Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

The political obligation of Catholics

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    This simply supports the belief that people shouldn't be "single issue" voters.
    So abortion should or should not be the preeminent issue for Christians?

    If you could see voting for the non-pro-life candidate over the pro life candidate, then abortion is not the preemminent issue for you, other factors come into play.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by simplicio View Post
      So abortion should or should not be the preeminent issue for Christians?

      If you could see voting for the non-pro-life candidate over the pro life candidate, then abortion is not the preemminent issue for you, other factors come into play.
      The choice of who to vote for in an election is rarely black and white.
      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
      Than a fool in the eyes of God


      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
        The choice of who to vote for in an election is rarely black and white.
        Okay. Many Christians did treat the 2016 election as if it were black and white.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by simplicio View Post
          Okay. Many Christians did treat the 2016 election as if it were black and white.
          I'm curious what basis you have for asserting this, but I don't suppose it really matters. I can't speak for other Christians, I can only speak for myself.
          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
          Than a fool in the eyes of God


          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Chaotic Void View Post
            I have beef with your hypothetical 100% Pro-Life Klanner... Mostly because any White Supremacist (WS) I've encountered, IRL or Online, is only 100% Pro-Life insofar as White Folk are concerned (which is not technically 100% Pro-Life). I'm curious... are there records of WS types that are 100% Pro-Life regardless of whether the unborn's skin has more melanin content than the mayonnaise complexion of their supporters?
            (Emphasis Mine)


            Oh, simplicio... still waiting for you to answer this question.

            ETA: Just in case you found my question too incoherent (and by extension found every irony meter in a block of you self-destructing from overload), I'll phrase it this way: Are there any known White Supremacist types who are 100% Pro-Life and DON'T have that stance restricted to White Babies Only?
            Last edited by Chaotic Void; 02-16-2020, 11:37 AM.
            Have You Touched Grass Today? If Not, Please Do.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Chaotic Void View Post
              (Emphasis Mine)


              Oh, simplicio... still waiting for you to answer this question.

              ETA: Just in case you found my question too incoherent (and by extension found every irony meter in a block of you self-destructing from overload), I'll phrase it this way: Are there any known White Supremacist types who are 100% Pro-Life and DON'T have that stance restricted to White Babies Only?
              Since African American women have the highest rate of abortions shouldn’t white supremacists support a position that’s likely to put much more of them in prison?

              Only restricting it to white babies seems like it would also increase interracial relationships just to be safe.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Chaotic Void View Post
                (Emphasis Mine)


                Oh, simplicio... still waiting for you to answer this question.

                ETA: Just in case you found my question too incoherent (and by extension found every irony meter in a block of you self-destructing from overload), I'll phrase it this way: Are there any known White Supremacist types who are 100% Pro-Life and DON'T have that stance restricted to White Babies Only?
                The question was posed as a hypothetical. Hypotheticals are designed to think about two principles which come into conflict in a decision making process. They are not meant to represent a real life situation.

                Archbishop Chaput did manage to answer the question and even give a discussion. I even suspect that he realized what a hypothetical is, and what its purpose is, though they are very challenging to contemplate.

                I wonder if you are really unfamiliar with a hypothetical situation, or if your imagination is really that limited, or you are just trying to avoid responding to the OP.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Watermelon View Post
                  Since African American women have the highest rate of abortions shouldn’t white supremacists support a position that’s likely to put much more of them in prison?
                  WS types aren't even interested in doling out chump change to a minority on the streets, and you expect them to think it's kosher to keep them alive in prison on the taxpayer dime?

                  Only restricting it to white babies seems like it would also increase interracial relationships just to be safe.
                  You must not know many White Supremacist types. They don't take too kindly to interracial relationships, much less multi-racial babies. WS types ain't the sharpest tools in the shed, but I think they can put two-and-two together once they see the parents.
                  Have You Touched Grass Today? If Not, Please Do.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by simplicio View Post
                    The question was posed as a hypothetical. Hypotheticals are designed to think about two principles which come into conflict in a decision making process. They are not meant to represent a real life situation.

                    Archbishop Chaput did manage to answer the question and even give a discussion. I even suspect that he realized what a hypothetical is, and what its purpose is, though they are very challenging to contemplate.

                    I wonder if you are really unfamiliar with a hypothetical situation, or if your imagination is really that limited, or you are just trying to avoid responding to the OP.
                    I know enough about Hypothetical situations to say they are supposed to be believable; I have a hard time believing politicians when they claim to be Pro-Life as it is, so throwing a piss-stained bedsheet over their head makes it even more incredulous.

                    Also, I really don't need to respond to the OP, as- not only am I not a Catholic- but I've been in a far worse situation than that ever since I could vote for the last 10+ years in my Country. Try having no Pro-Life party or candidates to vote more.
                    Have You Touched Grass Today? If Not, Please Do.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Chaotic Void View Post
                      I know enough about Hypothetical situations to say they are supposed to be believable; I have a hard time believing politicians when they claim to be Pro-Life as it is, so throwing a piss-stained bedsheet over their head makes it even more incredulous.
                      Most hypotheticals are at root ludicrous, asking absurd questions such as what you would do if found in the position of the German Christians under Nazi totalitarians (most insist on their own heroism);standing at a RR switch while watching a train barreling toward a choice of one hapless group or another; What actions to take if on a lifeboat in the ocean. They are not about reality, they are about what principles of ethics can be brought to bear.

                      But they do serve a purpose, they do help formulate a personal ethic, and help us recognize the situations which prompt us to weigh conflicting principles. The situations are artificial- the ethical basis of decision making is not.

                      Not sure what you mean by piss stained bedsheet, unless it is a reference to Klan. No, we will pro bably never be faced with the choice of casting any vote for a Klanner, but we will most certainly be faced with the choice of voting for someone with certain ideas and traits in common with the Klan.

                      Also, I really don't need to respond to the OP, as- not only am I not a Catholic-
                      The title mentioned Catholics because there exists an significant amount of Catholic writings on it. Most of that is applicable to all Christians. So while you choose not to respond to the OP, you respond to the OP by trying to do what exactly?

                      but I've been in a far worse situation than that ever since I could vote for the last 10+ years in my Country.
                      The victim card? Cardinal Mindszenty languished in jail, Christians in China are walking the proverbial tightrope. Canadian Christians are hardly in the same league, Sasketchwan in hardly Africa, China, and Pakistan. You have freedom of action: purposeful and public

                      Try having no Pro-Life party or candidates to vote more.
                      Sounds like here in the states. When Romney ran, many pro lifers did not see a pro life candidate in the field.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Chaotic Void View Post
                        WS types aren't even interested in doling out chump change to a minority on the streets, and you expect them to think it's kosher to keep them alive in prison on the taxpayer dime?



                        You must not know many White Supremacist types. They don't take too kindly to interracial relationships, much less multi-racial babies. WS types ain't the sharpest tools in the shed, but I think they can put two-and-two together once they see the parents.
                        I don’t think I know any. I just assumed they would take a position that would be the most disadvantageous to other races. ‘Pro life for black babies only’ would seem like a more consistent view, in my opinion, to white supremacy since it would allow whites to do something that the blacks would go to jail for.

                        Oh I meant increase in interracial relationships due to white women looking to have premarital sex may be reluctant to choose white partners to avoid the possibility of either going to prison or being stuck with a baby if they happen to get pregnant.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by simplicio View Post
                          Most hypotheticals are at root ludicrous, asking absurd questions such as what you would do if found in the position of the German Christians under Nazi totalitarians (most insist on their own heroism);standing at a RR switch while watching a train barreling toward a choice of one hapless group or another; What actions to take if on a lifeboat in the ocean. They are not about reality, they are about what principles of ethics can be brought to bear.

                          But they do serve a purpose, they do help formulate a personal ethic, and help us recognize the situations which prompt us to weigh conflicting principles. The situations are artificial- the ethical basis of decision making is not.

                          Not sure what you mean by piss stained bedsheet, unless it is a reference to Klan. No, we will pro bably never be faced with the choice of casting any vote for a Klanner, but we will most certainly be faced with the choice of voting for someone with certain ideas and traits in common with the Klan.

                          The title mentioned Catholics because there exists an significant amount of Catholic writings on it. Most of that is applicable to all Christians. So while you choose not to respond to the OP, you respond to the OP by trying to do what exactly?
                          I don't respond to it because it's a load of horse-puckey (voting for a lesser evil is still evil), and ultimately I don't think voting is the way to get any lasting change.

                          The victim card? Cardinal Mindszenty languished in jail, Christians in China are walking the proverbial tightrope. Canadian Christians are hardly in the same league, Sasketchwan in hardly Africa, China, and Pakistan. You have freedom of action: purposeful and public

                          Sounds like here in the states. When Romney ran, many pro lifers did not see a pro life candidate in the field.
                          And nor would I have the hubris to put myself or any fellow Canadian Christian in their league... but I guess you gotta go for the most mercurial reading of what I said to try and make me look bad, huh simpleton.

                          For the last 10+ years, not only have the Conservative Party Leaders gone on-record as to say, "We're not going to tackle Abortion," but- when they had a Majority Government- they also followed through on that statement shutting down a bill that was introduced to open a discussion of the topic. And yet I still have ignorant, "VoTe FoR tHe ChRiStIaN pArTy," types telling me that I have to vote Conservative if I want to see anything done about Abortion. Or just ignoramuses in general telling me to vote, even though where I live my vote literally does not matter because I don't live in Eastern Canada.
                          Have You Touched Grass Today? If Not, Please Do.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Watermelon View Post
                            I don’t think I know any. I just assumed they would take a position that would be the most disadvantageous to other races. ‘Pro life for black babies only’ would seem like a more consistent view, in my opinion, to white supremacy since it would allow whites to do something that the blacks would go to jail for.
                            Problem is, though... that's a long-term loss situation for the White Supremacists because then the minorities wound eventually, I dunno, become a majority?

                            Oh I meant increase in interracial relationships due to white women looking to have premarital sex may be reluctant to choose white partners to avoid the possibility of either going to prison or being stuck with a baby if they happen to get pregnant.
                            Yeah, but if the mayo-brigade is the only one allowed to get abortions done that's kind of irrelevant who she's knockin' boots with so the fact you're saying there'd be in increase in interracial relationships doesn't make sense.
                            Have You Touched Grass Today? If Not, Please Do.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Chaotic Void View Post
                              I don't respond to it because it's a load of horse-puckey (voting for a lesser evil is still evil), and ultimately I don't think voting is the way to get any lasting change.



                              And nor would I have the hubris to put myself or any fellow Canadian Christian in their league... but I guess you gotta go for the most mercurial reading of what I said to try and make me look bad, huh simpleton.

                              For the last 10+ years, not only have the Conservative Party Leaders gone on-record as to say, "We're not going to tackle Abortion," but- when they had a Majority Government- they also followed through on that statement shutting down a bill that was introduced to open a discussion of the topic. And yet I still have ignorant, "VoTe FoR tHe ChRiStIaN pArTy," types telling me that I have to vote Conservative if I want to see anything done about Abortion. Or just ignoramuses in general telling me to vote, even though where I live my vote literally does not matter because I don't live in Eastern Canada.
                              "....but I've been in a far worse position than that .... Try having no prolife party or candidate...." Seems like a pretty mercurial statement.

                              How is it horse puckey? When Romney ran, quite a few Christians actually discussed the hypothetical, as well as its implication.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                              16 responses
                              113 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post One Bad Pig  
                              Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                              53 responses
                              314 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Mountain Man  
                              Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                              25 responses
                              111 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                              33 responses
                              196 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Roy
                              by Roy
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                              84 responses
                              359 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post JimL
                              by JimL
                               
                              Working...
                              X