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.
FrankFletcher . . . .
Real dialogue requires listening and I don’t see much of that . . .
Click to expand...
I mean really Frank. WHAT could out “proportion” all this murder??

That’s the whole point!

Nothing!

At least nothing here. It is not even close.

That is part of WHY our own Bishops have reminded us premeditaed murder of innocent preborn children is THE preeminent voter issue.

Nothing else is close.

.
Real dialogue requires listening and I don’t see much of that . . .
Click to expand...
To an extent, I disagree. Actually, I think you have this backwards in your asessment. At least regarding this situation.
 
Last edited:
I’ve followed this from the start. Nobody has bothered to give a proportionate reason to ‘start with dialog’ but only attempted to move the goal posts, claim that ‘the other person has no interest in dialog’, refer to ‘the voters’ guide’, claim that it’s all viewpoints, etc.

Seriously. It should be a simple answer to a simple question. WHAT evil in the Republican Party platform is so horrifically evil that, proportionally speaking, the loss of millions of preborn children to abortion is seen as a lesser evil.

What is it? I have examined the voters’ guide, looked at all the issues in question (abortion still being preeminent according to the guide itself), and I cannot find any issue or even every plank combined in the Republican Party that is proportionally ‘greater’ than the loss of millions of preborn children.

It should be easy to give me the reason, or reasons, that Catholics ‘could choose’ the Democratic Party platform based on everything posted so far IF a proportionate reason exists.

So why won’t anybody give a reason?
 
sloancaprice said:
My only point here is that the idea that you must vote for the pro-life candidate over a pro-choice candidate because it is Church teaching is false. @upant agreed with that.
Click to expand...
You make it too simple, I agreed in theory and I said if the pro-life candidate supports other intrinsic evils worse than abortion.

This isn’t an option in the current election. Biden’s support for so many intrinsic evils make a vote for him against church teaching
 
stpurl said:
I’ve followed this from the start. Nobody has bothered to give a proportionate reason to ‘start with dialog’ but only attempted to move the goal posts, claim that ‘the other person has no interest in dialog’, refer to ‘the voters’ guide’, claim that it’s all viewpoints, etc.
Click to expand...
Probably because this isn’t the first conversation about the election that people here have had.
 
Ah, the viewpoint. However, since this goes to moral evil (a truth, not a relative opinion), there are going to be choices which are right and which are wrong.

That a person ‘can’ (has the ability by virtue of free will) determine incorrectly or wrongly, does not mean that he ‘may’ do so with impunity.

Again, the goalposts got moved away from facts though.

All you and Frank and others are dancing around is that in the modern universe of relativism, a given Catholic, no matter how he or she is ‘informed’, has free will to examine the issues. And to choose, based on whether or not he has an authentic understanding of Church teaching, and of conscience (well informed) and of proportional moral evil (wrong) versus right, something which is morally right. . .or not.

Now the thing is that instead of guiding people to a proper understanding of the preeminence of abortion among issues, it seems the guidance is more toward, “personal choice’.

It’s like saying to a person, “OK, here is the thing. Fire will burn you. BUT if you want to let yourself get burned, because hey, you might have a good reason to get burned, because right behind that fire is a pouch with a million bucks in it, and also a contract to star in a Hollywood movie, and also a deed to a new house, and also a year’s worth of groceries, so if you want to disregard the fire in your way and hope that you can get to one of those goodies, go for it. It’s YOUR CHOICE.”
 
stpurl said:
, the viewpoint.
Click to expand...
You are not given a proportionate reason because there must be no intrinsic evil in the GOP platform

Otherwise they would gladly give it

All the social issues are false and illusory when compared to abortion, SSM, euthanasia, etc
 
I personally feel that perhaps some realise that actually saying, “Well sure abortion is terrible but it’s not like we’re FORCING it on people, but Republicans DO want to deport the poor illegal aliens who will probably go back and die, and that IS forcing them by law,. . .” Or “well sure abortion is terrible but what about the women who will never have a good life and will abuse the child, but if they could only have an ABORTION they would all turn into these incredible superwomen with perfectly loved children and terrific jobs and be happy and free’. . . And actually seeing that in print would make even a Catholic who had been swayed that way by being assured that these issues were so much ‘more’ than abortion which is ‘going down anyway’ and ‘emotional so story terrible but necessary choice for the poor women and children of the world”. . .actually choke a bit seeing out there in print the attempt at equalising the death of millions of innocent children with sensationalised ‘what-if’ scenarios that would not necessarily even happen, while the death of the children is a certainty. IOW, it might make for some unhappy moments of wrestling with the conscience for the woke ones who are so sure that they can certainly justify voting for the Democratic platform.
 
What is an “intrinsic evil”?

As Karl Keating would say (I am paraphrasing) . . .
An intrinsic evil is an act that is never acceptable, never good, never OK, never appropriate, never, never, never under ANY circumstance.
No situation can ever make this act acceptable.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Well he left politics in 2016 but unfortunately has come back. Other than that I can’t think of anything.
 
ThinkingSapien said:
I think many are just voting for the non-Trump option.
Click to expand...
Why?
I would think that most faithful Catholics would be thrilled to have the opportunity to vote for perhaps the most actively pro-life and pro-religious liberty President in American history.

If we don’t have the President’s back, I fear that we will never see the same unapologetic fight for life and liberty in our lifetimes…
 
Last edited:
A friend of the sinner but not of the sin because he says go and sin no more!
 
And the other problem here is that kids should not be taught some kind of alternate reality, where whatever one wants to believe is true. Science and facts matter.

As Pope Benedict said, moral relativism will prove to be one of the most dangerous ideas.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top