G
Gift_from_God
Guest
Look in your government. Paul Ryan and Rand Paul to name a few
- Status
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
You mean the ones that don’t want to wage war on the job producers? So…if the government creates jobs are the expense of high taxes, that’s good. If a private entrepreneur builds a company that creates products or services that people want and gets wealthy in the process, that is evil. Okay, got it.
I
ishii
Guest
Hello Bkynguy - regarding your two main points - Obama isn’t a leftist and Roe V Wade should be overturned because the GOP picked seven out of the last nine justices:
You need to understand incrementalism, and the significance of Obamacare. Obamacare “redefines the relationship between the citizen and the state in fundamental ways that make limited government all but impossible” in the words of the great commentator Mark Steyn. So Obamacare didn’t need to begin with outright socialized medicine - but it started us on the road to socialized medicine, and that comes courtesy of Obama, who is a committed leftist There can’t be a radical leftist transformation of society - it has to be incremental. Look at the backlash at Obamacare. If Obama tried to ram a more leftist program down our throats (instead of the tamer Obamacare) the Democrats would have lost even more seats in the midterms. I suggest you read the whole column by the Canadian Mark Steyn.
nationalreview.com/articles/229267/its-about-government-not-health-care/mark-steyn?pg=2
As for Roe V Wade not being overturned by GOP appointed justices: there are no guarentees with supreme court justices - they are not robots or Manchurian candidates who vote according to how the president wants. David Souter was a disappointment, Anthony Kennedy was a disappointment. You need to remember that with a powerful Democrat majority that is aligned with the abortion lobby, it will be hard to get good constructionist justices approved who might vote to overturn Roe V Wade. The sad thing is, Democrat catholics on these forums will twist this political reality to make the argument that the GOP doesn’t really want to overturn Roe V Wade because it wants pro-life voters for future elections, etc. They will use that argument to “cancel out” the obvious pro-abortion Democrat platform which is indefensible.
As I said, there are no guarentees w/ supreme court justices. But with Democrat supreme court justices they are a guarentee/lockstep vote to uphold abortion rights. That alone should convince serious catholics to not vote for pro-abortion Democrats. I hope this sheds some light on things for you.
Ishii
I
ishii
Guest
Why the ad hominem, bellasbane? Why not explain to us why the ideas proposed by Paul Ryan are wrong? So much easier to label and call people names, isn’t it? Perhaps you could explain the difference between the conservatism of William F Buckley Jr, and that of Ayn Rand? (WFB was famous for publishing scathing reviews of Atlas Shrugged).
Ishii
B
Bklynguy
Guest
I read the article–I’ve always liked Mark Steyn. I believe, though, that we were already at this point in the U.S. even before Obamacare, namely, being in a left-of-center culture and having left-of-center bureacracies even though we have a right-of-center party (GOP) that will win elections. Perhaps we haven’t gotten as far as Europe–for example, it is rare to hear in Europe the right-of-center parties talk about reducing and limiting the size of government. However, even though the GOP pays lip service to it here, reducing the size of government is never really attempted and Mr. Steyn even addresses that in his article. For example, you don’t see any serious proposals to roll back the Departments of Energy or Education.
As to Roe v Wade, I agree with you and that was part of the point I was making. Supreme Court justices are unpredictable and even when we had 7/9 justices on the bench appointed by Republicans, Roe v Wade was never touched.
On the other hand, one other thing I noticed is that the justices appointed by Democratic presidents are much more in lockstep to the left-wing agenda than those appointed by Republican presidents. On the GOP side, you had John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O’Connor, and David Souter. You also currently have Kennedy, who is a toss-up. However, all the current justices appointed by Democrat presidents can be counted on to follow the liberal agenda.
C
Cinette
Guest
*WHY would you want Obama? Can you not see that he the enemy No. 1 par excellence of the Catholic Church and plans to harm the Church???Well, after Obama is re-elected I have no idea.
:nope::crying:*
C
Cinette
Guest
*That is always the case! Pity that the majority of people are so shallow and do not know how to analyse the situation.
I FIRMLY believe that the study of philosophy should be mandated in all high schools - at least two years!
*
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
How would that affect anything, especially in public school?*That is always the case! Pity that the majority of people are so shallow and do not know how to analyse the situation.
I FIRMLY believe that the study of philosophy should be mandated in all high schools - at least two years!
I
iamrefreshed
Guest
Can you provide a credible source that cites these “hundreds of thousand of dead Iraqis” claim of yours or is this just more rethoric from the left?
I can tell you that the party of death to which you claim allegiance is responsible for the death of MILLIONS of babies here and abroad.
C
Cinette
Guest
*I have lived and worked among people whose formation included the study of philosophy and found that they have a power of analysis which is definitely advantageous in decision making. Priests study philosophy in seminaries and it is considered essential to the study of theology. Certainly it can do no harm. It does increase the ability of lateral thinking.
*
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
A bit of hyperbole, this. There are any number of people and organizations who are more hostile to the Catholic Church, e.g. Planned Parenthood, Islamic jihadists, some Fundamentalist churches.*WHY would you want Obama? Can you not see that he the enemy No. 1 par excellence of the Catholic Church and plans to harm the Church???
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
And, who will teach this in the public schools, and who knows what their POV will be?*I have lived and worked among people whose formation included the study of philosophy and found that they have a power of analysis which is definitely advantageous in decision making. Priests study philosophy in seminaries and it is considered essential to the study of theology. Certainly it can do no harm. It does increase the ability of lateral thinking.
I took Philosophy for four years in college, but that was a Catholic institution, Fordham University in The Bronx, NY. It’s one thing to encourage seminarians to study Philosophy, another thing to teach it to inner city high school children.
I
ivebeenshown
Guest
I am behind Mitt. And I think most people who would vote for Santorum will vote for Mitt instead of Obama.
I want Mitt to be our president because we need someone who understands finances and the management thereof. As a single income father who tracks daily expenses I am disgusted by this administration’s lack of financial responsibility and feel that our county really needs strong management in that area.
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
It wouldn’t. The purpose of public school is not to teach kids how to think. It is designed to condition them to be compliant employees.
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
I agree. At best, public school is to make students literate and able to cope with the world they’ll be living in.
M
mary_bobo
Guest
How can they do that when they have taken away all forms of competition both in the classroom and on the playground.
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
I find it ironic that the force everyone to learn Darwinism and then eliminate competition, the very thing upon which Darwinism is based.
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
The playground doesn’t count, but the rest of your statement, however correct, doesn’t conflict with my saying “at best.”
C
Cinette
Guest
*I know Obama supports Planned Parenthood! Islamic jihadists?? Fundamentalist churches may not be as bad.
*
Fundamentalist churches may not be as bad.*A bit of hyperbole, this. There are any number of people and organizations who are more hostile to the Catholic Church, e.g. Planned Parenthood, Islamic jihadists, some Fundamentalist churches.
C
Cinette
Guest
Hm…you may be right. I am not familiar with what you call public schools etc.
- Status