Trump Thread

[cstheriot]

But again this is a conversation never really had only accusations and a indictment sheet proposed. Not very charitable of a conversation or scholarly I would venture to suggest, just saying.

not really unjust accusations. He said it: time.com/4247397/donald-trump-waterboarding-torture/

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I don’t consider waterbboarding extreme for terrorist murderers. If the punishment fits the crime, neither do I think the death penalty is extreme.

And to answer another poster, if I have to resort to physical measures in order to rescue my son, I don’t know how far I will go and indeed I will have to answer to God.

Don’t you think it’s hypocritical to be for one thing the USCCB condemns, and one thing that can cause death, but to condemn something the USCCB in another candidate. I have nothing against you personally, but don’t you think that’s rationalizing?

If you’re going to speak out against Hillary because she believes in something the Church condemns, don’t you think you should speak out against Trump for believing in things the Church also condemns as intrinsically evil? The Church says there is no way that torture can be made morally licit.

Or, forgive both in each candidate. We can’t pick and choose. We can’t, with any credibility, apply Catholic moral teaching to one candidate and not to another. We have to condemn both or excuse both.

 

[Tomdstone]

A self-styled “One Session Workshop” conducted by an unnamed person, sponsored by the USCCB determines Catholic teaching?

That’s as inaccurate as inaccurate gets. This is not the USCCB, or a USCCB spokesperson, let alone the USCCB as a body. And even if these unidentified participants were bishops (which they apparently are not) they can’t make determinations binding on the conscience of Catholics except under very limited circumstances, none of which apply in this citation. Might as well cite the opinion of the guy who orders the stationery and ink cartridges at the USCCB.

You say you are a Catholic professor of theology, and I don’t doubt your word on that. But as such, you should know this is not even remotely authoritative.

There is no doubt that waterboarding is a form of torture. Try it.
“French Journalist Henri Alleg Describes His Torture Being Waterboarded by French Forces During Algerian War”. Democracy Now! As one former CIA official, once a senior official for the directorate of operations, told me: ‘Of course it was torture. Try it and you’ll see.’ Another, also a former higher-up in the directorate of operations, told me: ‘Yes, it’s torture…’. 5 November 2007.
McCain, John (21 November 2005). “Torture’s Terrible Toll”. Newsweek. Retrieved 17 April 2009. In my view, to make someone believe that you are killing him by drowning is no different than holding a pistol to his head and firing a blank. I believe that it is torture, very exquisite torture.
hrw.org/news/2006/04/05/open-letter-attorney-general-alberto-gonzales
jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2007/10/endgame-on-torture-time-to-call-bluff.php
ondemand.bl.uk/onDemand/itemDetails/show/ETOCRN208094762

 

[JimG]

There is no doubt that waterboarding is a form of torture.

There is no doubt that abortion is an intrinsic evil.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

There is no doubt that abortion is an intrinsic evil.

But we’re talking about torture now.

Trump’s position on abortion varies with the day, and sometimes within one day. Right now, I think he finds it more politically advantageous to say he’s against it, with exceptions.

He’s not against torture. We are discussing torture and the Church’s condemnation of it.

Trump believes in this:

"Contrary to CIA’s description to the Department of Justice, the Senate report says that the waterboarding was physically harmful, leading to convulsions and vomiting. During one session, detainee Abu Zubaydah became “completely unresponsive with bubbles rising through his open full mouth.” Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded at least 183 times, which the Senate report describes as escalating into a “series of near drownings.”

thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/09/the-most-gruesome-moments-in-the-cia-torture-report.html

Yes, the people who were tortured are despicable, but like us, they are children of God, and while their actions are not loved, they are loved by Christ.

 

[GaryTaylor]

not really unjust accusations. ]

Sorry I follow what your saying I really do, but its not for me to read links and assume what point one is talking about or attempting to make when I in fact I already have read and heard all this makes no sense

If I post some links here are you to assume what I think and what flash points I am referring to? Of course not, how is that a conversation? I can’t read minds, nor am I to assume you agree with everything. In fact I’m not assuming at all. The points undercut his final statement which is as I highlighted to make a long story short. He digressed to the US generals. Now if you don’t believe anything he said then how can you pick and choose what he said is fact or fiction? You see, you can’t. The best I see is his on-going meanderings in which the generals was the final statement to date.

 

[Tomdstone]

There is no doubt that abortion is an intrinsic evil.

True. That is why if it comes down to one who unequivocally accepts it such as Hillary, and someone who is pro-life, such as Trump, it is better to choose the pro-life guy.
Still, I don’t agree with Trump on a whole lot of things. But Hillary seems to me to be worse.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

True. That is why if it comes down to one who unequivocally accepts it such as Hillary, and someone who is pro-life, such as Trump, it is better to choose the pro-life guy.
Still, I don’t agree with Trump on a whole lot of things. But Hillary seems to me to be worse.

People will be glad to discuss that with you on the Hillary Clinton thread, but this is the Trump thread.

 

[Tomdstone]

But we’re talking about torture now.

Trump’s position on abortion varies with the day, and sometimes within one day. Right now, I think he finds it more politically advantageous to say he’s against it, with exceptions.

He’s not against torture. We are discussing torture and the Church’s condemnation of it.

I agree with you on that. Torture, such as waterboarding and kidnapping people to send them to foreign countries to be tortured is wrong. Is Hillary against rendition? She seems to be somewhat of a warmonger, whereas Trump talks about making peaceful deals to solve international problems.

 

[jtauke]

I don’t consider waterbboarding extreme for terrorist murderers. If the punishment fits the crime, neither do I think the death penalty is extreme.

And to answer another poster, if I have to resort to physical measures in order to rescue my son, I don’t know how far I will go and indeed I will have to answer to God.

Queen, you seem to be ignoring the fact that there “terrorist murderers” have not been convicted of any crime, in fact, some are simply suspects that may be innocent.

Do you approve of torturing potentially innocent people? Or are they acceptable chaff?

 

[Tomdstone]

People will be glad to discuss that with you on the Hillary Clinton thread, but this is the Trump thread.

OK. But there is an overlap of material on the threads.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

From someone who was waterboarded.

nationalinterest.org/feature/no-doubt-about-it-waterboarding-torture-period-11937

And Trump accepts this affront to human dignity. He not only accepts it, he advocates for it, just as he advocates for killing the innocent families of terrorists.

 

[dixieagle]

My husband brought this brilliant and amazingly prescient satirical article by Christopher Buckley, Wall Street Journal, 1999, to my attention. They re-published a portion of it again today.

Here is a link for those who subscribe:

wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-president-trumps-inaugural-1458256626

For those who don’t, this pdf with the original complete article is online: (It’s a little PG-13, but dead-on.)

pscourses.ucsd.edu/ps100da/Buckley%20TRUMP.–%20The%20Inaugaural%20docx.pdf

Seems the leopard hasn’t changed his spots; this is precisely how many of us who are horrified at the thought of him becoming president view him.

 

[Monkey1976]

Don’t you think it’s hypocritical to be for one thing the USCCB condemns, and one thing that can cause death, but to condemn something the USCCB in another candidate. I have nothing against you personally, but don’t you think that’s rationalizing?

If you’re going to speak out against Hillary because she believes in something the Church condemns, don’t you think you should speak out against Trump for believing in things the Church also condemns as intrinsically evil? The Church says there is no way that torture can be made morally licit.

Which is the greater evil: The torture of 10 terrorists, or the murder of 10 innocents? If every single person every taken to Guantanamo Bay since 2001 had been subjected to “enhanced interrogation”, that would be 775. Today alone, it’s estimated that over 1700 babies have been killed by direct abortion.

In the history of the Church, there has never been a time when the justified application of what we would call torture was considered an absolute, intrinsic evil under all circumstances. However, there has never been a time when the killing of a child while still in its mother’s womb was ever considered anything but an absolute, intrinsic evil in all circumstances.

Given a choice between someone who would consider allowing the application of torture in certain circumstances to enemies of the state, and someone who advocates for the supposed right of a woman to kill her own unborn child for any reason right up to the very moment of birth, who would be the moral choice?

 

[GaryTaylor]

True. That is why if it comes down to one who unequivocally accepts it such as Hillary, and someone who is pro-life, such as Trump, it is better to choose the pro-life guy.
Still, I don’t agree with Trump on a whole lot of things. But Hillary seems to me to be worse.

Nor with Bernie nor any democrat, there is no moral equivalence in this regard. You can’t even make a logical worst of two evils case. let alone all the blood from war on these peoples hands. Its an insult to the Catholic educated here, in fact its Biblical warning for OT to NT gospels.

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

 

[jtauke]

Which is the greater evil: The torture of 10 terrorists, or the murder of 10 innocents? If every single person every taken to Guantanamo Bay since 2001 had been subjected to “enhanced interrogation”, that would be 775. Today alone, it’s estimated that over 1700 babies have been killed by direct abortion.

In the history of the Church, there has never been a time when the justified application of what we would call torture was considered an absolute, intrinsic evil under all circumstances. However, there has never been a time when the killing of a child while still in its mother’s womb was ever considered anything but an absolute, intrinsic evil in all circumstances.

Given a choice between someone who would consider allowing the application of torture in certain circumstances to enemies of the state, and someone who advocates for the supposed right of a woman to kill her own unborn child for any reason right up to the very moment of birth, who would be the moral choice?

Dear lord, one thing being horrific (abortion), does not give license to do something else that’s horrific (torture).

We should absolutely be adamantly AGAINST both. Why should we settle for candidate that thinks otherwise?

 

[Lily_Bernans]

My husband brought this brilliant and amazingly prescient satirical article by Christopher Buckley, Wall Street Journal, 1999, to my attention. They re-published a portion of it again today.

Here is a link for those who subscribe:

wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-president-trumps-inaugural-1458256626

For those who don’t, this pdf with the original complete article is online: (It’s a little PG-13, but dead-on.)

pscourses.ucsd.edu/ps100da/Buckley%20TRUMP.–%20The%20Inaugaural%20docx.pdf

Seems the leopard hasn’t changed his spots; this is precisely how many of us who are horrified at the thought of him becoming president view him.

You are right! Leopards do not change their spots.

The thought of a “President Trump” is horrifying to me, too. I don’t think it will come to pass, but I’m not complacent about it. I know it could.

Thanks to you and your hubby!

 

[grotto]

Theological seminaries and becoming a professor sounds wonderful doesn’t it? If one can persuade others to accept what they espouse by claiming to have great knowledge - you could sell a lot of books! Its best if there is proven success to back up the knowledge.

An example might be “The Art of the Deal” by Donald J. Trump. A very well known book, and currently selling quite well to those who didn’t read it when it was first released. One can see why it would be interesting - plus the author has proved success at what he wrote.

Hilary Clinton wrote a book, but it did not do well. Not surprising really. What would she be successful at? Maybe how to bark like a dog could inspire her supporters. Or, a book about commodity trading (she made lots of money off of cattle futures and there were accusations of bribery. Really many varied chapters in her history of being married to Bill would make for hot reading - not very inspiring though.

What difference does it make anyway, she advocates abortion including live birth and butchering baby parts for sale. What kind of a person would want to vote for her as the President and leader of our country? Only people who wish to see the complete ruin of the American people begun by Barry.

 

[dixieagle]

Which is the greater evil: The torture of 10 terrorists, or the murder of 10 innocents? If every single person every taken to Guantanamo Bay since 2001 had been subjected to “enhanced interrogation”, that would be 775. Today alone, it’s estimated that over 1700 babies have been killed by direct abortion.

In the history of the Church, there has never been a time when the justified application of what we would call torture was considered an absolute, intrinsic evil under all circumstances. However, there has never been a time when the killing of a child while still in its mother’s womb was ever considered anything but an absolute, intrinsic evil in all circumstances.

Given a choice between someone who would consider allowing the application of torture in certain circumstances to enemies of the state, and someone who advocates for the supposed right of a woman to kill her own unborn child for any reason right up to the very moment of birth, who would be the moral choice?

There’s no moral choice, in my view, except to vote for a third candidate.

I don’t trust Trump as far as I could throw him, and don’t believe for a minute he’s pro-life, which takes that argument right off the table for me. (I won’t vote for a pro-abortion or pro-choice candidate for dogcatcher.) Combined with my sheer terror at the thought of him with nuclear codes, added to his other outrageous positions, it means there are no circumstances under which I would vote for him.

 

[dixieagle]

You are right! Leopards do not change their spots.

The thought of a “President Trump” is horrifying to me, too. I don’t think it will come to pass, but I’m not complacent about it. I know it could.

Thanks to you and your hubby!

You’re welcome. He is a local broadcast journalist and part-time Catholic college instructor who has a wide range of articles on any number of topics at his fingertips. And we both still actually read a variety of sources, which is, sadly, becoming rarer and rarer.