Why Catholics Should Vote for Trump article

  • Thread starter Thread starter Limoncello4021
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
farronwolf said:
It might counter it but doesnt disprove it. Nor does it prove that proven liars are telling the truth when defending trump.

Big difference.
Click to expand...
Or it can be made up. Owner of thee Atlantic contributed 600K to Biden.
 
So because they contribute to one candidate or another that indicates whether or not they run factual stories.

That is a stretch.

I just wish that people who will support a person, regardless of what they do, would just admit that they they don’t care about their character.
 
farronwolf said:
I just wish that people who will support a person, regardless of what they do, would just admit that they they don’t care about their character.
Click to expand...
This brings up one of the biggest issues I have with the current Republican party. During the Clinton impeachment, essentially every Republican of note, whether in elected office or not, echoed the sentiment that “character counts” or “character matters”. Now, and from some of the very same people, it is similar to “well, he gets things done and has good policies so it isn’t really important that he be nice or even civilized”. I thought then and I still think that the character of our elected officials, especially our President, is very important. Reasonable people can disagree about whether a certain action or attitude demonstrates the kind of character they want to see, but to deny that character matters at all is just mind-boggling to me.
 
Character is all that matters, whether it is a politician, acquaintance or friend. I have no friends who lack character.

I can disagree with folks all day long on many subjects and still respect them. But if someone has no character, whether we agree or disagree, they are not worth my time or energy.

If someone has no character, how can anyone believe anything they say? How can anyone count on them to do what is right instead of what is in their best interest?
 
farronwolf said:
Character is all that matters,
Click to expand...
The only thing I would change about that, after some thought, is that having good character should be a baseline minimum for a politician. After that, other things come into play such as positions on important (to me) issues and basic philosophy of how government should work. And no one without character could be the sort of person I would be friends with.
 
I agree, that once a person can pass the character litmus test, then issues matter.

But if they fail on character, where they fall on the issues is of no concern to me.
 
farronwolf said:
So because they contribute to one candidate or another that indicates whether or not they run factual stories.
Click to expand...
It may.

I am on record here saying there are some personality issues that I am not happy with. What I am happy about is the actions he has taken while president. I also allow for individual growth and repentance.
 
farronwolf said:
If someone has no character, how can anyone believe anything they say? How can anyone count on them to do what is right instead of what is in their best interest?
Click to expand...
Character or not, if I elect someone based on the fact they will vote on a specific issue the way I want is what I want.

Think of all the high character congressmen who routinely vote for the evil of the murder of the unborn. Could a “high character” democrat get elected if they would promise to vote against abortion. They would not even get to first base. And if they did, second term? The money would abandon them.
 
Because someone does want to take a woman’s right to control what happens to them medically, doesn’t mean they don’t have good character. BTW, voting to allow medical procedures to continue isn’t the same thing as committing murder.

You may believe that fetus is a person with all the rights of you and I, but they may not.

You may believe in the true Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist, they may not.

You may believe that marriage is for life, they may not.

The fact they disagree with you or I on these issues, doesn’t mean they have bad character.

Lying, cheating, stealing, doing things solely for personal gain, expecting loyalty to a person over the good of the community, these are things that are a direct reflection of one’s character.
 
farronwolf said:
Because someone does want to take a woman’s right to control what happens to them medically, doesn’t mean they don’t have good character.
Click to expand...
Abortion is not healthcare. The unborn baby is not a part of the mother’s body but separate and unique. We are murdering them because of where they are living, power over one that has no power. That is bad character.
 
buffalo said:
Abortion is not healthcare. The unborn baby is not a part of the mother’s body but separate and unique. We are murdering them because of where they are living, power over one that has no power. That is bad character.
Click to expand...
That is your opinion, and your opinion only.

The law, and more than half the country disagrees with you.
 
buffalo said:
40.png
farronwolf:
So because they contribute to one candidate or another that indicates whether or not they run factual stories.
Click to expand...
It may.

I am on record here saying there are some personality issues that I am not happy with. What I am happy about is the actions he has taken while president. I also allow for individual growth and repentance.
Click to expand...
Trump.has flat out said he does not ask God for forgiveness. So fat chance of repentance. And I have seen zero growth from him over the last four years.
 
Last edited:
farronwolf said:
That is your opinion, and your opinion only.

The law, and more than half the country disagrees with you.
Click to expand...
Medical science now is sure life begins at conception. The Roe law left room for it to be overturned when we understood when life began. We do now. Hanging on to this murderous law is a power and convenience issue.
 
farronwolf said:
The Church does not control our country. In fact our Constitution forbids that.

Your point.
Click to expand...
Uh no. The constitution says no such thing. The establishment clause is like a one way valve in that the feds cannot institute a national religion. In other words it cannot impose a religion on its people, but the people can propose one to the government and has right along.
 
When did medical science determine that life begins at conception? How many times since that date has the SCOTUS upheld Roe?

Until there is a Constitutional amendment which grants unborn persons rights, this line of argument is a non starter.
 
buffalo said:
Are you actually doubting this?
Click to expand...
No, I asked you a question, and also asked how many times since that date has the SCOTUS upheld Roe.

I thought that was pretty clear by my wording. If you don’t want to answer it fine. But your point was basically the court didn’t understand when they ruled on Roe the first time.
 
farronwolf said:
But your point was basically the court didn’t understand when they ruled on Roe the first time.
Click to expand...
Correct. With more certainty and a SCOTUS that are not activists it may be overturned. How will you respond then?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top