Trump campaigned against Muslims, but will preach tolerance in Saudi speech

[St_Pancake]

The words total and complete are his. See post #33.
Yes, it was “until…” . That might be temporary, it might be forever. That is unkown. But total and complete - that is known.

His exact words were:

"Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States…

Until our countries representatives can figure out what the hell is going on."
.
That is the truth from December 2015. His words, reading his statement. thought I’m sure you already knew that but were hoping to confuse those that wouldn’t look it up.

Hey, you site post # 33. It says, until our representatives figure out what is going on. Read the statement. Thanks for providing me a source to expose your lies.

 

[St_Pancake]

In last year’s election it depended on race. According to Pew Research, the majority of Catholics voted for Trump 52% to 45%. But that was because he carried the Catholic white vote 60% to 37%. Latino Catholics however went heavily against Trump with the Democratic Party’s candidate winning their vote 67% to 26%.

pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/how-the-faithful-voted-a-preliminary-2016-analysis/

That is awesome and gives me a bit more faith in my fellow Catholics.

 

[St_Pancake]

Sorry. But to my ears, hearing someone talk of partaking of the Mysteries to make a point about most anything other than thanksgiving for grace unmerited is startling.

Sometimes your insulting comments go by unnoticed but tonight, you are really off your game. Take a couple of days off and try again.

 

[dvdjs]

His exact words were:

"Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States…

Until our countries representatives can figure out what the hell is going on."
.
That is the truth from December 2015. His words, reading his statement. thought I’m sure you already knew that but were hoping to confuse those that wouldn’t look it up.

Hey, you site post # 33. It says, until our representatives figure out what is going on. Read the statement. Thanks for providing me a source to expose your lies.

You think the “until” phrase denotes that something is temporary.
I assume you are aware that Protestants make the same argument to deny the perpetual virginity of Mary.

The odd part of the thread is that people denied the words Trump himself used.

Odder still is that people accuse other posters of lying. I may have stated something in a way that is misunderstood. I may have been mistaken. I may have stated something very clearly but wa still misunderstood. But the idea accusation, twice on this thread, that I lied is unacceptable. And makes no sense: whatever for?

 

[dvdjs]

If they are protestant or Orthodox, they do not believe that divorce and remarriage is wrong so it is not a mortal sin. For it to be a mortal sin, you have to have full knowledge and they do not.

Orthodox don’t speak of “mortal” sin, but the concept of remarriage after divorce us not ad black and white as you suggest. Allowance for remarriage is not automatic and not unlimited.

 

[St_Pancake]

You think the “until” phrase denotes that something is temporary.
I assume you are aware that Protestants make the same argument to deny the perpetual virginity of Mary.

The odd part of the thread is that people denied the words Trump himself used.

Odder still is that people accuse other posters of lying. I may have stated something in a way that is misunderstood. I may have been mistaken. I may have stated something very clearly but wa still misunderstood. But the idea accusation, twice on this thread, that I lied is unacceptable. And makes no sense: whatever for?

feel free to report me. I do not think there has been any information presented in this thread that you did not know. You in fact have not claimed that you didn’t know the information, you are just spinning it a different way.

I am willing to say that you might be improperly translating what was said. However, I think you’re smarter than that as are the many politicians and journalists that have repeatedly misrepresented the President and the campaign.

 

[St_Pancake]

Orthodox don’t speak of “mortal” sin, but the concept of remarriage after divorce us not ad black and white as you suggest. Allowance for remarriage is not automatic and not unlimited.

I never said that Orthodox believed in Mortal sin. What I said was that if someone commits a sin and it is not with full knowledge, it is not a mortal sin.

 

[dvdjs]

feel free to report me. I do not think there has been any information presented in this thread that you did not know. You in fact have not claimed that you didn’t know the information, you are just spinning it a different way.

I am willing to say that you might be improperly translating what was said. However, I think you’re smarter than that as are the many politicians and journalists that have repeatedly misrepresented the President and the campaign.

I just think, now that you adopt this harsh tone, that you misunderstood my post 32.

The issue drawn against the OP by ucfengr in post 4 and affirmed by MaryT777 was that the “ban” was limited to a small number of nations with a small portion of the total Muslim population. This position, post -election, is indeed softer that the campaign position that was explicitly referred to in the OP.

I reminded MaryT777 and by extension ucfengr that the original post was accurate in ehat it said, assuming that yhey did not notice that thevarticle referred to the campsign posture, or that thru did not know that that was his position. The issue of permanence was not a part of the OP or the responses to it.

If your point was that it was incumbent upon me to take up other inadequacies of the OP, or the responses, well good for you. But it is odd to say that my focus on differentiating between Trumps policy as POTUS and the campaign to resolve the claims of ucfengr against the OP is somehow lying seems like a harsh stretch.

 

[dvdjs]

I never said that Orthodox believed in Mortal sin. What I said was that if someone commits a sin and it is not with full knowledge, it is not a mortal sin.

I wanted to point out that what you wrote about what Orthodox believe about remarriage did not convey the matter accurately. I made the point about their use of the term “mortal”, to take that part of the inaccuracy out of the picture as I discussed the main point.

You might find this unimportant; as a BC i attach more importance to it.

 

[dvdjs]

That’s not racist, I agree with abucs. It’s the ones who think someone ‘deserves’ a special reward simply because of the color of their skin, who are the racists.

If he were white, would he have still received the award? if the answer is no, then that is racism.

Why does the question come up?
What does the discussion of race in the Nobel prize come from?
How does the idea of people deserving a special reward because of tge color of their skin come up in the discussion of this prize?

 

[St_Pancake]

Why does the question come up?
What does the discussion of race in the Nobel prize come from?
How does the idea of people deserving a special reward because of tge color of their skin come up in the discussion of this prize?

Just searching for a reason that Obama might have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize

 

[dvdjs]

Just searching for a reason that Obama might have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize

What does the citation say?

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

:sad_yes:

Character used to matter to Catholics. Sadly, now it doesn’t matter one whit, and I am appalled by that.

:sad_yes:

We could have done so much better.

 

[starshiptrooper]

Well, then it proves he’s a liar. He says he grabs women by the p****.

You’re saying he actually doesn’t do what he says.

So…a liar.

And I take it you’re not one of those who says, “I like him because he says what he means!”

We have discussed some locker room talk that happened a decade ago ad nauseam. Get over it.

I like him because he has a far better grasp on power politics than the Republicans who pride themselves on being a bunch of principled losers.

 

[PRmerger]

I think it is more appalling to ignore Hillary’s stand on late term abortion.

Oh, I haven’t ignored Hillary’s stand. It’s grotesque.

But not more grotesque than what the current Party of Family Values is doing.

I think Newt Gingrich has had multiple marriages and his current wife will be our Ambassador to the Vatican.

Yep. Another example of the amusing hypocrisy of the Party of Family Values.

Trump has not abandoned the children from those marriages. He has assumed parental responsibilities.

Except for the forgotten daughter.

And I find it bemusing and astonishing that we are even having this conversation about a man who leads the Party of Family Values–his children from 3 different women.