Trump calls out Biden on religion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, Orthodox Judaism is stricter about the necessity of abortion under such circumstances than less orthodox streams of Judaism, which leave the decision up to the woman. However, no stream of Judaism permits abortion on demand for no compelling reason.
 
Last edited:
Maybe sometimes it is best to step back and look at the big picture. Maybe over-excessive concern and zeal by some focusing on one single question is just a fear to tackle the grandiose universe or problems, that The President should have to handle? This universe should be handled by we, each of us and then - elect the our representative appropriately. The People are the Caesars, according to the Constitution. And are we really comfortable as Caesars to be ready to handle only one question? Is this the way to bear our responsibilities as Caesars before God which gave the People the highest power in constitutional democracies?

So - I just wanted to remind of this wonder song “Climb every mountain” from Sounds of Music:

Mother Abbess:
Maria, these walls were not meant to shut out problems. You have to face them. You have to live the life you were born to live.


(Of course, there are other renditions of this beautiful song as well). 😉
 
I’m not going to say anything bad about Trump. I will be voting for Biden on Election Day.
 
pnewton said:
40.png
HomeschoolDad:
your church teaches that abortion is murder, you claim to be a faithful Catholic,
Click to expand...
There is an answer for that, though it is not one that I agree with. The Church also teaches that homosexuality, no-fault divorce, and contraception are wrong. In a country where this is the minority opinion, such a ban on these three would not happen, and may not be wise if it were to happen. The opinion of the American people needs to lead the legislation enacted. That is why I believe removing pro-life hypocrisy is the first step to change the debate on abortion, which might in a generation of two allow for the value of children to again be embraced.
Click to expand...
farronwolf said:
Yes most all agree that murder is wrong. However how many give rights or personhood, required for murder, to the unborn.

Very few world wide ban abortion all together. Even Italy where the seat of our church is and where 80 to 90 percent of the population is Catholic or christian it is legal.

So explain how the USA is supposed to suddenly give the unborn rights of the citizen. Explain how any president is going to accomplish this task.
Click to expand...
Italy is a secular republic founded on labor (per their constitution) and I do not look to them as an example of what the Social Reign of Christ the King would look like.

Just being realistic, without a massive conversion of the American people to the Catholic Faith (or, arguably, also to the various flavors of fundamentalist Christianity that believe in life from conception and mean it), abortion in the first trimester, or at least before a heartbeat can be detected, will probably never be outlawed. So as much as I hate to say it, as long as a woman notices something is amiss, takes a pregnancy test, finds out she’s pregnant, and gets herself to an abortion clinic pronto, you’re probably never going to have an overwhelming majority of the American people to agree that this should be illegal. That takes in 89 percent of all abortions (this per the Guttmacher Institute).

So you’re left with 11 percent. It might be possible to persuade the American people at large along the lines of “barring some complication which most people have no problem with resolving, the rebuttable presumption is that you’ve had plenty of time to make up your mind about the abortion, and here we are at three or four months, that little creation inside of you is beginning to look more and more like a baby every day, there’s just something kind of messed-up about that, no, you can’t have an abortion”. I’d rather see 11 percent saved than zero percent saved. If all of our activism, all of our efforts to get reliable Supreme Court justices nominated and confirmed, end up accomplishing at least this much, it will be effort well spent.
 
Thbolt said:
40.png
vz71:
The treatment there is a removal of the diseased organ, specifically the tube where the pregnancy occurred.
Click to expand...
The tube isn’t diseased. I’ve never found.this argument to be compelling.
Click to expand...
This observation may be disliked, but I have always found this argument to be really troubling also, and it is razor-thin close to saying that “the end justifies the means”. To say “removing the conceptus is direct abortion (salpingotomy), but cutting out the piece of the tube that contains the conceptus is not direct abortion (salpingectomy)” has always struck me as a bit disingenuous. It is as though you have to destroy the tube, which could be saved if you performed a salpingotomy, to justify ending the pregnancy. The tube is not the problem — the conceptus in the tube is the problem. I have wondered if we might be able to say “we are not killing the conceptus, we are merely removing it from the tube, since the tube itself isn’t the issue, and we would save the conceptus if we could, but we can’t, the technology doesn’t exist”.

I do not mean to come across as insensitive to any woman who has been through this. It just comes across as saying “we can end this pregnancy by removing the portion of the tube where the conceptus happens to be”. But, as in all things, I ultimately defer to the teaching Church. If the Church says salpingectomy is acceptable, then I say it’s acceptable as well, and if the Church says salpingotomy is not acceptable, then ditto — I’d just like a better way of explaining it to the non-Catholic opponent, if there is indeed a better way to explain it.
 
Last edited:
One of my daughter’s suffered a ruptured tube due to an ectopic pregnancy. It had to be removed
 
President Trump just signed FOUR Executive Orders in ONE DAY to provide immediate relief to Americans.
Absolutely historic.
  • Extending Unemployment Benefits
  • Preventing Evictions
  • Extending Student Loan Relief
  • Payroll Tax Cuts
 
Thbolt said:
The problem can be fixed without removing the tube.
Click to expand...
You’re a doctor? You know this to be the case in all instances?

Two things that come to mind…
What caused implantation there?
And what damage was done before the problem was found.
 
Thbolt said:
I thought you were going to try to have a meaningful discussion.
Click to expand...
–Said a poster whose idea of a “meaningful discussion” is sarcasm, sarcasm, sarcasm…
 
Last edited:
You didn’t “explain” anything. You also mocked the mentally ill.
 
https://translate.google.com/transl...lutne-pravo-na-zabijanie-babatiek-pri-potrate

Machine translated from Slovak. Actually, as machine translations go, it’s pretty good. About the only wrinkle is the reference to “partial foaling abortion”, but it’s obvious what is meant here.

I wonder what the social justice warriors would have to say, about the woman who wants to abort her little girl, because she and her husband wanted a boy. Isn’t that anti-woman? And what about the woman who has had an affair with someone of a race from which she doesn’t want to bear a child — she didn’t find it distasteful enough to forego the little fling, but she doesn’t want to bear and raise one of them. Don’t say this couldn’t happen — “I don’t want to have a baby of Race X!”. Would pro-choice advocates be okay with that? And if so, why? (Of course, she wouldn’t dare give that as the reason… but she’d always know.)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top