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:
Of course, that isn’t Church teaching, but your own personal views.
Click to expand...
no, it is church teaching

one would need a proportionate reason and many bishops say there is none.

one just needs to read the full document and not make excuses for judgmental issues

I will vote in a person that will expand abortion but not be guilty of enabling him? how does that work?

I still haven’t been told what is as important as 600,000 dead children.
 
sloancaprice said:
No, it is not. In fact you contradict your statement when you write.
Click to expand...
sometimes when both politicians are pro-abortion you can vote for one if there is a proportionate reason.

there are no proportionate reasons in this election

sorry to burst your bubble

I have asked repeatedly what is more important, what is the proportionate reason and no one has come forward with it.
 
Last edited:
sloancaprice said:
I’m not the one making claims of this is what Church teaching is without the ability to actually back it up. You are. So, you are the one that need to quote Church teaching, not me.
Click to expand...
I have and you ignored the document you stated, the bishops, and popes I quoted.

you claim I am wrong, so what is right? what is more important than 600,000 aborted children?

I don’t think you have an answer.
 
sloancaprice said:
You have taken what they said and then applied your own personal views to what they said.
Click to expand...
so have you and you are wrong!

read their words, it doesn’t fit your view. intrinsic evils can never be supported, how do you change this into sometimes they can? you support them with your vote if the politician will expand them and Biden has pledged to expand abortion.

pope JP2 says the rest is false and illusory if the right to life isn’t defended with maximum determination. that doesn’t mean it can take a backseat to something judgmental. he specifically rules out the judgmental issues
  1. St. John Paul II explained the importance of being true to fundamental Church teachings:
Click to expand...
Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights-for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture-is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination. (Christifideles Laici, no. 38)
Click to expand...
you can have arguments about judgmental issues but not about abortion and euthanasia per pope Benedict.
“Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia.
Click to expand...
There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia” (WRHC 3). WRHC = Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion, General Principles
Click to expand...
the US bishops seem to agree with him
At the meeting, the bishops also approved a letter saying that "The threat of abortion remains our preeminent priority because it directly attacks life itself, because it takes place within the sanctuary of the family, and because of the number of lives it destroys."
Click to expand...
1 of 2
 
2 of 2
it is not negotiable
Pope Benedict XVI, Address to European Parliamentary Group, 30 March 2006.
(bold mine)
As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable.
Click to expand...
Pope St. John Paul II, Encyclical The Gospel of Life 74
Christians have a “grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. […] This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it”
Click to expand...
if you think it is their choice, ST JP2 says you are cooperating with evil

the USCCB agrees
There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society, because they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor . Such actions are so deeply flawed that they are always opposed to the authentic good of persons. These are called “intrinsically evil” actions. They must always be rejected and opposed and must never be supported or condoned. A prime example is the intentional taking of innocent human life, as in abortion and euthanasia.
Click to expand...
what do you think never do means? do it if you have a more important judgmental issue?
Yet if a candidate’s position on a single issue promotes an intrinsically evil act, such as legal abortion, redefining marriage in a way that denies its essential meaning, or racist behavior, a voter may legitimately disqualify a candidate from receiving support
Click to expand...
Biden is promoting all of the above and should be disqualified by the catholic voter

abortion isn’t a stand-alone issue anymore, the Democrats want to include it in all legislation, you can’t escape it.
help the poor -boom- abortion,
help the immigrant -boom- abortion
health care reform -boom- abortion
whatever your pet issue -boom- abortion

what do you see that is more important because the bishops and popes have not defined anything more important?
 
sloancaprice said:
Who is deciding to support abortion exactly?
Click to expand...
And to that, I refer back to my question that you have thus far ignored.
vz71 said:
And by the way.

I’m still waiting for that issue that is more important than the list provided.
Click to expand...
You keep pushing some kind of wiggle room in the idea of proportionate reasons.
So let’s hear it.
What exactly is this issue that is so important that one may support so many things that go directly against Church teaching.
 
Last edited:
Of all dogmas/principles/laws/doctrines followed and or dictated by Catholicism, the only one that I myself disagreeing with is, the opposition of same sex marriage (that includes rejecting the concept of any other genders). Even if it really is a SIN, didn’t Jesus say that He’s a friend of the sinners as well? I root for Biden (I’m not an American though).
 
upant said:
when you have a pro-abort politician, pro-SSM (even officiated a wedding), pro-euthanasia, etc.you don’t have a proportionate reason.
Click to expand...
Oh, but at least the people who have abortions and gay weddings and euthanasia will have food, housing, transportation, and heath care, and public schools–all free courtesy of the billionaires who will finally be forced to pay their fair share.

And if you believe that, I have a lovely home (mine) to sell you that needs just a tiny wee bit of work. And those weren’t gunshots in the neighborhood–they were…backfiring of cars, that’s it.

:roll_eyes:
 
sloancaprice said:
But these aren’t talking about voting until you get to the US bishops
Click to expand...
Maximum determination includes voting, never justified includes voting.

Not negotiable includes voting

You still haven’t said what you think is more important that let’s a person vote for expanding abortion

And the other issues, including allowing 8 year olds to choose
 
Can you give an example where Jesus told a sinner, ANY sinner, to ‘just continue on sinning, because I love you and I’m your friend and as God, if I have told you something is wrong to do and you do it, you don’t have to stop unless you want to and you’re still going to be saved even if the sin has completely killed our relationship?”
 
sloancaprice said:
Why does it use words like “may” disqualify a candidate instead of 'must"?
Click to expand...
what if both are pro-abortion, “must” would require you to not vote for either, this is the scenario where you have to use proportionate reasoning. this is also the reason it isn’t a paragraph.
sloancaprice said:
Are you saying Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship is in error?
Click to expand...
not at all, people are using it wrong, proportionate reason isn’t to place judgmental issues over intrinsic evils
 
sloancaprice said:
“There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position even on policies promoting an intrinsically evil act may reasonably decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons.
Click to expand...
what do you think they mean by morally grave

I ask you again what is as morally grave as abortion, euthanasia, SSM, etc

this option doesn’t exist in the national election for president. the morally grave policies of the Democrats overwhelm any social judgmental issue.

it isn’t just abortion.
 
sloancaprice said:
They list those in Faithful Consciences. You can find them yourself if you just look.
Click to expand...
The FC doesn’t list any greater evils than abortion, euthanasia, SSM. these items are all supported by Biden. You have not given a proportionate reason to support Biden and at this point I have to assume you really don’t have any.

Prudential judgment issues are not on par with the intrinsic evils I just listed
 
sloancaprice said:
“There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position even on policies promoting an intrinsically evil act may reasonably decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons.”
Click to expand...
So what are they?

We have a laundry list of various evils that a vote for Biden will support.
What is so morally grave that opposing it allows at least tacit support for the other grave evils he supports?
 
sloancaprice said:
may reasonably decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons.”
Click to expand...
Like what?

Not only is President Trump is superior to Joe Biden regarding protecting unborn babies and in protecting children from the gender-change agenda, but President Trump is superior regarding religious liberty, law and order, freedom from the excessive government control of socialism, policies that actually help minorities, and in the reduction in poverty that free markets provide,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top