B
bbarrick8383
Guest
I believe he is pro choice…if so, that’s my first problem and prevents me from discussing him as a legitimate candidate any further.
- Status
C
CMatt25
Guest
Ok maybe then a FOX News debate is not the same as when someone like Sean Hannity conducts an interview on FOX. I watch FOX some.
B
bbarrick8383
Guest
I’ve watched Hannity interview people he knew to be liberal and he was just as friendly to them as he was conservatives.
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
Huntsman supports a federal amendment to protect the unborn:
sltrib.com/sltrib/huntsman/52421682-188/abortion-huntsman-governor-utah.html.csp
Isn’t it very difficult to have a constitutional amendment? The real fight is in the states, this is where the pro life battle is winning. A pro choice group recently said there were an estimated 600 pro life bills proposed in 2011:
christianpost.com/news/600-pro-life-bills-proposed-in-2011-says-pro-choice-group-60261/
C
CMatt25
Guest
Pirate Talker, this is not your father’s Republican Party. Unless he can pass the Tea Party Express litmus test, forget about it nowadays. But don’t you wonder how many previous Republican Presidents throughout history could meet the test today?
C
CMatt25
Guest
Well I’m at least fairly certain he was playing with his football.
B
bbarrick8383
Guest
I apologize, is it Gary Johnson I’m thinking of?
B
bbarrick8383
Guest
He does do that a lot.
S
StevenFrancis
Guest
I’ve been all over the map since this thing started, but now, the more I really study and look into things, and rewatch things, and dig deep, I’m convinced with Rick Santorum. I don’t know how far he can make it. But I’m on the ride with him now until he’s not available any more.
G
gilliam
Guest
I wonder how many democratic presidents throughout history would make it past a democratic primary today?
G
gilliam
Guest
Ron Paul: Not Sure I Can Support Another GOP Nominee (VIDEO) mediaite.com/a/hekgu
C
CMatt25
Guest
I’m surprised he doesn’t do better on a Catholic forum. But in this poll at the moment he is tied for 4th.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Good question. I’m thinking but of course this is just my thinking. But in the past century, I’m thinking FDR under whose watch Social Security began. Maybe Truman, JFK. I know some like Johnson presided during wartimes but Medicare was begun under his watch. Clinton is still fairly popular, presided over a booming economy, so I’d say he possibly could. Indeed the nation’s current President and Commander in Chief who presided over the finding of Osama Bin Laden, has no primary opposition this time around. But a good number of Democrats seem to be backing President Obama’s reelection. Some might not be happy for instance that healthcare didn’t go further. But are nevertheless glad he at least brought the issue to the forefront and did SOMETHING. So I wouldn’t rule him out.
But a topic like so many others in life which are open to discussion perhaps over a cup of coffee.
I
ishii
Guest
Cmatt, your are conflating my criticism of policies of the Democrat party and the Democrat christians themselves. They are two different things. You keep implying that since I criticize modern Democrat party ***policies ***as anti-christian, that therefore I am also saying who is an authentic christian and who is not. Why do you keep confusing the two? Someone might be for the policy of the Democrat party which says its okay to support the snuffing out of the unborn (because we live in a pluralistic society, blah blah) but that doesn’t mean the person isn’t a christian. It might mean they are an ignorant christian, or a clueless christian, but they are still christian. I suppose at some point, though, the christian who supports anti-christian Democrat policies might be in danger of going too far in the wrong direction, as CS Lewis pointed out in the Screwtape letters,
“Provided that meetings, pamphlets, policies, movements, causes, and crusades, matter more to him than prayers and sacraments and charity, he is ours - and the more “religious” (on those terms), the more securely ours. I could show you a pretty cageful down here”
Could Screwtape have been referring to those who are Democrat first and Christian second? There are people for whom policies and movements have gradually replaced the important things - the prayer, charity, and sacraments. I see signs of this on leftist christian websites - christian anti-war groups, etc. But I suppose this could be found on either the left or the right, as anyone who puts politics first and religion second (but who insists that their motivation is religion) is playing into the hand of Screwtape.
I am speculating, but perhaps many Catholics don’t think Santorum has the best chance of getting the nomination and beating Obama. So they voted for a stronger candidate.
Ishii
I
ishii
Guest
I wonder what Truman, for example, would have thought about his party becoming the party of abortion rights and gay rights?
Ishii
I
ishii
Guest
Those earlier Democrats - FDR, Truman, JFK, etc. would have to sign on to the secular leftist social agenda of the modern Democrat party - abortion on demand and gay rights, etc. in order to get anywhere in the primaries. Indeed, in order to merely speak at the convention.Good question. I’m thinking but of course this is just my thinking. But in the past century, I’m thinking FDR under whose watch Social Security began. Maybe Truman, JFK. I know some like Johnson presided during wartimes but Medicare was begun under his watch. Clinton is still fairly popular, presided over a booming economy, so I’d say he possibly could. Indeed the nation’s current President and Commander in Chief who presided over the finding of Osama Bin Laden, has no primary opposition this time around. But a good number of Democrats seem to be backing President Obama’s reelection. Some might not be happy for instance that healthcare didn’t go further. But are nevertheless glad he at least brought the issue to the forefront and did SOMETHING. So I wouldn’t rule him out.
But a topic like so many others in life which are open to discussion perhaps over a cup of coffee.
Ishii
C
CMatt25
Guest
Maybe I’m confused because you keep misspelling the name of the party.
And Ishii, I believe I know with 100% absolute certainty I’ve told you numerous times in our discussions with one another that Democratic voters, and the same could be said for Democratic Presidents for that matter, look far beyond a single issue in their politics. Do have a good day my friend. God bless!
C
CMatt25
Guest
I was merely a child at the time but didn’t Kennedy say something about his public policy as a POTUS in relation to Rome? Who knows Ishii? President Obama says his views on gay marriage are evolving.
I
ishii
Guest
The sanctity of life, and the protection of the traditional values are hardly a “single issue”, Cmatt. Those who would neglect the most important issues in favor of their pet lefty political issues are in danger of falling into the trap set by Screwtape, imo.
Ishii
I
ishii
Guest
I don’t think one needs Rome to see the importance of opposing the leftist secular social agenda as embodied in the modern Democrat party of 2011. We don’t have a theocracy - a Catholic president wouldn’t be able to force everyone to abstain from eating meat on Friday. But, the issues of the sanctity of life go beyond what church we belong to. The pro-life movement has Jews, Christians of all denominations, Buddhists and even atheists. It is a mistake to say that because we are a republic that therefore we shouldn’t fight for human rights. On the contrary, we have an obligation to fight for human rights, especially where they are trampled upon, such as the unborn.
Ishii
- Status