minds is to assure them that they wont get catholic votes unless they adhere to catholic teachings. The idea that we are beating people over the head with our own interperprations of doctine is nonsense. The Catholic Churchs teaching on this is clear-one can not be a catholic politican and vote in support of abortion. That some Catholics continue to vote for such politicans aids and abetts the death of 1.2 millon children a year. Shame on those who do.
Click to expand...
There are about 5 pro-life politicians in this country…

It didn’t seem to bother everyone when Pro-Life President Bush campaigned for Pro-Choice Arlen Specter when there was an anti-abortion alternative pennsylvanians could vote for.

It’s all politics…it’s a dirty game and your all being played for fools when you let these people convince you they are pro-life when they advocate killing in just about every situation but a child in a womb.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top