S
Sy_Noe
Guest
That’s a bit uncalled for. Especially since ComplineSanFran gave examples of people out in the streets doing the work of our Lord who also might be voting for liberals.
- Status
C
ComplineSanFran
Guest
I think it is always good to hear both sides of the story and to understand why people believe and act the way they do. We are a country of many peoples and we have to live with each other. If we can’t understand differing belief systems (religiously as well as socially), then we are poorer for it.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
I have heard it already,I don’t need the earache,quite honestly.
C
ComplineSanFran
Guest
Sorry, but I was referring to people who actually DO this work. Were you thinking of someone else?
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
No, it isn’t. More often than not, liberals are only interested in giving away OTHER people’s money, not their own possessions. Jesus taught self-sacrifice, not using the government to take from others wastefully. That is just terrible stewardship.
I don’t consider deficit spending where some crumbs go to the poor in order to keep them in line so they vote liberals into power who are desperate to have meaning in their careers as “doing the Lord’s work”.
That would be more along the lines of scandal.
Many of those folks are not giving of their own but of the taxpayers. Not exactly what Jesus meant when he said to give to the poor.
In fact, conservatives give to charity 4x as much as liberals do, despite making less money.
This too often is a charade. It’s nothing more than excuse after excuse to justify voting for an anti-Christian party like the Democrats.
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
I just don’t see very many people volunteering in the trenches (no doubt the image that’s trying to be conveyed here) to do this work outside of clergy. Much of it has been institutionalized under the government, which is another reason why so many people are so poor.
I’m really not impressed by all these liberals supposedly reaching out to help the poor.
C
ComplineSanFran
Guest
Well, that’s not been my experience. I see it on a daily basis. Lay people. Volunteers. People in the streets. They’re doing what the Gospel commands us to do.
My mind just flashed on Jimmy Carter (a particular hero of mine), as a 91 year old man with cancer out building houses with Habitat for Humanity. For the less fortunate. Because his faith calls him to do this work. That’s the kind of Christian liberal I want to emulate.
T
TMC
Guest
You’ve been posting here over a year now. Surely by now you have figured out that liberals are all pure evil people that do no work and are only interested in stealing money from the good hearted conservatives? Don’t try to confuse us by relating your actual lived experience–you are in danger of popping the walls of the bubble!
J
JimG
Guest
There are two sides to every issue. When it comes to abortion, there is (a) killing unborn babies or (b) not killing unborn babies. I made up my mind on that a long time ago.
D
DeniseNY
Guest
thegatewaypundit.com/2016/07/detailed-list-findings-wikileaks-dnc-document-dump/
According to this blog, this list of emails were compiled by both Sanders and Trump supporters.
According to this blog, this list of emails were compiled by both Sanders and Trump supporters.
C
Cider
Guest
The church teaches that the unborn are also persons.
J
josh987654321
Guest
Clever wording ‘Make a decision about her pregnancy’, what if I changed it to ‘Make a decision about her 2 year old son’? giver her resources to do that?
The problem is, when dealing with a pregnant woman, there are two people right in front of you, one is given a loaf of bread, the other… death.
Whilever the child in the mothers womb is viewed as subhuman and killed indiscriminately, not only are ‘resources provided’ (as you say), but actively encouraged as ‘the better option’ for themselves and society, whilever the child cannot ‘agree to disagree’ on this issue, I will never agree to disagree on this issue.
“For the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.”
D
Dwyer
Guest
**"Hillary Clinton hails SCOTUS ruling as win for ‘safe, legal’ abortion:
Signalling an important shift, presumptive Democratic nominee drops ‘rare’ from description of abortions"**
I had to read about this . . . in the Canadian news.
Signalling an important shift, presumptive Democratic nominee drops ‘rare’ from description of abortions"**
[cbc.ca/news/world/hillary…tion-1.3655360](The problem was that anyone seeking to de-legitimize abortions interpreted “rare” as an ideal to be legislated, giving them reason to place extraordinary restrictions on access.)
I had to read about this . . . in the Canadian news.
C
ComplineSanFran
Guest
Your church does. Other branches of the church do not.
J
john_ennis
Guest
But that same woman, 15 or 16 or 21 years before, still inside her mother, warrants no such care, even though she exists, even after the point when she is capable of feeling the pain of being aborted.
Because she is not “in front of us”? How random, how arbitrary. What an absence of logic–to imply that caring for those before us is undermined when we also care for those not before us.
This is called rationalizing, and I’m sure it was used frequently as an answer to the anti-slavery crowd. “Maybe your religion teaches that slaves are persons, but others don’t. Just care for the people who are actually right in front of you.”
S
Sy_Noe
Guest
Don’t be sorry. Post #459 was clear as can be as to the people you were referring to.
Z
zz912
Guest
This is myth meant to convey some fictional past. Their relationship consisted of Tip denigrating the President and calling him virtually every name under the son, and Reagan brushing off his attacks. Meanwhile Tip violated almost every single agreement/compromise that he made with Reagan. They didn’t really have much of a social relationship.
Z
zz912
Guest
The child in the womb** IS** in front of you.
- Status