Trump Thread (cont.)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Bay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
estesbob said:
What has always surprised me the most in my years on CAF is the amount of venom directed at those of us in the pro-life ministry . You expect it on a public board but a Catholic Forum?
Click to expand...
What kind of venom? Are you saying it comes from Catholics as well as non-Catholics? This is one of the only places in my life in which nearly everyone is pro-life.
 
Crossbones said:
I don’t see how he could set it back because he clearly hasn’t thought it out.
Click to expand...
I agree that he’s all over the map on this issue. But I doubt that prosecuting women who have abortions (which he may or may not believe in, depending on the day) is going to help those who are part of outreach efforts to these women.
 
meltzerboy said:
Not I. I would prefer Ted Cruz as the nominee since I think he would be considerably easier for Hillary Clinton to beat than Donald Trump. However, if Trump has the delegates, I am sure you would agree that as a matter of fairness, he should be the nominee. I must also add that in terms of sheer political excitement, a Trump-Clinton contest would be so much better.
Click to expand...
I think “Cruz would be easier for Clinton to beat than Trump” is now the theme song of this forum.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Not really a good comparison. The justices in Roe had to invent a “penumbra” to find the right to abortion, meaning, of course, that it isn’t there in words. And it isn’t.
Click to expand...
There are all sorts of things that the Federal Government regulates that are no where explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. Many of these things, including the Civil Rights Act, are based at least in part on the rather expansive interpretation by the Supreme Court of the Commerce Clause: “[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” The way this clause is used is not much more of an invention than the “penumbra.”
 
gracepoole said:
I agree that he’s all over the map on this issue. But I doubt that prosecuting women who have abortions (which he may or may not believe in, depending on the day) is going to help those who are part of outreach efforts to these women.
Click to expand...
If it’s murder, then those that seek the murder must be punished. It only makes sense. He wasn’t well versed in this and stated what many want to pretend is illogical.
 
gracepoole said:
What kind of venom? Are you saying it comes from Catholics as well as non-Catholics? This is one of the only places in my life in which nearly everyone is pro-life.
Click to expand...
If I might jump in here, I think there’s a lot of “venom” in general. I can’t say whether prolifers get more than their share of it.

Fwiw.
 
Crossbones said:
To think it out? I think we’re safe that he won’t. It’s not in his wheelhouse. Social issues mean nothing to him.
Click to expand...
I think it’s possible that Trump Would Set Back Anti-Abortion Cause without having to think it out. His words affect a lot of people – not enough to get him into the White House, but still in the millions.
 
Peter_J said:
I think it’s possible that Trump Would Set Back Anti-Abortion Cause without having to think it out. His words affect a lot of people – not enough to get him into the White House, but still in the millions.
Click to expand...
Well, he’d set it back in the sense that it’s clear that neither party represents those that are pro-life.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
She hasn’t mentioned changing religious beliefs in any of them, …
Click to expand...
You must know now that is not true. We have quoted her speech many, many times. Why don’t we stick to the truth and not deny what she has said?
“And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed."
hotair.com/archives/2015/04/24/hillary-deep-seated-religious-beliefs-have-to-be-changed-for-abortion/
dailycaller.com/2015/04/23/hillary-on-abortion-deep-seated-cultural-codes-religious-beliefs-and-structural-biases-have-to-be-changed/
nation.foxnews.com/2015/04/27/hillary-religious-beliefs-must-change-sake-abortion
theblaze.com/blog/2015/04/27/hillary-clinton-says-religious-beliefs-have-to-be-changed-on-abortion-heres-why-thats-ironic/
truthrevolt.org/news/hillary-deep-seated-religious-beliefs-must-be-changed-abortion
nationalreview.com/article/417448/hillary-clinton-religious-beliefs-have-be-changed-accommodate-abortion-joel-gehrke
lifenews.com/2015/04/27/hillary-clinton-force-christians-to-change-their-religious-views-to-support-abortion/
nowtheendbegins.com/hillary-clinton-says-christianity-must-change-to-accommodate-abortion-on-demand-video/
 
meltzerboy said:
Not I. I would prefer Ted Cruz as the nominee since I think he would be considerably easier for Hillary Clinton to beat than Donald Trump. However, if Trump has the delegates, I am sure you would agree that as a matter of fairness, he should be the nominee. I must also add that in terms of sheer political excitement, a Trump-Clinton contest would be so much better.
Click to expand...
I would prefer Cruz, too. Hillary, or Sanders, would steamroll over Cruz.
 
josie_L said:
And tell me how you know what the pro-life movement and rather those involved in the pro-life movement are or aren’t doing, in other words please don’t make assumptions about what they do and don’t do and/or what they’re all about. Thank you!!!
Click to expand...
You and others have said what you’re involved in. I don’t make assumptions about people I do know let alone those I don’t. And, I’ve been involved in it myself. I’ve seen it up close.
 
Ridgerunner said:
“Militia” at the time were just citizens who had a duty to appear armed when called. Their weapons were their own.

Now, one might argue that we no longer have any need for militias, and therefore there is no need for anyone to keep and bear arms. Nevertheless, in my state at least, every able bodied person between the ages of 17 and 64 is subject to being called to militia service by the governor or the adjutant general. The statutes make a distinction between the “organized militia” (national guard) and the “unorganized militia” (everybody else of the proper ages who is not a minister or disabled). If you’re not in the former, you’re automatically in the latter.

Yes, potential enemies are a long way off, geographically. But they were even more distant in relative terms when the Constitution was written.

Seems to me an armed citizenry was exactly what the drafters of the Constitution had in mind.
Click to expand...
AND, the “militia” of the 2nd Amendment came long before the National Guard.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
I don’t mean to be disrespectful to Cardinal Burke.
Click to expand...
Oh I believe you. I’m just pointing out that fundamentalist (or “traditionalist”) Catholics have often been disrespectful towards the Church.
I’ll say he was removed from two posts and assigned to others. Still, I don’t think he should have said that about Pope Francis. I realize Pope Francis isn’t as conservative as Cardinal Burke would like, but still, Pope Francis is our Holy Father.
Click to expand...
You don’t need to rehash. Neither one of us wants to disrespect the Church or anyone in it. I understand that. You are always very polite, and that is greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...
🙂
 
Mary_Gail_36 said:
I, for one, have not been at all convinced by Trump’s pro-life epiphany.

He’s not pro-life, he just has the idea that Republicans are pro-life, and he’s going with that idea. His comments betray him. He has remained very much neutral in New York, where he lives.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe he’s any more pro-life than Hillary Clinton, who could actually be pro-life herself. I think all of them just adopt a certain stance for political expediency. I do believe Sanders, though. He says he is against abortion personally, but wouldn’t tell another person what to do in that regard. I believe he actually feels that way. The others, I think, would say whatever suits their political agenda.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
I don’t believe he’s any more pro-life than Hillary Clinton, who could actually be pro-life herself. I think all of them just adopt a certain stance for political expediency. I do believe Sanders, though. He says he is against abortion personally, but wouldn’t tell another person what to do in that regard. I believe he actually feels that way. The others, I think, would say whatever suits their political agenda.
Click to expand...
There is no possibility whatever that Hillary Clinton is prolife. She would probably take the assertion as an insult, particularly if said in front of one of her NARAL or Planned Parenthood supporters.

Remember, she re-endorsed PP even after the sale of baby parts was revealed. And her mocking and laughing at the torture-killing of Khaddaffi was chilling. What all, one wonders, does she intend to make us change in our religion in order to suit her goals? We don’t know, and can’t know why, exactly, her conscience is so dead. But what we can know is that it’s beyond foolish for anyone to think such a person could possibly care about them or their well-being. If anyone could be described as “beyond good and evil”, it’s Hillary Clinton.

But people do that because they somehow persuade themselves that they’ll be among the few who remain standing after the ones they disdain are blown down.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top