I
ImQuiet
Guest
I don’t see a need to tbh.
- Status
P
PrayForMe
Guest
Because you think you won’t convince me or you simply don’t have a better argument to offer other than “you’re wrong”?
If it’s the latter, why comment that I’m wrong to begin with? What value does it contribute to the discussion or to the greater good of other readers?
I
ImQuiet
Guest
Because I’m lazy.
Because I felt like voicing an opinion. This isn’t debate class, it’s a message board. I don’t have an obligation to explain anything further.
P
PrayForMe
Guest
Ha, well I must say I admire your honesty.
In any case, since you prefer not to expand, we’ve reached an impasse. No point in continuing the back and forth, I’d say.
Last edited:
I
ImQuiet
Guest
Yeah it is. The USCCB makes it clear that voting a non-Republican party isn’t a bad thing, which extends to the Democratic party.
Granted I have dismal views over the concept of a state in general but that’s neither here nor there. If someone wants to vote Democrat they aren’t commiting a mortal sin.
P
PrayForMe
Guest
I wasn’t specifically talking about voting for a Democrat. The line in my post that you quoted and seemed to take issue with was when I said “shame on Catholics who support those behaviors”. I was trying to say they shouldn’t support abortion or homosexual marriage, because the Church DOES formally rule on those acts and states they are grave sins.
That was my primary point. I never actually said voting for a Democrat is a mortal sin, though I did acknowledge it was possible if the person voting for them was consciously supporting any of their immoral positions.
Last edited:
I
ImQuiet
Guest
Aight guess I just misread then.
P
PrayForMe
Guest
No worries.
I think we both may have misunderstood one another.
Last edited:
G
Gingersnaps4
Guest
My bishop put out a guide to voting based on the platforms and issues and said that you shouldn’t vote for an individual candidate but rather for the platform, and posted it to Facebook… You should have seen all of the outraged comments from people whose politics are obviously their first religion! Seeing the platforms laid out by issue, it’s pretty obvious that the democratic platform is basically a laundry list of mortal sins. I can’t imagine the mental gymnastics that many Christians must perform in order to reach the voting conclusions they do.
Edit—the bishop did not name any parties or candidates but rather just listed many of the issues up for vote and detailed how they were sins.
Edit—the bishop did not name any parties or candidates but rather just listed many of the issues up for vote and detailed how they were sins.
Last edited:
L
LilyM
Guest
The so-called leader of the free world needs to be able, among their other abilities, exactly to verbalise well thought out and appropriate responses when asked questions. It shows that the person has put some thought into the issues and topics they are asked about. And they are usually asked questions about matters that are on the public radar, and rarely about out-of-far-left-field topics.1cthlctrth:
I do not listen to the leftist media. I also ignore the type of stuff you posted above. I find it spiritual dangerous. I never thought that this whole white supremacy thing was real. In any case, this argument against Trump was contrary to reason. So what if he did not verbalize the best possible response to an incident when asked about it. That is not a biggie.
I am sorry if the use of the word “president” hit too close to home. I was actually thinking of Nixon, as I have of late, appreciating what an insightful decision it was to pardon him.
Trump is barely coherent far too often. I’ve seen a lot less of Biden, so I’m not assuming he’s much better. I do not envy Americans trying to choose between the two.
Last edited:
H
HarryStotle
Guest
There is a dearth of good leadership and a corresponding lack of envy for choices of leaders all across the globe these days.
I suspect your assessment here is a little off. He would not have been able to accomplish everything he has if he really was “barely coherent.”
Last edited:
L
LilyM
Guest
Assuming his staff are competent, I suspect they would be able to work effectively enough on his behalf to do so. Most Presidents accomplish very little on their own.LilyM:
There is a dearth of good leadership and a corresponding lack of envy for choices of leaders all across the globe these days.
I suspect your assessment here is a little off. He would not have been able to accomplish everything he has if he really was “barely coherent.”
Sometimes I get the impression that the achievements of his administration are almost in spite of rather than because of Trump.
Last edited:
F
Flor
Guest
From what I have read, Pope Francis doesn’t like Trump. Perhaps we need to pray that once Biden takes office, God will turn his heart in the direction of embracing all Catholic teachings. There’s a conscience to work with. Biden is a Catholic.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
You will know them by their fruit, not by a presumed possession of conscience.
There is a conscience in every human person so I am unclear why having a conscience should favour Biden. It is mortal sin that separates from God. If Biden is Catholic he will be held to a higher standard by God precisely because he has access to supernatural grace and resources to properly form his conscience. That is no guarantee that the person will have a properly formed conscience.
According to John anti-Christs have and will come out of the Church.
“They went out from us, but they were not of us.” (1 John 2:19)
I am not saying Biden is anti-Christ, but I am saying that being Catholic does not insure someone will be morally or spiritually better than those who are not in the Church. you just have to look at the priest abusers and individuals in the hierarchy like Cardinal McCarrick who presumably had daily access to the Eucharist.
Your argument is specious.
Last edited:
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Yeah, no. Trump is clearly the driver in his administration. He is behind the achievements in terms of ends and goals because he expressed these before being elected and before having an administration, and he has got rid of many in his administration who were not effective at achieving them.HarryStotle:
Assuming his staff are competent, I suspect they would be able to work effectively enough on his behalf to do so. Most Presidents accomplish very little on their own.LilyM:
There is a dearth of good leadership and a corresponding lack of envy for choices of leaders all across the globe these days.
I suspect your assessment here is a little off. He would not have been able to accomplish everything he has if he really was “barely coherent.”
Sometimes I get the impression that the achievements of his administration are almost in spite of rather than because of Trump.
I would say the opposite is more true. He has achieved much of what he has in spite of many in the bureaucracy and his administration who continually slow-walk what he wants.
Last edited:
S
Shakuhachi
Guest
I’ve got to say that this is often my own view. I come here for brief entertainment and sometimes for a more in depth discussion on themes that I have a passion for. A good discussion does take time and research and care in putting together a decent post. But for many topics I just don’t have the where-with-all for anything other than a brief comment that others might take issue with. So be it. I can let it go at that.
S
stmax
Guest
well yea, that is a bad approach! We don’t live in a european parliamentary system where we only have to consider issue positions. We vote on people. I have observed politicians often say things for effect and don’t mean them. There are many issues people talk about but are actually not on the ballot in any real way.
Presidents enjoy very little legislative authority in our system but a lot of authority in foreign policy and immigration. We should weigh our issue stances by what the actual possibilities of the system are.
Presidents enjoy very little legislative authority in our system but a lot of authority in foreign policy and immigration. We should weigh our issue stances by what the actual possibilities of the system are.
1
1cthlctrth
Guest
You can say that, again.
Joe Biden said that he will pass the Equality Act in his first 100 days, if elected. Biden’s selection as Vice President,. Kamala Harris, co-sponsored the Equality Act, that would force public schools to allow biologically male athletes who identify as transgender on girls’ sports teams.
Biden was able to recalibrate “discrimination” as anything that openly espoused traditional marriage or insisted that a person actually is his or her biological sex. The Equality Act includes the goal of overturning Trump-era religious policies. The real rub is that sexual orientation and gender identity are granted special legal status with the power to trump religious convictions. Faith-based adoption and foster care agencies would not receive federal grants unless they agreed to place children in same-sex homes. Housing, employment, medical services — all would feel the impact of policies that label religious conviction as discrimination, with the power to sue in court.
P
Padres1969
Guest
If a good many priests are saying that, then a good many priests are wrong.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
The other issue with this idea about Biden and conscience is that Biden’s platform is all about removing the rights of conscience and replacing those with a social justice paradigm where what is “right” is determined by whatever the majority can be persuaded to promote.
His stance against the Little Sisters and pushing against the conscience rights of anyone in the medical profession to not participate in providing abortion services demonstrates his disregard for conscience.
His position on conscience appears to be that it is irrelevant as far as politics go. Hence, “I am personally opposed, but…” has transmogrified into "Anyone who opposes is… [insert appropriate term of vilification].
- Status