Republican Primary

[estesbob]

False, I have studied this, and I am sick of conservatives Catholics misrepresenting the truth to twist the facts. People who do not know what they are talking about deny the Pope’s support of slavery, and it hinders belief in Catholicism when nonCatholics can see the obvious lie and rightly doubt our sincerity. The Pope not only supported the slave trade but encouraged it. The frequent denials of Christians regarding their involvement in slavery may be one of the biggest reasons why many convert to secularism instead of Christianity.

Papal Bulls condemning slavery:

Eugene IV: Sicut Dudum, 1435

Paul III: Sublimis Deus, 1537

Gregory XVI: In Supremo, 1839

cfpeople.org/Apologetics/page51a003.html

 

[pnewton]

False, I have studied this, and it gets old when conservative Catholics misrepresent the truth to twist the facts. .

Your blog not withstanding, this has been addressed in the Apologetics Forum, the place it properly belongs.

Slavery is not an issue this election year.

 

[LovePatience]

\As president, I will end federal funding for abortion advocates like Planned Parenthood. I will protect a health care worker’s right to follow their conscience in their work. And I will nominate judges who know the difference between personal opinion and the law. It is long past time for the Supreme Court to return the issue of abortion back to the states, by overturning Roe v. Wade. - Romney’s speech at the Value Voters Conference, October 8, 2011

I posted a little while ago how he defended Roe v. Wade for over 20 years. George Bush also said he was against “nation building” before invading Iraq. So how do we know he means what he says?

 

[LovePatience]

Your blog not withstanding, this has been addressed in the Apologetics Forum, the place it properly belongs.

Slavery is not an issue this election year.

The issue of truth and whether the church has changed is an issue. In this thread, conservatives repeatedly denied that popes had disagreed with each other and that previous popes have supported slavery. They insulted me, and told me I was wrong and needed to look up the information.

I am showing the proof that they are blowhards and need to stop misrepresenting the truth. Popes have disagreed with each other; at one time, the popes did support slavery. This is not the only issue where the Church has changed teaching.

Should I just let people post lies and not respond?

 

[ishii]

Planned Parenthood vs. Casey came from Democrat Robert Casey, and it was an opportunity to overturn Roe v. Wade that Republican appointed justice Kennedy refused to undertake.

Is this your answer to my post? Anthony Kennedy wouldn’t even be on the supreme court were it not for the actions of liberal Democrat Catholics like Teddy Kennedy and Joe Biden derailing the Bork nomination. If not for them - and those liberal catholics who voted them in, Bork would have been on then bench instead of Anthony Kennedy and as Estesbob has said, Roe V Wade would already be history by now. Tell me where I’m wrong.

Ishii

 

[LovePatience]

Is this your answer to my post? Anthony Kennedy wouldn’t even be on the supreme court were it not for the actions of liberal Democrat Catholics like Teddy Kennedy and Joe Biden derailing the Bork nomination. If not for them - and those liberal catholics who voted them in, Bork would have been on then bench instead of Anthony Kennedy and as Estesbob has said, Roe V Wade would already be history by now. Tell me where I’m wrong.

Ishii

So you blame BOTH Souter AND Kenney on Bork?

 

[pnewton]

I am showing the proof that they are blowhards and need to stop misrepresenting the truth.

Should I just let people post lies and not respond?

While blogs are not proofs, but are no better than any other post here, I found a thread on slavery.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=551714

 

[LovePatience]

There is a long and detailed list of what President Bush II did to reduce abortion.

There is every reason to believe that a new Republican administration will do at least the same.

Does it matter to the pro-life cause whether a President is pro-life or not? Does it matter how many pro-life people are elected to Congress?

Despite all Bush did, abortion rates decreased faster during Clinton’s time in office than Bush’s; they even started increasing during Bush’s second term. Why is this? Are these battles symbolic or substantial?

 

[LovePatience]

While blogs are not proofs, but are no better than any other post here, I found a thread on slavery.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=551714

I gave a lot of sources other than the blog that all say the same thing, such as Judge John Noon’s book and Fr. Panzer’s book. One can even check the Vatican. Its not my fault that none on this thread can bother to look at direct sources and can only spend a few minutes glancing at a blog before they rush to attack to my posts. The proof of the Pope’s support of slavery is accurate, and the denial needs to end.

 

[estesbob]

Despite all Bush did, abortion rates decreased faster during Clinton’s time in office than Bush’s; they even started increasing during Bush’s second term. Why is this? Are these battles symbolic or substantial?

\

You chart shows that abortions reached their lowest level since Roe V Wade was imposed under Bush. The idea they started increasing uin Bushs second term has been thoroughly debunked. it was based on partial data from excatly 16 states that was interpolated to show a bogus increase

lifenews.com/2004/10/20/nat-886/

 

[kubark]

There is a long and detailed list of what President Bush II did to reduce abortion.

There is every reason to believe that a new Republican administration will do at least the same.

Does it matter to the pro-life cause whether a President is pro-life or not? Does it matter how many pro-life people are elected to Congress?

Part of the responsibility pro-life educational organizations like Priests for Life is to familiarize people with the electoral process and its implications.

The present document, therefore, explores the progress made for the pro-life cause under a pro-life administration, and the possible impact of a pro-abortion one.

PRO-LIFE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION

1. Appointed Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. The appointments resulted in the upholding of the federal partial-birth abortion ban by a 5-4 decision.
2. Reinstituted the Mexico City Policy, begun by the Reagan Administration and reversed by the Clinton Administration (when Congress tried to reinstitute the policy, Clinton vetoed the bill), that bars foreign aid funding to groups that perform or advocate for abortions. In 2003, the Bush Administration expanded the Mexico City Policy to include not just funds dispensed by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), but also the State Department.
3. Discouraged advancement of pro-abortion legislation by announcing early in his administration that he would veto legislation that threatened pro-life policy.
4. Signed the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act, which made it a federal crime not to treat babies who survive abortion.
5. Signed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban of 2003.
6. Signed Unborn Victims of Violence Act, recognizing the unborn child as a separate crime victim if injured or killed during an assault.
7. Cut off all federal funds to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) for its involvement in China’s one-child policy which includes forced abortion and sterilization. President Bush sent a fact-finding mission to China which found that the nation’s one-child policy was indeed coercive in nature and that the UNFPA was an integral part of implementing that policy, placing the UNFPA in clear violation of the Kemp-Kasten Amendment that prohibits any aid to any program that involves forced abortion or forced sterilization. Tens of millions of dollars that otherwise would have gone to the UNFPA were redirected to maternal and child health programs.
8. Thwarted efforts at the United Nations to promote abortion by instructing U.S. delegates to state at every appropriate opportunity that America does not regard anything in any document before the U.N. to establish any international right to abortion.
9. Issued Executive Order banning the use of new lines of embryonic stem cells in federally funded experiments. Later vetoed legislation passed by Congress to permit federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.
10. Signed the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005, which will fund research using umbilical cord and adult stem cells. The measure provides funding to increase the inventory of cord blood units available to match and treat patients and to link cord blood banks so that doctors have a single source to search for cord blood and bone marrow matches. It also reauthorizes the National Bone Marrow Registry…

That is an interesting list.

Unfortunately all that tinkering around the edges has done nothing to change the fact that abortion is legal in all 50 states as I write this.

Ron Paul reintroduced the Sanctity of Life Act in the 109th, 110th, and 111th United States Congresses along with the We the People Act. Had “pro-lifers” like Rick Santorum and other establishment Republicans rallied around Ron Paul’s legislation, there is a very high probability that abortion would be illegal in many of our States, as I write this.

Unfortunately, Rick Santoroum and his ilk have put their loyalty to an unconsitutional philosophy of Federal domestic intervention, that will never bring about a lasting solution to the issue of legal abortion.

So, keep tinkering around the edges and keep voting into office the mediocre partisan ideologues, and I will guarantee you that abortion will be legal for a very long time, as the Democrats will use the exact same Federal interventionist strategy to tear down any gains that are made.

 

[estesbob]

I gave a lot of sources other than the blog that all say the same thing, such as Judge John Noon’s book and Fr. Panzer’s book. One can even check the Vatican. Its not my fault that none on this thread can bother to look at direct sources and can only spend a few minutes glancing at a blog before they rush to attack to my posts. The proof of the Pope’s support of slavery is accurate, and the denial needs to end.

You have posted nothing to back up your assertion other than to tell us to “go read a book” I posted links to four different Papal Encylicals condemning slavery.

 

[LovePatience]

\

You chart shows that abortions reached their lowest level since Roe V Wade was imposed under Bush. The idea they started increasing uin Bushs second term has been thoroughly debunked. it was based on partial data from excatly 5 states that was interpolated to show a bogus increase

The chart shows an increase in abortions, and it is from: catholicsentinel.org/ hardly a source that would be against Bush.

 

[LovePatience]

You have posted nothing to back up your assertion other than to tell us to “go read a book” I posted links to four different Papal Encylicals condemning slavery.

False! I posted the exact words of the Papal Encyclical where the Pope supported slavery a few posts back. In those books that I additionally referenced, the encyclical is reprinted there for those who criticize the online web. Are you saying that this Papal Encyclical is false?

 

[estesbob]

The chart shows an increase in abortions, and it is from: catholicsentinel.org/ hardly a source that would be against Bush.

I have already posted the link showing it was false

 

[LovePatience]

I have already posted the link showing it was false

That link does not apply. The article was written in 2004 before Bush’s second term had even finished. The chart I attached is not from the same data as in that link.

 

[kubark]

Sorry, your link didn’t show that this was false. Your link showed that the Church changed. Different popes have said different things over time.

This discussion on slavery seems to diverge a bit from the topic of this thread.

I would suggest that you begin your education on this controversial issue by visting the following resource: The Bible, Church History, and Slavery: Huge Scandal for Christianity or Thoroughly Distorted Picture from Skeptics and Atheists? (socrates58.blogspot.com/2011/02/bible-church-history-and-slavery-huge.html)

Enjoy!

 

[Monte_RCMS]

That is an interesting list.

Unfortunately all that tinkering around the edges has done nothing to change the fact that abortion is legal in all 50 states as I write this.

Ron Paul reintroduced the Sanctity of Life Act in the 109th, 110th, and 111th United States Congresses along with the We the People Act. Had “pro-lifers” like Rick Santorum and other establishment Republicans rallied around Ron Paul’s legislation, there is a very high probability that abortion would be illegal in many of our States, as I write this.

Unfortunately, Rick Santoroum and his ilk have put their loyalty to an unconsitutional philosophy of Federal domestic intervention, that will never bring about a lasting solution to the issue of legal abortion.

So, keep tinkering around the edges and keep voting into office the mediocre partisan ideologues, and I will guarantee you that abortion will be legal for a very long time, as the Democrats will use the exact same Federal interventionist strategy to tear down any gains that are made.

The phenomenon we are dealing with is this: liberals attack pro-life policies and pro-life politicians with every fiber of their strength. And then they attack pro-life politicians for not fighting hard enough to resist their onslaught.

The Catholics in the Senate who demolished Robert Bork’s nomination for the U.S. Supreme Court [and who also challenged every other nominee who might have even remotely have been construed or suspected of being pro-life] bear full responsibility and will some day have to bear full accountability for the continuation of abortion in the United States.

It is possible to use clever words, but they do not change the essential facts.

They will have to account for themselves. And clever words are not going to make it easier.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Despite all Bush did, abortion rates decreased faster during Clinton’s time in office than Bush’s; they even started increasing during Bush’s second term. Why is this? Are these battles symbolic or substantial?

Clinton was in office from 1993 to 2001, according to the attachment you linked the abortion rate declined about 3% during that time? Abortions fell 8.1% between 2000 to 2005, during Bush’s presidency:

jillstanek.com/archives/2009/05/correction_abor.html

 

[LovePatience]

The phenomenon we are dealing with is this: liberals attack pro-life policies and pro-life politicians with every fiber of their strength. And then they attack pro-life politicians for not fighting hard enough.

The Catholics in the Senate who demolished Robert Bork’s nomination for the U.S. Supreme Court [and who also challenged every other nominee who might have even remotely have been construed or suspected of being pro-life] bear full responsibility and will some day have to bear full accountability for the continuation of abortion in the United States.

You haven’t addressed Kennedy, a conservative appointed justice who is content to reduce abortion but will not end Roe v. Wade. Are you confident that any reasonable justice appointed will be willing to turn over Roe v. Wade as long as the issue is immensely politicized as a liberal vs. conservative issue? No country has eliminated the conservative vs. liberal divide, but some countries have eliminated abortion - Malta, Ireland, Poland.

If the issue hadn’t become political football instead of a nonpartisan cause (see how pro-life democrats such as Stupak and Casey get attacked but pro-choice Republicans such as Guiluani or Meg Whitman get supported under the argument that at least they are GOP and the GOP is pro-life even if they aren’t), then public opinion wouldn’t be so hostile against abortion. VERY liberal countries such as Norway have significantly lower abortion rates than we do so liberalism can’t be 100% blamed.

Some of the problem is also with the cheapness with which Republicans use abortion to claim moral high ground while prioritizing other priorities. Then, when those other priorities are unpopular, they ask to be supported on pro-life grounds. They should follow their own advice. If abortion is the most important issue, then stop prioritizing other issues above it and tying them together when they are unrelated! That can be seen by the collapse of the Tea Party, which is only slightly more popular than Occupy Wall Street that includes rapists and defecators in the street. “Budget showdowns” and other brinksmanship strategies are obvious to observers with open eyes.

So any conservative who pushes strongly for unpopular policies that are unrelated to abortion knowing it will cause loss of support instead of acting as a single issue voter shares some blame. Can you do what you ask others to do?