Paul Ryan Discussion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Al_Moritz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
FaithBuild18 said:
Silly TC, there’s no such thing as the “Catholic left.” That’s like saying there’s such a thing as a hot ice cube.
Click to expand...
The term “Catholic left” came from the article by William McGurn. Since this thread is based on his article, it would be appropriate to continue. Out of curioisity, which term is “hot” and which is “ice cube”? :confused:
 
Tarpeian_Rock said:
Advocates of “liberation theology” would beg to disagree with your statement.
Click to expand...
The irony is that those who have been greatly influenced by “liberation theology” have accepted a watered-down version of it. I think of it as “liberation theology lite”. At least the full-bore Marxist liberation theology people in Latin America were willing to take up AK-47s and take over latifundia. As wrong as they were, they at least believed themselves.

Liberation theologians “lite” don’t believe themselves. They condemn “the rich” while finagling to become rich themselves, and idealize “the poor” without ever addressing why it is, exactly, that the poor are poor and, largely, without doing anything to actually relieve their plight, and spend their time supporting random and often pointless redistributive notions. They lack focus and real conviction.
 
estesbob said:
It should not be dependent on anyone opinion. Again it is a scientific fact that separate distinct human life is present from the moment of conception on. Once society starts making exceptions based on any factors whether they be stage of development,skin color,ethnicity etc it have embarked down a road that can only end in horror.

*As long as there are men on the earth, the struggle between man and subhuman with be the historical rule; this Jewish-led struggle against the folks, as far back as we can look, belongs to the natural course of life on our planet. One can safely be convinced that this struggle for life and death is just as much a law of nature as the struggle of an infection against a healthy body."

Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler 1935*
Click to expand...
I do not mean to be flippant, but as long as we are the subject of the Aryan ‘superman’, why in God’s name would the Republicans sponsor a Sanctity of Human Life Act H.R. 212 that protects cloned embryo’s? Why would anyone want to protect the cloning of anything, especially human beings? Should not the Republican Party be outlawing cloning which is contrary to the Sovereignty of our Creator? Am I misunderstanding the intent of H.R. 212? My God, it sounds monstrous to me:

SEC. 2. DECLARATION.
In the exercise of the powers of the Congress, including Congress’ power under article I, section 8 of the Constitution, to make necessary and proper laws, and Congress’ power under section 5 of the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States–

(1) the Congress declares that–

(A) the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution is vested in each human being, and is the paramount and most fundamental right of a person; and

(B) the life of each human being begins with fertilization,** cloning**, or its functional equivalent, irrespective of sex, health, function or disability, defect, stage of biological development, or condition of dependency, at which time every human being shall have all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood; and

opencongress.org/bill/112-h212/text
 
ishii said:
I can see your tactic is to bombard and overwhelm with all kinds of points.

Don’t deny your tactics are quite similar.

I am perfectly happy to discuss your points, but let’s take them one at a time. You said you would like neither Romney nor Obama to choose the next supreme court justices - up to three possibly. So is it fair to say you think the justices given to us by Obama/Biden are pretty much the same ideologically as those that would be chosen by Romney/Ryan? Would you say that Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg are cut from the same ideological cloth too? Or do you think there are significant ideological differences between the two?

Ishii
Click to expand...
I suppose you feel they should all be the same and think the same. Why then not just have one?
 
DeSanto said:
I suppose you feel they should all be the same and think the same. Why then not just have one?
Click to expand...
Constitution of the United States 🙂

No one is saying they should all be “the same”. It would be ideal if they were all strict constructionists and not be making up rulings out of whole cloth.
 
DeSanto said:
you’re beating a dead horse…been there!
Click to expand...
This was an answer to a request from someone to prove that Romney had overseas accounts. If this is a dead horse, then why did this person ask me to prove to him that Romney did have accounts overseas?
 
JoeBowen7 said:
This was an answer to a request from someone to prove that Romney had overseas accounts. If this is a dead horse, then why did this person ask me to prove to him that Romney did have accounts overseas?
Click to expand...
Sorry, I’m just saying it won’t make a difference. I saw the Sankaty reference and thought, I’ve tried to point out all the shady business dealings by Romney on the previous thread to no avail. Some people just don’t want to hear it. But, I do apologize for butting in.
 
DeSanto said:
Sorry, I’m just saying it won’t make a difference. I saw the Sankaty reference and thought, I’ve tried to point out all the shady business dealings by Romney on the previous thread to no avail. Some people just don’t want to hear it. But, I do apologize for butting in.
Click to expand...
Ok, we are just trying to figure things out here, so a lot of what we say is tentative and subject to further discussion.
 
Luigi_Daniele said:
Constitution of the United States 🙂

No one is saying they should all be “the same”. It would be ideal if they were all strict constructionists and not be making up rulings out of whole cloth.
Click to expand...
I should hope not and I agree.
 
JoeBowen7 said:
Ok, we are just trying to figure things out here, so a lot of what we say is tentative and subject to further discussion.
Click to expand...
yes, that’s all I’m trying to do. I’m no expert by any means but, I have learned much. I wont dare repost my findings unless requested. I will say, I did read the reference you posted and it was very interesting.
 
Tarpeian_Rock said:
Advocates of “liberation theology” would beg to disagree with your statement.
Click to expand...
Most of those in “The Catholic Left”, at least in the US, are cradle catholics who were never properly catechized and who attend Mass only on the major hollidays, such as Christmas and Easter. They loudly proclaim that they are Catholic, but rarely go to church.
As for “liberation theology”, JP II was not only vehemently opposed to it, he took active steps to supress it- to the point of restricting the actions of several orders of missionaries whose members espoused it. There were a number of missionaries who were de-frocked over this…and the Jesuits, in particular were privately called to account for their actions, and a new, very conservative head of the order was put in place.
 
Try as they might, no matter how many social programs the liberals stack on their side of the scale, it will never balance out the bloody infant corpses on the other.
 
If we can’t elect a good Catholic as president, elect a good Catholic for VP. I consider Biden a traitor to the faith (sorry if that seems a little harsh.)

Has anyone put together a list of all the Obama/Biden donors that got “green energy” money and have now declared bankruptcy? I’m looking for a non biased source.
 
Someone Said there are no companies that make American flags in the United States. That is incorrect. Annin flagmakers…family owned and Made in USA
 
DeSanto said:
I suppose you feel they should all be the same and think the same. Why then not just have one?
Click to expand...
Really? In what way? I believe I’m asking a fair, simple question: Which team do you want picking the next two or three supreme court justices? Neither? Then, do you think that justice Scalia and justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg are similar ideologically? My point was that if the poster answers that Scalia & Ginsburg are the same ideogically then he/she (the poster) is exposed as being very ignorant at best and deliberately misleading at worst. Either way, the poster is discredited. No wonder they ran away.

Ishii
 
ishii said:
Really? In what way? I believe I’m asking a fair, simple question: Which team do you want picking the next two or three supreme court justices? Neither? Then, do you think that justice Scalia and justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg are similar ideologically? My point was that if the poster answers that Scalia & Ginsburg are the same ideogically then he/she (the poster) is exposed as being very ignorant at best and deliberately misleading at worst. Either way, the poster is discredited. No wonder they ran away.

Ishii
Click to expand...
I’ve noticed the enjoyment you get from calling people ignorant. I understood your point just fine, sarcastic as it was. the point I would like to make is that it shouldn’t matter who appoints the justices or what their personal views are on any given subject. their decisions should be based solely on the law and interpreting it. notice the emphasis on the word “should”. im not saying this is always the case but, if a certain justice dishonors their position by favoring a certain bias view is upon that justice not the one whom appointed them. the justices should be held accountable for themselves, they are not children and the one who appoints them is not responsible for their judgments.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top