Rand Paul: Without change, GOP will "not win again in my lifetime"

[seaton2005]

Assuming the above post is serious (and not someone making fun of liberals by posting parodies of their thought process):

This is the problem with Democrat catholics who so want the abortion issue to go away. It is an inconvenient issue for them - as it gets in the way of everyone “getting behind Obama.” Yes, this minor issue of 900,000 unborn being killed each year, and Obama’s saying, “God bless Planned Parenthood” is sticking around. It will continue to stick around as long as our leaders continue to allow this to happen legally. Catholic moral principles, and the agenda of Obama are not compatible, Seaton. You should choose one or the other. I hope you make the right choice.

Ishii

This was a serious post. By the way, no where does it say that the church dictates how an individual votes. They do that in theocracies. We’re not a theocracy. God Bless our president.

 

[ishii]

This was a serious post. By the way, no where does it say that the church dictates how an individual votes. They do that in theocracies. We’re not a theocracy. God Bless our president.

Thanks for clarifying your post was serious - I wasn’t sure because it read like a parody. The Church allows you to choose freely. You can continue to choose the president who says "god bless planned parenthood " or you can choose someone not directly at odds with catholic teaching on the sanctity of life. The unborn are crying out for justice seaton. You might have made your choice - did you consider what the Church says?

By the way, A theocracy would be if the Church and the govt were the same. Informing yourself of catholic moral teaching and allowing that to influence how you vote is NOT a theocracy.

Ishii

 

[ProVobis]

God Bless our president.

Or as someone from the U.K. might say, “God save our president.” or “God save the U.S.”

 

[RC_Sojourner]

If one reads any significant part of the Book of Mormon, one discovers that it’s largely a paraphrase of the Bible; page after page after page, with the peculiarly “Mormon” parts inserted.

The Vatican didn’t say Mormons aren’t Christians, just that their baptism is not valid from the standpoint of the Church. That’s not just true of the Mormons. But I’ll concede the point that Mormonism is so far departed from Catholicism that it’s hard to call it “Christian”. It’s sort of like Santeria in that way.

I have and will vote AGAINST the likes of Obama and Hillary Clinton, even if my choice is not perfect. I will not fall into the trap of the pagans and fail to oppose their rule by sitting out elections or voting third party. The whole strategy of turning up one’s nose to their only effective opposition is a product of the DNC. It kept them in power in 2012. Unfortunately, too many people of good will fall for it.

And I do not doubt that the Church is in for additional persecution in this country; that is, unless the current ruling party is ousted.

Just because the Book of Mormon was largely composed by Joseph Smith who copy and pasted random parts of his King James bible together doesn’t make it a Christian book. The Bible says, "[BIBLEDRB]Rev. 22:19[/BIBLEDRB]

That is the Bible’s condemnation of Joseph Smith, not mine. And it is a harrowing one indeed.

The Church accepts the Baptisms of almost every Protestant denomination. Obviously, the validity hinges on proper Trinitarian form, and the use of “flowing” water. The Mormons and the Jehova’s Witnesses lack proper Trinitarian form, because they have heretical beliefs about God and the Trinity.

And neither of them are Christian denominations. If you reject the Trinity, you’re not a Christian. Not in the eyes of the Church. The ability to confer a valid Baptism is absolutely a test of whether you are a Christian denomination or not. If your denomination cannot confer a valid Baptism, then it is not Christian, in the eyes of the Catholic Church.

I voted against Obama, and I’ll vote against Hillary too. Any vote that isn’t for the Democrats is a vote against them. I mean, this goes back to fundamental theology.

Any choice, is a rejection of all other choices. The choice to go to a steakhouse isn’t only a choice for going to that restaurant, but it is a choice against going anywhere else. There are serious fallacies we use in the political sphere, that infringe upon theological truths expressed by Aquinas and those influenced by him.

And, for a taste of your own medicine, to call 3rd party voters responsible for the election of Obama, YOU are falling into the REPUBLICAN playbook.

As a practicing Catholic, I can’t vote for someone who’s views are laughable from a Catholic perspective. That’s right, you saw the meme. If Mitt Romney claimed he was 100% pro-life, that would be laughable. Laughable. he accepts the murder of some innocent children.

If both Presidential candidates accept the murder of some innocent children in the womb, then the ENTIRE SYSTEM is OVER! Its all wickedness and evil, ok?

Its all over.

“not perfect” Not perfect? Yeah, those aren’t quite the words I would use to vote for a child killer! Mitt Romney is perfectly fine with the murder of some unborn children.

How are the U.S. elections any more legitimate than the leadership elections of the Communist Party of China? I won’t vote for anyone, if all the candidates support abortion. I found a 3rd party candidate who did not support abortion in any circumstance, and his name was Virgil Goode

I hope you take some of these words to heart. Stop hoping in politics. Just give up! The only institution that has all the answers to all the problems is the Catholic Church. Not the GOP not the DNC. The Catholic Church has all the answers. And that is, again, why I place 100% of my hope in her.

And, as the thread is titled. We’ll have Obama until 2016, we’ll have Hillary until 2024, and we’ll have an endless stream of Democrats after that. [If the country doesn’t collapse, as predicted by Patrick James Buchanan, who is a Knight of Malta].

 

[ishii]

Or as someone from the U.K. might say, “God save our president.” or “God save the U.S.”

Understand that when the poster says, “God bless the president” he/she is saying “God bless what the president is doing.” This is different from praying that Obama will do the right thing, or that God will bless the country. It is a full-on partisan endorsement of the Obama agenda. If there is any confusion about what Obama’s agenda is, recall that he said, “God bless Planned Parenthood.”

Ishii

 

[RC_Sojourner]

I’m not a Repub. Never have been. And I certainly dissent from some of the “standard” Repub views.

I was a “cradle Democrat” and held office in the party until it became clear to me that it had abandoned its former values and stood for nothing but abortion. To that it has now added the degradation of marriage and the persecution of the Catholic Church.

So, I oppose that party, as I believe it is the moral obligation of every Catholic to do. This is not a matter of consumer preference like going to this restaurant or that. It is a matter of whether one chooses to oppose evil by means that could imaginably be effective, though far from perfect, or withdraw out of pride and refuse to fight evil.

When we refuse to oppose evil when we could do so, we become a party to that evil, and participate in the moral evils ourselves.

That’s why I no longer support the Democrat party, and that’s why I support Republicans.

Again, voting for Republicans isn’t opposing evil, if the Republicans themselves support evil.
If you agree that supporting abortion is evil, then you must agree that Barrack Obama and Mitt Romney both support evil in varying degrees. So, the classic cliche “vote for the lesser of two evils” is literally true here.

Geist and I aren’t withdrawing from the fight out of pride, we’ve realized that both the GOP and DNC support evil. At least in the 2012 election they did.

We won’t vote for any candidate that supports abortion. And, if both parties elect someone who does, then we oppose evil by voting for a 3rd party.

** Opposition to evil now must entail voting for neither party, given that they both nominate pro-aborts.**

 

[_Abyssinia]

Again, voting for Republicans isn’t opposing evil, if the Republicans themselves support evil.
If you agree that supporting abortion is evil, then you must agree that Barrack Obama and Mitt Romney both support evil in varying degrees. So, the classic cliche “vote for the lesser of two evils” is literally true here.

Geist and I aren’t withdrawing from the fight out of pride, we’ve realized that both the GOP and DNC support evil. At least in the 2012 election they did.

We won’t vote for any candidate that supports abortion. And, if both parties elect someone who does, then we oppose evil by voting for a 3rd party.

** Opposition to evil now must entail voting for neither party, given that they both nominate pro-aborts.**

What is evil in the Republican platform? Most recent platforms are from 2012. Here are excerpts from a text by Bishop Thomas John Paprocki:

Even more troubling is that this whole discussion about God in the platform is a distraction from more disturbing matters that have been included in the platform. In 1992 Presidential candidate Bill Clinton famously said that abortion should be “safe, legal and rare.” That was the party’s official position until 2008. Apparently “rare” is so last century that it had to be dropped, because now the Democratic Party Platform says that abortion should be “safe and legal.” Moreover the Democratic Party Platform supports the right to abortion “regardless of the ability to pay.” Well, there are only three ways for that to happen: either taxpayers will be required to fund abortion, or insurance companies will be required to pay for them (as they are now required to pay for contraception), or hospitals will be forced to perform them for free.

Moreover, the Democratic Party Platform also supports same-sex marriage, recognizes that “gay rights are human rights,” and calls for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, the federal law signed by President Clinton in 1996 that defined marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman.

Now, why am I mentioning these matters in the Democratic Party Platform? There are many positive and beneficial planks in the Democratic Party Platform, but I am pointing out those that explicitly endorse intrinsic evils. My job is not to tell you for whom you should vote. But I do have a duty to speak out on moral issues. I would be abdicating this duty if I remained silent out of fear of sounding “political” and didn’t say anything about the morality of these issues. People of faith object to these platform positions that promote serious sins. I know that the Democratic Party’s official “unequivocal” support for abortion is deeply troubling to pro-life Democrats.

So what about the Republicans? I have read the Republican Party Platform and there is nothing in it that supports or promotes an intrinsic evil or a serious sin. The Republican Party Platform does say that courts “should have the option of imposing the death penalty in capital murder cases.” But the Catechism of the Catholic Church says (in paragraph 2267), “Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor. If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person. Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm — without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself — the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.”

One might argue for different methods in the platform to address the needs of the poor, to feed the hungry and to solve the challenges of immigration, but these are prudential judgments about the most effective means of achieving morally desirable ends, not intrinsic evils.

Certainly there are “pro-choice” Republicans who support abortion rights and “Log Cabin Republicans” who promote same-sex marriage, and they are equally as wrong as their Democratic counterparts. But these positions do not have the official support of their party.

catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=2311

 

[ishii]

Again, voting for Republicans isn’t opposing evil, if the Republicans themselves support evil.
If you agree that supporting abortion is evil, then you must agree that Barrack Obama and Mitt Romney both support evil in varying degrees. So, the classic cliche “vote for the lesser of two evils” is literally true here.

Geist and I aren’t withdrawing from the fight out of pride, we’ve realized that both the GOP and DNC support evil. At least in the 2012 election they did.

We won’t vote for any candidate that supports abortion. And, if both parties elect someone who does, then we oppose evil by voting for a 3rd party.

** Opposition to evil now must entail voting for neither party, given that they both nominate pro-aborts.**

From my perspective, you are seeking perfection. If you can’t see how Romney’s position on abortion was an improvement over someone who says, "God Bless Planned Parenthood then you’re not seeing things clearly. I mean, just supporting the constitution - (i.e. overturning Roe V Wade) is a vast improvement over Obama. Perfectionism is the enemy of the good. By rejecting the GOP, you reject any of the improvements and legal reforms which would promote the sanctity of life. Would you reject any law that does not completely outlaw abortion at all times? If so, we will never make any progress.

Are you aware that the overwhelming majority of pro-life groups endorsed Romney? These groups have been fighting the good fight for decades to end abortion. Are accusing them also of contributing to evil by endorsing Romney?

Ishii

 

[JimG]

What is evil in the Republican platform? Most recent platforms are from 2012. Here are excerpts from a text by Bishop Thomas John Paprocki:

Even more troubling is that this whole discussion about God in the platform is a distraction from more disturbing matters that have been included in the platform. In 1992 Presidential candidate Bill Clinton famously said that abortion should be “safe, legal and rare.” That was the party’s official position until 2008. Apparently “rare” is so last century that it had to be dropped, because now the Democratic Party Platform says that abortion should be “safe and legal.” Moreover the Democratic Party Platform supports the right to abortion “regardless of the ability to pay.”

catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=2311

Yes, it’s remarkable that the Democratic Party has written support for evil right into its party platform. It is a pro-abortion, anti-family, pro-gay marriage platform.

 

[ProVobis]

What is evil in the Republican platform? Most recent platforms are from 2012. Here are excerpts from a text by Bishop Thomas John Paprocki:

Our system of checks and balances would probably not have allowed Roe vs Wade to be the law of the land. Even in cases of rape and incest, there would probably have been endless filibusters and debate. This is an entirely a SC creation and as long as it’s in their hands, there is no purpose to address it in any platform except to get votes on your side perhaps. The only solution as I see it is to take R vs W out of the federal hands altogether and amend the Constitution. I’m sure 3/4 of the states can agree to making the 10th Amendment stronger.

 

[ishii]

Our system of checks and balances would probably not have allowed Roe vs Wade to be the law of the land. Even in cases of rape and incest, there would probably have been endless filibusters and debate. This is an entirely a SC creation and as long as it’s in their hands, there is no purpose to address it in any platform except to get votes on your side perhaps. The only solution as I see it is to take R vs W out of the federal hands altogether and amend the Constitution. I’m sure 3/4 of the states can agree to making the 10th Amendment stronger.

Do you really think that Democrat majority blue state legislatures would pass the amendment? Especially considering if the amendment was associated with effectively overturning RvW? Isn’t the only solution challenging the law with five or more justices who would vote to overturn?

Ishii

 

[RACJ]

pollingreport.com/C2.htm#Hillary

Her popularity has gone down all of 7% since Benghazi, to 59%. She has a +22% popularity rating in the public.

washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/12/05/National-Politics/Polling/release_182.xmlThis poll was done only 3 months after Benghazi, and 68% of people approved of her job as SoS vs. 22% against. That is a positive +46% *job approval rating.*I realize you’re an extremely conservative Republican Ishii, but it does no good to your side to pretend like everyone thinks the way you do. And unless you’re suggesting 68% of the country are “partisan liberal Democrats,” your post has already been disproven.She was actually an exceptional SoS who presided over an unfortunate situation in a wartorn country where an ambassador died. That’s not a “scandal.”

First, what does “extremely conservative” mean? Does it mean “belief in the Costitutional principles of God-given individual rights which no government can eviscerate”? If so, I am one, and you oughta be as well.
Second, I do hope that when you call Mrs. Clinton an “exceptional SoS”, your tongue was firmly implanted in your cheek. “We came, we saw, he (Ghadafi) died.” That was what Hillary bleated, before the terrorists who took over killed four of our people, including Amb Chris Stephens. You remember, the fellow who asked for assistance which Hillary denied. Moreover, I am sure that you recall that Hillary lied about a goofy video triggering the attack. Please open your eyes and educate yourself. She has been an utter failure at everything in her life except her self-promotional PR campaign. :sad_yes: Rob

 

[Mickey_Finn]

How so, Mickey?

Here most Republican supporters when they quickly run out of excuses throw out Abortion. Which is similar to your questioning

Why do liberal Democrat Catholics reduce the issues to a straw man choice of:

“starve the poor/destroy our schools OR* kill the unborn”

??? (out of respect and admiration, I’ve changed the lower case c in Catholic, for a Large case C.)

The answer for both is the same. They do not have a sound defense for the actions of their perspective parties. Politics in our nation are a little too divisive to be of any use. Many are now saying that there is no political solution. I have to wonder what part Forums such as this have played into that. Lets face it, there have been a lot of ugly things vented. Things that in the past would have never been spoken.

Vote anyway you wish. Just don’t vote Republican.

 

[DeniseNY]

First, what does “extremely conservative” mean? Does it mean “belief in the Costitutional principles of God-given individual rights which no government can eviscerate”? If so, I am one, and you oughta be as well.
Second, I do hope that when you call Mrs. Clinton an “exceptional SoS”, your tongue was firmly implanted in your cheek. “We came, we saw, he (Ghadafi) died.” That was what Hillary bleated, before the terrorists who took over killed four of our people, including Amb Chris Stephens. You remember, the fellow who asked for assistance which Hillary denied. Moreover, I am sure that you recall that Hillary lied about a goofy video triggering the attack. Please open your eyes and educate yourself. She has been an utter failure at everything in her life except her self-promotional PR campaign. :sad_yes: Rob

By the way, is that filmmaker still in jail?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Come on! Why do we always have to resort the abortion argument. Now please know before you resort to being judgmental, I’m not for abortion but we simply have to move on. There are many important issues facing the country. Maybe if we get behind our president instead of being obstructionists, we might get something done. We have an opportunity for the first time in many years to actually to make substantial progress in the area of social justice with President Obama’s leadership - i.e., to get some social justice for those at the bottom end of society (living wage, education reform, clean energy, heath care) - attention to these issues is long overdue. Please, jump on board and come on in for the big win.

Some issues are more important than others. I not only voted against Obama because of his devotion to abortion, I left my office in the Dem party for that reason, and for it alone.

Obama and social justice?
Let’s see, there was “cash for clunkers” that subsidized well-to-do people and destroyed the “clunkers” upon which the poor depend.

Then there is Obama’s self-declared intention to “make utility bills skyrocket”. Not much “social justice” to poor people who would rather not face winters like the last one with no heat.

Then there is Obamacare, which throws millions onto an already overburdened Medicaid, and makes most peoples’ medical insurance costs increase, promises to put 2.4 million out of work, will leave 30 million + with no coverage at all, and reduces funding to “chronic care” patients as well as the elderly. But it does increase funding for “well care”, which studies have shown do not affect outcomes, and is typically used by “well off” people.

Then there is the minimum wage increase, at least 35% of which will go to people who don’t need it (3-6 times the poverty level), will cost half a million jobs or more.

And nothing at all is being done to encourage employment or, indeed, investment in anything other than the stock market. Since retail trade is essentially flat, that means enriching the rich.

So, where’s the “social justice” in all of this?

And you do know that Europe, particularly Germany, is abandoning “clean energy” because it’s losing manufacturing to countries where the cost is not artificially high, like the U.S., Canada and Australia, don’t you? As they say now in Germany, “you can make wind generators with steel, but you can’t make steel with wind generators” The only country on earth that’s still chasing that myth is the U.S. Apparently in Europe they have found to their sorrow that high unemployment does not equal “social justie”.

And for the sake of that, we’re okay with a million murdered infants per year?

No, I’ll never “move on” from that, because I would rather explain to the Lord of Hosts someday that I tried and failed to stop abortion, than to explain that I supported it for the sake of “social justice” that somehow seems only to benefit the well off.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Again, voting for Republicans isn’t opposing evil, if the Republicans themselves support evil.
If you agree that supporting abortion is evil, then you must agree that Barrack Obama and Mitt Romney both support evil in varying degrees. So, the classic cliche “vote for the lesser of two evils” is literally true here.

Geist and I aren’t withdrawing from the fight out of pride, we’ve realized that both the GOP and DNC support evil. At least in the 2012 election they did.

We won’t vote for any candidate that supports abortion. And, if both parties elect someone who does, then we oppose evil by voting for a 3rd party.

** Opposition to evil now must entail voting for neither party, given that they both nominate pro-aborts.**

Romney said he opposed abortion. Some chose not to believe him. Obama supports abortion on demand. Everybody believes him, and should.

Third party is supporting abortion, pure and simple. It’s a way to support abortion without admitting that one did.

 

[ishii]

Here most Republican supporters when they quickly run out of excuses throw out Abortion. Which is similar to your questioning

Why do liberal Democrat Catholics reduce the issues to a straw man choice of:

“starve the poor/destroy our schools OR* kill the unborn”

??? (out of respect and admiration, I’ve changed the lower case c in Catholic, for a Large case C.)

The answer for both is the same. They do not have a sound defense for the actions of their perspective parties. Politics in our nation are a little too divisive to be of any use. Many are now saying that there is no political solution. I have to wonder what part Forums such as this have played into that. Lets face it, there have been a lot of ugly things vented. Things that in the past would have never been spoken.

Vote anyway you wish. Just don’t vote Republican.

Liberal Catholic disagree with GOP policies on the poor. Conservative Catholics disagree with Democrat policies on abortion. But here is the difference: The GOP policies are not morally evil, but a different take on how to help the poor. Contrast that with abortion: Democrats are for the legalized killing of the unborn.

I hope you can see the difference between someone falsely accusing the GOP of “destroying schools and starving the poor” and correctly pointing out that Democrat policies make killing the unborn an easy thing to do. The two are not equivalent. But the Democrat Catholic must falsely portray the straw man in order to justify voting for Democrats.

Vote any way you wish, Mickey. Just don’t vote for pro-abortion candidates.

Ishii

 

[RC_Sojourner]

From my perspective, you are seeking perfection. If you can’t see how Romney’s position on abortion was an improvement over someone who says, "God Bless Planned Parenthood then you’re not seeing things clearly. I mean, just supporting the constitution - (i.e. overturning Roe V Wade) is a vast improvement over Obama. Perfectionism is the enemy of the good. By rejecting the GOP, you reject any of the improvements and legal reforms which would promote the sanctity of life. Would you reject any law that does not completely outlaw abortion at all times? If so, we will never make any progress.

Are you aware that the overwhelming majority of pro-life groups endorsed Romney? These groups have been fighting the good fight for decades to end abortion. Are accusing them also of contributing to evil by endorsing Romney?

Ishii

I’m not looking for perfection, all I want is someone who opposes abortion in ALL CIRCUMSTANCES, and is a Christian. People like Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum. They are all Christians, they all oppose abortion in all circumstances.

And, to answer Abyssinia’s quote of Bishop Thomas J. Paprocki, Mitt Romney is one of those “pro-choice” Republicans who support abortion rights and “Log Cabin Republicans” who promote same-sex marriage, and they are equally as wrong as their Democratic counterparts. But these positions do not have the official support of their party."

Mitt Romney is one of them, and he led the ticket.

P.S. Michelle Bahman, Rick Perry (who changed his position to oppose abortion in all circumstances).** Mitt Romney was an outlier, most of the candidates met these two criteria, we nominated one who met neither.**

 

[RACJ]

Some issues are more important than others. I not only voted against Obama because of his devotion to abortion, I left my office in the Dem party for that reason, and for it alone.

Obama and social justice?
Let’s see, there was “cash for clunkers” that subsidized well-to-do people and destroyed the “clunkers” upon which the poor depend.

Then there is Obama’s self-declared intention to “make utility bills skyrocket”. Not much “social justice” to poor people who would rather not face winters like the last one with no heat.

Then there is Obamacare, which throws millions onto an already overburdened Medicaid, and makes most peoples’ medical insurance costs increase, promises to put 2.4 million out of work, will leave 30 million + with no coverage at all, and reduces funding to “chronic care” patients as well as the elderly. But it does increase funding for “well care”, which studies have shown do not affect outcomes, and is typically used by “well off” people.

Then there is the minimum wage increase, at least 35% of which will go to people who don’t need it (3-6 times the poverty level), will cost half a million jobs or more.

And nothing at all is being done to encourage employment or, indeed, investment in anything other than the stock market. Since retail trade is essentially flat, that means enriching the rich.

So, where’s the “social justice” in all of this?

And you do know that Europe, particularly Germany, is abandoning “clean energy” because it’s losing manufacturing to countries where the cost is not artificially high, like the U.S., Canada and Australia, don’t you? As they say now in Germany, “you can make wind generators with steel, but you can’t make steel with wind generators” The only country on earth that’s still chasing that myth is the U.S. Apparently in Europe they have found to their sorrow that high unemployment does not equal “social justie”.

And for the sake of that, we’re okay with a million murdered infants per year?

No, I’ll never “move on” from that, because I would rather explain to the Lord of Hosts someday that I tried and failed to stop abortion, than to explain that I supported it for the sake of “social justice” that somehow seems only to benefit the well off.

Beautifully explained, Friend. The lefties are wearing blinders if they believe that today’s Democrats are not enemies of (formerly) working people. Rob

 

[RACJ]

:thumbsup:By the way, is that filmmaker still in jail?

I think that he was released in the fall. Rob uch: