Trump Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Bay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is also interesting:

washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-would-seek-to-block-money-transfers-to-force-mexico-to-fund-border-wall/2016/04/05/c0196314-fa7c-11e5-80e4-c381214de1a3_story.html
Donald Trump says he will force Mexico to pay for a border wall as president by threatening to cut off the flow of billions of dollars in payments that immigrants send home to the country, an idea that could decimate the Mexican economy and set up an unprecedented showdown between the United States and a key diplomatic ally.
Click to expand...
In a two-page memo to The Washington Post, Trump outlined for the first time how he would seek to force Mexico to pay for his 1,000-mile border fence, which Trump has made a cornerstone of his presidential campaign and which has been repeatedly scoffed at by current and former Mexican leaders.
Click to expand...
The proposal would jeopardize a stream of cash that many economists say is vital for Mexico’s struggling economy. But the feasibility of Trump’s plan is unclear both legally and politically, and also would test the bounds of a president’s executive powers in seeking to pressure another country.
Click to expand...
I’m wondering what happens to a Mexican immigrant here legallywho is supporting his aging parents.

Also, many money transfer companies that deal with Mexico, also deal with other Latin American countries.

Couldn’t it work that instead of a transfer directly to Mexico, someone transfers funds to the Guatemalan subsidiary, and then from there to Mexico?
 
Mary_Gail_36 said:
This is also interesting:

washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-would-seek-to-block-money-transfers-to-force-mexico-to-fund-border-wall/2016/04/05/c0196314-fa7c-11e5-80e4-c381214de1a3_story.html

I’m wondering what happens to a Mexican immigrant here legallywho is supporting his aging parents.

Also, many money transfer companies that deal with Mexico, also deal with other Latin American countries.

Couldn’t it work that instead of a transfer directly to Mexico, someone transfers funds to the Guatemalan subsidiary, and then from there to Mexico?
Click to expand...
The plan is both impractical and unjust. So to pay for Donald’s wall we should confiscate money being exchanged between two unrelated third parties? Why not just go out in the street and shake down passersby?
 
estesbob said:
Lily if you want to support punishing women who have abortions that is your right. i just don’t agree with you
Click to expand...
Definitely have to add this to the list. Apparently the prolife side is not vengeful enough towards pregnant women, so that justifies supporting virulently proabortion politicians and horrific evil.
 
Beautiful said:
Wow! No surprise

The media is hitting Trump harder than ever this morning.

There won’t be much for media to chew on Trump when it gets down to Trump vs. Hillary.

Trump is saving his best for the last leg.

Show down soon to come
Click to expand...
Looking forward to Trump versus Hillary. People are saying if he wins wisconsin, it’s over. I don’t really understand the mathematics of it all, but excitement is in the air!
 
zz912 said:
Definitely have to add this to the list. Apparently the prolife side is not vengeful enough towards pregnant women, so that justifies supporting virulently proabortion politicians and horrific evil.
Click to expand...
Its not vengeance that is the problem, its integrity and consistency. The pro-life movement says that abortion is murder, but refuses to support punishing the supposed murderers. One is left with two conclusions, either the pro-life movement doesn’t really believe that abortion is murder, or the pro-life movement doesn’t think murder is a crime that should be punished. The movement apparently thinks its being clever, but I think it hurts their argument. How can the movement convince people that abortion is murder when it refuses to treat abortion like murder?
 
TMC said:
Its not vengeance that is the problem, its integrity and consistency. The pro-life movement says that abortion is murder, but refuses to support punishing the supposed murderers. One is left with two conclusions, either the pro-life movement doesn’t really believe that abortion is murder, or the pro-life movement doesn’t think murder is a crime that should be punished. The movement apparently thinks its being clever, but I think it hurts their argument. How can the movement convince people that abortion is murder when it refuses to treat abortion like murder?
Click to expand...
The false choice presented by liberal abortion-supporters flies in the face of American experience with abortion. Women were never prosecuted under previous abortion laws because the public didn’t choose to do it. Possibly the public viewed the women as victims too, at least to a sufficient degree to exclusively punish those who coldly did it for money.

Today’s perps also include those who promote abortion for political gain, and who don’t mind telling any falsehood in order to persuade women they can’t live without abortion on demand, including the fabrication that prolifers will surely punish the women too, when they have no such intention.

Failure to prosecute women might cause abortion-supporters to get the vapors, but for prolife people, it doesn’t. And the abortion-supporters aren’t going to convince true prolife people that it is. But then, that’s not the point anyway. The purpose in saying it is to frighten women. Again, some promote abortion on demand for money. Some do it for political gain.
 
TMC said:
Its not vengeance that is the problem, its integrity and consistency. The pro-life movement says that abortion is murder, but refuses to support punishing the supposed murderers. One is left with two conclusions, either the pro-life movement doesn’t really believe that abortion is murder, or the pro-life movement doesn’t think murder is a crime that should be punished. The movement apparently thinks its being clever, but I think it hurts their argument. How can the movement convince people that abortion is murder when it refuses to treat abortion like murder?
Click to expand...
I am not referencing anyone here, but in general, I don’t think the pro-life movement really cares about the life of the unborn. If they did, they would be outraged at the women who choose to murder their unborn child, and they would have other causes. Pro-life, to me, means caring about a person from birth to natural death.

I also think the pro-life movement, if sincere, would be attempting to bring the message of the sanctity of life to the public. They aren’t.
 
Ridgerunner said:
The false choice presented by liberal abortion-supporters flies in the face of American experience with abortion. Women were never prosecuted under previous abortion laws because the public didn’t choose to do it. Possibly the public viewed the women as victims too, at least to a sufficient degree to exclusively punish those who coldly did it for money.

Today’s perps also include those who promote abortion for political gain, and who don’t mind telling any falsehood in order to persuade women they can’t live without abortion on demand, including the fabrication that prolifers will surely punish the women too, when they have no such intention.

Failure to prosecute women might cause abortion-supporters to get the vapors, but for prolife people, it doesn’t. And the abortion-supporters aren’t going to convince true prolife people that it is. But then, that’s not the point anyway. The purpose in saying it is to frighten women. Again, some promote abortion on demand for money. Some do it for political gain.
Click to expand...
The one and only reason women weren’t prosecuted when abortion was illegal is so they wouldn’t be afraid to give up the name of the abortionist or testify in court against him, much in the same way other criminals are granted immunity. But, that didn’t work. The one and only thing that will work is to teach children the sanctity of life from an early age so they would never dream of having an abortion. My brothers and sisters and I were taught that as soon as we could understand, and not one of us would ever have an abortion, or in the case of the boys, encourage anyone.
 
TMC said:
Its not vengeance that is the problem, its integrity and consistency. The pro-life movement says that abortion is murder, but refuses to support punishing the supposed murderers. One is left with two conclusions, either the pro-life movement doesn’t really believe that abortion is murder, or the pro-life movement doesn’t think murder is a crime that should be punished. The movement apparently thinks its being clever, but I think it hurts their argument. How can the movement convince people that abortion is murder when it refuses to treat abortion like murder?
Click to expand...
Or the pro-life movement recognizes that calling for punishing women for having an abortion will allow abortion supporters to demonize them and make the goal of banning abortions difficult if not impossible. This is nothing more than a deliberate attempt to move the discussion away from the evil they support.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
The one and only reason women weren’t prosecuted when abortion was illegal is so they wouldn’t be afraid to give up the name of the abortionist or testify in court against him, much in the same way other criminals are granted immunity. But, that didn’t work. The one and only thing that will work is to teach children the sanctity of life from an early age so they would never dream of having an abortion. My brothers and sisters and I were taught that as soon as we could understand, and not one of us would ever have an abortion, or in the case of the boys, encourage anyone.
Click to expand...
The last woman to be prosecuted in the US for procuring an abortion was 1907. Since then the punishment for abortion was always been levied on the abortionist. I am at a loss as to why those who support this evil are so determined to have these women punished when abortion is once again illegal.

I think we can all agree that you don’t teach children the sanctity of life by voting for those who support abortion.
 
estesbob said:
Or the pro-life movement recognizes that calling for punishing women for having an abortion will allow abortion supporters to demonize them and make the goal of banning abortions difficult if not impossible. This is nothing more than a deliberate attempt to move the discussion away from the evil they support.
Click to expand...
I guess then we should let all murderers run free in the name of “sympathy.” What more heinous crime than to contract for the murder of your own defenseless flesh-and-blood?

And since we are advocating that child murderers run free, I guess thieves and rapists should be given the same right, too. Not to do so would be hypocritical of society.

But, back to Hillary:

Well, I think Sanders will win the majority of delegates in Wisconsin today, but I don’t think it’s going to be the “blow out” he suggested. I think he and Clinton will just about split the delegates.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
I am not referencing anyone here, but in general, I don’t think the pro-life movement really cares about the life of the unborn. If they did, they would be outraged at the women who choose to murder their unborn child, and they would have other causes. Pro-life, to me, means caring about a person from birth to natural death.

I also think the pro-life movement, if sincere, would be attempting to bring the message of the sanctity of life to the public. They aren’t.
Click to expand...
A simple visit to your local CPC would show you that everything you state above is false.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
I guess then we should let all murderers run free in the name of “sympathy.” What more heinous crime than to contract for the murder of your own defenseless flesh-and-blood?

And since we are advocating that child murderers run free, I guess thieves and rapists should be given the same right, too. Not to do so would be hypocritical of society.
Click to expand...
If you want them tried for murder you are welcome to advocate that. I don’t know of anyone in the pro-life ministry who favors that but it is your right to support it.
 
zz912 said:
This is contrary to Church teaching and the Christian faith.
Click to expand...
Caring about a person from birth to natural death is in every Catholic ethics textbook. At what point should we not care about them?
 
Lily_Bernans said:
Caring about a person from birth to natural death is in every Catholic ethics textbook. At what point should we not care about them?
Click to expand...
I think it should start before birth at conception, is what the poster was saying.
 
estesbob said:
The last woman to be prosecuted in the US for procuring an abortion was 1907. Since then the punishment for abortion was always been levied on the abortionist. I am at a loss as to why those who support this evil are so determined to have these women punished when abortion is once again illegal.

I think we can all agree that you don’t teach children the sanctity of life by voting for those who support abortion.
Click to expand...
Women were flocking to abortionists under Republican presidents as well. It appears that society, parents, and even the Church, have failed in teaching the sanctity of life.

I will say, though, that the Church cannot teach those who are not there, so they can probably be excused. Parents have the primary responsibility, and they have failed in that regard.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
Caring about a person from birth to natural death is in every Catholic ethics textbook. At what point should we not care about them?
Click to expand...
  1. TEACHINGS OF THE MAGISTERIUM
On its part, the Magisterium of the Church offers to human reason in this field too the light of Revelation: the doctrine concerning man taught by the Magisterium contains many elements which throw light on the problems being faced here. From the moment of conception, the life of every human being is to be respected in an absolute way because man is the only creature on earth that God has "wished for himself " (16) and the spiritual soul of each man is “immediately created” by God; (17) his whole being bears the image of the Creator. Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves “the creative action of God” (18) and it remains forever in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end.(19) God alone is the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can, in any circumstance, claim for himself the right to destroy directly an innocent human being.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top