Hillary Clinton Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thorolfr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sy_Noe said:
I do think it can be difficult for Catholics in communion with Rome to understand that other branches of Christianity do allow members in good faith to reason and not have to agree on everything.
Click to expand...
Faithful Catholics use reason.My faith makes complete sense to me,I don’t blindly follow but through the grace and guidance of the HolybSprit I recognize the absolute brilliance of Holy Mother Church.,therefore ascend to the teachings willingly.
 
Jeanne_S said:
You have stated this opinion many times in the past.While you may be speak for your own faith and maybe even other faiths’ , you do not speak for the Catholic faith.
Click to expand...
Did I miss something? Did ComplineSanFran say she or he spoke for the Catholic faith in communion with Rome?
 
Jeanne_S said:
Faithful Catholics use reason.My faith makes complete sense to me,I don’t blindly follow but through the grace and guidance of the HolybSprit I recognize the absolute brilliance of Holy Mother Church.,therefore ascend to the teachings willingly.
Click to expand...
I actually think that is great, Jeanne. Many continued blessings to you! And others too hold faiths that make sense to them as well and believe in discernment and theirs guided by the Holy Spirit too.
 
Padres1969 said:
CNN is reporting the same thing. They have her up 4 pts. And Georgia isn’t the only traditionally red state skewing to Clinton of late. Utah is a statistical tie between the two. And they’ve not voted Democrat in Utah since 1964. The national polling is interesting of course, but it’s the electoral college polling that really matters when it comes to electing a president. And of late Clinton’s inroads into traditionally solid red states has to be particularly worrying to Republicans.
Click to expand...
If HC can further reduce advertising buys in some states as she has in CO and VA, I wonder if she will increase ads in some of those traditionally solid red states and if the inroads into them might then make DT actually have to defend otherwise traditional GOP turf instead of just being in states such as OH and PA?
 
Jeanne_S said:
Re read post 832
Click to expand...
I think you misunderstood post 832.
You can have differing positions in many branches of the Church and still be considered good and faithful members. Sometimes I think it’s difficult for RCs to grasp this concept. I tend to see people scratching their heads over it a lot.
Click to expand...
The “Church” being referred to here is not the RCC. It’s all of Christianity. And the statement is true. In many branches of Christianity you can have different opinions on issues even within that branch/denomination. The UMC that Mrs. Clinton belongs to is one such branch.
 
Padres1969 said:
I think you misunderstood post 832.

The “Church” being referred to here is not the RCC. It’s all of Christianity. And the statement is true. In many branches of Christianity you can have different opinions on issues within that branch.
Click to expand...
I knew what she was getting at which is why I said what I did.Reread my post.😉
 
Jeanne_S said:
I knew what she was getting at which is why I said what I did.Reread my post.😉
Click to expand...
I’m honestly still lost then :confused:. Your response which was
You have stated this opinion many times in the past.While you may be speak for your own faith and maybe even other faiths’ , you do not speak for the Catholic faith.
Click to expand...
Didn’t make any sense within the context of what was said. No claim to speak for the Catholic faith was made in the post you were responding to :confused:

But no matter, moving on. 👍
 
Jeanne_S said:
Re read post 832
Click to expand...
Okay I did. Where did ComplineSanFran speak for the Catholic Church in communion with Rome? I see the word “Church”. And true. The Catholic Church teaches it is Christ’s one and only true Church. But if I understand her/his faith’s view of the Church correctly, is not the same as that of Roman Catholics. And I’m assuming she/he used “Roman” because some Anglicans or Episcopalians I know of consider themselves to be Catholic just not Roman. So that is why they use the adjective “Roman”. I still don’t see where ComplineSanFran was claiming to speak for the Catholic Church in communion with Rome.
 
Jeanne_S said:
Re read post 832
Click to expand...
Jeanne, since I wrote that post, I guess I am confused about your concern. Was it:

sentence 1 - that many Christians in branches of the Church have differing positions on issues and it’s acceptable.

sentence 2 - that sometimes Christians who are Catholic don’t often understand this about their fellow Christians

sentence 3 - that I often see the not understanding here on CAF

Help me out here. Please tell me if I wasn’t being clear. Or if I led you to believe that Hillary Clinton was Catholic.

Are we all talking over each other here? I’m sorry if I said something, or inferred something, that wasn’t clear. It wasn’t my intention to doublespeak.
 
Padres1969 said:
I’m honestly still lost then :confused:. Your response which was

Didn’t make any sense within the context of what was said. No claim to speak for the Catholic faith was made in the post you were responding to :confused:

But no matter, moving on. 👍
Click to expand...
Exactly. I should probably just move on with you. 🙂
 
“Clinton
3/10/15: “There is no classified material.”
8/5/16: Three of them had markings, but that’s “pretty much” what I have been saying”

twitter.com/byrontau/status/761608826839785472

“WASHINGTON (AP) — Hillary Clinton asserted Friday that FBI Director James Comey said she was truthful in her statements to investigators about her private server and use of private emails — and that those statements were consistent with what she has said publicly. But Comey made no such blanket assessment.”

bigstory.ap.org/article/ae7656186b9745578a217f427cdc64cf/ap-fact-check-clintons-new-email-clarifications-fall-short
 
ComplineSanFran said:
sentence 1 - that many Christians in branches of the Church have differing positions on issues and it’s acceptable.
Click to expand...
Acceptable in what sense? A denomination holding the position that abortion is a personal choice, that the unborn child is not a person, or that the unborn child may be direction, and intentionally killed when a rape has occurred or for the life of the mother, is not an acceptable position the Catholic Church.

Or a denomination that thinks that two men or two women can be “married.” That is not an acceptable position to the Catholic Church.

Or a denomination that thinks that a validly married person may divorce and remarry. That is not an acceptable position to the Catholic Church.

Or a denomination that thinks that contraception may be used with the intended end to prevent pregnancy. That is not an acceptable position to the Catholic Church.

The Church may tolerate other denominations holding those positions. But those position are certainly not accepted.
 
Suudy said:
Acceptable in what sense? A denomination holding the position that abortion is a personal choice, that the unborn child is not a person, or that the unborn child may be direction, and intentionally killed when a rape has occurred or for the life of the mother, is not an acceptable position the Catholic Church.

Or a denomination that thinks that two men or two women can be “married.” That is not an acceptable position to the Catholic Church.

Or a denomination that thinks that a validly married person may divorce and remarry. That is not an acceptable position to the Catholic Church.

Or a denomination that thinks that contraception may be used with the intended end to prevent pregnancy. That is not an acceptable position to the Catholic Church.

The Church may tolerate other denominations holding those positions. But those position are certainly not accepted.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that sentence has any relation to the Catholic Church. I think that’s where everyone is getting confused. The Catholic Church has nothing to do with the discussion we’ve been having beyond that some Catholics can’t seem to understand churches that don’t take issue with their adherents holding contrary positions on issues to the that church’s teachings. But the Catholic Church is not being discussed, rather the fact that some other Christian denominations, such as the UMC which Mrs. Clinton is a member of, allow their members to hold contrary positions.

That’s what started this discussion, the implication that Mrs. Clinton was somehow in trouble because her views on abortion and same sex marriage don’t align with her own church. But her church doesn’t take issue with that, particularly since her own church’s views on those issues aren’t the most solid. Particularly the gay issues such as SSM.
 
_Abyssinia said:
“Clinton
3/10/15: “There is no classified material.”
8/5/16: Three of them had markings, but that’s “pretty much” what I have been saying”

twitter.com/byrontau/status/761608826839785472

“WASHINGTON (AP) — Hillary Clinton asserted Friday that FBI Director James Comey said she was truthful in her statements to investigators about her private server and use of private emails — and that those statements were consistent with what she has said publicly. But Comey made no such blanket assessment.”

bigstory.ap.org/article/ae7656186b9745578a217f427cdc64cf/ap-fact-check-clintons-new-email-clarifications-fall-short
Click to expand...
Nevertheless, Trump is way ahead of Clinton in Washington Post Four Pinocchio and PolitiFact Pants on Fire statements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top