Pope suggests Trump: not Christian

  • Thread starter Thread starter ringil
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
On this thread trump supporters have been called low information, low in cognitive ability, narrowedly exposed in reading, cafeteria catholic, and those are just what I can remember. Has anybody called the other side any names like that, other than disagreeing with what the pope said and how he said it? It seems ok for trump supporters to be insulted but not ok to raise an eyebrow on the popes words.
 
Path_Finder said:
False, Senator Joseph Biden was instrumental in denying the nomination of Robert Bork for starters during the Reagan administration. I will look up and see if Joseph Biden has actively voted for abortion bills such as for partial birth abortion and quotes as well as to this debate point. Information will be added on. In fact, just being a Democrat is being part of a party that has abortion on demand in its platform.
Click to expand...
But it is an exaggeration to call this “actively promoting abortion”. Look up the definition of “promote” and tell me how it applies to this case. You are not appreciating the difference between promoting a thing and refusing to prohibit a thing.
 
Path_Finder said:
False, Senator Joseph Biden was instrumental in denying the nomination of Robert Bork for starters during the Reagan administration. I will look up and see if Joseph Biden has actively voted for abortion bills such as for partial birth abortion and quotes as well as to this debate point. Information will be added on. In fact, just being a Democrat is being part of a party that has abortion on demand in its platform.
Click to expand...
Being opposed to the Bork nomination does not mean that Biden or anyone else was in favor of abortion. There were many issues about Bork’s reading and philosophy of the law that one might oppose which had nothing to do with his view on abortion.

Insofar as so-called partial-birth abortion (there is no such thing according to physicians), my religion allows and even requires abortion up until the moment of birth PROVIDED the mother’s life is in danger, so that would include partial-birth abortion. I would consider a strict law against ALL abortion as an infringement of my religious rights. This is why Biden is opposed to imposing his personal Catholic view of abortion on the rest of society. He is standing for the religious rights of ALL, including Jews, Muslims, Quakers, Protestants of all denominations, as well as Catholics. Abortion is an issue that must remain between a woman, her family, her doctor, and HER FAITH.
 
meltzerboy said:
Being opposed to the Bork nomination does not mean that Biden or anyone else was in favor of abortion. There were many issues about Bork’s reading and philosophy of the law that one might oppose which had nothing to do with his view on abortion.

Insofar as so-called partial-birth abortion (there is no such thing according to physicians), my religion allows and even requires abortion up until the moment of birth PROVIDED the mother’s life is in danger, so that would include partial-birth abortion. I would consider a strict law against ALL abortion as an infringement of my religious rights. This is why Biden is opposed to imposing his personal Catholic view of abortion on the rest of society. He is standing for the religious rights of ALL, including Jews, Muslims, Quakers, Protestants of all denominations, as well as Catholics. Abortion is an issue that must remain between a woman, her family, her doctor, and HER FAITH.
Click to expand...
That’s interesting to know.
 
queenofheartscv said:
That’s interesting to know.
Click to expand...
For me, just being part of the Democratic Party means registering under the name of a party in support of abortion and same-sex marriage in their platform.

So, this comes down to the “personally pro-life, publicly pro-choice” sorts of statements.

I take it, in 1860, one could be “personally against slavery but publicly for the right to own slaves”. This is double talk to me.
Is it Possible to be Personally Pro-Life, but Publicly Pro-Choice?
Click to expand...
Those who try to take this view should heed the words of Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, who once said
Click to expand...
“Take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented” [1]
Click to expand...
Read more: Is it Possible to be Personally Pro-Life, but Publicly Pro-Choice? whyprolife.com/is-it-possible-to-be-personally-pro-life-but-publicly-pro-choice/#ixzz40jDB9crx
Click to expand...
So back during World War II, I guess one could be personally against the concentration camps but not publicly against them.

And if Biden believes so much in keeping the two separate, why, at times, has he voted against things such as Partial Birth Abortion. I thought he thought the abortion debate should be kept separately.
 
queenofheartscv said:
On this thread trump supporters have been called low information, low in cognitive ability, narrowedly exposed in reading, cafeteria catholic, and those are just what I can remember. Has anybody called the other side any names like that, other than disagreeing with what the pope said and how he said it? It seems ok for trump supporters to be insulted but not ok to raise an eyebrow on the popes words.
Click to expand...
Exactly, while expressing great support for the Pope at the same time, a rationale. I wonder if he would approve of his words being supported in this manner? I think I know the answer to that.
 
queenofheartscv said:
On this thread trump supporters have been called low information, low in cognitive ability, narrowedly exposed in reading, cafeteria catholic, and those are just what I can remember. Has anybody called the other side any names like that, other than disagreeing with what the pope said and how he said it? It seems ok for trump supporters to be insulted but not ok to raise an eyebrow on the popes words.
Click to expand...
It is kind of silly for anyone to call Trump a cafeteria Catholic, given that he is a Presbyterian.
Low information does describe his lack of knowledge on any of the details of the issue of the day, but his own position is that he has people that will deal with the small stuff. Low cognitive ability was used frequently against Bush, and people have questioned the validity of Obama’s education credentials, so it is a stock insult that is used in politcs. Narrowly exposed in reading is a new criticism, and not very catchy or memorable, but is goes with the others.

It is ok to raise an eyebrow over a pope getting involved in the nitty gritty of american politics. The pope has not exactly come out smelling clean in all this either. Noone who throws their hat into the political ring comes out unsullied.

But of course there are going to be all sorts of Catholic Democrats and others who are not Trump supporters who will use the pope’s words to their advantage, and cry that anyone who does not support the pope is an anti-Catholic. That is the kind of perception that works to the advantage of Democrats, and the truth of whether people who disagree with the pope politically are anti-Catholic is irrelevant. Building advantageous perceptions of ones political opponents is all that matters.
 
Darryl1958 said:
It is kind of silly for anyone to call Trump a cafeteria Catholic, given that he is a Presbyterian.
Low information does describe his lack of knowledge on any of the details of the issue of the day, but his own position is that he has people that will deal with the small stuff. Low cognitive ability was used frequently against Bush, and people have questioned the validity of Obama’s education credentials, so it is a stock insult that is used in politcs. Narrowly exposed in reading is a new criticism, and not very catchy or memorable, but is goes with the others.

It is ok to raise an eyebrow over a pope getting involved in the nitty gritty of american politics. The pope has not exactly come out smelling clean in all this either. Noone who throws their hat into the political ring comes out unsullied.

But of course there are going to be all sorts of Catholic Democrats and others who are not Trump supporters who will use the pope’s words to their advantage, and cry that anyone who does not support the pope is an anti-Catholic. That is the kind of perception that works to the advantage of Democrats, and the truth of whether people who disagree with the pope politically are anti-Catholic is irrelevant. Building advantageous perceptions of ones political opponents is all that matters.
Click to expand...
And I’m glad Trump actually was complimentary of the Pope yesterday, saying what the Pope said “a beautiful statement”, that Trump likewise, has acted conciliatory, I see as a positive. And I don’t say that as supporting Trump, my mind is not made up, this is all in the interest of the public discourse.
 
queenofheartscv said:
It seems ok for trump supporters to be insulted but not ok to raise an eyebrow on the popes words.
Click to expand...
I think what some are finding so disturbing is the equalizing of a politician and the pontiff. For Catholics, I’d hope one of the two would automatically garner more attention, deference, and consideration than the other. Simply dismissing the Pope’s comments as being “not ex cathedra” denies the weight of his office. Respectfully, so does complaining that Trump isn’t being treated as the Pope is.
 
gracepoole said:
I think what some are finding so disturbing is the equalizing of a politician and the pontiff. For Catholics, I’d hope one of the two would automatically garner more attention, deference, and consideration than the other. Simply dismissing the Pope’s comments as being “not ex cathedra” denies the weight of his office. Respectfully, so does complaining that Trump isn’t being treated as the Pope is.
Click to expand...
I could act like some other posters here and complain your reading ability isn’t so great, but I will not. I didn’t talk about what people said about trump but what they said about trump supporters who are catholic. Trump has been called all kinds of names, which is part and parcel with the role of being a candidate, but for Catholics to call each other names because they don’t agree, well, that comes off to me as hypocritical.
 
queenofheartscv said:
I could act like some other posters here and complain your reading ability isn’t so great, but I will not.
Click to expand...
Huh. Sure sounded like that’s what you did there.
queenofheartscv said:
I didn’t talk about what people said about trump but what they said about trump supporters who are catholic. Trump has been called all kinds of names, which is part and parcel with the role of being a candidate, but for Catholics to call each other names because they don’t agree, well, that comes off to me as hypocritical.
Click to expand...
It seems my reading abilities were spot on then. I was referring to those who are Catholic but don’t seem to comprehend why fellow Catholics prefer to see the Pope and his words treated with greater care and respect than a politician and his.
 
gracepoole said:
Huh. Sure sounded like that’s what you did there.

It seems my reading abilities were spot on then. I was referring to those who are Catholic but don’t seem to comprehend why fellow Catholics prefer to see the Pope and his words treated with greater care and respect than a politician and his.
Click to expand...
You mean if a catholic doesn’t automatcially shut up and refrain from asking questions after the Pope makes a statement, they deserve to be called names? Got it!
 
queenofheartscv said:
You mean if a catholic doesn’t automatcially shut up and refrain from asking questions after the Pope makes a statement, they deserve to be called names? Got it!
Click to expand...
Yes, clearly that’s exactly what I meant. Glad that got straightened out.
 
At the same time, this is a domestic issue, the Pope is not running for the Presidency of the United States. If one enters the fray, thorough debate, pro and con is natural.
 
gracepoole said:
I think what some are finding so disturbing is the equalizing of a politician and the pontiff. For Catholics, I’d hope one of the two would automatically garner more attention, deference, and consideration than the other. Simply dismissing the Pope’s comments as being “not ex cathedra” denies the weight of his office. Respectfully, so does complaining that Trump isn’t being treated as the Pope is.
Click to expand...
How many years has the Pope lived in the USA? Perhaps an American understands the difference versus a Foreigner if one is going to point out some sort of comparison between a Politician and a Pope.

Perhaps it is disturbing to equalize a foreigner to a home-grown American as well.
 
Path_Finder said:
How many years has the Pope lived in the USA? Perhaps an American understands the difference versus a Foreigner if one is going to point out some sort of comparison between a Politician and a Pope.

Perhaps it is disturbing to equalize a foreigner to a home-grown American as well.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about cultural or moral relativism here?
 
A Hungarian Archbishop came out against the immigrant waves in Europe.

Yet, to Hungary’s building of a wall, something tangentially unrelated was brought up about anti-semitism in Hungary. Well, the Archbishop said it.

The Archbishop likewise, carries weight in the discussion per immigration.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top