H
HarryStotle
Guest
Does right to privacy permit you to terminate the life of a human being?
- Status
P
PaulinVA
Guest
Basically, the Court said it allows abortion.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Your claim was about Russian collusion with Trump, not evidence of Russian election interference. Conflating issues and moving goalposts. China and big tech corporations are interfering in elections to an exponentially greater degree than Russia. Even postal workers and election officers are interfering more directly than Russia.
Where is your outrage?
Last edited:
J
John10
Guest
He support abortion, that makes him ineligible to become a viable candidate to even consider. Unless he publicly states otherwise (and follows through with actions of course) you would be indirectly cooperating with a grave evil by voting for him.
Last edited:
O
opop
Guest
So your two arguments, if I understand well, is that the number of abortions doesn’t go down with republican presidents compared with democratic presidents, and that there is no reason to think that Roe will be overturned this time.
Regarding your first argument: Don’t you think that, even if we admit that Trump winning would not decrease the number of abortions, it would at least prevent it to increase as fast as it would with Biden winning? Because, given the fact that Democrats want to expand abortion rights (for example by making it more easy to abort up until nine months) it seems that if they win the number of abortions will increase faster than if Republicans win. And this means that, if Republicans win, at least some lives could be spared. Don’t you think?
Regarding your second argument: Don’t you think that the fact, that the Democrats are really worried right now that Roe could be overturned, is a good sign that there is indeed a possibility for it to be overturned?
Furthermore, even if it is difficult to see when abortion will end, don’t you think that we should fight for it until it is done? Don’t you think that it is too defeatist to say “it will not end anyway”. Imagine if abolitionists had thought like that in the time of slavery. Slavery was much older and much more engrained in American society than abortion ever was. And still, they managed to end slavery. It is about long-term fights and commitment. Abolitionists fought more than a century for this goal. The fight against abortion is still less than 50 years old. Don’t you think that we should fight till the end, and not lose hope and determination? Don’t you think that, if we start thinking “well abortion will not be defeated anyway” or “not this time anyway” then this way of thinking will precisely cause abortion to last longer?
Regarding your first argument: Don’t you think that, even if we admit that Trump winning would not decrease the number of abortions, it would at least prevent it to increase as fast as it would with Biden winning? Because, given the fact that Democrats want to expand abortion rights (for example by making it more easy to abort up until nine months) it seems that if they win the number of abortions will increase faster than if Republicans win. And this means that, if Republicans win, at least some lives could be spared. Don’t you think?
Regarding your second argument: Don’t you think that the fact, that the Democrats are really worried right now that Roe could be overturned, is a good sign that there is indeed a possibility for it to be overturned?
Furthermore, even if it is difficult to see when abortion will end, don’t you think that we should fight for it until it is done? Don’t you think that it is too defeatist to say “it will not end anyway”. Imagine if abolitionists had thought like that in the time of slavery. Slavery was much older and much more engrained in American society than abortion ever was. And still, they managed to end slavery. It is about long-term fights and commitment. Abolitionists fought more than a century for this goal. The fight against abortion is still less than 50 years old. Don’t you think that we should fight till the end, and not lose hope and determination? Don’t you think that, if we start thinking “well abortion will not be defeated anyway” or “not this time anyway” then this way of thinking will precisely cause abortion to last longer?
Last edited:
P
PaulinVA
Guest
I don’t think the President him/herself actually has that much/any affect on the actual abortion rate. He/she is a lightning rod for the issue, more than actually affect the rate.
No. The Republicans are loudly pinning all their hopes on nominating another Supreme, but that doesn’t guarantee Roe will be overturned, either.
The gains are occurring at the state and local level. Concentrate on them instead of continuing a failed strategy at the national level.
Slavery did indeed end, but it took a Constitutional amendment to guarantee the freed slaves the rights afforded everyone else.
S
Shakuhachi
Guest
This entire concept of “co-operation” in intrinsic evil as quite a stretch.
The actual act of abortion is so remote from the act of voting and there are so many other factors such as:
the intent of the voter,the uncertainty of who will be elected, the uncertainty if that candidate will have any opportunity to do or not do anything germane to the issue,. On top of that, in a presidential election the state either goes red or blue and unless it is a swing state an individual’s vote carries little significance.
So if a voter in a Red State votes for Biden for other reasons I just don’t see how one can call it a mortal sin.
The actual act of abortion is so remote from the act of voting and there are so many other factors such as:
the intent of the voter,the uncertainty of who will be elected, the uncertainty if that candidate will have any opportunity to do or not do anything germane to the issue,. On top of that, in a presidential election the state either goes red or blue and unless it is a swing state an individual’s vote carries little significance.
So if a voter in a Red State votes for Biden for other reasons I just don’t see how one can call it a mortal sin.
O
OraLabora
Guest
This is pure conjecture and based on past performance since Roe vs. Wade, whether a Democrat or Republican occupied the White House made little or no difference on the rate of abortions (and I’ve seen some data to suggest that the rate went down with Democrat Presidents, but I’m no expert on abortion in the US, especially since I am Canadian).
Therefore the main logical pillar your conclusion rests on, is simply not a given.
In my case, as the Other Trudeau said:
However unlike Harry, I believe the current elephant in the White House is not friendly, and certainly not even-tempered.
Which the Church allows for proportionate reasons. Some here argue there are no proportionate reasons. That however is a matter of individual conscience. There may be very powerful private proportional reasons as I have pointed out elsewhere, that would not be obvious to those not close to the voter.
P
pnewton
Guest
It is a political motivation, or someone thinks they know more than the Church.
S
Shakuhachi
Guest
Can you say more?
H
HarryStotle
Guest
The prevalence of the act of abortion is enabled, made available and in all ways materially and morally supported by laws permitting it, and government funding through various mechanisms making it a preferred option for women seeking an easy solution to their predicament.
When Poland outlawed abortion the numbers in that country dropped to near zero. Legislation directly impacts abortion access and frequency.
At the very least you have to admit that a candidate who pushes for tax-payer funding of abortion is cooperating with the evil directly, no?
Last edited:
A
Anrakyr
Guest
No
my brother’s in the military he’s a very unflappable individual but last night we were talking and he pointed all the evils of the current president. He and I are so politically opposite on spectrum and he feels that Trump would cause more harm than any good.
That alone is reason enough to remove any incompetence buffoon.
Last edited:
S
Shakuhachi
Guest
“Pushed for” yes. Such a candidate intends it.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
You and I clearly have different standards for warranting an action. Your warrant appears to be “My brother has feelings.” That might meet the threshold for you but I am not convinced by your “reasoning” nor your brother’s emotional state.HarryStotle:
No
my brother’s in the military he’s a very unflappable individual but last night we were talking and he pointed all the evils of the current president. He and I are so politically opposite on spectrum and he feels that Trump would cause more harm than any good.
That alone is reason enough to remove any incompetence buffoon.
The word is “incompetent buffoon.”
A
Anrakyr
Guest
That’s not the basis for my decision I was just amazed we agreed to being so different.
I legitimately saw it like many Catholics on this forum that he would be excited about the opportunity presented on the supreme Court.
If anything it made him more leery which I think is telling.
S
Shakuhachi
Guest
I do think the immediate damage this incumbent does outweighs the remote evil of abortion.
And those who vote for him are also enabling and co-operating in his evil which includes every lie.
Last edited:
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Why not specify exactly why you think it is “telling?” It may not be very telling about anything politically significant, although it might be telling about your brother.HarryStotle:
That’s not the basis for my decision I was just amazed we agreed to being so different.
I legitimately saw it like many Catholics on this forum that he would be excited about the opportunity presented on the supreme Court.
If anything it made him more leery which I think is telling.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Right. The “evil” of having a difference of opinion on political matters and not being amenable to being kowtowed by the aggressive progressive left.Anrakyr:
I do think the immediate damage this incumbent does outweighs the remote evil or abortion.
And those who vote for him are also enabling and co-operating in his evil which includes every lie.
As opposed to the very real damage done by a party and candidate that promotes and funds rioting, bailing out of rioters and looters, bureaucratic malfeasance, stacking the SC when the party can’t control it, abortion up to and after birth, defunding of the police, erosion of the presumption of innocence and individual rights, gutting free speech, completely re-writing the Constitution according to the whims of the mob, the curtailment of religious liberties and civil rights generally, the expansion and intrusion of the power of the state into all areas of life, etc., etc.
Apparently, we have different views on what constitutes evil.
You say someone who has a different take on events and situations in the world is “lying” about them and is, therefore, supremely evil.
I try to assess things more broadly than from the perspective of how my feelings are impacted. I can see, however, how relying on immediate feelings can cause individuals to react impulsively and explosively, which is why I rarely rely on feelings as determiners of perspectives, decisions and actions.
Hey, but that is just me. I wouldn’t want to force agreement, shut down those who disagree or riot on the streets.
Last edited:
S
Shakuhachi
Guest
You know as well as I do that this President cannot be trusted in anything he says.
A
Anrakyr
Guest
You have no proof.
- Status