Obama and Romney hit the final stretch

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tampa_Dave
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Luigi_Daniele said:
I suggest looking up the meaning of the word “extraordinary”.
Click to expand...
I woud also suggest that Mitt Romey is the one who has forced Catholics into this dilemna. It is his support for MURDER (abortion) in the cases of rape and incest that is the issue. He has changed his mind on numerous issues numerous times over the years but for some inexplicable, illogical, and irrational reason he will not budge one millimeter on this issue of exceptions, even though he claims that he is aware of the “science of life” which means that he knows full well that his posititon will lead to the murder of unborn innocents and that by revising his position he will save the lives of unborn innocents. There is no valid reason for Romney to have this exception on a matter of intrinsic evil. He has had more than ample time to revise this postition and he refuses to do so. Oh, well. I take the “science of life” more seriously than he does and I don’t find Romney’s position credible. And the Bishops make it clear that I have every right not to vote when faced with a this dilemna that Romney could end tomorrow if he wanted to.
 
ishii said:
Nice quote, Hanstrappist. So how does you sitting out the election not help Obama shape the supreme court into a permanent pro-abortion rights majority? Or do you care about that? Why don’t you speak to my points, Hanstrappist? Do you not care that you are helping Obama shape the supreme court? Do you not want states to be able to pass laws against abortion? Do you care? I sure hope so - millions are aborted every year and those unborn deserve better than Catholics who let themselves off the hook based on technicalities.

Ishii
Click to expand...
Sorry, I was in the middle of responding to another post. See above
 
HansTrappist said:
Sorry, I was in the middle of responding to another post. See above
Click to expand...
Hello Hanstrappist. You didn’t respond to my post at all. Here it is - again:

So how does you sitting out the election not help Obama shape the supreme court into a permanent pro-abortion rights majority? Or do you care about that? Why don’t you speak to my points, Hanstrappist? Do you not care that you are helping Obama shape the supreme court? Do you not want states to be able to pass laws against abortion? Do you care? I sure hope so - millions are aborted every year and those unborn deserve better than Catholics who let themselves off the hook based on technicalities.

Ishii
 
ishii said:
Hello Hanstrappist. You didn’t respond to my post at all. Here it is - again:

So how does you sitting out the election not help Obama shape the supreme court into a permanent pro-abortion rights majority? Or do you care about that? Why don’t you speak to my points, Hanstrappist? Do you not care that you are helping Obama shape the supreme court? Do you not want states to be able to pass laws against abortion? Do you care? I sure hope so - millions are aborted every year and those unborn deserve better than Catholics who let themselves off the hook based on technicalities.

Ishii
Click to expand...
Ishii, for the second time, I am answering your post with the answer that I gave to Luigi Daniele. Read it and then get back to me if you have any further concerns.
 
HansTrappist said:
Ishii, for the second time, I am answering your post with the answer that I gave to Luigi Daniele. Read it and then get back to me if you have any further concerns.
Click to expand...
I guess I’ll try again - you’re not answering my post at all. I will number my questions to make it easier for you:
  1. So how does you sitting out the election not help Obama shape the supreme court into a permanent pro-abortion rights majority?
  2. Or do you care about that? Why don’t you speak to my points, Hanstrappist?
3)Do you not care that you are helping Obama shape the supreme court?

4)Do you not want states to be able to pass laws against abortion? Do you care? I sure hope so - millions are aborted every year and those unborn deserve better than Catholics who let themselves off the hook based on technicalities

There you go, Hanstrappist.

Ishii
 
ishii said:
  1. So how does you sitting out the election not help Obama shape the supreme court into a permanent pro-abortion rights majority?
Click to expand...
One vote doesn’t make a difference and, at this point, it could go in either direction.
ishii said:
4)Do you not want states to be able to pass laws against abortion?
Click to expand...
They already can and there’s nothing Romney could do to ban abortion. Nominating ultra-conservative Supreme Court Justices doesn’t guarantee that the Supreme Court would even take such a case and no individual has the legal standing to challenge it anyway.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
One vote doesn’t make a difference and, at this point, it could go in either direction.

They already can and there’s nothing Romney could do to ban abortion. Nominating ultra-conservative Supreme Court Justices doesn’t guarantee that the Supreme Court would even take such a case and no individual has the legal standing to challenge it anyway.
Click to expand...
Which of course, brings it to our prudential judgement.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
One vote doesn’t make a difference and, at this point, it could go in either direction.
They already can and there’s nothing Romney could do to ban abortion. Nominating ultra-conservative Supreme Court Justices doesn’t guarantee that the Supreme Court would even take such a case and no individual has the legal standing to challenge it anyway.
Click to expand...
Thanks for responding, Hanstrappist. Oh wait, I mean EmperorNapolean. What would happen if a thousand people thought “one vote doesn’t make a difference.” ? See where I’m going with this?

I never said Romney could ban abortion - why do you twist my words? He could, however, shape the supreme court into a pro-life majority and that court could overturn Roe V Wade. Then states could pass laws that restrict or ban abortion - and they could stand, which they can’t do now. But with all due respect - I was more interested in seeing how a Catholic could justify helping Obama shape the supreme court so that we have abortion on demand for the next 20 years. I would hope Catholics who are pro-life would want to stop what Obama is doing, but so far, Hanstrappist is unable or unwilling to answer those questions.

Ishii
 
ishii said:
I guess I’ll try again - you’re not answering my post at all. I will number my questions to make it easier for you:
  1. So how does you sitting out the election not help Obama shape the supreme court into a permanent pro-abortion rights majority?
  2. Or do you care about that? Why don’t you speak to my points, Hanstrappist?
3)Do you not care that you are helping Obama shape the supreme court?

4)Do you not want states to be able to pass laws against abortion? Do you care? I sure hope so - millions are aborted every year and those unborn deserve better than Catholics who let themselves off the hook based on technicalities

There you go, Hanstrappist.

Ishii
Click to expand...
Ishii, I think you are hijacking your own discussion with this juvenile language of “making it easier for me” and demanding that I answer your questions. A discussion is a two way street Ishii and I was discussing my position with Luigi over the issue of intrinsic evil and Catholic voting responsibilities when you decided to go in another direction with the Supreme Court.

If you wish to understand my views, you will go back and read post # 677.

Now, I am going to answer your demands provided that you at least go back and read post #677 and tell me if I am right or wrong. Again, two way street.

Your questions make two assumptions.

First, that I would sit out the election. I have not decided on that and Romney still has time to renounce his exception for murder in the cases of rape and incest. If he does that he will have my vote, because as it stands, that is really the primary issue in this election and until he can differentiate himself (fundamentally) from Obama on this issue, the rest of the pro-life talk coming from Romney is just campaign rhetoric. You cannot be pro-life and have exceptions for murder in the cases of rape and incest. So, here’s hoping Romney makes the right choice.

Now, as to your notion that the Supreme Court should be the focus of efforts to correcting abortion and that by not electing Romney things will get worse. Sorry, but abortion IS legal right now and it has been for close to 40 years. The GOP has a horrible track record on Supreme Court justices. GOP Supreme Court appointees gave the country Roe v. Wade and then a court of eight GOP-appointed judges (five by Reagan and Bush) strengthened it in 1992. That same GOP Court rendered many other liberal rulings. The Senate confirmed the liberal and pro-abort Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg by a vote of 97–0. Not a single “no” vote could be mustered from the most “conservative” GOP senators. If this was my first election, Ishii, and I was not aware of the results of the last 40 years of this failed strategy of voting for the “lesser evil” and the failure that so many GOP-appointed SC Justices have been, then you might have had a point and you might have convinced me. But as it stands, I am aware of the history and your points are therefore moot. Additionaly, there have been numerous attempts (think Sanctity of Life Act and We the People Act) aimed at REMOVING the jurisdiction of the Federal Courts on this issue but all the Republicans do is cry “we can’t do that” or “the Courts have effectively been delegated the power to decide this” or some other unconstitutional nonsense. Its been the same old song and dance from the Republicans for close to 40 years. Enough is enough!
 
stinkcat_14 said:
Actually, that might make him endearing. I want them made wherever they can be made the cheapest. If that is China, good for them!
Click to expand...
As long as they are made to the same safety standards. Not fair to require it from US companies, but not Chinese ones (lead paint leaps to mind) 😉
 
HansTrappist said:
Ishii, I think you are hijacking your own discussion with this juvenile language of “making it easier for me” and demanding that I answer your questions. A discussion is a two way street Ishii and I was discussing my position with Luigi over the issue of intrinsic evil and Catholic voting responsibilities when you decided to go in another direction with the Supreme Court.

If you wish to understand my views, you will go back and read post # 677.

Now, I am going to answer your demands provided that you at least go back and read post #677 and tell me if I am right or wrong. Again, two way street.

Your questions make two assumptions.

First, that I would sit out the election. I have not decided on that and Romney still has time to renounce his exception for murder in the cases of rape and incest. If he does that he will have my vote, because as it stands, that is really the primary issue in this election and until he can differentiate himself (fundamentally) from Obama on this issue, the rest of the pro-life talk coming from Romney is just campaign rhetoric. You cannot be pro-life and have exceptions for murder in the cases of rape and incest. So, here’s hoping Romney makes the right choice.

Now, as to your notion that the Supreme Court should be the focus of efforts to correcting abortion and that by not electing Romney things will get worse. Sorry, but abortion IS legal right now and it has been for close to 40 years. The GOP has a horrible track record on Supreme Court justices. GOP Supreme Court appointees gave the country Roe v. Wade and then a court of eight GOP-appointed judges (five by Reagan and Bush) strengthened it in 1992. That same GOP Court rendered many other liberal rulings. The Senate confirmed the liberal and pro-abort Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg by a vote of 97–0. Not a single “no” vote could be mustered from the most “conservative” GOP senators. If this was my first election, Ishii, and I was not aware of the results of the last 40 years of this failed strategy of voting for the “lesser evil” and the failure that so many GOP-appointed SC Justices have been, then you might have had a point and you might have convinced me. But as it stands, I am aware of the history and your points are therefore moot. Additionaly, there have been numerous attempts (think Sanctity of Life Act and We the People Act) aimed at REMOVING the jurisdiction of the Federal Courts on this issue but all the Republicans do is cry “we can’t do that” or “the Courts have effectively been delegated the power to decide this” or some other unconstitutional nonsense. Its been the same old song and dance from the Republicans for close to 40 years. Enough is enough!
Click to expand...
Hanstrappist, the history of supreme court appointments in the past 40 years has been well documented on these forums. But rather than give up - consider that we have Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, Thomas Alito and John Roberts. We need one more. There is likely to be a vacancy in the next four years. Either Obama or Romney will be choosing the justice. Romney will have Robert Bork advising him on this. So for anyone interested in seeing Roe V Wade overturned - voting for Mitt Romney is a no-brainer. The fact that there is no 100% guarantee with a Mitt Romney appointed justice is no reason to give up - which is what you seem to be doing.

As for my response to your comments on Romney’s stance on abortion with exceptions for rape or incest - I would say two things:
  1. Its irrelevant.
  2. Its irrelevant.
Hanstrappist, its not fair to the unborn that you would hold them hostage based on the technicality of Romney’s position on allowable exceptions. There will be millions of unborn killed because Roe V Wade is the law of the land. We ought not to do nothing in a fit of stubborn perfectionism. Think of the unborn, Hanstrappist.

Ishii
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top