Trump family’s elaborate lifestyle is a ‘logistical nightmare’ — at taxpayer expense

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sy_Noe
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
joshman1 said:
Once again, Democrats aren’t anti-Christian.
Click to expand...
That’s your opinion. And this is mine. They’re on that path. The first example that comes to mind is legislation meant to protect Christians who don’t want to cater, photograph, etc. gay weddings are consistently opposed by Democrats. In a saner world, if a business didn’t want to provide a service, the customer moves on instead of litigating but many Democrats have shown they don’t want a saner world. Also legislation in Ohio that will prevent churches from being forced to rent out property to pro-abortion groups and gay weddings.
They don’t want restrictions on abortions on demand, embryonic stem cell research and euthanasia.
 
ATraveller said:
That’s your opinion. And this is mine. They’re on that path. The first example that comes to mind is legislation meant to protect Christians who don’t want to cater, photograph, etc. gay weddings are consistently opposed by Democrats. In a saner world, if a business didn’t want to provide a service, the customer moves on instead of litigating but many Democrats have shown they don’t want a saner world. Also legislation in Ohio that will prevent churches from being forced to rent out property to pro-abortion groups and gay weddings.
Click to expand...
To me that’s discrimination, not a saner world.
 
joshman1 said:
To me that’s discrimination, not a saner world.
Click to expand...
So if a person believes a gay wedding is violating God’s standards on sexuality (according to Romans and 1 Corinthians) then that person should be assisting in it?
And yes it would be a saner world where people don’t drag others to court over petty things like cakes and flowers. If they don’t want to sell it to you go to another business. America has more than one florist and more than one bakery.
 
ATraveller said:
That’s your opinion. And this is mine. They’re on that path. The first example that comes to mind is legislation meant to protect Christians who don’t want to cater, photograph, etc. gay weddings are consistently opposed by Democrats. In a saner world, if a business didn’t want to provide a service, the customer moves on instead of litigating but many Democrats have shown they don’t want a saner world. Also legislation in Ohio that will prevent churches from being forced to rent out property to pro-abortion groups and gay weddings.
They don’t want restrictions on abortions on demand, embryonic stem cell research and euthanasia.
Click to expand...
I’m not even sure how we got to this in regard to the Trump’s elaborate lifestyle and travel costs. But just to reply to you and Phil… Roe v Wade actually restricts abortion on demand. It is on demand for the first trimester then the states can and have placed restrictions on the procedure. I trust you and the Catholics here who speak of religious freedom do not mean only for your own religions but for all people of faith. There are Christian denominations whose beliefs allow at least abortion choice in cases. As well as denominations coming to an evolving understanding of marriage.

In regard to euthanasia, I’m less of an expert on Christian denominational perspectives, but I did find this from a few yrs ago.

The Presbyterian Church U.S.A. has examined theological questions related to end-of-life issues, but the denomination has not taken specific positions or provided guidance on assisted suicide or euthanasia.

The United Church of Christ supports the right of terminally ill patients to make their own decisions about when to die – including whether to hasten death. This position is in keeping with broader church teachings that stress the importance of respecting individual conscience and choice, according to the Rev. Timothy Tutt, a senior minister at Westmoreland Congregational United Church of Christ in Bethesda, Md. “We believe that each of us approaches God on our own terms, and this includes at the end of our lives,” he says.

pewforum.org/2013/11/21/religious-groups-views-on-end-of-life-issues/

Some may even support contraceptives being covered for women’s health care since sometimes they are prescribed for medical conditions. The Little Sisters who Phil brought up and others who employ non Catholics were given the opportunity to sign a form and opt-out of the mandate and coverage would have been provided for these women by the insurers or plan administrators.

I don’t pretend to have all the answers. But balancing rights in a society of plural beliefs as well as non beliefs is not always something I find as simple or easy as we sometimes may think. Pleasing everyone is not always an easy thing to do. That’s my opinion and I won’t be replying further to abortion, SSM, euthanasia, religious liberty on this thread. Peace.
 
ATraveller said:
So if a person believes a gay wedding is violating God’s standards on sexuality (according to Romans and 1 Corinthians) then that person should be assisting in it?
And yes it would be a saner world where people don’t drag others to court over petty things like cakes and flowers. If they don’t want to sell it to you go to another business. America has more than one florist and more than one bakery.
Click to expand...
I do think its discrimination. And yes, America has one more bakery/florist - but not if everyone thought like that. America under Jim Crow was like that until people stood up and went to court, I don’t consider human dignity petty.
 
joshman1 said:
I do think its discrimination. And yes, America has one more bakery/florist - but not if everyone thought like that. America under Jim Crow was like that until people stood up and went to court, I don’t consider human dignity petty.
Click to expand...
Is it fair to say you don’t mind forcing a person to violate his or her conscience by providing a service to a gay wedding?
We’re now equating a wedding with segregation?
 
ATraveller said:
Is it fair to say you don’t mind forcing a person to violate his or her conscience by providing a service to a gay wedding?
We’re now equating a wedding with segregation?
Click to expand...
We’re now equating not discriminating with not discriminating. I’m sure people provide many services to divorced couples, couples of other religions, couples living in sin, etc. - and no one cares. People draw the line here, why?

You don’t even have to agree with the act - you just have to serve them, as you would any other customer, because they are your fellow man and fellow citizen.
 
joshman1 said:
We’re now equating not discriminating with not discriminating. I’m sure people provide many services to divorced couples, couples of other religions, couples living in sin, etc. - and no one cares. People draw the line here, why?
Click to expand...
A stranger would not know if the couple were divorced, of mixed religions or living in sin. A same-sex wedding becomes known at some point, particularly with names.
joshman1 said:
You don’t even have to agree with the act - you just have to serve them, as you would any other customer, because they are your fellow man and fellow citizen.
Click to expand...
If that were the case, should a pro-gay ‘marriage’ baker be forced to bake a cake that says ‘Gay marriage is wrong’? If no, that’s a double standard.
 
ATraveller said:
And yes it would be a saner world where people don’t drag others to court over petty things like cakes and flowers.
Click to expand...
I think it’d be a saner world if people didn’t do things as petty as deny gay people cakes or flowers.
 
phil19034 said:
No… they just declared war on the Little Sisters of the Poor. That’s all. Oh, wait… they also declared war on EWTN, Christendom College, Catholic hospitals across the nation, and other Catholic colleges and schools who follow the magisterium of the Church.

Plus, when did Hillary or Kane distance themselves from the anti-Catholic language in the Wikileaks? They didn’t, because Hillary believes that religions need to change.

They also support Abortion 100%, even though “Jane Roe” spoke out against the Roe v Wade ruling, and was even upset with it the day it happened (she later became 100% pro life, was baptized a Christian, started working with Priests for Life, and eventually become a Catholic).

And this is just a small example from the Catholics. They, also attacked Hobby Lobby and have looked to financially destroy any conscientious objectors to “same sex marriage.”
Click to expand...
Yuk! There is no way that conscientious Catholics will vote for them with such anti-Catholic politic. Lucifer himself would not do any better.
 
Reuben_J said:
Yuk! There is no way that conscientious Catholics will vote for them with such anti-Catholic politic. Lucifer himself would not do any better.
Click to expand...
So you think nearly 50% of Catholic voters were not conscientious?
 
lmachine said:
I think it’d be a saner world if people didn’t do things as petty as deny gay people cakes or flowers.
Click to expand...
They aren’t being denied for being gay, it’s the wedding. The small businesses see this as contributing to an act of sin. Forcing them to do this is wrong and people who think it’s okay to force them don’t realize they are setting up a state with powers that will be abused. There’s a good chance in the future these things will come back to haunt primarily the left.
 
ATraveller said:
They aren’t being denied for being gay, it’s the wedding. The small businesses see this as contributing to an act of sin. Forcing them to do this is wrong and people who think it’s okay to force them don’t realize they are setting up a state with powers that will be abused. There’s a good chance in the future these things will come back to haunt primarily the left.
Click to expand...
“Haunt”? Lol how. Majority of Americans support gay marriage, and you are not “contributing to an act of sin” - you’re literally just baking a cake.
 
ATraveller said:
They aren’t being denied for being gay, it’s the wedding. The small businesses see this as contributing to an act of sin. Forcing them to do this is wrong and people who think it’s okay to force them don’t realize they are setting up a state with powers that will be abused. There’s a good chance in the future these things will come back to haunt primarily the left.
Click to expand...
No one’s forcing anyone to do anything. If you feel the antidiscrimination laws in your jurisdiction might violate your beliefs you don’t have to volunteer to run a business there.
 
joshman1 said:
So you think nearly 50% of Catholic voters were not conscientious?
Click to expand...
… can’t say with certainty about that. Many of us in America probably are Catholics in name only. But yes, conscientious deeply believing Catholics will certainly not condone killing of unborn babies or approve of same sex marriages.

This is one reason why Catholics all over the world receive Mr. trump with great joy, realising that for a long time an American President takes up their value and belief. Praise the Lord.

That would make he is supported and voted overwhelmingly by Catholics. 👍
 
Reuben_J said:
… can’t say with certainty about that. Many of us in America probably are Catholics in name only. But yes, conscientious deeply believing Catholics will certainly not condone killing of unborn babies or approve of same sex marriages.

This is one reason why Catholics all over the world receive Mr. trump with great joy, realising that for a long time an American President takes up their value and belief. Praise the Lord.

That would make he is supported and voted overwhelmingly by Catholics. 👍
Click to expand...
Wow. We’ll never see eye to eye, going to have to agree to disagree.
 
joshman1 said:
“Haunt”? Lol how. Majority of Americans support gay marriage, and you are not “contributing to an act of sin” - you’re literally just baking a cake.
Click to expand...
The powers the state gains. The left won’t be thrilled if they get used in certain ways. Let’s not forget Trump wasn’t supposed to win. Can you imagine someone worse winning? And it is contributing i.e. giving something knowing full well what it’s for .
lmachine said:
No one’s forcing anyone to do anything. If you feel the antidiscrimination laws in your jurisdiction might violate your beliefs you don’t have to volunteer to run a business there.
Click to expand...
No one is forcing anyone to do anything except those who feel the need to drag others into a costly legal process over not receiving a non-essential service related a wedding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top