Trump Thread Two

  • Thread starter Thread starter XndrK
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jeanne_S said:
Watch it,I received an infraction for saying basically the same thing re John Kerry’s outrageous remark. What you just said is most uncharitiable,remember no personal attacks on candidates or their family members;)
Click to expand...
I see what you are doing here. This is not meant to be uncharitable nor is the article about Alzheimer disease. Every channel I watched last night and this morning are talking about the state of Trumps mental health. I’m not making it up to be mean. You may think this is personal but it’s not. I’m sorry if I offended you in some way.
 
zz912 said:
It’s an excuse to ignore Church teaching and vote for pro-abortion politicians. “Prolife groups don’t care about the baby once it’s born, so I can vote for the politician that supports killing the baby!”

It’s false, and the logic is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
The logic isn’t ridiculous. Look at National Right Life PAC’s web site:
nrlpac.org/
It’s a PAC (Political Action Committee) focused exclusively on legislation.
Nothing about the mother and baby – everything about legislation.
Nothing about the obscenely expensive cost of childbirth, nothing about midwives.

Look at Pro-Life Action League’s web site:
prolifeaction.org/links.php
To the credit of Pro-Life Action League, they do link to Feminists For Life, one of the only major pro-life groups that does address pro-life at all stages, including after birth:
"Established in 1972, Feminists for Life of America is a nonsectarian, nonpartisan, grassroots organization that seeks real solutions to the challenges women face."
feministsforlife.org/our-mission-organization/

By and large, the goal of “pro-life” cause is to – well, now that Trump is the face of “pro-life,” apparently to stop federal funds from going to PP – however, it should be offering financial help to those mothers who do choose life because it’s not free to choose life and hospitals make way more money $$$ on those deliveries than PP makes on abortion (something even Trump realizes, since he raves about the “wonderful” work PP does for women – “except for when it comes to abortion.”) Why don’t National Right To Life and other political-based groups work on any legislation to help hospitals, especially Catholic hospitals, and insurance carriers negotiate LOWER RATES for deliveries? How did AFFORDABLE childbirth become a “non-issue” in the pro-life movement? Everyone wants to talk about how much money PP and the abortionists make killing babies, but nobody wants to talk about how much MORE money is being made in childbirth – that’s the logic I don’t understand. It shouldn’t take a second mortgage to deliver a baby, yet often, it does. Why isn’t affordable childbirth part of the “pro-life” cause? 🤷
 
zz912 said:
It’s an excuse to ignore Church teaching and vote for pro-abortion politicians. “Prolife groups don’t care about the baby once it’s born, so I can vote for the politician that supports killing the baby!”

It’s false, and the logic is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
This is a mode of thinking that must be addressed, especially given today’s candidates.

Abortion is a very important issue, perhaps THE most important issue. But in this election we all must ask ourselves if we are willing to risk. Risk what?

It seems to me that Donald Trump would be so bad for this country and this world in so many ways that this harm outweighs any good he might do in regard to abortion. And I say “might do” because he cannot be counted on for anything even if he had the opportunity to do something specific, like appoint a SCOTUS judge, or influence legislation. He is an unpredictable, unstable wildcard who is now being criticized by prominent members of his own party.

Hilary? As bad as she is, she at least will not destabilize our nation as a going concern. And this is not even getting into political preferences where we can all disagree. It has gone beyond that at this point. Trump is not a civil leader. He knows nothing about sharing power and decision making. He will try to be a dictator and when he doesn’t get his way he will react like a truculent little boy. What will that do for us in the world? How will that bring us together as a nation? I can see no good whatsoever coming from his presidency.
 
Michael_Mayo said:
This is a mode of thinking that must be addressed, especially given today’s candidates.

Abortion is a very important issue, perhaps THE most important issue. But in this election we all must ask ourselves if we are willing to risk. Risk what?

It seems to me that Donald Trump would be so bad for this country and this world in so many ways that this harm outweighs any good he might do in regard to abortion. And I say “might do” because he cannot be counted on for anything even if he had the opportunity to do something specific, like appoint a SCOTUS judge, or influence legislation. He is an unpredictable, unstable wildcard who is now being criticized by prominent members of his own party.

Hilary? As bad as she is, she at least will not destabilize our nation as a going concern. And this is not even getting into political preferences where we can all disagree. It has gone beyond that at this point. Trump is not a civil leader. He knows nothing about sharing power and decision making. He will try to be a dictator and when he doesn’t get his way he will react like a truculent little boy. What will that do for us in the world? How will that bring us together as a nation? I can see no good whatsoever coming from his presidency.
Click to expand...
Basically this, yes.

Why in the world should I believe Trump will do anything for abortion?
 
Good_Tidings said:
I see what you are doing here. This is not meant to be uncharitable nor is the article about Alzheimer disease. Every channel I watched last night and this morning are talking about the state of Trumps mental health. I’m not making it up to be mean. You may think this is personal but it’s not. I’m sorry if I offended you in some way.
Click to expand...
What am I doing,besides warning you about forum rules,I don’t understand?:confused:
 
Jeanne_S said:
Watch it,I received an infraction for saying basically the same thing re John Kerry’s outrageous remark. What you just said is most uncharitiable,remember no personal attacks on candidates or their family members;)
Click to expand...
By the way, I’m not saying this. It’s the title of the article.
 
Michael_Mayo said:
This is a mode of thinking that must be addressed, especially given today’s candidates.

Abortion is a very important issue, perhaps THE most important issue. But in this election we all must ask ourselves if we are willing to risk. Risk what?

It seems to me that Donald Trump would be so bad for this country and this world in so many ways that this harm outweighs any good he might do in regard to abortion. And I say “might do” because he cannot be counted on for anything even if he had the opportunity to do something specific, like appoint a SCOTUS judge, or influence legislation. He is an unpredictable, unstable wildcard who is now being criticized by prominent members of his own party.

Hilary? As bad as she is, she at least will not destabilize our nation as a going concern. And this is not even getting into political preferences where we can all disagree. It has gone beyond that at this point. Trump is not a civil leader. He knows nothing about sharing power and decision making. He will try to be a dictator and when he doesn’t get his way he will react like a truculent little boy. What will that do for us in the world? How will that bring us together as a nation? I can see no good whatsoever coming from his presidency.
Click to expand...
I trust Hillary will do more for the sanctity of life AFTER the baby’s born. I trust her policies will do more to persuade mothers to choose life because “pro-life” is a healthcare issue before anything else. Her policies will make it easier for mothers to choose life, and isn’t that what we all want?
 
LeafByNiggle said:
As I said the last time you made this claim, it is not quite true. The specific section in the catechism reads:
*
The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modem times with “communism” or “socialism.” She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of “capitalism,” individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor. Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for “there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market.” Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended*.

It is not socialism per se, but the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated with socialism in modern times. If someone or something is “socialist”, but without those ideologies, the Church does not condemn. It is interesting to note that the Church also condemns certain ideologies sometimes associated with capitalism, but does not condemn capitalism itself.

It is no more correct to say “the Church condemns Socialism” than it is to say “the Church condemns Capitalism”.
Click to expand...
Socialism is inherently atheistic. It replaces God with the state. And show me an actual example of socialism somewhere that didn’t violate the Church teaching on subsidiarity.
 
Michael_Mayo said:
This is a mode of thinking that must be addressed, especially given today’s candidates.

Abortion is a very important issue, perhaps THE most important issue. But in this election we all must ask ourselves if we are willing to risk. Risk what?

It seems to me that Donald Trump would be so bad for this country and this world in so many ways that this harm outweighs any good he might do in regard to abortion. And I say “might do” because he cannot be counted on for anything even if he had the opportunity to do something specific, like appoint a SCOTUS judge, or influence legislation. He is an unpredictable, unstable wildcard who is now being criticized by prominent members of his own party.

Hilary? As bad as she is, she at least will not destabilize our nation as a going concern. And this is not even getting into political preferences where we can all disagree. It has gone beyond that at this point. Trump is not a civil leader. He knows nothing about sharing power and decision making. He will try to be a dictator and when he doesn’t get his way he will react like a truculent little boy. What will that do for us in the world? How will that bring us together as a nation? I can see no good whatsoever coming from his presidency.
Click to expand...
👍👍
 
randomuser said:
I trust Hillary will do more for the sanctity of life AFTER the baby’s born. I trust her policies will do more to persuade mothers to choose life because “pro-life” is a healthcare issue before anything else. Her policies will make it easier for mothers to choose life, and isn’t that what we all want?
Click to expand...
I trust Hillary to do one thing: Not randomly nuke someone.

I trust Trump on literally nothing.

Now, that doesn’t mean I’m voting for Hillary. That is not going to happen. But I sure as heck am not voting Trump either.
 
randomuser said:
I trust Hillary will do more for the sanctity of life AFTER the baby’s born. I trust her policies will do more to persuade mothers to choose life because “pro-life” is a healthcare issue before anything else. Her policies will make it easier for mothers to choose life, and isn’t that what we all want?
Click to expand...
“…abortion is separated from other important social issues like affordable housing by a difference in kind, not a difference in degree. Every abortion kills an unborn human life – every time. No matter what kind of mental gymnastics we use, elective killing has no excuse. We only implicate ourselves by trying to provide one.” - Archbishop Chaput
 
Al_Moritz said:
Yeah, that’s brutal (link):

*Mr. Trump,

We are all Gold Star Families, who have lost those we love the most in war. Ours is a sacrifice you will never know. Ours is a sacrifice we would never want you to know.

Your recent comments regarding the Khan family were repugnant, and personally offensive to us. When you question a mother’s pain, by implying that her religion, not her grief, kept her from addressing an arena of people, you are attacking us. When you say your job building buildings is akin to our sacrifice, you are attacking our sacrifice.

You are not just attacking us, you are cheapening the sacrifice made by those we lost.

You are minimizing the risk our service members make for all of us.

This goes beyond politics. It is about a sense of decency. That kind decency you mock as “political correctness.”

We feel we must speak out and demand you apologize to the Khans, to all Gold Star families, and to all Americans for your offensive, and frankly anti-American, comments.

We hope you will hear us.

Sincerely,

(undersigned)
Click to expand...
To the writer of this article, Mr. Khan is a political operative and just because he son died in battle doesnt give him the right to say anything he wants without question.

There is no doubt of his son sacrifice for this country. But Mr. Khan was on that stage to attack Trump as if Trump had somehow directly insulted his son’s death. That somehow stopping the flow of islamic terrorist from Muslim countries is an insult to his son.

Khan waved around the constitution claiming that Trump has never read it. Yet there is nothing in the consitution that allows unrestricted immigration into the usa, when in fact it does give congress the ability to restrict immigration.

Now here is a fact, Mr. Khan is an immigration proponent and makes lots of money thru immigration. If Trump were to be elected, Mr. Khan stands to lose lots and lots and lots of money.
 
Michael_Mayo said:
This is a mode of thinking that must be addressed, especially given today’s candidates.

Abortion is a very important issue, perhaps THE most important issue. But in this election we all must ask ourselves if we are willing to risk. Risk what?

It seems to me that Donald Trump would be so bad for this country and this world in so many ways that this harm outweighs any good he might do in regard to abortion. And I say “might do” because he cannot be counted on for anything even if he had the opportunity to do something specific, like appoint a SCOTUS judge, or influence legislation. He is an unpredictable, unstable wildcard who is now being criticized by prominent members of his own party.

Hilary? As bad as she is, she at least will not destabilize our nation as a going concern. And this is not even getting into political preferences where we can all disagree. It has gone beyond that at this point. Trump is not a civil leader. He knows nothing about sharing power and decision making. He will try to be a dictator and when he doesn’t get his way he will react like a truculent little boy. What will that do for us in the world? How will that bring us together as a nation? I can see no good whatsoever coming from his presidency.
Click to expand...
Need to ease up on the Dem kool aid a bit. It can damage brain cells.

Anybody who knows anything about business knows that sharing power and decision making is absolutely crucial to management. And one thing about business, most of it is on top of the table and mostly honest. “Pay to play” in politics is all under the table and crooked of its nature.

We cannot possibly know what Hillary Clinton’s real policies will be because we can’t predict who will pay her to do what. Why, for example, did we turn Libya over to ISIS and related groups? Was it because of potential oil deals worked out by Blumenthal, or was it simply terrible judgment? We’ll not know before the election, unless Russia or Assange or somebody has emails dealing with it, and might never know.

And if Russia has extremely damaging emails of Hillary’s, will they perhaps just keep them and blackmail her with them? 30,000 of them she erased. But they all went somewhere.

At least Trump does what he does out in the open. And he will be a dictator? Has he yet told us we have to “change our religion” as Hillary Clinton has? No. When Hillary said that, do you think she was just bluffing, or do you think she meant it? Seeing this odious government sue the Little Sisters of the Poor as it has, I think she meant it. Next thing, guess what she is going to do to enforce it.
 
The_Bucket said:
I trust Hillary to do one thing: Not randomly nuke someone.

I trust Trump on literally nothing.

Now, that doesn’t mean I’m voting for Hillary. That is not going to happen. But I sure as heck am not voting Trump either.
Click to expand...
You trust the woman who backed the Muslim Brotherhood, enabled Iranian nukes and turned Libya over to ISIS not to randomly nuke someone? Sometime watch that incident where she laughs about Khaddaffi’s torture/death. Chilling.
 
Jeanne_S said:
Watch it,I received an infraction for saying basically the same thing re John Kerry’s outrageous remark. What you just said is most uncharitiable,remember no personal attacks on candidates or their family members;)
Click to expand...
It’s not uncharitable to describe something accurately and Good Tidings is just repeating from the article they posted. Take a look at the video. It’s very bizarre. It actually gives me the creeps but I’ll leave it at that.

nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000004565158/trump-jousts-with-crying-baby-at-rally.html
 
zz912 said:
Socialism is inherently atheistic. It replaces God with the state.
Click to expand...
That is your view. It is not the official position of the Church.
And show me an actual example of socialism somewhere that didn’t violate the Church teaching on subsidiarity.
Click to expand...
Various things are called socialism. Some people call the US system socialism. The Church has not condemned the US for its “socialism”. What matters is not the label but the ideology. Is it atheistic to want to give free healthcare to all children in poverty? Is it totalitarianism to have Social Security or welfare?

The Church’s teaching on subsidiarity leaves a lot of room for interpretation. One person’s opinion of the “proper level of government” to handle as particular issue may be different from another person’s opinion on that question. The Church does not provide a formula, just as she does not provide a formula on how much we are obliged to give alms. Not all systems that fall under the label of “socialism” necessarily violate the Church’s teaching on subsidiarity.
 
Thorolfr said:
In today’s Guardian:

theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/03/francois-hollande-says-donald-trump-makes-you-want-to-retch

Considering how Mr. Trump reacts towards people who criticize him, I wouldn’t expect very good relations with France after these comments by Hollande if Trump wins the election.
Click to expand...
When exactly did Trump say anything that disrespected the dead soldier, as the article says? I know everyone and especially the media is reacting as if he did, but as far as I can tell he got into a feud with the parents, about the parents’ criticisms of him. He never said anything about the dead soldier at all. Am I wrong about this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top