Trump Supporter Brutally Beaten Is Speaking Out And Fighting Back

[Ridgerunner]

I don’t need to prove this. Trump certainly has had affairs and sex outside of marriage (after all, his VietNam was avoiding VD in the 70s). We have already established how this behavior results in abortions. Whether or not Trump is responsible for an abortion would only be do to the luck of the draw.

Of course, if he did not have sex with Daniels, it wouldn’t be “the luck of the draw”, it would be physically impossible for him to make her pregnant.

There has been a great drop in the number of abortions over the last decade. This, despite it still being legal. I personally think that there are greater impacts on the number of abortions than its legality. A stronger social support system will reduce the number of abortions. Having leaders that embrace moral sexual behavior will reduce the number of abortions. And, simply put, I have spent almost my entire life and abortion is still legal, despite the Republicans claiming to be pro-life and having control of government as often as not. I just don’t think voting because someone claims to be pro-life actually solves the issue anymore.

Those who support the abortion politicians all say this. The Repubs have been responsible for every prolife measure (and there have been plenty) over the years. Dems blame Repubs for the constitution of the Supreme Court while voting for presidential candidates who promise to appoint more abortionists.

And then when a fairly clearly prolife appointee comes along like Kavanaugh, the Dems crucify him and bear false witness to prevent him from being confirmed. They still attack him and want to impeach him. The Democrat apologia for their support of abortion doesn’t wash.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

I gave you a long list of people that were persuaded. It is amazing how far Trump supporters will go to avoid being persuaded.

Just saying “this guy believes it” is not evidence and is not persuasive.

Look again at the list of “this guys”.

 

[dvdjs]

I gave you a long list of people that were persuaded. It is amazing how far Trump supporters will go to avoid being persuaded.

Is it still amazing? And is it amazing how far some of his supporters go to conjure up and support phony narratives.

Here is tough piece by the conservative Bulwark.

Dear Republicans, Is This the Idol to Whom You Have Sold Your Souls?​

Dear Republicans, Is This the Idol to Whom You Have Sold Your Souls?

In the past few weeks, Donald Trump has gone from saying that no, he didn't collude with a foreign dictatorship to interfere with the U.S.

thebulwark.com

Once people are … drawn in, there is a kind of sunk-cost fallacy that pulls them farther down. Having already compromised their principles to go along with Trumpism, they need to keep on justifying their original investment by minimizing or making excuses for every new awful thing he does.

 

[drcube]

Of course, if he did not have sex with Daniels, it wouldn’t be “the luck of the draw”, it would be physically impossible for him to make her pregnant.

Did you read what I wrote? We’re talking about more than one sexual encounter outside of marriage.

Those who support the abortion politicians all say this. The Repubs have been responsible for every prolife measure (and there have been plenty) over the years.

Republicans have been responsible for laws that restrict abortion, yes, but those few laws do not explain the decline in abortions. There are other factors in play.

Dems blame Repubs for the constitution of the Supreme Court while voting for presidential candidates who promise to appoint more abortionists.

No, I am saying that Republicans have failed to nominate those that actually overturn Roe v Wade. They have had more than enough chances and I won’t base my vote on the hope that somehow Republicans get it right when there are many moral issues with voting Republican.

And then when a fairly clearly prolife appointee comes along like Kavanaugh, the Dems crucify him and bear false witness to prevent him from being confirmed. They still attack him and want to impeach him. The Democrat apologia for their support of abortion doesn’t wash.

Kavanaugh was accused of three incidents of sexual abuse. His finances had oddities to them and his temperament was awful. He was a terrible choice.

And, in your response, you continue to duck the issue on how your views on voters supporting pro-choice politicians is the equivalent of ‘holding the knife’ in an abortion. At what point do you admit that this is outside of Catholic teaching and simply your personal theological view? And why do you continue to ignore that sex outside of marriage is the primary act that results in abortion? Are you, as a pro-life supporter, going to condemn sex outside of marriage?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Did you read what I wrote? We’re talking about more than one sexual encounter outside of marriage.

I believe he has admitted to adultery durng his first marriage with the woman he married second. Other than that, I don’t think there’s proof of any other adulterous relationships. But it really is ironic that people who support politicians who are responsible for the deaths of millions purport to be in a swivet about one guy committing adultery when they don’t even know he has done it.

But maybe if I was an abortion supporter, I would try to direct attention away from my guilt as well. But it’s always best to admit to one’s sin. That’s the first step.

 

[drcube]

I believe he has admitted to adultery durng his first marriage with the woman he married second. Other than that, I don’t think there’s proof of any other adulterous relationships

Do you really think that the only sex that Trump had outside of marriage was one adulterous affair on his first wife?

But it really is ironic that people who support politicians who are responsible for the deaths of millions purport to be in a swivet about one guy committing adultery when they don’t even know he has done it

I explained this above that the vast majority of abortions are a result of sex outside of marriage. And, again, do you seriously believe that the only time Trump had sex outside of marriage was one adulterous affair?

But maybe if I was an abortion supporter, I would try to direct attention away from my guilt as well. But it’s always best to admit to one’s sin. That’s the first step.

I do not feel guilty because I have chosen to use the information available to me to make an informed decision on how to vote based on Catholic teachings. Personally, I feel bad that I have spent much of my life following the lead of those like yourself, who think that you can just get rid of abortion by law and continue to put their faith in politicians that fail over and over again without addressing the issues that cause the abortions in the first place. It’s been 46 years. Your approach has failed. Miserably. Because I choose to ignore the failures of the past and seek a new direction that could actually work does not mean I am an abortion supporter and I would hope that you could actually argue a position without the insults, but so far, you haven’t demonstrated that ability.

 

[Theo520]

I looked at the eight posts that the forum software shows that you have made on this thread. None of them contain any links at all.

It was in another thread, where you made the exact same comment.
Just look in your notifications

 

[Ridgerunner]

Do you really think that the only sex that Trump had outside of marriage was one adulterous affair on his first wife?

I don’t know, and neither do you.

I do not feel guilty because

Again, if I was supporting the murder of millions of children I would either reform my conscience or find a way of rationalizing it. I was a Democrat once myself, but found that I could no longer follow the teachings of the Church and those of the Dem party. I’m not a member of any party now.

When the Dem party platform supports abortion and when we see Supreme Court results like Carhart vs. Gonzales, and when we look at the ratings of NARAL and National Right to Life, it’s plain that there is one pro-abortion party only, and that’s the Dem party.

 

[dvdjs]

It was in another thread, where you made the exact same comment.

I did see that one later. But as a rule, in an effort to keep discussion within forum rules, I don’t respond to posts in which I am addressed in the imperative voice. The response that I gave here in post#86 is sufficient.

 

[drcube]

I don’t know, and neither do you.

If you are going to ignore the obvious, it makes it very hard to take any point you make seriously.

Again, if I was supporting the murder of millions of children I would either reform my conscience or find a way of rationalizing it. I was a Democrat once myself, but found that I could no longer follow the teachings of the Church and those of the Dem party. I’m not a member of any party now.

When the Dem party platform supports abortion and when we see Supreme Court results like Carhart vs. Gonzales, and when we look at the ratings of NARAL and National Right to Life, it’s plain that there is one pro-abortion party only, and that’s the Dem party.

Whatever your path away from the Democratic party took, I doubt that abortion was the only issue given your pro-Republican, pro-Trump view of every single issue.

Again, you don’t address my actual points and choose to go back to the old defense. So, let me restate it: the pro-life approach of the last HALF CENTURY has failed. Winning and losing this battle through politics has failed. There were significant reductions in the number of abortions under the Democrats that you despise. Successive Republican Presidents have failed to nominate a Supreme Court that overturns Roe v Wade. It’s time for a new approach, which should involve an emphasis on moral sexual behavior and not excusing that behavior because you like the views of the politicians that exhibits the opposite behavior.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Whatever your path away from the Democratic party took, I doubt that abortion was the only issue given your pro-Republican, pro-Trump view of every single issue.

You doubt it? It was true. You have to realize the Dem party when I was growing up and when I was a younger man was not very different from the Repub party of today in most ways. The Dem party of today is more like the Rockefeller Repubs of decades ago. It was not difficult to be Catholic and Democrat for a substantial part of my life, and almost all Catholics were Democrats.

But the Dem party changed, and the most dramatic change was going all in for abortion. I held office in the party and was an activist. So was my wife. She was on the State Committee. Want to know what the final straw was? She gave a speech in front of the State Committee encouraging the party to be welcoming to prolife candidates. She was told afterward never to say such things again because they were “divisive”. Well, that has proven to be true. Speaking prolife in a Dem context was, and is now (even more) “divisive”.

We had no place to go after that and have remained party-less ever since. If my posts seem “Repub” it’s because they’re “old Democrat”. The party has changed, not me.

Do I support Trump? Well, as long as he continues doing what he has been doing, I do. He let the Little Sisters off the Obama HHS Mandate, reinstated the Mexico City Policy, appointed two prolife justices and a lot of lower court judges. No new wars. Job improvement, especially for blacks and Hispanics. To me, Trump is “old Democrat” more than he is a Republican.

Successive Repubs have appointed prolife justices. Look at Carhart vs. Gonzales. The issue was whether states could ban partial birth abortions. Every Dem voted not to allow states to do it. Every Repub voted for the bans.

A fight against murderousness is not necessarily over with in the time period many would prefer. After all, it took 70 years to defeat communism and it still remains in altered form in China, NoKo and Cuba. But progress has been made with abortion, and with Trump in office, it will continue.

 

[drcube]

You doubt it? It was true. <>

But the Dem party changed, and the most dramatic change was going all in for abortion. I held office in the party and was an activist. So was my wife. She was on the State Committee. Want to know what the final straw was? She gave a speech in front of the State Committee encouraging the party to be welcoming to prolife candidates. She was told afterward never to say such things again because they were “divisive”. Well, that has proven to be true. Speaking prolife in a Dem context was, and is now (even more) “divisive”.

Given your support for every Republican issue based on your comments in this forum, either the Democratic Party changed on FAR MORE than abortion or your views never aligned with that party well. Not that I really care because this is ancient history.

We had no place to go after that and have remained party-less ever since. If my posts seem “Repub” it’s because they’re “old Democrat”. The party has changed, not me.

Your posts definitely are “Repub” and, if that’s “old Democrat” then thank goodness that party is long dead.

Do I support Trump? Well, as long as he continues doing what he has been doing, I do. He let the Little Sisters off the Obama HHS Mandate, reinstated the Mexico City Policy, appointed two prolife justices and a lot of lower court judges. No new wars. Job improvement, especially for blacks and Hispanics. To me, Trump is “old Democrat” more than he is a Republican.

Again, you only care about abortion. Trump just started a war in Syria by his inaction and the improvement in the jobs is a continuation of Obama’s years.

Successive Repubs have appointed prolife justices. Look at Carhart vs. Gonzales. The issue was whether states could ban partial birth abortions. Every Dem voted not to allow states to do it. Every Repub voted for the bans.

Small issues on the very fringe to keep the pro-lifers happy while not really making a lick of difference.

A fight against murderousness is not necessarily over with in the time period many would prefer. After all, it took 70 years to defeat communism and it still remains in altered form in China, NoKo and Cuba. But progress has been made with abortion, and with Trump in office, it will continue.

Your methods have failed. There is no reasonable path to expect to eliminate abortions in the US through legal means. The ‘win’ is overturning Roe v Wade, which means most states will still have legal abortion and Republicans are so poor at governing and considered racist by most minorities, there is little hope of them being in a position of power to pass laws against abortion where the vast majority of the population lives.

It’s time for a new approach.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Given your support for every Republican issue based on your comments in this forum, either the Democratic Party changed on FAR MORE than abortion or your views never aligned with that party well.

After I left the party, it certainly did change in more ways than support of abortion. But I was an officeholder in the party and they didn’t throw me out, so I think my views aligned pretty well.
I’m getting the feeling you must be pretty young not to remember what the Dem party was like in decades past. It wasn’t always “Green New Deals” and “Open Borders”.

Small issues on the very fringe to keep the pro-lifers happy while not really making a lick of difference

I can tell you have never read the case. It was a very big deal. But for the Repub appointees on the Court, partial birth abortion would now be a “constitutional right” and states could not ban it.

It’s time for a new approach and it won’t look like the failures of your generation of pro-lifers.

Maybe so. But politically supporting abortion promoters sure won’t work as a “new approach”.

 

[drcube]

After I left the party, it certainly did change in more ways than support of abortion. But I was an officeholder in the party and they didn’t throw me out, so I think my views aligned pretty well.
I’m getting the feeling you must be pretty young not to remember what the Dem party was like in decades past. It wasn’t always “Green New Deals” and “Open Borders”.

Well, it isn’t that now, certainly not “Open Borders”. The “Green New Deal” seems like an intelligent plan to invest in energies that can sustain us without pollution and the government has always spent on R&D and basic research, so I’m thinking you’re not terribly in touch with the Democratic Party except what you hear from the right wing media.

I can tell you have never read the case. It was a very big deal. But for the Repub appointees on the Court, partial birth abortion would now be a “constitutional right” and states could not ban it.

And there aren’t many partial birth abortions, so fringe case.

Maybe so. But politically supporting abortion promoters sure won’t work as a “new approach”.

Fighting them hasn’t worked in the old approach, so maybe the solution isn’t political.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I’m thinking you’re not terribly in touch with the Democratic Party except what you hear from the right wing media.

Imagine how foolish this is if you’re wrong.

And there aren’t many partial birth abortions, so fringe case.

Doesn’t the Talmud say “Who saves one life saves the world entire” ? I have always liked that statement. But it has to be recognized that the Dem party of today would go even further and extinguish the lives of children born alive of botched abortions. Let’s see, I believe Obama voted against legislation to save their lives twice, didn’t he? Yes, it was twice.

Fighting them hasn’t worked in the old approach, so maybe the solution isn’t political.

Some of it is, but admittedly not all.

It worked in Carhart vs. Gonzales. Since all of the Dem justices voted for partial birth abortion, only the Repub votes saved the day. And every single thing that has been done to promote prolife has been done by the Republicans. I will grant that the Dem party has fought any kind of prolife measures tooth and toenail, but there have actually been some victories.

One of my favorite charities is Catholic Charities of Southern Missouri. Among other things, it operates a home for pregnant women in danger of abortion. About a year ago, the City of Springfield had a grant for womens’ health and Catholic Charities was in the running. The person in charge of the grant expressed that Catholic Charities shouldn’t qualify because it wouldn’t refer women for abortion, thus limiting their “choice”. The director for Catholic Charities remarked that the women they dealt with had already made their “choice” and that choice was for life. The audience applauded and Catholic Charities got the grant.

For the last few years, the Republican legislature of Missouri has issued tax credits for donations to that home run by Catholic Charities. It provides education, medical care, room and board, detox if needed, counseling, job training and job referrals. And perhaps most important of all, it provides safety. Women in danger of abortion always have people who think it’s in their own interest to have the child killed.

But no, I’m not a Republican. I do vote for them and contribute to their campaigns because they’re not pro-abortion like the Dems are.

 

[drcube]

Imagine how foolish this is if you’re wrong.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) drcube:

It wouldn’t be more foolish than many things I read here.

Doesn’t the Talmud say “Who saves one life saves the world entire” ? I have always liked that statement. But it has to be recognized that the Dem party of today would go even further and extinguish the lives of children born alive of botched abortions. Let’s see, I believe Obama voted against legislation to save their lives twice, didn’t he? Yes, it was twice.

It’s funny then that you seem to mock me for thinking that a political representative of this movement have good sexual morals. After all, if a politician had frequent sexual contact outside of marriage, he probably caused a pregnancy that was very much at risk to end in abortion. One life saved and all if that politician can behave properly. Or maybe a few…

Some of it is, but admittedly not all.

It worked in Carhart vs. Gonzales. Since all of the Dem justices voted for partial birth abortion, only the Repub votes saved the day. And every single thing that has been done to promote prolife has been done by the Republicans. I will grant that the Dem party has fought any kind of prolife measures tooth and toenail, but there have actually been some victories.

As I said, this has made a very small difference in the total number of abortions. I agree with the decision, but the political endgame of this will be for Roe v Wade to be overturned and states will decide. But, because of Republican politics, in states where the vast majority of people live, abortion will remain legal. A different approach is needed.

For the last few years, the Republican legislature of Missouri has issued tax credits for donations to that home run by Catholic Charities. It provides education, medical care, room and board, detox if needed, counseling, job training and job referrals. And perhaps most important of all, it provides safety. Women in danger of abortion always have people who think it’s in their own interest to have the child killed.

And I totally agree this is where effort should go as well as developing a better social safety net.

But no, I’m not a Republican. I do vote for them and contribute to their campaigns because they’re not pro-abortion like the Dems are.

And you certainly seem to support them in every post you make at CAF to the point where you start to insult those that disagree with you.

 

[Ridgerunner]

It’s funny then that you seem to mock me for thinking that a political representative of this movement have good sexual morals. After all, if a politician had frequent sexual contact outside of marriage, he probably caused a pregnancy that was very much at risk to end in abortion. One life saved and all if that politician can behave properly. Or maybe a few…

I’m not mocking you. I’m simply observing that you don’t know what sexual contacts Trump has had or whether any of them resulted in an abortion. You just don’t. But even if he did, that doesn’t justify supporting those who promote the killing of millions.

And you certainly seem to support them in every post you make at CAF to the point where you start to insult those that disagree with you.

I think you have missed my critiques of “cruise Republicans”; perhaps the “purest Repubs” of all. I could be called an “Ozark mountain populist” with some justification, but not a Repub.

But as I said before, you seem to be too young to remember what the Dem party was like before it essentially abandoned all of its values except abortion.

 

[drcube]

I’m not mocking you. I’m simply observing that you don’t know what sexual contacts Trump has had or whether any of them resulted in an abortion. You just don’t. But even if he did, that doesn’t justify supporting those who promote the killing of millions.

And again, we go full circle again, where I point out that the vast majority of abortions occur in women who are not married, hence any sexual relations that occur are outside of marriage and, if this could be remedied, the number of abortions will drop drastically. I wonder: who do you blame more for abortions: the father of the child when the sex occurs outside of marriage or Democrats?

I think you have missed my critiques of “cruise Republicans”; perhaps the “purest Repubs” of all. I could be called an “Ozark mountain populist” with some justification, but not a Repub.

Yep, I must have missed that because I have seen nothing along those lines.

But as I said before, you seem to be too young to remember what the Dem party was like before it essentially abandoned all of its values except abortion.

Given that you don’t seem to understand that the Democratic Party that exists now has not abandoned all of its values except for abortion, I doubt I would remember the Democratic Party that you claimed existed in the past.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I wonder: who do you blame more for abortions: the father of the child when the sex occurs outside of marriage or Democrats?

I can do nothing about individuals unknown to me who procure abortions. I can oppose the political party that promotes them.

Given that you don’t seem to understand that the Democratic Party that exists now has not abandoned all of its values except for abortion

People who used to be Dems (and that’s most Catholics, by way of example) know what I’m saying is true.

 

[abucs]

People who used to be Dems (and that’s most Catholics, by way of example) know what I’m saying is true.

I come from a Catholic family who naturally voted Left.
I know what you mean.