Hillary Clinton Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cider
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’d say his life was ruined because they blamed him, but they rooted around and found other charges to put him behind bars. Pretty smarmy of Obama.
One thing that has always troubled me a lot over that is whether it was a “shut your mouth” warning against anyone opposed to Obama’s Arab Spring foolishness. “Criticize Islam and you’ll end up in jail” being the message. Because of Hillary Clinton’s bobbling the followup, it miscarried. But it does suggest how the left would deal with dissent from its “party line” if it could.

But for Hillary’s mishandling of it, I don’t think we would be hearing the critiques of radical Islam we’re hearing still today. But I do think the deliberately misleading statements about “the film” were designed to set up curbs on free speech.
 
From today’s Guardian:
The Washington Post has been forced into a major correction in a story about Hillary Clinton and the FBI investigation into whether her use of a private email server compromised security.
The Post originally reported, via an anonymous “lawmaker”, that there are 147 FBI agents on the Clinton case. The figure was part of a long story about the investigation, and a short story in which a Post reporter asks: “W-H-A-T?” and “Doesn’t that seem like a ton for a story that Clinton has always insisted was really, at heart, a right-wing Republican creation?”
I-n-d-e-e-d. On Tuesday the Post issued the following correction:
"The article cited in this piece said that 147 FBI agents had been detailed to the investigation, citing a lawmaker briefed by FBI Director James B Comey. Two US law enforcement officials have since told The Washington Post that that figure is too high.
The FBI will not provide an exact figure, but the officials say the number of FBI personnel involved is fewer than 50. The headline has been corrected accordingly. I apologize for the error."
theguardian.com/us-news/live/2016/mar/30/us-election-2016-live-clinton-sanders-trump-cruz-kasich-campaign
 
Drip - Drip - Drip! Hilary had another server. Turning over emails was a made for tv series!
Her staff had to work 24/7 to sanitize as much as they could. Not good enough staff! The emails are taking on a life of their own and refuse to be ignored any longer! So the “other” than the two already is giving up the Benghazi “cut and pastes”. How much longer will we await the advice: “you are under arrest. you have a right to remain silent, you are advised that anything you say may be used against you in a court of law”, etc.
 
I’m reluctant to speak off topic, but that is a complete load. Abortion isn’t a religious question.
And yet there are people of faith, whose faith communities view the abortion issue much differently than does yours. I can even think right off the top of my head of several Christian churches that do. And I remember discussion earlier, it might have been on this thread, I’d have to go back and look, about abortion in Judaism. Lily Bernans talked about it a lot on one of these threads. Quite possibly this one since abortion has been such a hot topic on the Hillary thread.
 
And yet there are people of faith, whose faith communities view the abortion issue much differently than does yours. I can even think right off the top of my head of several Christian churches that do. And I remember discussion earlier, it might have been on this thread, I’d have to go back and look, about abortion in Judaism. Lily Bernans talked about it a lot on one of these threads. Quite possibly this one since abortion has been such a hot topic on the Hillary thread.
Meltzerboy told us an Orthodox Jewish woman is bound by her religion to seek an abortion if her life is in danger, Sy. I repeated it several times. 😉 I’ve known a lot of Jewish people since I used to work for a company owned by a wonderful Orthodox Jewish family, but I didn’t know that the woman was bound by her religion to have an abortion if her life was in danger.

I know people of other faiths who believe the same. And I know people of faiths not Catholic who believe God does not breathe a soul into the living being until its birth.

I don’t think we should infringe on their religious beliefs.
 
Meltzerboy told us an Orthodox Jewish woman is bound by her religion to seek an abortion if her life is in danger, Sy. I repeated it several times.

I know people of other faiths who believe the same. And I know people of faiths other than the Catholic who do not believe God breathes a soul into the living being until its birth.

I don’t think we should infringe on their religious beliefs.
Should we infringe on ISIS’s religious beliefs?
 
ISIS is a cult, not a major world religion like Judaism. There is a difference between a religion and a cult.

The US was built on freedom of religion.
Should we try to infringe on Saudia Arabia’s Muslim religious beliefs which they use to justify killing members of the (and I hate the term, but will post it anyway) LGBT community?
 
Should we try to infringe on Saudia Arabia’s Muslim religious beliefs which they use to justify killing members of the (and I hate the term, but will post it anyway) LGBT community.
That is a cult, too, and I honestly think you know it’s not mainstream Islam.

Tell me, though, why you think Catholics have the right to dictate to Orthodox Jews?
 
Meltzerboy told us an Orthodox Jewish woman is bound by her religion to seek an abortion if her life is in danger, Sy. I repeated it several times. 😉 I’ve known a lot of Jewish people since I used to work for a company owned by a wonderful Orthodox Jewish family, but I didn’t know that the woman was bound by her religion to have an abortion if her life was in danger.

I know people of other faiths who believe the same. And I know people of faiths not Catholic who believe God does not breathe a soul into the living being until its birth.

I don’t think we should infringe on their religious beliefs.
Can anyone cite a single instance where a direct abortion - not a hysterectomy, not the removal of a fallopian tube housing an ectopic pregnancy, but only the killing of the child in the womb - has saved a woman’s life?

To my knowledge, the Church has no issue with the unintended death of an unborn child if the overall treatment (chemotherapy, removal of the uterus, etc) is the only means available to save the mother’s life - not “health”, but life.
 
Can anyone cite a single instance where a direct abortion - not a hysterectomy, not the removal of a fallopian tube housing an ectopic pregnancy, but only the killing of the child in the womb - has saved a woman’s life?

To my knowledge, the Church has no issue with the unintended death of an unborn child if the overall treatment (chemotherapy, removal of the uterus, etc) is the only means available to save the mother’s life - not “health”, but life.
The life of the mother issue is a non-issue, at least in developed countries.

Interesting read: lifenews.com/2013/10/11/is-abortion-ever-necessary-to-save-the-life-of-the-mother/
 
ISIS is a cult, not a major world religion like Judaism. There is a difference between a religion and a cult.

The US was built on freedom of religion.
The difference between a religion and a cult is in the eye of the beholder. One person’s religion is another person’s cult, usually the latter designation being applied to a religious system of belief that one considers unusually deviant from one’s own. It’s subjective.

Is ISIS a cult? Well, many would think so in terms of practice, but when it comes to actual beliefs, it’s mainline Sunni Islam. It just takes a literal, and quite historic, application of some of the more extreme parts of the Koran. But if it’s a “cult” then so is Islam generally, because the current aggressiveness of ISIS was part of the spread of Islam from the beginning. The Middle East, Persia, north AFrica, Spain, part of France, Greece, Asia Minor, the Balkans, part of Russia and even Poland. All were taken by the sword at various times, and in the name of Islam.
 
The difference between a religion and a cult is in the eye of the beholder.
No really.

Theology professor, Ted Peters of the Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary offered the following definition:

“A religion belongs to the wider culture; its adherents come and go freely. A cult tends to be counter-cultural, restricting the social life of its adherents to other cult members. The key characteristic of a cult is the axis mundi, the shamanic leader at the center of the organization. The cult leader claims exclusive access to transcendent reality, and dispenses power and grace as he or she sees fit. It is not theology that distinguishes a cult from a religion; in fact, cults may appear within a religion, for example, the Branch Davidians or Jim Jones’ Peoples Church were both cults within Christianity. The most interesting cult operative today, in my opinion, is the UFO cult oriented around its leader, Rael (Claude Vorilhon), who connects his 60,000 adherents to extraterrestrial wisdom and power.”

Episcopal priest, Fr. Albert Cutie:

“Authentic religion is focused on God and never puts another human being in the position of “playing God” or as someone who has power over the rest. Religion leads us to faith with a deep and profound respect on freedom and an individual’s ability to make choices regarding his or her own life.”
 
No it’s a cult. I know that.
From whose point of view? From yours, certainly. From some unknown number of Muslims, undoubtedly. The fact is, probably nobody knows how many Muslims approve of the actions of ISIS. And we certainly don’t know how many Muslims at least agree with the concept of violent jihad. Some polls have put the latter at about 10% of all Muslims. That’s a lot of people, if so. But even when one considers the 90%, one has to ask how many believe in violent jihad someday or other and in a vague sort of way, or believe in for the present but just don’t think it’s practical.

Remember, Muslims are excused from jihad if the enemy is too strong to overcome. Of the 90%, how many simply think the infidels are too strong, thus giving them a reason not to engage in it?
 
Are the great majority of Catholic women forced to have a abortion simply because it’s legal?

Should Catholics have the right to force their religious beliefs on Orthodox Jews?

If so, why?
 
No really.

Theology professor, Ted Peters of the Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary offered the following definition:

“A religion belongs to the wider culture; its adherents come and go freely. A cult tends to be counter-cultural, restricting the social life of its adherents to other cult members. The key characteristic of a cult is the axis mundi, the shamanic leader at the center of the organization. The cult leader claims exclusive access to transcendent reality, and dispenses power and grace as he or she sees fit. It is not theology that distinguishes a cult from a religion; in fact, cults may appear within a religion, for example, the Branch Davidians or Jim Jones’ Peoples Church were both cults within Christianity. The most interesting cult operative today, in my opinion, is the UFO cult oriented around its leader, Rael (Claude Vorilhon), who connects his 60,000 adherents to extraterrestrial wisdom and power.”
Well, that’s his definition. If you go by the first part of that, then all of Islam is a cult. It’s adherents do not come and go freely. It is not counter-cultural in its own lands. It definitely restricts the social life of its adherents to other members. It has a lot of “shamanic leaders”. (Remember that Iran is ruled by a “Supreme Leader”)

It could easily apply to Mormons, and many do call Mormonism a “cult”. It could be applied to Catholicism just as easily.

Then, of course, the pastor drifts off into examples of religious groups that he thinks of as cults.

Basically, he’s saying “A cult is what I think it is. A religion is what I think it is.”
 
Are the great majority of Catholic women forced to have a abortion simply because it’s legal?

Should Catholics have the right to force their religious beliefs on Orthodox Jews?

If so, why?
Orthodox Jews believe that abortion is mandatory to save the mother’s life. Can someone point out when this has ever happened? Not as a side effect of a procedure, but the direct, intentional killing of the unborn child.
 
Well, that’s his definition. If you go by the first part of that, then all of Islam is a cult. It’s adherents do not come and go freely. It is not counter-cultural in its own lands. It definitely restricts the social life of its adherents to other members. It has a lot of “shamanic leaders”. (Remember that Iran is ruled by a “Supreme Leader”)

It could easily apply to Mormons, and many do call Mormonism a “cult”. It could be applied to Catholicism just as easily.

Then, of course, the pastor drifts off into examples of religious groups that he thinks of as cults.

Basically, he’s saying “A cult is what I think it is. A religion is what I think it is.”
Debate on cult versus religion aside, do you think Catholics have the right to force their religious beliefs on Orthodox Jews? (I don’t think many here would call Orthodox Judaism a “cult.”)

If so, why?

Please take note that Orthodox Jews are not trying to force their beliefs on Catholics. If an Catholic woman wants to carry her child to term even though it endangers her life, Orthodox Jews do not have a problem with that. Why should Catholics tell Orthodox Jews what to do?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top