Kavanaugh Drama Risks Driving Moderates, Women Away From GOP

  • Thread starter Thread starter robertmidwest
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tell us which religions favor maternal mortality and prohibit safe childbirth.

That excuse for Hillary’s pro-abortion anti-Catholicism is the worst one yet.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Tell us which religions favor maternal mortality and prohibit safe childbirth.

That excuse for Hillary’s pro-abortion anti-Catholicism is the worst one yet.
Click to expand...
Respectfully to all, how can one be a pro-life Democrat unless one abandons the leader of one’s party? I’m sure Kerry and Obama are both pro-choicers, then, one goes back in time… and I don’t like to go to far back in time, because the struggle is quite a bit different than it was in 1989 say, I’ve had problems finding figures on how much Planned Parenthood was funded decades ago.

But the point remains, do some people who claim to be pro-life democrats actually still vote for pro-choice candidates?

en.wikipedia.org

Erik Paulsen - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Erik Paulsen, mentioned somewhere in these threads is Republican.

Back to the main topic, a lot of people are saying, this whole thing is mainly about abortion, I’d be gullible if I thought different.

Still reading this article too.

www.westernjournal.com

Game-Changer: Kavanaugh Accuser Linked to Anita Hill Hit Job on Clarence Thomas

What a coincidence.
www.westernjournal.com www.westernjournal.com
 
Last edited:
I’m not a big fan of Geraldo Rivera. He describes himself as “pro choice”. But I heard him say this Kavanaugh fight is all about abortion and nothing else.

And he’s right about that. Now, Kavanaugh has never said whether he would rule to overrule Roe or not. So those Dems who oppose him do so solely because he’s a devoted Catholic and is therefore suspicious to them. Basically, it’s anti-Catholic stereotyping.
 
If you tell a Catholic that you’re only okay with him being Catholic if
he does not follow the doctrines of his faith that would be anti-Catholic.
 
Access to reproductive health care?

You mean access to abortion?
 
Last edited:
Ridgerunner said:
Tell us which religions favor maternal mortality and prohibit safe childbirth.
Click to expand...
LOL. You think that that is a proper frame? Your polemics get more and more far out.
  1. A fair question is are there “deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases” that put women at risk in maternity through lack of good health care? It is difficulty un many cultures to tease apart these three things. But even if you, unfairly focused singly on religious belief there are examples of religiouns that proscribe medical practices - apart from abortion - that put women in jeopardy.
  2. More importantly, as I already suggested to your, you might look at the fuller quote:
Yes, we’ve nearly closed the global gender gap in primary school, but secondary school remains out of reach for so many girls around the world. Yes, we’ve increased the number of countries prohibiting domestic violence, but still more than half the nations in the world have no such laws on the books, and an estimated one in three women still experience violence. Yes, we’ve cut the mortality rate in half, but far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth.

All the laws we’ve passed don’t count for much if they’re not enforced. Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper. Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will. And deep seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.
Click to expand...
You omitted all of the discussion of education, domestic violence. In these cases, you must admit awareness of “deep seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases” that disadvantage women.

in order to spin your point, you neglect issues that she actually talked about in an attempt to say that this is a statement about abortion, which she in fact did not talk about. Moreover, the neglected issues have little to do with Western and Catholic cultures. It is necessary for you neglect them to try to make this about the Catholic Church.

Good polemics, maybe. But the fidelity to what was spoken is not good.
 
Sarcelle said:
If you tell a Catholic that you’re only okay with him being Catholic if
he does not follow the doctrines of his faith that would be anti-Catholic.
Click to expand...
I would always advise people to follow the teaching of the Church. What would give the the idea to suggest otherwise?
Sarcelle said:
You mean access to abortion?
Click to expand...
I mean reproductive health care.
 
Last edited:
Victoria33 said:
So says a “party apparatchik” per the article.
Click to expand...
Do have evidence otherwise. When did she start to get help?

And in the Politico article that CT references the statement is from a “Democratic operative”
Not sure what that is morphed to apparatchik by CT. Surely they like the PR firms and apparatchiks trying to generate public support for Kavanaugh.
 
Last edited:
You dismissed @Ridgerunner charge of anti-Catholicism against Democrats but I think his charge holds true. The only time a Catholic is accepted is when they don’t follow the teachings of the Church. That is anti-Catholicism to me. You don’t seem to think it is.
 
Sarcelle said:
You dismissed @Ridgerunner charge of anti-Catholicism against Democrats but I think his charge holds true. The only time a Catholic is accepted is when they don’t follow the teachings of the Church. That is anti-Catholicism to me. You don’t seem to think it is.
Click to expand...
I am not sure precisely what you mean when you talk of not following the teachings of the church. That could mean anything from sacred theology through adherence to the ten commandments. Over that realm, I cannot say how well or how poorly any individual except myself follows the Church teachings. In that light, the idea that one has to depart from the teachings of the Church to be “accepted” by Democrats can’t hold water. Who would say what a departure is, and who has or has not departed?

Now if you consider a specific issue, for example support access to legal abortion under some conditions, and take that position as incompatible with Church teachings, then the question is more clear. The idea that that should be a litmus test for party members or voters has not been raised, but the idea that it should be one for party-supported candidates has. And it was shot down.

One could also ask that question about capital punishment. Overall, I don’t think that a case honestly can be made departure from one or another Catholic teaching is a requirement for candidacy, membership, or voting in any US party. On the other hand, it is, as i mentioned before a requirement for membership in certain religious groups. But I don’t think it fair to call such religious groups anti-Catholic. They just have different principles.
Victoria33 said:
Can you please cite where the Catholic Catechism speaks of reproductive health care?
Click to expand...
Huh?
 
Last edited:
koff said:
Merrick Garland, Merrick Garland, Merrick Garland.
Click to expand...
Constitution, Constitution, Constitution… Let alone, this point has been brought up many times prior in these threads, it seems the Democrats likewise, blocked people.
 
dvdjs said:
Help from political “apparatchiks”.
Click to expand...
Yes, party officials. Wow. Making a big point of this but not about the DNC’s pro-choice stance, almost taking God out of it’s platform and some hubub with their treatment of Israel.
 
What accusations were put against Meritt Garland?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top