Who will you be supporting in the U.S. presidential election with our Catholic values in mind?

Status
Not open for further replies.
farronwolf said:
What President has ever stopped an abortion or ever performed an abortion?

Umm, none.
Click to expand...
However, I remember when Obama said he wanted “choice” so if one of his daughters made a “mistake”, she wouldn’t be “burdened with a baby”. Now that was his own grandchild he was talking about killing. How could he have not said he would raise the child himself if it came to it. Heartless. But then, the deeper one gets into condoning and promoting killing, the easier it becomes, it appears.
 
TARRAT said:
The party platform is clearly marked on all ballots if you are a savvy voter, just look for the D or R after the candidates name.
Click to expand...
But if you are really savvy, you would also know that you are still not voting for the party platform. No single person running is bound by party platform. If party loyalty wasn’t an excuse to put absolutely terrible candidates on the ballot, I might be more inclined to care about party.

The truth is though, I do not think anyone is so gullible as to buy any of the rhetoric presented as “reasons” here. A Catholic should read what the bishops have written. It is way different than the partisan posturing presented on this thread.
 
Last edited:
This thread has just become another Trump bashing political thread. It’s run it’s course.
 
I’m tied, Pres Trump and Kasich at 84% each.
Also tied on the parties, Republican and Constitution parties at 84%, with Libertarian at 83%. That was a fun quiz to take.😁
 
I understand you want your vote to count, I really do. Last election, I voted independent, and I knew the candidate didn’t stand a chance. I have a clean conscience, when I sleep at night, I’m not sorry. Both parties, have failed us all, they’ve pitted us against one another, and it certainly shows. I’m just done, and sad for us all.
 
The tread topic is about presidential candidates, correct. The dems have yet to pick their candidate. The only one we know for certain as of now is Trump.
 
It’s also about Catholic values. There is a severe lack of charity here.
 
Well Joe that’s what The Democrats want. It is apparent that viciousness has become a virtue to people on both sides and we have Democrats campaigning for the presidency who are nearly universally calling for the abolition of the legislative filibuster and the electoral college, as well as the remaking of the Supreme Court in order to secure a majority more to their ideological liking. Democrats believe in in the power of the majority. If majority rule would be the only postulation of democracy, it would be a system that indeed condones that which is being criticized as “forcing your beliefs on others”.
 
There are none in the Democrat party, that I know of, correct me if I’m wrong. You might find them, running on another ticket. It’s early.
 
I do not expect to find a candidate for President more consistent with Catholic values this cycle. In fact, I half-expect President Trump to convert to Catholicism during his second term.
 
When the House sends ridiculous legislation to the Senate, the Senate is right to treat it with as much seriousness as it deserves, which is none.
 
Without a uniform standard of eligibility to vote, your position is nonsensical. Why should felons in California be able to cancel out the votes of Texans, when Texas does not allow felons to vote? To wit, nothing in the Constitution precludes a State from giving children the right to vote.
 
Might read the 26th amendment to the Constitution.

As far as bills waiting on the Senate, they can certainly bring them up and vote them down instead of letting them sit and do nothing. But that would require they actually do something and be on record for it.
 
No, the 26th Amendment forbids States from setting their minimum voting age higher than 18. It does not forbid them from setting it lower, or doing away with the minimum voting age entirely.
 
Not for federal elections. Local or state they can set it lower but not federal.

HR1 was introduced and failed to pass the house earlier this year. It would have lowered the age to 16 for federal elections.

So you are right that the 26 forbids states to have an age over 18 required, but the federal gov. must past legislation to lower it below 18 for federal elections.

Talk about a nightmare. If states allow voting at say 16, there would have to be separate counting and ballots for federal elections vs. state elections.
 
Turkey is doing nothing, but letting them have their way.
He talks loudy, but lets them beat us over the head with a big stick.
 
Is there any evidence from Trump’s actions, that supports other religions besides Christianity? He attempts to create divide between majority and anyone else who does not fit into that group.

This EO didn’t accomplish anything that did not already exist. Religious liberty does and always has existed in America.

Democrats (outside of extremists) are 100% for religious liberty. However, religious liberty does not give license to harm or discriminate.
 
I think they fail to define discrimination correctly. Refusing to do business with someone because of who they are is one thing, but refusing to involve your business in something against your beliefs is another. Like I would make a birthday cake for a person with same sex attraction, but I wouldn’t make a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding. I believe they are hurting themselves. It’d be like forcing me to sell a knife to someone that tells me they are going to cut themselves with it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top