Obama Rally Attendees Spit On, Yell at Pro-Life Protestors

Status
Not open for further replies.
Farsight001 said:
… life is the most precious gift of God, preservation of life is our biggest priority. Normally this means that we vote pro-life, but if one believes that the anti-abortion candidate will destroy more lives than abortion does (ala nuclear war or some such), then we must vote against that.
Click to expand...
Not correct. A myth passed around by those who want to rationalize voting for a particular candidate. Abortion is an INTRINSIC evil; war is not in the same category. There can be a ‘just’ war, for example fighting against Nazi Germany and Japan in WW II. Good can come out of, and did come out of, nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki - it brought the war to an abrupt end.

And it is not what one ‘believes a candidate might do’ as compared to what one KNOWS a candidate will do because they have done it before and say they will do it again. We know for example that Obama will sign any pro-abortion legislation since he has done so and says so. Nobody knows what Romney will do regarding wars etc. I think it is called setting up a straw man (i.e false argument) against somebody - in this case imposing a false position on Romney by saying ‘Romney will start a nuclear war’ and then using that made-up position, that straw man, as an excuse to vote for the pro-death candidate.

[Straw man: A straw man, known in the UK as an Aunt Sally, is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy **based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position.]

INTRINSIC evil means no good can EVER come out of it, so it is always pure evil and always unacceptable and a grave sin.

God bless you.
 
estesbob said:
If we don’t keep correcting them we run the risk of them leading other poorly cathecized Catholics astray.
Click to expand...
Poorly catechized Catholics have allowed a lot of these things to happen. And we’ve had at least fifty years of poor catechizes. Here at CAF we debate many topics and try to learn from one another (I hope!) but I’ve heard that about 78% of Catholics in North America don’t even go to Sunday Mass.
 
beehumble said:
Not correct. A myth passed around by those who want to rationalize voting for a particular candidate. Abortion is an INTRINSIC evil; war is not in the same category. There can be a ‘just’ war, for example fighting against Nazi Germany and Japan in WW II. Good can come out of, and did come out of, nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki - it brought the war to an abrupt end.
Click to expand...
Not a myth. I have consulted several famous Catholic theologians directly on this issue, including Dr. Edward Sri, and Catholic voting experts such as Dr. Troy Hinkel.

I specifically said “nuclear war”, not nuclear action to stop a war. It does not matter that good can come out of it. The ends do not justify the means. That’s basic Catholic moral teaching. No, war is not an intrinsic evil. But starting a nuclear war unprovoked is still just as evil as anything else that is intrinsically evil.

As I said before, our goal as a Catholic is to preserve life as much as possible. Voting pro-life is typically the best way to preserve the mot life. But behind this voting is the core understanding that we must vote to preserve life first. This means that if one candidate is pro-choice and isn’t trying to nuke China unprovoked, while the other candidate is pro-life and IS trying to nuke China, which would start a huge war resulting in the death of billions of innocents in perhaps a matter of minutes (as opposed to a million over the course of a year as with abortion), then we are morally OBLIGATED to vote for the candidate who is against nuclear action, despite their pro-choice stance.
And it is not what one ‘believes a candidate might do’ as compared to what one KNOWS a candidate will do because they have done it before and say they will do it again. We know for example that Obama will sign any pro-abortion legislation since he has done so and says so. Nobody knows what Romney will do regarding wars etc. I think it is called setting up a straw man (i.e false argument) against somebody - in this case imposing a false position on Romney by saying ‘Romney will start a nuclear war’ and then using that made-up position, that straw man, as an excuse to vote for the pro-death candidate.
Click to expand...
I never said I believed they might. I specifically avoided the use of the term “might” to avoid this non sequitor. Please pay closer attention to what I type.
[Straw man: A straw man, known in the UK as an Aunt Sally, is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy **based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position.
Click to expand...
]Which you committed multiple times by changing the words of my post and responding to your tweaked version instead.
INTRINSIC evil means no good can EVER come out of it, so it is always pure evil and always unacceptable and a grave sin.
Click to expand...
I know this already. This is besides the point.
 
ringil said:
The message must be sent that the faithful Catholic MUST vote for Romney. . .

How transparent.
Click to expand...
That’s not what either Bob or I posted. 🤷

There are other options. Obama is not one of them. It is my opinion, and Bob’s I think, that Romney is the best option, but faithful Catholics may choose a third party candidate or choose not to vote.
 
ringil said:
Why do you vote GOP?
Click to expand...
I believe SuperLuigi asked you first. Why do you vote Democrat? If you want to know one reason why I vote Republican its because they generally don’t vote to keep abortion legal. Also, their standard bearer Romney didn’t vote to keep partial birth abortion legal - like the Democrat standard bearer Obama did. That’s probably the biggest reason. But there are many more reasons. Why do you vote Democrat, Ringil?

Ishii
 
ishii said:
I believe SuperLuigi asked you first. Why do you vote Democrat? If you want to know one reason why I vote Republican its because they generally don’t vote to keep abortion legal. Also, their standard bearer Romney didn’t vote to keep partial birth abortion legal - like the Democrat standard bearer Obama did. That’s probably the biggest reason. But there are many more reasons. Why do you vote Democrat, Ringil?

Ishii
Click to expand...
I don’t think I’m going to get an answer. I think that a lot of folks vote democrat for very selfish reasons, and the harder to the left they go the more excuses Catholics need to keep checking the D box.

Whenever someone answers a question with a question, it means the discussion is over and he/she doesn’t have an answer.
 
epan said:
The same is true going the other way, except that we don’t yet have an instance of a pro-choice person murdering a pro-life person, as we do the other way. This is the unfortunate reality we live with.
Click to expand...
not a single instance???
I think you may need to check out some other news services.
Human Life International’s “Pro-Choice Violence Project” commenced several years ago, when it became apparent that the media had no intention of portraying the opposing sides in the life and death struggle over abortion with objectivity and fairness. Television shows regularly portray pro-lifers as mean-spirited, bullying, or even violent; and portray abortionists and pro-choice activists as peace-loving champions of human rights who only care about what is best for women.
<…> the fact is that there is a great deal more documented proof of violence by those who defend abortion, especially by the abortionists themselves. You will be shocked to learn how many abortionists have committed mass murder and other violent crimes against women and men even beyond the overwhelming violence of abortion itself.
Click to expand...
http://htmlimg2.scribdassets.com/4wz87xy6tc1129g0/images/7-c5e560c3e3.jpg
This is a graph showing the comparative numbers of deaths of born people deliberately caused by “pro-choicers” (red and pink) and “pro-lifers” (black). Guess which of these is more heavily publicized by the biased and dishonest “mainstream media?”
Click to expand...
prochoiceviolence.com/intro
Of the 302 people we know of who have been killed by “pro-choicers” since Roe v. Wade (not including fatal botched abortions), 287 (95 percent of the victims) have been women and children and only 15 have been men. And any pro-lifer who has spent any time at all praying outside any abortion mill knows that the pro-aborts tend to physically attack women, the elderly, the handicapped, or children, as shown in the state-by-state documentation.
Below is a summary of the people killed by pro-abortionists since Roe v. Wade
Click to expand...
• 551 abortion clients (for documentation, click here);
• 85 other pregnant women [78 pregnant girlfriends, 5 pregnant wives, and 2 other pregnant women];
•15 other women [including one 75-year-old pro-life minister and four elderly women aged 83,76 and 76];
• 74 born children [29 newborn babies and infants, 29 living aborted preborn babies, and 16 other children under the age of ten];
• 113 wanted preborn children [remember that even the most heartless “pro- choicers” say that the preborn child is a human being if the mother wants it]; and
•15 men [including one pro-life activist, two abortionists, one sheriff’s deputy, and three suicides].
Click to expand...
Brutal murder of pro-life activist exposes epidemic of pro-choice terrorism and violence
In September of 2009, a pro-life activist was gunned down on a public sidewalk by a violent pro-choicer who hated his message. James Pouillon was standing in front of a Michigan High School, where he had stood peacefully many times before, carrying a pro-life sign.
Click to expand...
‘Pro-Choice Terrorist’ Sentenced for Threatening to Kill Pro-Life Advocates
Read more at christianpost.com/news/pro-choice-terrorist-sentenced-for-threatening-to-kill-pro-life-advocates-82858/#yXoSbOP75VImePWG.99

20-year-old pro-life Crossroads walker hit by car and killed Friday morning
IndyStar reported that the group was walking on the grassy median of the four lane divided highway and did not hear a vehicle approaching them from behind. Police consider the incident to have been an unfortunate accident and no charges have been laid.
Click to expand...
as with the police at the rally who side with the pro abortionists, they think that deliberately entering the median strip to run down a pro-lifer from behind and who was in a large group of people walking in the median strip, carrying signs, is an “unfortunate accident”.

Following is a Partial List of Women Killed by Legal Abortion
so much for legal abortion being safe.

Pro choice is pro murder, The choice being demanded is the choice to kill without consequence. Not surprised that those who support Obama who supports abortion and infanticide, would spit on people who oppose it.
 
I am not surprised at the heinous acts done by Obama’s supporters.
 
ringil said:
No I don’t support abortion.

A Catholic cannot vote for a pro-choice candidate because of that stance but may in spite of it.

I appreciate the “endangering of the soul” comment though. I’ve spoken with my confessor and read the Bishop’s documents and see no conflict in my support of Obama thank you.
Click to expand...
The heck of it is … sometimes we can “see no conflict” in something and be wrong about something with terrible consequences.

**Warning: Contemporary Parable Imminent! **

A four year old chasing a buttlerfly in the front yard may be innocent as the day he was born - and understand his Mom’s warning “don’t run in the street” yet liberally celebrate his free will because (mostly) it is as safe as the yard is. But if he gets hit by the car … even if it** only** wounds him … his life can be shattered and more painful for years. Eternal consequences are even scarier. We can be tricked into hell as Adam and Eve were tricked out of Paradise.

You and I have free will. It won’t be denied us. ** You **are seeking counsel from what should be good people and places.

And yet - you seem determined to vote for this candidate who: Bishops are suing for potential harm to our church; seems to be radically committed to the mortal sin of aborting the innocent; and even at a much more pedestrian level - hasn’t exactly had the Midas Touch (except in reverse?) regarding our economy so far.

You are right (as we all should be) to secure yourself against “endangering your soul,” and you have time to change your mind, or vote third party pro-life, or abstain in the Presidential race - and vote in the ones you’re more sure about.

I enjoy the colloquy between myself and those I don’t agree with almost as much as being re-affirmed by hearing or seeing my own views put well by someone else (so thank you, lol). And hey, if somehow Barack Obama is denied your vote - and “loses” - I suspect he will have a long career in Hollywood, fundraising, commentating, lecturing and such.

Now the REST of us (I’m an artificially laid off teacher in the “bluest” state of the union who has by now floated scores - maybe hundreds of cyber resumes looking for work good enough to save my mortgage and home in these Obama years) - may have to struggle a bit now, whomever is elected.

Yet the economy is not why I’m voting the way I will. It’s that the President’s core values seem in opposition to mine.

Where they are NOT and he enunciates something I DO believe in – I don’t believe his promises. I don’t see the results.

He IS our President and we are to pray for him as good Catholic Americans - and actually “hope” for a “change” in him and HIS endangering his own soul (and countless lives in his care as President) - but I know I don’t have to vote for him. And I’d be surprised at any Bishop who’d endorse him or seem to actually. I’d actually rejoice in his conversion - but dang-o, not even THAT would garner him my vote this time, ringil. Unless I am smitten with a case of masochism unparalelled in Western history. 😉

There! Now let the silly “pro-choice” side folks from the creative morality party honor you with this much effort (for your vote/nonvote)!🎉
 
Linda_Marie said:
not a single instance???
I think you may need to check out some other news services.

Brutal murder of pro-life activist exposes epidemic of pro-choice terrorism and violence

‘Pro-Choice Terrorist’ Sentenced for Threatening to Kill Pro-Life Advocates
Read more at christianpost.com/news/pro-choice-terrorist-sentenced-for-threatening-to-kill-pro-life-advocates-82858/#yXoSbOP75VImePWG.99

20-year-old pro-life Crossroads walker hit by car and killed Friday morning
as with the police at the rally who side with the pro abortionists, they think that deliberately entering the median strip to run down a pro-lifer from behind and who was in a large group of people walking in the median strip, carrying signs, is an “unfortunate accident”.

Following is a Partial List of Women Killed by Legal Abortion
so much for legal abortion being safe.

Pro choice is pro murder, The choice being demanded is the choice to kill without consequence. Not surprised that those who support Obama who supports abortion and infanticide, would spit on people who oppose it.
Click to expand...
:bowdown: Thank you for your exhaustive and dedicated work for the Lord here Linda Marie. The impression that only “hypocritical pro-lifers” resort to violence or harm people - just took an atomic bomb to the center of its house of cards. :bigyikes::frighten:

You are the Enola Gay … except maybe with the light of truth as your “payload”. :angel1: Well done and charitably - many have the same impression of the facts as did poster epan.
 
as with the police at the rally who side with the pro abortionists, they think that deliberately entering the median strip to run down a pro-lifer from behind and who was in a large group of people walking in the median strip, carrying signs, is an “unfortunate accident”
Click to expand...
there has never been any indication that this was anything more than an accident.
In September of 2009, a pro-life activist was gunned down on a public sidewalk by a violent pro-choicer who hated his message. James Pouillon was standing in front of a Michigan High School, where he had stood peacefully many times before, carrying a pro-life sign.
Click to expand...
the nut-job that killed him had no opinion one way or another about abortion, he did have a problem with the victim displaying graphic signs outside schools and he went on to murder his old boss later that same day.
 
april32010 said:
there has never been any indication that this was anything more than an accident.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe it was an accident for one second. A large group of people walking in the median strip of the highway holding pro-life signs, and the driver just accidentally left the road and plowed into them from behind. hmmm
april32010 said:
the nut-job that killed him had no opinion one way or another about abortion, he did have a problem with the victim displaying graphic signs outside schools and he went on to murder his old boss later that same day.
Click to expand...
Not according to the police:
Police reported that Drake was ticked off at Pouillon’s pro-life message, so he hunted him down in a killing spree, drove up next to the man who had 2 leg braces and carried an oxygen tank, and opened fire. (from the previously provided link)

Or it is ok to kill someone for displaying a graphic image of a baby dismembered by abortion?

If they are old enough to get pregnant and have an abortion, they are old enough to see what an abortion really is, especially with PP in the schools teaching them how to have sex, handing out the least effective ABC pills and the highest failure rate condoms.
If he is going to be that enthusiastic about his support of abortion, then he should be happy that we are showing his supporters what he is so gung ho about.
<…>
Even will all the opposition most people could not take their eyes off the signs, they were staring at them and just looked in shock. Our prayer is that they go home and contemplate what they saw and seriously reconsider what they think about abortion. They have see the truth and we pray that it will sink in and God will change their hearts.
lifenews.com/2012/10/09/obama-rally-attendees-spit-on-yell-at-pro-life-protestors/
Click to expand...
With most looking on in shock, I think many supporters of ‘choice’ have no idea what that ‘choice’ really is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top