Extremely disappointed with Catholic Answers

  • Thread starter Thread starter petinley
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Victoria33 said:
Nobody is talking about not preaching the gospel, it is the simple matter of not endorsing candidates.
Click to expand...
Then we can conclude that endorsing specific candidates is not part of required Church teaching, and that the faithful are free to use their prudential judgement in deciding who to vote for, just as the USCCB documents say.
 
Tim Staples, Jimmy Akin, and Trent Horn on C.A.L. (Jimmy and Trent on their own individual podcasts as well.)
 
Last edited:
Actually, exit polls showed that Perot took votes from both sides of the aisle pretty equally.
 
maybe the Church should render unto Caesar what is Ceasar’s and tell us how to vote.
 
The whole reason for the Church not directly involving itself in politics is to protect itself from government’s corrupting influence. It’s a lesson that history has taught time and again.
 
petinley said:
despite the fact that their presidential candidate is possibly the biggest con man in the United States history.
Click to expand...
The biggest con is what the Democrats are trying to pull off now with running a candidate whom they claim is a “moderate” and who at this point in his life has poor mental acuity because of his age. The whole party has gone far left and anyone who cannot see that has their head stuck in the sand. The idea is to get him elected and then shortly thereafter he resigns and Kamala Harris becomes the Chief Executive. God help us.
 
Last edited:
TMC said:
He said the quiet part out loud once again.

There currently appears to be one vote on the Court to overturn (Thomas). If Barrett votes to overturn (a big “if”) that will be two. The truth is that both parties use RvW as fodder for fund raising, but the Court is not close to overturning it.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I think it’s certainly possible that RvW can be overturned. The impossible has happened throughout U.S. history; e.g., the emancipation of slaves–what a shock that must have been after several hundred years of legal slavery here in the U.S.!

However, it took years to implement throughout the U.S., and it could be argued that there is still a “slave mentality” that some white folks harbor to this day–a law or amendment or proclamation cannot change people’s hearts.

Also, the overturning of RvW does NOT mean that abortion is illegal in the U.S. All it means is that each sovereign state can make its own laws. No doubt my state of Illinois will not only enact the most liberal abortion laws in the country, but will offer discounts, free transportation, free hotels, and t-shirts with Pres. Lincoln’s picture and “Emancipation of Women!” slogans–and all kinds of other perks to women who come to Illinois from other states to have their abortions (ca-ching! source of money for Illinois!).

So the point is, the overturning of RvW will not make a difference in the hearts of the many people in this country who see abortion as a “woman’s right.” That’s up to God.

Nevertheless, overturning RvW is our best chance right now of damaging the “legality” of abortion and giving women the opportunity to have a few more days to think about it–often that delay will help women to gain a new perspective, consider all their options including adoption, remember the teachings of their religions, and give them hope that birthing a child does NOT mean the end of their world.

So what if we, by some amazing miracle, elected a 3rd party candidate to the White House?

I’m sure you already know that the Executive and Legistlative branches have no power to change the U.S. Consitution—only the Supreme Court can do that. The Executive Branch can influence the U.S. Constitution whenever they have the opportunity to appoint a new justice–and Pres. Trump has been given 3 opportunities, and each time, he has chosen a justice that is a friendly to the pro-life cause. He has delivered–I personally think it’s disgraceful that pro-lifers are so anti-Trump after he has hit the ball out of the park 3 tmes.

Of course, when pro-lifers themselves cast doubt on the President and urge their fellow pro-lifers to vote for someone else–their Senators are wary of doing anything that might make them appear “pro-Trump”—so it’s just possible that some of our pro-life friends might sacrifice that all-important pro-life Supreme Court justice in order to win re-election.

Think about that.
 
I suggest you do some research on Trump over the last 40 years. You can start with the book “Football for a Buck”
 
" and Pres. Trump has been given 3 opportunities, and each time, he has chosen a justice that is a friendly to the pro-life cause"

Obviously you haven’t paid attention to their decisions since being appointed.
 
It’s extremely sad to see how many Catholics see their theology through the lense of their politics instead of the other way around. (and yes, that applies to the Republicans every bit as much as the Democrats)
 
Peeps said:
I’m sure you already know that the Executive and Legistlative branches have no power to change the U.S. Consitution—only the Supreme Court can do that.
Click to expand...
Uh, not quite. The Supreme Court can interpret the Constitution. There are established procedures for changing it with amendments, usually involving a number of states.
 
I love how everyone pontificates (or bloviates) with such certainty about one candidate or the other. It’s specially funny when all of the barbs could equally apply to the other guy, too.

Yes, Catholic Answers skews right. It shows that in the videos talks and also in how posts are deleted or commenters censored on CAF.

My view is that it’s a scandal that people vote for or support Trump. I realize that’s a minority view here.

I look past abortion, because, while it is a horrendous thing, the women and the providers are the primary culprits. Supporting a bad Presidential candidate because of a tenuous link between the President and Supremes and overturning Roe is bad democracy. You can’t trust how Supremes will vote. Plus, overturning Roe doesn’t outlaw abortion.

Supporting someone who refuses to condemn the Proud Boys and White Supremacy is just shocking.
 
Anybody can participate in a twitter survey. There’s no way to ascertain that the participants are Spanish speaking Telemundo viewers.
 
More shocking than supporting the killing of the most innocent and helpless members of the human race?
 
petinley said:
Actually, exit polls showed that Perot took votes from both sides of the aisle pretty equally.
Click to expand...
Your point is somewhat irrelevant because Perot was a moderate who opposed policies of both Bush and Clinton. His position was between the other two so it would be expected that he would take votes from both.

When the third party is more to one side or the other it will pirate more votes from the party on that side of the aisle.

Then the Wild Rose Party formed in Alberta, it took votes from the Progressive Conservative party alone. It did not take the votes of left leaning voters.
 
petinley, voting for a 3rd Party will assuage individual consciences, but will most certainly NOT affect the “national conscience,” especially as the candidate will lose.

When the President and First Lady are vocally, unashamedly pro-life, as are Pres. Trump and Melania Trump this influences the “national conscience.”

It gives pro-lifers legitimacy in their part of the country–although considering the vitriolic hate campaign leveled against Pres. Trump and the First Lady not only by prominent Democrats, but by the entertainment media, the news media, and even the religious media–it’s no wonder that those of us who support Pres. Trump and are pro-life are sometimes considered ignorant and even racist, anti-women, etc.–and sadly, our Catholicism is even called into question.

Pres. Trump holds the most powerful office in the country–and he is pro-life and he has given proof of that over and over again not only by appointing 3 pro-life SC justices, but also by appointing hundreds of pro-life judges all over the country. He has also vocally supported pro-life rallies including the March For Life.

So different from Pres. Obama (or had Secy of State Clinton been elected)–pro-lifers were castigated constantly, and the rights of the unborn were not only trampled, but spit upon and worse. He was so arrogant in his unapologetic campaign to make killing an unborn person totally legal, and Secy of State Clinton promised to make abortion a requirement for the world’s poor to receive any humanitarian aid. God help us!

By voting for a 3rd Party, you and others will make it more likely that VP Biden and Sen. Harris will be elected–and then, heaven help the unborn. There is no chance that any pro-life legislation will get through, and there’s a good chance that the hate campaign against pro-life politicians will be so well-crafted by the most evil people in this country that many young women and men, with little or no religion in their family and the constant connection with their I-phones, will blithely go along with Pres. Biden and VP Harris and consider abortion an obvious “women’s right”–and ignore the science–in spite of the contiued calls by the Democrats to “listen to the science!” Baloney!–rotten baloney!!–they only want people to listen to science that support Democratic claims.

Be careful petinley–there is a way that sounds right, but it will end in wrong.
 
Roe was confirmed by Planned Parenthood vs Casey. Reagan appointees.

Roberts testified that it was settled law, stare decisis at his confirmation hearing.

So did Gorsuch.

Kavanaugh convinced Susan Collins that he wouldn’t rule against Roe.

So, are we to assume the perjured themselves to get on the court?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top