WALSH: Biden Endorses The Idea That 8-Year-Olds Can Choose Their Gender, Proving That He Is Owned By The Radical Left

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
sloancaprice said:
You are welcome to read Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship to understand the full breadth of Catholic social teaching with regards to voting.
Click to expand...
I did and I read Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict, there are no proportionate reasons for all the anti-catholic policies of the democrats.

when you have a pro-abort politician, pro-SSM (even officiated a wedding), pro-euthanasia, etc.you don’t have a proportionate reason.

unless I missed something? care to share what it is?
 
sloancaprice said:
You are welcome to your opinion on what constitutes a proportional reason.
Click to expand...
I was hoping you could show me where I was wrong in my observation that I in good conscience can’t support a party that supports:

abortion, 50 million kids a year die worldwide, 60 million in the USA since RvW
the LGBT agenda,
euthanasia,
embryonic stem cell research,
transgenderism,
identity politics,
the destruction of the family,
contraception,
socialism,
breaking the seal of the confession,
federal funds to pay for abortions,
forced abortions in Catholic hospitals,
the selection of liberal judges who will uphold these policies,
the anti-family welfare system,
etc

I don’t understand why people won’t share the proportionate reasons that make all these anti-catholic policies okay to support through my vote?
 
Last edited:
Yes. I too wonder about the proportional reasons that negate all the moral problems that one particular party supports.
It isn’t simply about abortion.

One party supports abortion up to birth. Plus euthanasia.
One party supports ‘rights’ not to the point of accepting a behaviour that has problems even for the people who uphold it, but to the point of demanding that the behaviour be accepted as equally ‘moral’ to non-LGBT, to the point of penalising a person if the person even states that his or her conscience cannot accept the belief as moral. THOUGHT crime, IOW.
One party supports the harvesting and use of aborted children for research.
One party does not simply offer ‘diverse family structures’ as things which are not the ideal, but which can offer as much stability as possible IF the ideal family of father-mother-children is not possible (i.e. death, divorce) but as SUPERIOR TO the ideal or who mock and denigrate the ideal as inferior, hateful, etc.
One party in the name of ‘helping the victim’ demands that Catholics deny their conscience by breaking the seal of the confession, providing contraception, assisting in abortions and surgeries and practices which involve mutilation and death.

Those are all very much against both individual freedoms, especially freedom of conscience and freedom of religion, and against the freedom of various ‘groups’, whether religious groups, small companies, small non-religious groups, families, etc.

Remember, there is nothing in the Republican platform that calls for actual denial of things like nondiscrimination or the rights of individuals; no denial of health care in the abstract, no denial of policies to help keep and develop clean air, clean water, to fund schools and businesses and to provide state, local, and federal government committees to help address problems and to encourage growth and development, and also there is nothing per se to keep a person from seeking to become a legal immigrant just as millions of those who, or whose families, did for generations?

So exactly what in the Democrat platform is so important killing children, denying individual and group freedoms, and attacking religious liberty can be disregarded because that other is ‘so much more morally important to the Catholic Church?”
 
stpurl said:
One party supports abortion up to birth. Plus euthanasia.
One party supports ‘rights’ not to the point of accepting a behaviour that has problems even for the people who uphold it, but to the point of demanding that the behaviour be accepted as equally ‘moral’ to non-LGBT, to the point of penalising a person if the person even states that his or her conscience cannot accept the belief as moral. THOUGHT crime, IOW.
One party supports the harvesting and use of aborted children for research.
One party does not simply offer ‘diverse family structures’ as things which are not the ideal, but which can offer as much stability as possible IF the ideal family of father-mother-children is not possible (i.e. death, divorce) but as SUPERIOR TO the ideal or who mock and denigrate the ideal as inferior, hateful, etc.
One party in the name of ‘helping the victim’ demands that Catholics deny their conscience by breaking the seal of the confession, providing contraception, assisting in abortions and surgeries and practices which involve mutilation and death.
Click to expand...
Just today, in fact, in the EWTN Mass, a lot of the homily was about this.

“One party” supports the “sanctity of life,” the “dignity of marriage and family,” and “religious freedom.”
 
Last edited:
I actually was going to start a thread later about Fr. Joseph Mary’s homily at Mass today on EWTN. It was certainly a homily that I devoutly—and I mean that term—hope that many Catholics heard and will listen to.

We do hear ‘well-informed conscience’ a lot, but often without the notation that a conscience cannot, in the Catholic sense, be considered well-informed if the conscience is against Church teaching.

It’s kind of like a student who truly strives to master English grammar and composition, has made use of the manuals of style, extensively studied, and who still insists on using incorrect grammar because, for example, he or she feels that a ‘too correct’ usage will make him/her appear as a pedant or as ‘inconsiderate of those who aren’t so well educated’.

The rationale for not using correct language is then attributed to a person being ‘perfectly well informed’ but choosing not to use the language as it should be in order to be ‘tolerant, inclusive, not showing off privilege’ etc. It is supposed to be all about ‘meeting people where they are’ and not demanding that they be held to a standard that they do not wish to meet.

No matter how well informed the person may personally be, or how he/she can justify acting contrary to the correct way by claiming doing so is actually something he/she can justify by his/her OWN ‘well informed’ conscience, the person is still wrong.
 
Last edited:
sloancaprice said:
If you are using a well-formed conscience that bases your decision on Church teachings, then you are doing the correct thing. Other people with well-formed consciences may come to different conclusions.
Click to expand...
that is what I don’t understand. how can the things I listed be overlooked to be deemed, at the least, inconsequential to something more important?

what is this more important thing that makes all these anti-catholic policies acceptable to support through my vote?
 
Pope Francis should offer fraternal correction because Biden is claiming to be practicing Catholic and seeking votes from Catholic laity. Biden is in a position to influence Catholic laity that is endangering their souls.
 
signit said:
Just today, in fact, in the EWTN Mass, a lot of the homily was about this.

“One party” supports the “sanctity of life,” the “dignity of marriage and family,” and “religious freedom.”
Click to expand...
The Democrats don’t really live up to that description.
 
sloancaprice said:
Other people with well-formed consciences may come to different conclusions.
Click to expand...
How?
A well formed conscience means it is aligning themselves with God’s will.

How can one truthfully claim that while at the same time supporting so much that goes directly against God?
 
Last edited:
sloancaprice said:
Because people deem other Catholic teachings more important than what you listed.
Click to expand...
please list them for my enlightenment? I am willing to see the error of my understanding.

for those who don’t follow Catholic doctrine, St Paul uses some of these as his litmus test for heaven. what can be more important?

(bold mine)
1 Corinthians 6

9Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, 10Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God. 11And such some of you were; but you are washed, but you are sanctified, but you are justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Spirit of our God.
Click to expand...
here we have Biden allowing 8 year-olds to make decisions that may affect their eternity. we should be washing these children in the blood of Jesus, not leading them down the wide path to…
 
BabyWitch said:
God forbid a child gets to decide their identity for themselves instead of society doing it for them.
Click to expand...
you can be accused of child abuse for leaving an 8-year-old alone, but you want us to let them decide their identity.

enough of this woke nonsense. in almost all births, you are born either male or female
Mark 10:6-9 NIV. “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’ ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’. So they are no longer two, but one flesh.
Click to expand...
it doesn’t get any simpler for people of faith.
does your democratic party support this belief.

a vote for a democrat enables their anti-catholic policies
 
Last edited:
upant said:
it doesn’t get any simpler for people of faith.
does your democratic party support this belief.

a vote for a democrat enables their anti-catholic policies
Click to expand...
Yeh, I took this advice and voted for Rauner, a Republican Illinois Governor, who signed a bill funding abortions. Right away we had a fourfold increase in the number of abortions. And that’s on my conscience so excuse me for not taking such advice (voting for party platforms) in the future. Maybe voting pro status quo is safer, I don’t know.
 
Last edited:
ProVobis said:
Yeh, I took this advice and voted for Rauner, a Republican Illinois Governor, who signed a bill funding abortions. Right away we had a fourfold increase in the number of abortions. And that’s on my conscience.
Click to expand...
yeh, you mentioned it, a few times

Biden will legalize it when he codifies it into law, states won’t be able to govern it on their own.

don’t worry Biden will fund it federally and worldwide.

or should I say the taxpayer will pay for it and that is on my mind.
 
sloancaprice said:
If you lied and haven’t read Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, then I would just point you there anyway.
Click to expand...
rather uncharitable, I should take offense but it is the internet

I’ve been attacked before when people can’t explain their position. I stand by what I said above
I did and I read Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict, there are no proportionate reasons for all the anti-catholic policies of the democrats.
Click to expand...
still waiting for someone to tell me
what is this more important thing that makes all these anti-catholic policies acceptable to support through my vote?
Click to expand...
 
upant said:
Biden will legalize it when he codifies it into law,
Click to expand...
The budget isn’t that simple. Both sides have to agree to it, and even then it isn’t binding. And I’ll bet he will meet heavy resistance if he tries to raise taxes at the same time he tries to fund abortions.
 
sloancaprice said:
No, it is the truth. You said you read it, so you know what reasons others may find more important when making a decision on who to vote for. To ask me indicates you haven’t read it.
Click to expand...
it does not list what people find more important, that concept is different with each individual, which is why I asked.
what is this more important thing that makes all these anti-catholic policies acceptable to support through my vote?
Click to expand...
the bishops prioritized abortion, I included the rest of the anti-catholic agenda of the democrats.
sloancaprice said:
I don’t have to explain my position to you. You are welcome to use your well-formed conscience on who to vote for, as I am.
Click to expand...
you don’t.

I thought you may have a good enough reason I hadn’t thought of, I guess not.
ProVobis said:
The budget isn’t that simple
Click to expand...
I just listen to what he and other Democrats say they will do

should I not believe what he says? should I not think he will work to accomplish his campaign promises?

why say all this if he doesn’t mean it? does he really mean 8-year-olds can choose or not

why so many excuses for him?
 
BabyWitch . . .
God forbid a child gets to decide their identity for themselves instead of society doing it for them.
Click to expand...
You neglected to mention that they have got to be allowed to be born first before they can make any decisions about anything.

(Your premise has a built-in [false] presupposition that the pre-born baby is not a full person until it is born.)

.

To the readers here:

This is WHY the issue of being born is the preeminent right.

Because if you are not allowed to be born, no other “policies” matter (if you are murdered).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top