Mocking those who are religious

[vz71]

His environmental positions may kill many more.

Most see a certain logic in choosing the uncertainty of “may” over the certainty of deaths through abortion.

 

[dvdjs]

Most see a certain logic in choosing the uncertainty of “may” over the certainty of deaths through abortion.

You do realize, don’t you, that the legality of abortion does not ordain a "certainty’ that they will occur, only that they “may”.

it is stopping laws that are/will be passed that allow for more kids to be killed

How, exactly, has the trend line in abortion changed under Trump?
What is the honest, workable plan to change it?

 

[silentwitness]

And he used that hyperbole to get the media to advertize this without cost to his campaign.

And the media attempting to run him down, did just what he wanted them to do.)

From memory this comment was in response to the media trying to tell it’s audience (consumers) that people were turning against Trump.

This was the media’s attempt to try and create the appearance of a move away from Trump to

1. challenge his credibility and
2. attempt to draw people away from Trump and most importantly
3. continue to provide a justified hatred of Donald Trump as a candidate.

Thankfully, three years later and after at least 2 nonsensical state run ‘investigations’ to continue the anti Trump hatred, people have generally had enough.

Trumps comment at the time was to take the fight to the protagonists who were attacking him.

Which is why I think he is a great inspiration to Christians who are sorely in need of such backbone.

 

[JanetF]

I love my faith, but I wouldn’t bring it up with co-workers in a pluralistic job setting

This! And I work at a Jesuit University. I don’t talk about it unless specifically asked.

“And, they’ll know we are Christians by our love, by our love…”

 

[Thom18]

And that is why we are a country so divided.
You are more concerned with abortion than with civility between human beings.
I have said it before and I will repeat. I do not like abortion.
But I will not vote for a person like Donald Trump just because he is against abortion.

You won’t vote for Trump in spite of his pro-life stance, but will vote for someone else “in spite of” their radical pro-abortion stance?

Tell me, and please be honest- which issue is of greater importance than 650k lives each year? And why are you not criticizing the Democratic Party which has made abortion its capstone issue?

You are far too eager to point out “Trump is saying nasty things”, but I have never witnessed you say anything negative about a democrat in spite of their infatuation with abortion. Why?

 

[JoeShlabotnik]

Thom18, I am not voting for any candidate solely based on their stand on abortion.
There are many other issues to be considered.
And I will not engage with a debate with you on one issue’s importance versus another.
The Democrats I have heard seem to be focused on a woman’s right to choose, not so much on whether someone should have an abortion.

 

[JoeShlabotnik]

But that’s how people vote. There are very few voters who like everything about a candidate/party they vote for, but they vote for the candidate/party closest to their beliefs/views. Whether they then do or do not implement the policies they promise in their campaign is another issue. Trump from what I gather though, has followed through on much of what he promised, and in terms of Christianity, is introducing pro-Christian policies, or at least policies that align with Christian beliefs. He certainly hasn’t introduced any anti-Christian policies as far as I know.

His words and his deeds tell me that he is not as Christian as claims to be.
And what about his embracing of Far Right, White Nationalists. They hate Catholics!

 

[Polak]

His words and his deeds tell me that he is not as Christian as claims to be.
And what about his embracing of Far Right, White Nationalists. They hate Catholics!

I’m not convinced he is a Christian either, but his policies are the most pro-Christian in the US right now. Could you name me one Democratic candidate this year who you think would be more Christian friendly than Trump?

As for embracing the far-right and white nationalists, do you have definitive examples of that? I mean, not just some off the cuff comment (such as that there were bad people on both sides, after the Charlottesville violence) that the media spun into him ‘embracing neo-Nazis and white nationalists’.

Also remember that a lot of folks get labelled ‘far-right’ or ‘Nazis’ very quickly. These days being a Christian who is against mass immigration into your country can earn the label of being a racist, far-right Nazi.

 

[JoeShlabotnik]

The people carrying torches are Charlottesville looked a lot more like Nazis than they did people who were demonstrating against illegal immigration.
As for Trump’s policies, he is the ultimate politician. He says anything that will help him get elected.
But his history is to befriend, to gain what he wants, and then to throw people under the bus.
Once elected, suppose he simply undoes most of what he has done?

 

[Cathoholic]

JoeShlabotnik on minimizing the abortion issue. . . .

There are many other issues to be considered.

Tell me Joe.

WHAT “issue” is of benefit
to a given person if that person
has been pre-meditatively murdered
in the pre-born stage?

 

[Polak]

Yes a lot of the people that took part in the Charlottesville tiki torch march did not seem like nice people, and neither did some of those antifa people who were against them and started being violent.

As for Trump being the ‘ultimate politician’ just making promises, that’s just it, a lot of his supporters feel has has done a lot of what he said he would do, unlike many politicians. I think building the wall is one of the few things they are upset he hasn’t done yet.

 

[Cathoholic]

JoeShlabotnik . . .

The people carrying torches are Charlottesville looked a lot more like Nazis than they did people who were demonstrating against illegal immigration.

That is irrelevant.

What is relevant is what President Trump explicitly said about the Neonazis at Charlottesville.

President Trump condemned them and everyone that has checked into that knows it (although not all will admit it).

PragerU - The Media Lied About Trump's Charlottesville Comments World News

Although this story is over two months old, I am still hearing fake news about what President Trump did and did not say regarding Charlottesville. So I thought it timely enough to post. The Media Lied About Trump’s Charlottesville Comments 66,302 views Published on Aug 7, 2019 The media has been lying for two years about who President Trump called “very fine people.” The lies continue this very week. A straight exploration of the facts should reveal the truth. That’s what CNN political ana…

CNN’s Jake Tapper Admits: Trump Did Not Call Neo-Nazis ‘Very Fine People’ in Charlottesville World News

CNN’s Jake Tapper Admits: Trump Did Not Call Neo-Nazis ‘Very Fine People’ in Charlottesville Joel B. Pollack 27 Apr 2019 Breitbart News CNN anchor Jake Tapper admitted Friday that President Donald Trump did not refer to neo-Nazis or white supremacists as “very fine people” in his remarks about the Charlottesville, Virginia, riots in 2017. The admission came as Tapper and his CNN panel discussed former vice president Joe Biden’s campaign launch video, released Thursday, in which Biden explicitl…

The anti-Trump Charlottesville spoof was another example of FAKE news. Not by everybody (see Tapper above from CNN who actually truthfully defended the President), but by enough.

President Trump . . . You’re changing culture and you had people, and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists because they should be condemned, totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, OK? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had troublemakers and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets and with the baseball bats. You got a lot of bad people in the other group, too.

Later too . . .

President Trump . . . Those people, all of those people- excuse me. I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups, but not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists, by any stretch.

 

[Cathoholic]

I’m still waiting for you to condemn the pro-abortion politicians who support absolutely no restrictions on abortion Maximus1.

After all. It was you who said you are worried about murder.

Now you get to show me that.

I’ll be waiting to see your condemnation of all the Democrats for their pro-murder of innocent people stance Maximus1.

 

[7_Sorrows]

I cannot even conceive of an unprovable fiction to support envy.

He is a wealthy successful man in many areas - business and
politics and he had the nerve to beat Hillary!! So anger
and envy are obvious reactions to President Trump.
It is pretty obvious from the petty complaints posted here on CAF about the President by those who oppose Trump.

 

[Maximus1]

A president has little and very indirect influence with abortion, while he has significant impact on climate change policy.
Plus
The potential death with climate change is significantly, almost exponentially worse.

 

[Maximus1]

You can believe what you want( or perhaps what they want),
But I have not thought about Hillary at all. And I don’t know anyone who does. I have not thought of Mondale, or Dukakis, and I am sure Republicans don’t still think about Bob Dole. ENVY is a bit of a fantasy I think. They are " pulling your leg" when they suggest this I promise.

 

[Maximus1]

I don’t condemn people. I oppose that particular position. Most politicians have virtually no impact, or potential impact on the law involving abortion. They certainly do not make people’s choices of free will for them.
A president certainly does influence climate policy. Where the potential is so much worse than abortion.

 

[vz71]

A president has little and very indirect influence with abortion, while he has significant impact on climate change policy.

The appointment of pro life judges is hardly a small or indirect.

The potential death…

Trying to equivocate an unknown with a known.
We know abortion is taking the lives of our children.
You can only speculate that lives could possibly be at risk if something happens.

 

[vz71]

A president certainly does influence climate policy. Where the potential is so much worse than abortion.

You believe abortion to be only a potential problem?

 

[Maximus1]

First, abortion has always existed. The numbers change and first and foremost it is an exercise of free will by a mother who is right thinking or isn’t. The influence of church values affects the number.
Access can also affect the number, but access is economically derived not spiritually derived. Where wealth determines worthiness to have a choice.
Pro life judge means what? Maybe something, maybe not. That isn’t speculation? They are not supposed to be predisposed by the way. Either way.
The science of climate change is more than speculation and our Church recognised this truth. And the consequences are exponentially worse in terms of impact.