March for Women

  • Thread starter Thread starter on_the_hill
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
When it comes to this women’s march and the all inherent contradictions of the media coverage and the type of feminists who are pro-abortion, pro-pill, pro-porn, etc. etc. nobody calls it out and synthesizes it better than Jennifer Fulwiler. Nor does anybody do as nice a job of also explaining the other issues that were at least indicated as being subjects of the march in order to shut down the people who might be outraged about pro-life Catholics or women of faith in general attending one of the marches.

If you have Sirius XM on demand, listen to her show from yesterday. If not, I’m sure it will be available in a podcast or something.
 
Michael68 said:
Hold on, weren’t we told just days ago it wasn’t the language on the tape everyone is up in arms about? I think ya’ll need to tell the ladies at that march. They seem to think that’s a big part of it like I said just days ago
Click to expand...
You still don’t GET why people are upset. Its not the language, its the intent.

Language is heavily context dependent, see e.g., use of the n-word.
 
RCinMT said:
Is there anybody else who laments that we had two candidates who said and did vile things, that we have one platform that is anti-immigration and another that’s pro-abortion?

Is there any chance that as Catholics we come together and be the salt and light we’re called to be?😦
Click to expand...
The Republican platform is NOT “anti-immigration.” It’s anti ILLEGAL immigration.
 
RCinMT said:
I know the platorms and the rhetoric. I voted for the republican party platform. He would deport thousands already in this country and send some of them back to certain death. I oppose him as a Catholic on his stance on immigration.

I’m not ashamed to say that I’m not a conservative Catholic or a liberal Catholic or a republican Catholic: the Catholic comes first, always.
Click to expand...
I’m not following here. I have heard Trump say that he wants “big gates” in the wall to allow lots of LEGAL immigration.

I’ve also heard Trump mention that we need immigration reform which will allow good people to legally immigrate to the US much easier.

However, before we can fix immigration, we have to gain control of the border. There is lots of illegal activity crossing our Southern border, and not just from Mexico, but from Columbia, Venezuela, etc. as well. Central and South American drug lords drive through Mexico on their way to bring illegal drugs to the United States. There is also a ton of human trafficking that comes across the Southern border too.

The reason we don’t need a wall (at least now) across our Northern border is because no one can drive from one nation though Canada to come to the United States. Illegals from other nations would need to legally fly into an airport in Canada or legally take a cruise ship (unless they were illegally shipped in crates). So the human trafficking and drugs crossing the Northern border is far less. Plus, the sheer size of the northern border is daunting.

Establishing tougher border security along our Southern border will reduce the drug trade, reduce human trafficking, and reduce the number of foreign gang members illegally crossing the border.

Let’s remember, when an illegal immigrant crosses the border, they typically don’t just walk across the border. They are often smuggled across by smugglers, smugglers who are often smuggling more than just people. It’s very dangerous for everyone involved.

Democrats in Congress know all of this. The only reason the DNC is against the wall (which Hillary Clinton fully supported during her time in the US Senate) is because they are playing identity politics. They want to make sure the majority of hispanics keep voting for them, so they are using attempting to change the issue of “illegal immigration” into “immigration” and paint Republicans as racists.
 
joshman1 said:
By all measures, it was an overwhelming success. Huge media traction, huge turnout eclipsing the inauguration, and a powerful message to Trump that he cannot trample women.
Click to expand...
And that same biased media will completely ignore the March for Life, as they do every year.
 
joshman1 said:
I fundamentally disagree, I think it was full of hope and uplift. But we are never going to agree on this.
Click to expand...
Do you think Madonna talking about how she thought about “blowing up the White House” is full of “hope and uplift”?

You think Ashley Judd’s speech was “full of hope and uplift”?

You think Cecile Richards’ pro-abortion talk is “full of hope and uplift”?

If the march would have been rated G or PG, it would have agreed with you. But the speakers and a lot of the far left crazies there made the event R rated. I’m sorry, it wasn’t even PG-13… the talks and crazies made it an R rated event.

There were little children there, subjected to Madonna’s f-bombs, etc.

I would LOVE to hear stories from people who went with children and wish they had not due to all the profanity and extremism.

God Bless.
 
joshman1 said:
The vaginas are a play on “grab em by the *****”.

Which, you know…
Click to expand...
That doesn’t matter! They made it R rated & uncivilized.

Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King would have NEVER condoned such behavior at one of his marches.

Rule of thumb: If Rev Martin Luther King would say “no” to the type of protest, then the protestor is WRONG, period.

God Bless
 
phil19034 said:
I’m not following here. I have heard Trump say that he wants “big gates” in the wall to allow lots of LEGAL immigration.

I’ve also heard Trump mention that we need immigration reform which will allow good people to legally immigrate to the US much easier.

However, before we can fix immigration, we have to gain control of the border. There is lots of illegal activity crossing our Southern border, and not just from Mexico, but from Columbia, Venezuela, etc. as well. Central and South American drug lords drive through Mexico on their way to bring illegal drugs to the United States. There is also a ton of human trafficking that comes across the Southern border too.

The reason we don’t need a wall (at least now) across our Northern border is because no one can drive from one nation though Canada to come to the United States. Illegals from other nations would need to legally fly into an airport in Canada or legally take a cruise ship (unless they were illegally shipped in crates). So the human trafficking and drugs crossing the Northern border is far less. Plus, the sheer size of the northern border is daEstablishing tougher border security along our Southern border will reduce the drug trade, reduce human trafficking, and reduce the number of foreign gang members illegally crossing the border.
Let’s remember, when an illegal immigrant crosses the border, they typically don’t just walk across the border. They are often smuggled across by smugglers, smugglers who are often smuggling more than just people. It’s very dangerous for everyone involved.
Democrats in Congress know all of this. The only reason the DNC is against the wall (which Hillary Clinton fully supported during her time in the US Senate) is because they are playing identity politics. They want to make sure the majority of hispanics keep voting for them, so they are using attempting to change the issue of “illegal immigration” into “immigration” and paint Republicans as racists.
Click to expand...
Amen! 👍👍
 
dvdjs said:
Go back and listen.

It may be sufficient for reasonable doubt and acquittal, but it is not a definitive test for consent.

The key word was definitive.

Go back and listen.
Click to expand...
Actually at the start of the tape Trump discusses how he tried to score with a woman and failed … so while there was much bragging and vulgar bragging at that - he really admitted that even if he was a rich guy surrounded by women who let you do whatever … he wasnt particularly successful …

Trump: “* … I moved on her very heavily in fact I took her out furniture shopping. She wanted to get some furniture. I said I’ll show you where they have some nice furniture. I moved on her like a *****. I couldn’t get there and she was married. …*”

When they finally leave the bus and meet the women they were there to meet - it is Billy Bush that initiates the desire for contact …

Bush: “How about a little hug for the Donald, he’s just off the bus?”
And again you need to refresh your memory. No one voted for BC after he “admitted and was found guilty of sexual harassment”.
Click to expand...
Clinton was elected to be the governor and the president when it was known he was a womanizer … Not just those claiming that he had sexual relations with him - knowing that he used his security staff to procure women … even some who claimed to do so unwillingly … he was a man of power … first as Governor

And his antics did not stop once he was elected President - then it was sex between the most powerful man in the world [US President] with and Intern in the oval office - and then made unwanted moves on a widow … so Clinton was not only a womanizer and an accused rapist - he was a slow learner … but then he thought he could get away with it forever … He lied directly to the American people, he suborned perjury, he redefined what constituted sex [as in oral sex is not :confused:] and the definition of the word “is” The fact that Bill Clinton disgraced not only himself, and his wife but the the Office of the Presidency and the American People is far different than words caught on tape on a bus or an appearance on Howard Stern - whom I have never listened to and have no desire to
We are not talking about what he said behind closed doors, but very publicly.
Click to expand...
The Howard Stern comments were public - sort of - the Howard Stern audience anyway [a very crude show - one should not be surprised … kind of like those who were shocked :eek: when they invited Imus to the Radio and TV dinner http://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/23/us/unexpectedly-the-clintons-are-skewered-at-a-dinner.html :rolleyes:]
You are entitled to hold and defends standards as low as you like. But when such low standards prevail and are deemed acceptable for the POTUS, yes people will appear to be “losing their minds, souls, dignity, humanity”.
Click to expand...
And perhaps we learned this acceptance of low behavior from the likes of you - who still adore Bill Clinton and who named Teddy Kennedy the Lion of the Senate - revered and re-elected to the Senate after carousing with a young woman, drinking, driving, wrecking and leaving her to die - not even reporting the accident … and yes I know when he ran for President - Kennedy did not win the primary … but Mary Jo and her death were not the reason … and - I don’t really think the standards for Congress of President should be that different IMHO … Bill Clinton and Hillary of its all a "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy- I am not just a stand by your man woman fame … and let me handle the Bimbo Eruption - drag them through the mud] is getting rich off of peddling his power and influence - still to this day … that is how much the left really cares about behavior such as this …

I know its hard to take … but that is a fact … and why many people who wanted a different candidate would vote for the one who promised to respect the lives of children over the one who sees them as easily dispensed with …

And the verbiage of the Women’s March is par with what is glorified on the Left … it is not new … it is not because the Trump tape is out there … its because the left glorifies bad language … Rappers = B!t@h and whoe’s , cop killers and et all lyrics - to the White House - for dinner with the Hip Prez and his wife !!!
 
On the Howard Stern Show, Howard suggested Ivanka was a " piece of ____"
If you listen, all you hear is Trump reluctantly agree as if he was put on the spot, which is what Howard did. Trunp said nothing after that.
 
Michael68 said:
On the Howard Stern Show, Howard suggested Ivanka was a " piece of ____"
If you listen, all you hear is Trump reluctantly agree as if he was put on the spot, which is what Howard did. Trunp said nothing after that.
Click to expand...
I thought the reason you guys like Trump is because he speaks his mind no matter what. And yet, he didn’t stand up for his own daughter when Stern degraded her.
 
I have seen a lot of defending President Trump in these threads. Look, I am not going to rehash the odious behavior of Secretary Clinton toward women who crossed paths with President Clinton but it suffices to say that the decision as to the personal nature of the candidate was hardly Mother Theresa versus Pope Francis.

But for the love of all that’s good, PLEASE fellow republicans STOP trying to excuse or fight about the man’s past comments and seemingly continued attitude toward women! He has said disgusting things, been divorced three times and, yes, even hinted at his approval of objectifying his daughter (who I think is a lovely person by the way).

Ask yourself, would you want to befriend him? Would you want your wife to work for him or for your daughter to date him? If you like his policies, fine, there’s no shame in that per se. If you preferred the republican platform to the democrat platform than fine, there’s no shame in that. But if you didn’t care about issues and voted for either candidate simply as a person than I would say you have a very backward view in either direction.
 
RCinMT said:
I have seen a lot of defending President Trump in these threads. Look, I am not going to rehash the odious behavior of Secretary Clinton toward women who crossed paths with President Clinton but it suffices to say that the decision as to the personal nature of the candidate was hardly Mother Theresa versus Pope Francis.

But for the love of all that’s good, PLEASE fellow republicans STOP trying to excuse or fight about the man’s past comments and seemingly continued attitude toward women! He has said disgusting things, been divorced three times and, yes, even hinted at his approval of objectifying his daughter (who I think is a lovely person by the way).

Ask yourself, would you want to befriend him? Would you want your wife to work for him or for your daughter to date him? If you like his policies, fine, there’s no shame in that per se. If you preferred the republican platform to the democrat platform than fine, there’s no shame in that. But if you didn’t care about issues and voted for either candidate simply as a person than I would say you have a very backward view in either direction.
Click to expand...
Bravo!!
 
RCinMT said:
I have seen a lot of defending President Trump in these threads. Look, I am not going to rehash the odious behavior of Secretary Clinton toward women who crossed paths with President Clinton but it suffices to say that the decision as to the personal nature of the candidate was hardly Mother Theresa versus Pope Francis.

But for the love of all that’s good, PLEASE fellow republicans STOP trying to excuse or fight about the man’s past comments and seemingly continued attitude toward women! He has said disgusting things, been divorced three times and, yes, even hinted at his approval of objectifying his daughter (who I think is a lovely person by the way).

Ask yourself, would you want to befriend him? Would you want your wife to work for him or for your daughter to date him? If you like his policies, fine, there’s no shame in that per se. If you preferred the republican platform to the democrat platform than fine, there’s no shame in that. But if you didn’t care about issues and voted for either candidate simply as a person than I would say you have a very backward view in either direction.
Click to expand...
:clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping: This couldn’t be said enough. Thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top