Obama vs Romney, who are you voting for and why?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rafael502
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I frankly am getting tried of the attitude of this thread. The noble poor and the wicked wealthy thing is getting old. A friend of mine was behind someone who hard a link card ( food stamps) and the girl was buying a large amount of hamburger the cashier asked if she was having a cook out, she said no food stamps won’t buy dogfood so I buy hamburger for my dog. This is a slap in the face to all of us who work to provide for our families! Like I said earlier the entitlement thing is getting old.
 
Al_Moritz said:
And with this remark you are again missing the point. If you want to claim that that is another example of my alleged “I’m vastly more intelligent than any of you twits” attitude, then be my guest. I don’t have that attitude.
Click to expand...
I accept that. I am telling you, then, that your posts come across that way. And, again with all due respect, if all of us keep missing your points, maybe it’s because you aren’t making them very well.

In the end, my point is that Obama is the most pro-abortion US president in history. As such, a Catholic can not vote for him. All the other issues matter nothing in the face of that issue.
 
wendy_w said:
I frankly am getting tried of the attitude of this thread. The noble poor and the wicked wealthy thing is getting old. A friend of mine was behind someone who hard a link card ( food stamps) and the girl was buying a large amount of hamburger the cashier asked if she was having a cook out, she said no food stamps won’t buy dogfood so I buy hamburger for my dog. This is a slap in the face to all of us who work to provide for our families! Like I said earlier the entitlement thing is getting old.
Click to expand...
It sure is.
 
Al_Moritz said:
Right, they had to, oh horror, dip into their stock portfolio from time to time. Does anyone else have that luxury?
Click to expand...
Oh, the terrible wicked rich people who made positive inroads in this country should be shamed whenever possible.
 
Ridgerunner said:
But you wouldn’t think peoples’ allegiance would come so cheaply. I can sort of imagine the well to do being grateful for their “cash for clunkers” subsidies, which ran into thousands of dollars, but is it really possible in this country to buy womens’ votes for $4-$8/month worth of contraceptives?:confused:
Click to expand...
That’s the thing. Many women have this herd mentality that yes, if you say something about a particular woman’s behaviour, they all attack you for it. I find this strange as I don’t usually defend men. I think that men are worse then women, men tend to be more violent, more driven by sex and probably egoistical then women and I don’t mind saying it, but women in general-- they just well protect each other. So yeah, free Estrogen combo pills? “We’ll support the sisters who can’t afford to buy” or in general: “this candidate seems to care more for, or understand, our issues.”
 
wendy_w said:
I frankly am getting tried of the attitude of this thread. The noble poor and the wicked wealthy thing is getting old. A friend of mine was behind someone who hard a link card ( food stamps) and the girl was buying a large amount of hamburger the cashier asked if she was having a cook out, she said no food stamps won’t buy dogfood so I buy hamburger for my dog. This is a slap in the face to all of us who work to provide for our families! Like I said earlier the entitlement thing is getting old.
Click to expand...
Sort of like putting up with the political commercials since January.
 
wendy_w said:
I frankly am getting tried of the attitude of this thread. The noble poor and the wicked wealthy thing is getting old. A friend of mine was behind someone who hard a link card ( food stamps) and the girl was buying a large amount of hamburger the cashier asked if she was having a cook out, she said no food stamps won’t buy dogfood so I buy hamburger for my dog. This is a slap in the face to all of us who work to provide for our families! Like I said earlier the entitlement thing is getting old.
Click to expand...
The fact that there will always be abuse of any government program does not mean that every government program is bad. It only means that human nature is weak. Abuse cannot be prevented, only reigned in.

If your argument were right we would have to prohibit all handguns only because some lunatics go on a shooting spree.
 
katy said:
While not fond of Romney, I see Obama as a game changer in the American Experiment with his attempt to repress religious liberty, which was part of the reason for our founding. Also, I would never vote for someone who seems to have the abortion industry as an arm of his administration.
Click to expand...
Katy, you expressed my feelings exactly. In good conscience I can never vote for a “pro-choice” politician. The seriousness of that issue trumps all social issues.
 
johnnyjones said:
Oh, the terrible wicked rich people who made positive inroads in this country should be shamed whenever possible.
Click to expand...
What about the ones who’ve done nothing for this country and have only stayed home “clipping coupons”? Believe it or not, there are wealthy people today who just live off the wealth earned a hundred or so years ago by some great-great grandfather or such. 🤷
 
Tenofovir said:
That’s the thing. Many women have this herd mentality that yes, if you say something about a particular woman’s behaviour, they all attack you for it. I find this strange as I don’t usually defend men. I think that men are worse then women, men tend to be more violent, more driven by sex and probably egoistical then women and I don’t mind saying it, but women in general-- they just well protect each other. So yeah, free Estrogen combo pills? “We’ll support the sisters who can’t afford to buy” or in general: “this candidate seems to care more for, or understand, our issues.”
Click to expand...
Ok are we back on the war on women or the war on babies. Which is it now?
 
Luigi_Daniele said:
I accept that. I am telling you, then, that your posts come across that way. And, again with all due respect, if all of us keep missing your points, maybe it’s because you aren’t making them very well.

In the end, my point is that Obama is the most pro-abortion US president in history. As such, a Catholic can not vote for him. All the other issues matter nothing in the face of that issue.
Click to expand...
ALL other issues matter nothing? In trying to understand Mormons I found this link: carm.org/hinckley-says-mormons-believe-different-jesus this really doesn’t matter to you compared to abortion?:eek:
 
kookieduck said:
I’m not for abortion at all and if I thought Romney could overturn Roe v Wade I would vote for him. But does abortion have to be the only issue? A non-Christian who basically stated that he despises the poor doesn’t seem to be a very good choice for president. But then Obama isn’t perfect either! Whew! Everyone here brings up great points for voting for Romney AND for voting for Obama. Scary times for America. If I were a begger on the side of the road with a tin cup in my hand I wonder which man would help me?
Click to expand...
Abortion is not the only issue as there are extremely important other issues to consider such as homosexual marriage, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, the right of parents to educate their children, religious liberty.

However, in a statement released in October, 2008 by Bishop Vann, along with his brother Bishop Kevin Farrell of Dallas, clarifying the meaning of the USCCB’s Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship document, they said:

“we cannot make more clear the seriousness of the overriding issue of abortion – while not the ‘only issue’ – it is the defining moral issue, not only today, but of the last 35 years. Since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, more than 48 million innocent lives have been lost. Each year in our nation more than one million lives are lost through legalized abortion. Countless other lives are also lost through embryonic stem cell research.”

And Pope John Paul II said:

Again, "Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf
of human rights—for example, the right to health, to home,
to work, to family, to culture—is false and illusory if the right to
life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition
for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum
determination. (Christifideles Laici, no. 38)

According to the above, can anybody reasonably explain to me what issue or issues (besides the other important issues I mentioned above) this country faces today that is/are more grave then the genocide of over a million of unborn babies each year?
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
What about the ones who’ve done nothing for this country and have only stayed home “clipping coupons”? Believe it or not, there are wealthy people today who just live off the wealth earned a hundred or so years ago by some great-great grandfather or such. 🤷
Click to expand...
But most wealthy people are not of that sort. I know lots and lots of people who have acquired very substantial wealth, but not one of them inherited it.

I’m not saying this is typical, but I am reminded of a family I know on the other side of the wealth blanket. When I was just a little kid, the father of a girl my age died. He was one of the founders of a presently well-known company everybody has heard of. And he left each of his children a tidy sum of “X” in trust, and a larger one for his wife. Not a great fortune, but pretty impressive for the time and place.

They had lived large while he was living, and continued to do so. Maybe ten years ago I had occasion to talk to this girl, now a woman and getting on a bit. Perhaps because we knew each other all our lives more or less, but more likely because of what she does for a living now, she started talking money with me, and revealed that she still had that trust fund of “X” dollars. It had not gained a dime, but of course inflation and spending the income had taken a massive toll on its purchasing value. She and her family had lived really well for many years; country club, big cars, travel, boats. all that stuff. And now she really has to work at something she’s not all that good at, and no longer has a fortune.

Yes, I realize there are some fortunes so huge that even profligacy will not keep it from still being a fortune. But there is slippage over time. Sure, some of the Walton heirs are in the top 400 or 100 or whatever the “rich people list” is called. But they are nowhere near as rich as Sam was, and even those fortunes may well diminish over time if they spend a lot and if it gets divided among heirs enough times. There’s more than one threadbare Earl in England who will testify to that as he squires tourists through his home in order to pay the taxes on it.

Regardless, the super wealthy are totally irrelevant to my life.
 
I get tired of liberals chastising the rich for their wealth. I’m a lawyer and, while not rich, I’m certainly well off. I do not envy lawyers, doctors, business executives or heirs who have accumulated more wealth than I have. Nor do I look down on anyone with less. Money has nothing to do with character except for how its presence or absence influences the individual’s attitude and actions towards others. Wealthy and poor alike have no patent on greed or generosity, goodness or evil. I donated to Catholic charities before I made money; I simply donate more now. I am no better than anyone with less means, nor inferior to someone of greater means. I’m voting for Romney because I honestly believes he wants everyone else to accumulate more wealth on their own. He does not want to re-distribute the wealth of other citizens through government largesse. More importantly, I believe his positions on Catholic issues is more favorable than Obama’s. I apologize for the rant, but I get tired of hearing liberals vilifying those with ‘portfolios’.
 
kookieduck said:
ALL other issues matter nothing? In trying to understand Mormons I found this link: carm.org/hinckley-says-mormons-believe-different-jesus this really doesn’t matter to you compared to abortion?:eek:
Click to expand...
Jehovah’s Witnesses’ belief about Jesus is perhaps stranger still. Jews think Jesus was just a nice guy and nothing more.

But as between Mormons’ having a weird theology and the murder of a million children per year, you think Romney’s beliefs are more compelling to your sense of moral duty? How many children did the Mormon beliefs kill this year?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top