Republican hopefuls in TV debate

[irishpatrick]

The church doesn’t spell out how exactly to apply these principles, but it would involve infinitives which would promote micro loans, small/family run businesses over big corporations, local family run farms over giant agricultural companies, clean energy and environmentally sound energy production…, etc. And always, international coordination and oversight to help developing countries and efficient and just use of our natural resources.

It seems most republicans on this forum have never sat down and read or at least tried to absorb the ideas spelled out in catholic social teaching encyclicals but have been instead mislead into believing that the Austrian school of economics somehow can be reconciled with catholic tradition.

Instead of endless arguments over protestant-modernist distortions of free market economics and liberty, read CARITAS IN VERITATE yourself. You will quickly see that what the pope says doesn’t fit nicely with conservative talk radio economics. And guess what, all of these things would involve sacrifice for the common good. Protestants believe that God blesses you with wealth, catholics with suffering–big difference.

The phrase “protestant-modernist distortions” might seem like a clever means to approach those on this thread who disagree with you, but there is no truth in it when it comes to the economy.

People today seem to not grasp that liberty is far easier lost, than kept. They also seem to not grasp that as much as we Catholics want equality for all, that is just NOT possible in this world if we also want to be free. If we want true freedom to worship Jesus in the fullness of the faith, than we have to understand that it comes with messiness in this world because all people are fallen. Obviously, that won’t be so in Heaven, and obviously we should always try to find ways to make things more fair and more just–but NOT at the price of liberty.

 

[CMatt25]

Can anyone tell me why its necesary for those on the far left to be pro-abortion?
Ishii

I can’t tell you why they would be pro abortion, Ishii. But I can tell you why they would be pro-choice. There is quite the difference. Many who are pro choice would never in a million yrs choose abortion for themselves. It’s simply a matter of trying to balance the rights of women in a democracy of plural beliefs on this very diffficult issue vs the rights of the unborn. And a matter of such a democracy attempting to come up with a law for its land.

Lets not turn this thread into just another abortion thread on CAF. Afterall there are more issues for the Republican hopefuls, Republicans of note, and the Republican House to address than this one issue or for instance whether Obama is a Socialist or whether he was raised in Kenya instead of in Hawaii or Kansas, or whether pro choice Americans are baby killers or murderers, things a Republican or 2 of note have been known to speak on. And as you also stated there is another thread for it. But I’ll just briefly for this one moment take Leader Pelosi’s recent statement since you brought it up here. If a women is in a hospital emergency situation and the only way to save her life is to tragically abort, but the GOP House has prohibited her insurance from providing coverage, I believe that was Leader Pelosi’s point. The GOP would let the fetus survive but the woman to die.

See Ishii it comes down to the choice of how rights are balanced in an imperfect world. I hope that helps. God bless and peace to you.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

I can’t tell you why they would be pro abortion, Ishii. But I can tell you why they would be pro-choice. There is quite the difference. Many who are pro choice would never in a million yrs choose abortion for themselves. It’s simply a matter of trying to balance the rights of women in a democracy of plural beliefs on this very diffficult issue vs the rights of the unborn. And a matter of such a democracy attempting to come up with a law for its land.

Lets not turn this thread into just another abortion thread on CAF. Afterall there are more issues for the Republican hopefuls, Republicans of note, and the Republican House to address than this one issue or for instance whether Obama is a Socialist or whether he was raised in Kenya instead of in Hawaii or Kansas, or whether pro choice Americans are baby killers or murderers, things a Republican or 2 of note have been known to speak on. And as you also stated there is another thread for it. But I’ll just briefly for this one moment take Leader Pelosi’s recent statement since you brought it up here. If a women is in a hospital emergency situation and the only way to save her life is to tragically abort, but the GOP House has prohibited her insurance from providing coverage, I believe that was Leader Pelosi’s point. The GOP would let the fetus survive but the woman to die.

See Ishii it comes down to the choice of how rights are balanced in an imperfect world. I hope that helps. God bless and peace to you.

Never in a million years would I ever consider killing my wife, regardless of how much she gets on my nerves, but in a pluralistic society…etc…

 

[CMatt25]

Never in a million years would I ever consider killing my wife, regardless of how much she gets on my nerves, but in a pluralistic society…etc…

That’s good Scott. As your wife I assume has been born and has attained full personhood rights. And the law of the land in the pluralistic democratic society I live in has long made it illegal for you to kill her. God bless!

 

[_Abyssinia]

I can’t tell you why they would be pro abortion, Ishii. But I can tell you why they would be pro-choice. There is quite the difference. Many who are pro choice would never in a million yrs choose abortion for themselves. It’s simply a matter of trying to balance the rights of women in a democracy of plural beliefs on this very diffficult issue vs the rights of the unborn. And a matter of such a democracy attempting to come up with a law for its land.

Lets not turn this thread into just another abortion thread on CAF. Afterall there are more issues for the Republican hopefuls, Republicans of note, and the Republican House to address than this one issue or for instance whether Obama is a Socialist or whether he was raised in Kenya instead of in Hawaii or Kansas, or whether pro choice Americans are baby killers or murderers, things a Republican or 2 of note have been known to speak on. And as you also stated there is another thread for it. But I’ll just briefly for this one moment take Leader Pelosi’s recent statement since you brought it up here. If a women is in a hospital emergency situation and the only way to save her life is to tragically abort, but the GOP House has prohibited her insurance from providing coverage, I believe that was Leader Pelosi’s point. The GOP would let the fetus survive but the woman to die.

See Ishii it comes down to the choice of how rights are balanced in an imperfect world. I hope that helps. God bless and peace to you.

That is not how it is viewed from a Catholic perspective., The Pope has spoken of non negotiables when it comes to voting; abortion, marriage, euthanasia and the right of parents to educate their children. In a 2004 letter to the Catholic Bishops on politicians and Communion he even said issues such as waging war and capital punishment of lesser ‘‘moral weight’’ that abortion and euthanasia. He said while there could be a diversity of opinion between Catholics on those two issues, there couldn’t be on abortion and euthanasia.

Pro choice vs pro abortion is nothing but rhetoric. Describe somebody as Pro abortion is accurate for somebody who supports abortion rights. ‘‘Pro’’ means in support of something. If you think it is okay for somebody to get an abortion you are pro abortion. Pro choicers only object to the word ‘‘pro abortion’’ because ‘‘pro choice’’ sounds a lot nicer. The truth can not sanitized that thousands of babies worldwide are being slaughtered in abortion mills every day.

 

[ishii]

I can’t tell you why they would be pro abortion, Ishii. But I can tell you why they would be pro-choice. There is quite the difference. Many who are pro choice would never in a million yrs choose abortion for themselves. It’s simply a matter of trying to balance the rights of women in a democracy of plural beliefs on this very diffficult issue vs the rights of the unborn. And a matter of such a democracy attempting to come up with a law for its land.

Cmatt, this is from the USCCB resolution on abortion:

" Nonetheless, ***pro-abortion or so-called “pro-choice” groups ***have mounted a campaign to convince legislators and others that Americans want abortion on demand." (my bold italics). Notice, Cmatt, how they use the term “pro-choice” and “pro-abortion” interchangeably. I agree with the USCCB on this one. How about you? Do you agree or disagree with the USCCB on this question?

old.usccb.org/prolife/tdocs/resabort89.shtml

Lets not turn this thread into just another abortion thread on CAF. Afterall there are more issues for the Republican hopefuls, Republicans of note, and the Republican House to address than this one issue or for instance whether Obama is a Socialist or whether he was raised in Kenya instead of in Hawaii or Kansas, or whether pro choice Americans are baby killers or murderers, things a Republican or 2 of note have been known to speak on.

So you’re comparing the issue of the sanctity of life with the frivolous issue of Obama’s birth certificate or whether Obama’s a socialist? The fact that you lump these issues together calls into question whether you take the sanctity of life serious or not.

I believe that was Leader Pelosi’s point. The GOP would let the fetus survive but the woman to die.

See Ishii it comes down to the choice of how rights are balanced in an imperfect world. I hope that helps. God bless and peace to you.

No, the woman would get what she wanted and would be billed later. Pelosi’s is using scare tactics and hyperbole - do you really think the GOP wants women to die?

It does come down to how rights are balanced in an imperfect world. Pro-abortion/pro-choice people come down in favor of killing a human being in the name of “pluralism”. They think the unborn child has no rights. Its a twisted view that I believe only divine intervention will change. That is why I keep praying for the conversion of those who believe in abortion rights.

Ishii

 

[CMatt25]

Cmatt, this is from the USCCB resolution on abortion:

" Nonetheless, ***pro-abortion or so-called “pro-choice” groups ***have mounted a campaign to convince legislators and others that Americans want abortion on demand." (my bold italics). Notice, Cmatt, how they use the term “pro-choice” and “pro-abortion” interchangeably. I agree with the USCCB on this one. How about you? Do you agree or disagree with the USCCB on this question?

The fact that you lump these issues together calls into question whether you take the sanctity of life serious or not.

No, the woman would get what she wanted and would be billed later. Pelosi’s is using scare tactics and hyperbole - do you really think the GOP wants women to die?

Ishii

Hi Ishii, no I’ve already said I do not agree the terms are necessarily interchangeable. Neither do I necessarily think it is correct to make such a blanket statement about pro choice Americans advocating abortion on demand. Roe v Wade itself allows for restrictions. And many pro choice persons don’t even vote for a candidate because that candidate is pro choice. They are not single issue voters.

I take life seriously Ishii. Life to me is a range of a whole host of issues.

Being billed later might be the concern, Ishii, that Leader Pelosi has for many women who could not afford the bill if the GOP House denies them health insurance coverage. And then as a result their choice is either not being able to afford saving their life or die.

Other than spending time on anti abortion legislation to pacify their base, when in these times the priority for Americans is not these social issues but jobs and the economy, I’m not sure what the GOP wants other than to also make Barack Obama a 1 termer. I do wonder though at times if perhaps the GOP has not considered the many facets of this very difficult issue, including what happens to the woman’s life if she could not afford the out of pocket expense to save her life.

Peace be with you Ishii.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Took the family out for a long trip to the city and back today. Late this evening I tuned into a guy that I don’t normally listen to and he was speaking to Cain’s head economic adviser. I caught the conversation from the beginning and I wish I could find the transcript. That guy was sharp, very convincing and sounded very honest. I’m not easily sold on anything, especially when it comes to politicians, regardless of party. But when he was done I think I may be sold on Cain. What we have now is a joke, and the products we buy and sell are already high enough because of taxes. A complete overhaul like Cain is proposing sounds good to me, I’m willing to try anything. I still have my doubts that it could get anywhere in Congress, but who knows these days.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Other than spending time on anti abortion legislation to pacify their base, when in these times the priority for Americans is not these social issues but jobs and the economy

Heath and LIfe is one the Seven areas which must be controlled correctly in any country to rul a country as a Moral man or a Dictator. And its of “equal” importance to the other seven. Its not and Pro-Choice is fairy tale which we “allowed” to escalate, which is not part of Chritianity. We allowed a monster to grow disquised as womens rights. Your focus on the “rare” 1% is an utter failure to see the mass genocide acroos America.

I’m not sure what the GOP wants other than to also make Barack Obama a 1 termer. I do wonder though at times if perhaps the GOP has not considered the many facets of this very difficult issue, including what happens to the woman’s life if she could not afford the out of pocket expense to save her life

Please get off the 1% which is as rare as seeing a Cougar. You have a statistical link for this rare gem???

Obama is a one-termer and utter failure who will go down in History as the worst President in history. And yes the GOP correctly wants this, though democrats are not the issue, Obama is.

When we reduce mass genocide than that RARE one-percent “you” are focused on. The cost will be minimal and easy to resolve financially. Are you not Christain, this is not a Catholic issue and thats an illusion, its a CHRISTIAN issue? Whats clear is when you follow this hodgepodge thinking, than the real foundation of life, family is lost. Thus is the American Dream. Never mind the understanding of how to effectively control a country be it morally of immoral. Finance is but “one” other aspect. You have to bring all Seven correctly this term. And the genocide is “out” in 2012. Nothing to do with “Catholic” which you seem to have such issues with. As a Christian its called choose LIFE.

Peace

 

[GaryTaylor]

Took the family out for a long trip to the city and back today. Late this evening I tuned into a guy that I don’t normally listen to and he was speaking to Cain’s head economic adviser. I caught the conversation from the beginning and I wish I could find the transcript. That guy was sharp, very convincing and sounded very honest. I’m not easily sold on anything, especially when it comes to politicians, regardless of party. But when he was done I think I may be sold on Cain. What we have now is a joke, and the products we buy and sell are already high enough because of taxes. A complete overhaul like Cain is proposing sounds good to me, I’m willing to try anything. I still have my doubts that it could get anywhere in Congress, but who knows these days.

Could you please explain to me his 999 financial theory which is “unproven” and has “zero” guarentee of working? Uh I think not, another pipe-dream Let alone it will place the enormous borden of tax on those making under six-figures.

We have no-time for “chance”. Where fresh out of “maybe” this will work. He has “no” solid financial plan. Yes I like he’s pro-life. yes I like he’s a devote Christian. His financial proposal is dismal.

And again his financial support is not realistic of being a viable candidate for the coming year. You cannot compete in the political realm without correct financial backing. He’s on the bottom of the list.

Peace

 

[_Abyssinia]

The next debate will be great because only Romney, Paul, Perry and I think Herman Cain are debating. The others are boycotting because of primary dates I believe. More substance equals fewer speakers, I think.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I agree.

However, do you thinks Cains remark that the “The Flavor of the Month” is always “Black Walnut” was appropriate? I believe what we are already seeing is moral/immaturity combined with Fraudian slips with hopefulls such a Cain and Perry. Again Perry refusal to thus far distance himself from the Southern Baptist remarks is a grave error. At least Cain has had the sense to do this. However…whats never been challenged with Cain, and probly because he’s not consider a viable candidate is…

Accusing liberal Democrats of being “racist” and of questioning why he, as a black man, would choose a conservative political ideology.

Saying black voters have been “brainwashed” into supporting Democrats.

Saying he would not appoint a Muslim to serve in his administration.

And making weird, near-paranoid claims about Sharia law infiltrating the US legal system.

As I stated there’s a moral/immaturity which sticks out like a sore thumb with this man. The country is based on “religious freedom”. And yes that includes Islam. Why anyone would speak on or entertain any racial questions? I do not know. You’ll have to answer that for yourself. I do not think like that, wasn’t raised as such, nor believe its an issue but in the minds of some whom I pray for.

Peace

 

[rlg94086]

That’s good Scott. As your wife I assume has been born and has attained full personhood rights. And the law of the land in the pluralistic democratic society I live in has long made it illegal for you to kill her. God bless!

Slavery is a better example. Many who were pro-slavery…er, I mean pro-choice…would never have held a slave themselves, but in a pluralistic democratic society…

Being born wasn’t enough to give you “full personhood rights” for African Americans back then. I guess you would have been pro-choice on slavery? A basic right to life, as mentioned in the Declaration, should extend to human beings who have been conceived. Heck, I think it’s still a federal offense to destroy a Bald Eagle’s egg, but we can’t protect our own species’ unborn??!!

 

[GaryTaylor]

Amen.

 

[CMatt25]

I guess you would have been pro-choice on slavery?

Not at all. 2 entirely different issues. Apples and oranges. For instance slavery had nothing to do with attempting to balance the rights of the unborn with the rights of a woman regarding her body. A slave embryo/fetus was not in the slavemaster’s body. And no I would have opposed slavery even though it is found in the Bible.

 

[rlg94086]

Not at all. 2 entirely different issues. Apples and oranges. For instance slavery had nothing to do with attempting to balance the rights of the unborn with the rights of a woman regarding her body. A slave embryo/fetus was not in the slavemaster’s body. And no I would have opposed slavery even though it is found in the Bible.

So, it has to do with location? What substantly changes in the 30 seconds from in-the-womb to out-of-the-womb to make that human being more human?

The baby is not part of a woman’s body. You may want to do a little bit of scientific study on the subject.

As we’ve discussed before, your reasoning in favor of abortion (i.e. personhood rights, pro-choice even though personally opposed) could have identically been used for slavery. You have yet to give a logical reason to counter your own argument applied to slavery, so your “I would have opposed slavery” is just hollow opinion.

 

[CMatt25]

Are you not Christain, this is not a Catholic issue and thats an illusion, its a CHRISTIAN issue? As a Christian its called choose LIFE.

Peace

Yes. And yes I know it is not only Catholic. And yet there are many Christians who are pro choice. Everything is not so simple and black and white to many Christians. And that 1% rare life you mentioned is just as important to some who strive to choose life. As are the lives of the poor, the hungry, the homeless, the sick, lives lost in war. In fact many pro choice Christians would never themselves abort except perhaps if their lives were in danger. But on this issue they separate their own religious beliefs from the state. Peace to you as well. God bless!

 

[CMatt25]

So, it has to do with location? What substantly changes in the 30 seconds from in-the-womb to out-of-the-womb to make that human being more human?

The baby is not part of a woman’s body. You may want to do a little bit of scientific study on the subject.

As we’ve discussed before, your reasoning in favor of abortion (i.e. personhood rights, pro-choice even though personally opposed) could have identically been used for slavery. You have yet to give a logical reason to counter your own argument applied to slavery, so your “I would have opposed slavery” is just hollow opinion.

They’re born and receive their full rights under the law. But no it is not only location before you start a rumor that I favor abortion even in those last 30 secs. In fact as I’ve discussed before I don’t even favor abortion myself. Other than I honestly can’t say if I were a woman and my life was in danger what I would choose. I just thank God I’m never to be faced with such an excrucinating decision and that in America women have a choice to live. Well as long as they can afford to save their own life if the GOP hopefuls and House get in their way. But you’re free to continue fighting to change the law. I just have other issues that matter to me as well and we are not going to solve this issue here on CAF. God bless and peace.

 

[rlg94086]

They’re born and receive their full rights under the law. But no it is not only location before you start a rumor that I favor abortion even in those last 30 secs. In fact as I’ve discussed before** I don’t even favor abortion myself**.

No, but you favor allowing other people to abort…there is no difference. As Scott said, it’s like saying, *I wouldn’t never kill my own wife, but I wouldn’t think it fair to prevent someone else from making that choice." Ditto for my comments on slavery. You’ve come full circle in your lack of argument.

CMatt25:

Other than I honestly can’t say if I were a woman and my life was in danger what I would choose. I just thank God I’m never to be faced with such an excrucinating decision and that in America women have a choice to live. Well as long as they can afford to save their own life if the GOP hopefuls and House get in their way. But you’re free to continue fighting to change the law. I just have other issues that matter to me as well and we are not going to solve this issue here on CAF. God bless and peace.

So, you are for banning all abortions except for cases where a woman will absolutely die if she doesn’t have one? I’m okay with that political compromise.

Democrats are not.

They want to use weasel words like “health of the mother” that can be misapplied to a large variety of things. And, that only applies to Democrats who would allow any restrictions on abortion. The platform of the party is against a “woman’s right to choose.”

 

[Usbek_de_Perse]

All except Romney are toast. Gingrich really doesn’t want to be President, he wants to be Professor in Chief. Santorum is a very good man, unable to keep the spotlight on himself.

The campaign will be between Obama and Romney. Romney will be hobbled by his Mormonism and Obama will be dogged with claims that he is Muslim.

Still, the claims that Obama is Muslim might be enough to allow the Christian Right to hold its collective nose and accept Romney.

God save America.

Top choices:

• Gingrich, Bachmann, Santorum
• Paul, Romney, Cain
• Perry and Huntsman are done. (IMO)

---

Gingrich is the man, but I’d love to see Bachmann as the first woman president. Santorum was good as usual, but doesn’t get the credit.