How will a devout Catholic handle the job as President of the US?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zynxensar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
phil19034 said:
But the issue with an absolute Monarch is they are great when they are devout, but when crooked, they are horrible.
Click to expand...
Sounds like Stalin. (Maybe not a traditional monarch) but he did deviate from the ideas of Lenin. That may put him in the category of “not so devout” (and how history would teach us of the human nature). And that brings us to today…

Humans have a problem staying “devout” to anything. It may be better not to let the people suffer because of that. Lenin and Stalin had each their own issues. But humans could not even agree on “how suffering works”. (That last point I hope all gets the point. Else I will just repeat that.)

Regards
 
MichaelP3 said:
Is there an example of this in history?
Click to expand...
There have been any number of absolute monarchs in Catholic nations and plenty were considered devout. The popes were absolute temporal rulers of the Papal States which went defunct in the mid 19th Century and were devout by definition.
 
Thank you for the response.

But I knew all that. I was rather asking if there are anything else “interesting”. And most of all, anything that “could” make that “proposition” in some life "REALISTIC "
 
I’m probably not the best person to answer or even speak for them (non-observant/practicing here), but maybe a lot of pro-lifers simply and correspondingly agree with some or a lot of conservative or
right-leaning views which might not appear ideal or favorable for some of us but aren’t necessarily (or at least intentionally) “anti-life” and they believe these things because they mean well (skepticism with the government and other reasons)?
 
mythbuster1 said:
When was the last time someone starved to death for want of food in the United States?
Click to expand...
Every day. WHO statistics for 2107 give the US death rate from malnutrition at .64 per 100,000 deaths. The US ranks just under Egypt and just above Costa Rica. The US ranks #63 out of 183 countries. “Sad,” as Our Great Leader would say.
 
Last edited:
Does the WHO report separate eating disorders? Malnutrition is the proximate cause of death in the case of eating disorders, but it’s because the patient neglected to eat properly, rather than a lack of access to food. Likewise, drug addiction can cause people to neglect eating in favor of getting high.
 
Last edited:
Very good response. Considering the original question I see many times on here that posters forget about the reality of the world we live in. Yes we can have “your” ideal world. But then we have the ACTUAL world!
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
Every day. WHO statistics for 2107 give the US death rate from malnutrition at .64 per 100,000 deaths. The US ranks just under Egypt and just above Costa Rica. The US ranks #63 out of 183 countries. “Sad,” as Our Great Leader would say.
Click to expand...
I have my doubts about internationally compiled statistics. Different nations have different standards and some leaders have a real motivation to lie.

A lot of Fake News out there, particularly as a lot of UN bureaucrats are jealous of the United States and seem to take real joy in sassing us.
 
Augustinian said:
I have my doubts about internationally compiled statistics. Different nations have different standards and some leaders have a real motivation to lie.

A lot of Fake News out there, particularly as a lot of UN bureaucrats are jealous of the United States and seem to take real joy in sassing us.
Click to expand...
So we should all shut our eyes, spin around three times, and guess? Or should we just ask Trump?
 
Zynxensar said:
EDIT: Okay, let’s assume the President has absolute power and needs no approval from the Supreme Court and Congress.
Click to expand...
He wouldn’t be the President of the US, maybe some other real or imaginary country.

It would be morally good to ban contraceptives and abortion, but unfortunately most Americans are Americans first, and Catholics second, and would fight tooth and nail to keep those “freedoms”.
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
So we should all shut our eyes, spin around three times, and guess? Or should we just ask Trump?
Click to expand...
No , I think we need to examine the statistics ourselves, see how they are compiled and not just take one’s adversaries word for it that America is pathetic.
 
Yeah. I think I should have changed my question to like a Catholic monarch or something.
 
@inisfallen @augustinian

Yes, let me revise. Per the theory, a Catholic absolute monarch is the best as long as he/she is a GOOD Catholic monarch. Meaning both orthodox and a competent leader.

Direct Democracy is considered the worst because mob rule often rules.

That’s why a Republic is considered (typically the 2nd best form) is considered the best compromise and the best overall form of govt. Because a monarch can go bad when you have a bad leader and democracy can go bad when the mob takes over.

God Bless
 
Last edited:
I meant to say “American Catholics”, and yes, it will be difficult but not impossible to ban contraceptives. After all, the Catholic population is growing.
 
Last edited:
He/She will definitely not be a single issue President but will take into account ALL stages of the human condition. From birth to grave. He/She will take into account the need and right that gives all persons dignity based on the underlying understanding not everyone is born with a silver spoon in their mouth and therefore may not have the proverbial rugged individual boot straps in which to pull themselves up with. He/She will have a wonderful God enlightened understanding that education and work lead to dignity, and that medical care cannot continue to be so costly.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top