Joe Biden Denied Holy Communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Donald_S
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Saying that is not a distinction between allowing for the choice over participating in the act would be similar to saying that me shooting and killing a guy is the same as refusing to give up my liver to save him because his is shot.
 
Oh, good grief. Thanks for the correction; I didn’t know that. That is a reversal after decades of sticking at least to that. The man needs prayers. His ambition is undercutting his moral understanding.
 
Last edited:
Abortions will not go to zero if it is illegal either. The whole subject is a political one. Trump just uses it to get people on his side.
 
So are they psychopaths or what, because you just said they were 2 sentences ago.
 
ForeverLearn said:
Abortions will not go to zero if it is illegal either. The whole subject is a political one. Trump just uses it to get people on his side.
Click to expand...
I don’t think there are any nation that estimates it has zero abortions. (Well, other than the Vatican, which also does not have any births.) On the other hand, there aren’t any nations with a population over 100,000 that estimate a zero long-term murder rate, either. That doesn’t mean that laws against murder are pointless.

In his case, it is the notorious support for abortion as a right of pregnant women combined with his public self-identification as a practicing Catholic that is the problem. Catholics in national elected office are in a position to lead many other Catholics and many other people astray concerning moral truth.
 
Last edited:
ForeverLearn said:
40.png
melonhead:
Yet someone can support the right of a mother to rip apart the child right up until the baby passes through the birth canal, and not be considered a psychopath. Huh.

Perhaps they were extreme examples, but the point was supporting an evil act still has a level of moral culpability associated with it.
Click to expand...
So over 50% of Americans are psychopaths?
Click to expand...
Would you agree that anyone supporting slavery was a psychopath?
 
PetraG said:
I don’t think there are any nation that estimates it has zero abortions. (Well, other than the Vatican, which also does not have any births.) On the other hand, there aren’t any nations with a population over 100,000 that estimate a zero long-term murder rate, either. That doesn’t mean that laws against murder are pointless.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But the majority of America does not equate abortions to murder. That is the reality. You will say that are wrong and you of course are entitled to that opinion. But if it were that simple, the law would already exist and it doesn’t.
 
ForeverLearn said:
40.png
Aquinas11:
Yes its like saying “I don’t think Bin Laden killed anyone on 9-11, it was those 15 hijackers…”
Click to expand...
No it is not. He commanded them to kill and give their lives. Abortion could be legal and 0 of them could be performed. That would be the ultimate goal, to have no reason for the law to even exist.
Click to expand...
I think herein lies the problem. You see no problem with abortion being legal, so you don’t recognize the issue of someone trying to keep it that way and even expand it.

If I were to suggest making slavery legal, even though there might be no actual slaves, what would you have to say?
 
ForeverLearn said:
Agreed. But the majority of America does not equate abortions to murder. That is the reality. You will say that are wrong and you of course are entitled to that opinion. But if it were that simple, the law would already exist and it doesn’t.
Click to expand...
US history is full of unjust laws and unjust actions by the federal government, including policies and actions that amounted to the intended genocide of aboriginal nations. From a certain vantage point, most people of good will can agree that there is a natural law in operation in the universe that is true whether or not it is recognized. Most periods in history tolerated or misinterpreted some kinds of evils. There are also those who make a distinction between actions are gravely wrong and what actions are best discouraged by criminalization. As for those who really think morality is a matter of opinion? I think they are few and I don’t trust them. That opinion implies that morality is a social construct that essentially accomplishes little other than crowd control.
 
Last edited:
Thom18 said:
I think herein lies the problem. You see no problem with abortion being legal, so you don’t recognize the issue of someone trying to keep it that way and even expand it.

If I were to suggest making slavery legal, even though there might be no actual slaves, what would you have to say?
Click to expand...
Good question, but no I would not condone it to be legal. I see many distinctions between slavery and abortion however. I personally think they are both bad. But, I do not want this thread to become an abortion one, I have already sidetracked it enough.
 
ForeverLearn said:
Agreed. But the majority of America does not equate abortions to murder. That is the reality. You will say that are wrong and you of course are entitled to that opinion. But if it were that simple, the law would already exist and it doesn’t.
Click to expand...
But majorities have voted in States like Alabama, Georgia, to equate abortion with murder.

The only reason abortion is legal in USA is 7 unelected lawyers voted in Roe in 1973, which prevents any state from voting to make abortion legal or illegal.

Roe blocks any State from voting up or down on abortion and essentially says “no State can outlaw abortion”. So essentially robs democracy from the people. Why? Why are we letting 7 unelected lawyers tell us we can’t vote? I thought liberals were always pushing how democracy is our strongsuit?
 
Last edited:
I don’t think that it is helpful to say that one is a greater evil than the other. Just saying.

It is sufficient to say that they are as bad as each other, is it not?
[/quote]

Generally speaking, we would consider more evil to be greater evil. Abortion is its own kind of slavery, turning the unborn into property (or “my body”) that can be dealt with as the individual sees fit. So on top of slavery, you also have murder.

Regardless, the point stands.
 
PetraG said:
US history is full of unjust laws and unjust actions by the federal government, including policies and actions that amounted to the intended genocide of aboriginal nations. From a certain vantage point, most people of good will can agree that there is a natural law in operation in the universe that is true whether or not it is recognized. Most periods in history tolerated or misinterpreted some kinds of evils. There are also those who make a distinction between actions are gravely wrong and what actions are best discouraged by criminalization. As for those who really think morality is a matter of opinion? I think they are few and I don’t trust them. That opinion implies that morality is a social construct that essentially accomplishes little other than crowd control.
Click to expand...
I think erring on the side of freedom is usually the safer bet, when in a deep gray area.
 
ForeverLearn said:
40.png
Thom18:
I think herein lies the problem. You see no problem with abortion being legal, so you don’t recognize the issue of someone trying to keep it that way and even expand it.

If I were to suggest making slavery legal, even though there might be no actual slaves, what would you have to say?
Click to expand...
Good question, but no I would not condone it to be legal. I see many distinctions between slavery and abortion however. I personally think they are both bad. But, I do not want this thread to become an abortion one, I have already sidetracked it enough.
Click to expand...
Yet you condone the legality of abortion? This is pretzel logic.

I already told you that “maybe” there wouldn’t actually be any slaves, just as you justified keeping abortion legal “with the hope that no abortions would ever be performed”, so what’s the difference?
 
Last edited:
I still say the two requirements were not afterthought, superfluous, irrelevant. The idea that a pastor from South Carolina sees him once in a congregation and determines," gaming the system," then nullifies the two requirements, means he acted inappropriately, or the former Pope just liked to hear himself talk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top