Lindsey Graham Says He Backs Trump in ‘Any Effort to Move Forward’ on RBG Vacancy

[RidgeSprinter]

I do not believe so.

So in the event, we have a Red President and a Blue Senate, you would not have a problem with the Blue Leader not bringing a Red nomination to the floor because there is no obligation to do so?

 

[RidgeSprinter]

Republicans don’t advocate child murder whereas Democrats do.

Not so fast there.

Most recent from Pew Research:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Abortion and Morality | Pew Research Center

 

[RidgeSprinter]

I just disagree with Democratic policy, namely because they advocate for child murder.

Then you must have a problem with the Bible. It advocates Child Murder by performing Child Murder.

1. The Flood (Genesis 6-8)
2. The cities of the plain, including Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18-19)
3. The Egyptian firstborn sons during the Passover (Exodus 11-12)
4. The Canaanites under Moses and Joshua ([Numbers 21:2-3]; [Deuteronomy 20:17] [Joshua 6:17]
5. The Amalekites annihilated by Saul (1 Samuel 15)

Just to name a few.

 

[vz71]

So in the event, we have a Red President and a Blue Senate, you would not have a problem with the Blue Leader not bringing a Red nomination to the floor because there is no obligation to do so?

I most certainly would have problems with it.
But I know this to be an eventuality that is within the constitution.
I may protest, but ultimately it is their right.

 

[RidgeSprinter]

I’d say this proves Republicans are against child murder rather than for it and Democrats are.

Far from it mate.

It shows that only 51% to 75? of Republicans are against Abortion.
It shows that 31% to 55% of Democrats are against Abortion.

58% of Catholics are against Abortion.

 

[MikeInVA]

I was in a Bible study a while ago and the priest had an interesting point about polygamy in the Bible. He said that in every case where a man took several wives it ended poorly for him. The lesson being that not everything that happens in the Bible is an example of what God wants.

 

[marybobo]

There is no constitutional duty to bring a nomination to the floor. And do you really think the GOP senate would have confirmed Merritt Garland? On the other hand, GOP does not treat nominees the way Dems do.

 

[Victoria33]

Well, we know the Mother Church clearly tells us “No”, not to do it no matter what “Numbers” says, Old Testament anyway. We aren’t using Leviticus or whatever Scripture to justify stoning.

 

[upant]

Then I guess Trump should be nominating Merrick Garland.

not at all, the current president picks who he wants

No, each person should have equal representation.

so you advocate doing away with the senate?

You should have reminded McConnell in March, 2016.

they did their job, in their own timeframe.

 

[RidgeSprinter]

Some research done by others:

https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/roman-catholic-church-quickening

And she is full of scholarship ( sources ). 8 of them with 7 being Catholic. The standout being Plato.

And we can look at how St Aquinas was cited in the roe vs wade case.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[RidgeSprinter]

I was in a Bible study a while ago and the priest had an interesting point about polygamy in the Bible. He said that in every case where a man took several wives it ended poorly for him. The lesson being that not everything that happens in the Bible is an example of what God wants.

Every case?

the short list:

Abdon
Abijah
Abram / Abraham
Ahab
Ahasuerus
Ashur
Belshazzar
Ben-hadad
Caleb
David
Eliphaz
Elkanah
Esau
Ezra
Gideon

the person stopped at Gideon because there is Jacob and Solomon that I know of also.

Maybe he was putting a distinction between several and a couple of wives just to give him the benefit of a doubt.

According to wiki, there are over 40 biblical figures that had more than one wife.

 

[Cathoholic]

tomarin . . .

As far as I can tell, they (the Republicans led by Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham) established a precedent the last time this happened . . .

Do you think now
the White House and
the Senate
are of the same party
like NOT WHAT OCCURRED
when McConnell invoked the elective “Biden rule”?

Or do you think Obama was a Republican back then?

 

[vz71]

Then I guess the Senate didn’t do their job in 2016

They did their jobs well then.
Perhaps it was not popular, but then you would think people would have voted them out. So I guess it was not as popular as you would think.

Personally, I think the Senate should go the way of the House of Lords in the UK.

Sounds like sour grapes to me.

 

[MikeInVA]

He didn’t go down a roster. Of the list you present, did any of them have a positive result from taking multiple wives?

 

[vz71]

Sure, because of minority rule, they weren’t voted out.

How so?
Really…you need to provide details as to how exactly getting fewer votes keeps a senator in his seat.

upants asked if I would get rid of the Senate, and honestly, I would. It is not representative.

Yes it is.
Do you know what the senate is representative of? If not, then I understand your confusion.

 

[vz71]

Their people will have equal say in the policies of the whole United States

Very short sighted for someone trying to lay claim to a tyranny of the minority earlier.
Perhaps even a bit disingenuous.

It is the senate that keeps states like Alabama from being subjects to states like New York.

they can regulate their states to their own rules as much as they want.

This is, in fact, false.
All states fall under federal laws.

If they don’t like it, they can leave.

This is also false.
Perhaps you forgot about the civil war?

 

[vz71]

Fewer votes are needed to keep a seat in a small state.

So you think other states should have a say in who a state senator is?
That the senators from Alabama should be voted on by people that are not in Alabama?
How could they represent the state of that is the case?

No, every 27 million Californians are represented by one Senator while every 270,000 Wyomingians (or whatever they are called) are represented by one Senator. That means, you Wyomingian has 100 times the representation as a Californian.

I see your confusion.
The senate represents the states.
Not the individuals in that state, but the state itself.
The representative for the people in that state is their congressmen.

So wyoming has the same number of senate seats. But fewer congressional representation in the house.

 

[vz71]

States aren’t subject to other states.

They would be without the senate.

It is in the senate that all 50 states stand on equal ground.
If this were not so, then what is to stop the more populous states from taking advantage of the less populous states?

 

[vz71]

Sure, but federal laws do not cover all aspects of the law and the Constitution carves out a role for the state.

Doesn’t have to.
You made the claim that each state could be free to govern itself without interference from others.
And federal laws show this to not be the case.

There are limits to what a state can and cannot do.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The Bible does not advocate child murder. Just because it is in the Bible does not mean it is advocated for. That is like saying the Bible advocated for the crucifixion of Christ even though it was the worst crime humanity has committed.

According to the bible, God decreed the eradication of the Canaanites because they sacrificed their children. There are people on this planet who would eradicate Americans for the same reason.