Trump v GOP

  • Thread starter Thread starter Abynissa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Whether not Democrat elected officials help the poor and needy more than Republican elected officials is debatable but it is irrelevant as far as our Catholic obligation to help the poor and needy . That is a personal responsibility and cannot be delegated to those we vote for . One cannot fulfill this personal obligation by voting for someone who promises to take other peoples money and do it for them.

Study after Study shows that conservatives given far more to charity than Liberals
True, but that won’t stop the folks who parrot the party line about how much Dems do for the poor. I proffer that since the inception of the Great Society the poor are not faring as well as we were told and there are far more of them. If you keep giving a man a fish, he will never learn to fish for himself.
 
The church is also against the death penalty. The Republican Party is for the death penalty.

Wait, your going to say it’s not an official teaching?
Actually the church does now and always has allowed for the death penalty. Pope Benedict specifically said that Catholics can support the death penalty . The same cannot be said about abortion.

But let’s say you’re supposition is correct- Are you seriously making a moral equivalence between the execution of a couple dozen murders a year with the wanton destruction of 1.2 million children a year?
 
Study after Study shows that conservatives given far more to charity than Liberals
Does ‘charity’ include donations to religious organizations? I think the Mormons are required to donate 10% of their income and I don’t know that I would consider that all ‘charity’. Is there any study that takes out the donations to religious organizations?
 
Does ‘charity’ include donations to religious organizations? I think the Mormons are required to donate 10% of their income and I don’t know that I would consider that all ‘charity’. Is there any study that takes out the donations to religious organizations?
Of course it includes religious donations-have you looked at the Charitable actions of Religious organizations of Catholic Charities or the Southern Baptist Convention.? Churches are the number one providers of private Charity in this country.
 
I kind of like Sanders but felt he wouldn’t have as good a chance in the general election as Clinton. So I was kind of surprised by the big lead this poll showed by Sanders over the three Republicans, too.
I was pretty surprised by that too, but after some thought I guess it makes sense: the poll tells how it would be *if the election were held today. *Republicans haven’t campaigned against Sanders hardly at all, whereas we’ve been campaigning against HRC … well, finish that for yourself.
 
Of course it includes religious donations-have you looked at the Charitable actions of Religious organizations of Catholic Charities or the Southern Baptist Convention.? Churches are the number one providers of private Charity in this country.
How does the amount the churches spend on charity compare with the amount they spend on facilities and salaries? I would guess that when compared to an organization whose only purpose is charity, the churches do not measure up very well. But I don’t know the exact numbers, so I would love to be proven wrong.
 
How does the amount the churches spend on charity compare with the amount they spend on facilities and salaries? I would guess that when compared to an organization whose only purpose is charity, the churches do not measure up very well. But I don’t know the exact numbers, so I would love to be proven wrong.
For example:

80% of contributions to catholic charities is spent on charity

charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=10656#.Vtb8lI-cFhE

Alliance of confessing Evangelicals spends 82.3% on contributions on charity

charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=3232#.Vtb9n4-cFhE

Continental Baptist Mission is 85.5%
charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=15297#.Vtb9-4-cFhE
 
For example:

80% of contributions to catholic charities is spent on charity

charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=10656#.Vtb8lI-cFhE

Alliance of confessing Evangelicals spends 82.3% on contributions on charity

charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=3232#.Vtb9n4-cFhE

Continental Baptist Mission is 85.5%
charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=15297#.Vtb9-4-cFhE
Oh, I have no doubt the charity-oriented arms of these various churches and religious institutions are very efficient agents of charitable good works. But the largest part of most people’s donations are to their local church’s general fund. And that fund goes mostly to pay the bills to keep their own church open, which benefits mostly themselves. I say “mostly” because a portion of the general fund in our church also goes to charitable works, but most of my donation goes to benefit me in that I have a church to go to.
 
I still prefer someone who’s actually hired and managed people before,
POTUS has >4million employees
Yeah, except the Commander-in-Chief doesn’t actually manage or hire 99% of those people…
 
Yeah, except the Commander-in-Chief doesn’t actually manage or hire 99% of those people…
No CEO directly hires or manages 99% of his employees. A CEO hires key people and sets their objectives who in turn have the power to drive execution within their various sub organizations.

Obama had zero experience and thus zero clue about managing the Federal Govt, which helps explain his lack of corrective response to many of the Govt scandals that surfaced under his term.

Obama didn’t cause the VA scandal, but he is responsible for the lack of corrective response to it, etc. etc.
 
He said until they get out of the abortion business, that he would not fund them.
I am confused why this is so, well, confusing to some people
I don’t find this statement confusing, I just don’t trust him when he says it. If he thinks so highly of pp and he thinks a woman should be able to obtain an abortion in early pregnancy and he likes to negotiate for things he thinks are important, why should I be convinced he will actuay defund pp.

Look at all the Cathics on this site who say they are pro-life and yet they are more than willing to compromise on life issues for the promise of a wall.
 
He said until they get out of the abortion business, that he would not fund them.
I am confused why this is so, well, confusing to some people
Because he’s acknowledging areas of grey and people prefer very black or very white.

That he can perceive the grey is why I think he is a capable leader. What he’s said is quite shrewd since PP will not get out of the abortion business. If they did, they would be competing against all the other ‘free clinics’ that offer far more extensive health services for the whole family (not just lady parts)
 
He said until they get out of the abortion business, that he would not fund them.
I am confused why this is so, well, confusing to some people
Bottom line, because I don’t believe half the things that come out of his mouth. He contradicts himself a lot, especially with regards to abortion. He also says ridiculous things like PP has helped millions and millions of women with cervical and breast cancer.
 
No CEO directly hires or manages 99% of his employees. A CEO hires key people and sets their objectives who in turn have the power to drive execution within their various sub organizations.

Obama had zero experience and thus zero clue about managing the Federal Govt, which helps explain his lack of corrective response to many of the Govt scandals that surfaced under his term.

Obama didn’t cause the VA scandal, but he is responsible for the lack of corrective response to it, etc. etc.
So basically, you’re argument is that congressmen should not be President? That’s some pretty thin logic.

Should we not disqualify trump since he has no legislative, foreign policy, or political experience? Not to mention a duboius moral code.
 
So basically, you’re argument is that congressmen should not be President? That’s some pretty thin logic.

Should we not disqualify trump since he has no legislative, foreign policy, or political experience? Not to mention a duboius moral code.
When I took ‘civics’ I learned there are three branches of Govt.
The executive branch has >4m people and spends virtually all the money
The legislative branch writes the laws and provides the money
The judicial branch keeps the peace

I don’t think Trump would make a great legislator or judge, but his experience is relevant to the executive branch.
 
There is a pro-life party and a pro-abortion party. Simple as that. I don’t care how good the social programs are*, you can’t take advantage of them if you are dead.
Not everyone votes for the party. Some of us vote for people. Yes, there is a pro-abortion candidate or two running for president. I do not think a pro-life candidate will be nominated. Donald Trump is anti-abortion. for now, but I would not describe him as pro-life.
 
When I took Civics, I learned what a democratic republic was and what fascism was. Here are Merriam-Webster’s online definitions, for those that might need a refresher.

fascism
noun fas·cism \ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm all ˈfa-ˌsi-
Popularity: Top 1% of lookups (Gee, I wonder why?)
Simple Definition of fascism
: a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government
: very harsh control or authority
 
Of course it includes religious donations-have you looked at the Charitable actions of Religious organizations of Catholic Charities or the Southern Baptist Convention.? Churches are the number one providers of private Charity in this country.
I tend to agree with others. These charities are great, but I have atheist friends that donate to Catholic Charities. I’m talking more about direct donations to individual churches. Some of my more cynical friends see that as no different than spending money at a movie theater and believe it should not counted as a ‘charitable’ donation.
 
When I took ‘civics’ I learned there are three branches of Govt.
The executive branch has >4m people and spends virtually all the money
The legislative branch writes the laws and provides the money
The judicial branch keeps the peace

I don’t think Drumpf would make a great legislator or judge, but his experience is relevant to the executive branch.
You uhhh, conveniently left out that foreign policy (a major lacking of mr. drumpf) is the purview of the executive.

Oh yeah, and that over half of the executive branch is active and reserve military. They’re not really hired…as we pretty much take all healthy recruits.

As it relates to the executive spending the most, well yeah, they have the DoD, which is a money blackhole.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top