Will Obama Destroy Franciscan University Of Steubenville?

[Maggyie]

Hmmm. This thread can mean only one thing: a national election is right around the corner, IOW a huge occasion of sin in terms of charity. Oh yummy!!! Stab me in the face with a chair leg and end the suffering before it begins!!!!

[Winchester]

If the government can force a company to provide insurance to you, then it can force it to supply birth control. If you want the benefits of fascism, then you'll just have to put up with the drawbacks.

[Maggyie]

[quote name='arfink' timestamp='1317602200' post='2314202']
I don't wish to engage in more bashing here, but I will pull out from my handbag of philosophical tricks one of the only ones that's useful on the internet anymore: something I like to call "reductio ad Hitler."

Hitler pulled Germany out of a financial gutter. He got the whole nation back to work, restored their national pride, sent millions of Germans to school. Millions of Germans were given jobs with good pay. Much of this was connected to Hitler's war efforts, but in many cases people were genuinely given a big break by Hitler's plans. He pulled Germany up by the bootstraps after the crushing economic toll of losing WWI. After all, he was actually very popular because of the many good works he did. Many Germans loved him.

His actions also killed millions upon millions of people, both in the death camps and on the field of battle where he waged an unjust war.

In the end, Germany paid an even greater price for following Hitler than they had for WWI. I say we shouldn't attempt to compromise- politicians are going to give us the whole enchilada or we'll bestow the big Catholic boot upon their rears and kick them out of office. They give us very regular and orderly intervals at which to change politicians, and while I have not seen a "whole enchilada" candidate in my entire life (except perhaps Allan Keyes) I still think voting with intent to block the worse evils from office is worthwhile.
[/quote]

Your point is taken, however are you aware that invoking Hitler causes you to automatically forfeit any argument you are making on the internet. This is because inevitably, even if you are discussing Browns vs. Steelers or brats vs. weiners, someone will bring up Hitler...eventually. Tis the least useful philosophy trick on the Internet, ever.

ETA: AKA, [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law"]Godwin's Law[/url]

Edited October 3, 2011 by Maggie

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1317595900' post='2314152']
3. Premiums may go up, but it'll still be far less expensive then me having to get my own health insurance at the moment. They're generous to keep declaring me as a dependent in that sense, until I can get a real job after I get my degree. I'm just saying this as an example of one good thing Obama has done to help Americans, when others were proposing that he hadn't done a single thing to help America.
[/quote]

who do you think is paying for it? not just premiums will go up. taxes go up too.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Deus_te_Amat' timestamp='1317601135' post='2314191']
Basilisa, while I understand what you are trying to say, I think the others are trying to make, albeit somewhat absurdly, is that you cannot have one of the corporal works of mercy at the expense of any of the others. While some of Obama's changes may be perceived as good for those less fortunate, these goods come at the expense of aborted lives. Without life, corporal works of mercy are... superfluous. If we give food to the hungry, we've failed because a baby has starved. If we clothe the naked, we've failed because we've ripped a baby from the protection of its mother's womb.

While it is good to look on the bright side of things and say "Obama, as president, has done this and this and this to benefit society," we cannot ignore the fact that he has failed to protect [i]the sanctity of human life[/i]. The ends do not justify the means.

I sincerely apologize for the lack of manners of my peers in this forum. It is impossible to progress in understanding without considerate dialogue, and, unfortunately, some in the debate board have yet to comprehend the nature of "dialogue."

Pax Christi,
DtA
[/quote]

I heart you.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1317603856' post='2314228'] good reason to sharpen the pitchforks [/quote]

i always keep my pitchfork ready, thank you very much.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Maggie' timestamp='1317606518' post='2314272']
Hmmm. This thread can mean only one thing: a national election is right around the corner, IOW a huge occasion of sin in terms of charity. Oh yummy!!! Stab me in the face with a chair leg and end the suffering before it begins!!!!
[/quote]

a-freakin'-men. you won't see me much in the debate table during elections

[Clare~Therese]

[quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1317609370' post='2314320']

i always keep my pitchfork ready, thank you very much.
[/quote]


Don't forget the torches.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Clare~Therese' timestamp='1317609603' post='2314324']


Don't forget the torches.
[/quote]
i have special torch holders here at my house, just in case.

[Clare~Therese]

[quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1317609721' post='2314326']
i have special torch holders here at my house, just in case.
[/quote]


it's always good to keep torch holders available

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1317609370' post='2314320']

i always keep my pitchfork ready, thank you very much.
[/quote]

i only meant to say that it would hurt more if they DIDNT sharpen the pitchforks before they go a-stabbin'

[Norseman82]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1317603856' post='2314228']
This thread is pathetic. there is no need for all this rabid posting. Im pretty sure everyone here, me included is prolife, when basilae says that some of Obama's actions are neutral or Ok, that is NOT a good reason to sharpen the pitchforks and burn down the babykiller.



Abortion is awful. duh. But that doesnt mean that every president that doesn't immediately revoke Roe vs Wade (haven't had one yet) is incapable of doing unrelated, good acts. and listing them out does not imply a tacit approval of everything else that president does.

unless you mean to imply that the vast majority of America is incapable of performing a good deed because they are prochoice... because that covers a good number of Conservatives as well, not to mention many catholics, and some other people who are prolife until they get pregnant.(its fairly common and very sad [url="http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/anti-tales.html"]http://mypage.direct...anti-tales.html[/url])


or maybe i should just start posting several high resolution graphic pictures of burnt and mutilated children taken during any of the wars happening when Reagan, Bush sr or G W Bush (or Clinton, but no one here sings his praises) is mentioned in a semi positive way. That would make this forum a lovely place.





/flamebait
[/quote]

But the President can't unilaterally (sp?) overturn Roe vs Wade. It takes either:

1) A constitutional amendment, which requires 2/3 of both houses of Congress to pass and the approval of the state legislatures in 38 states (3/4 of 50); or
2) The Supreme Court must reverse Roe vs. Wade

Neither option will happen quickly, but where Bush 43 did act, he did appoint Roberst and Alitto, who most believe are pro-life.

Additionally, under Bush, federal employees had a wide variety of health insurance options, including one that did not cover contraception. Obama has erased this gain.

Now, the first amendment right to freedom of religion is under attack by a government redefinition of what religion is.

Other groups take to the streets in protest (think of the march to Selma). Maybe it's time for us Catholics to stop playing the "sheep" and start becoming more vocal in demanding our constitutional rights. After all, we're Americans, too.

Edited October 3, 2011 by Norseman82

[Brother Adam]

This thread is a prop making machine. I have never seen so many crazy dope posts.

The easiest ways to solve non-debates like these is to listen to Winchester. He's the chees e on the phatmass cracker.

[Marie-Therese]

[quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1317589459' post='2314076']
he's the worst.president.ever
[/quote]

*coughcoughJIMMYCARTERcoughcough*


[quote name='vee8' timestamp='1317590570' post='2314085']
Without the right to life from the moment of conception to natural death nothing else matters. If that isnt protected and respected first then all else is in vain.
[/quote]

Absolutely right. And last time I checked, life extended beyond the nine months that a human spends in utero. That's the whole "to natural death" part. It is our duty as Catholics to defend and protect life. That's life, full stop. To excoriate a fellow poster for having the audacity to state that there were pertinent concerns to Catholics regarding life issues that were not directly related to abortion is not only myopic, it's ridiculous. And then to add this post
[quote name='vee8' timestamp='1317595881' post='2314151']

THOU SHALL NOT KILL
[/quote]

was just tasteless. This debate was in regard to the provision of contraception and abortion in terms of health insurance. NO ONE on this thread was arguing in favour of abortion. No one. To shamelessly drag out photographs of some poor innocents in order to reinforce the importance of pro-life issues was pointless and and the worst sort of emotional manipulation and grandstanding. Those dead babies didn't make your point. They only reinforced a point no one was arguing.

[quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1317596592' post='2314159']
what does all that matter vee, when women aren't getting their contraception and their abortions on catholic campuses?


oh, and of course dear leader himself pays for people's health insurance and for their way to college? so, abortion, although it certainly is a big deal, we can't ignore the great things dear leader is doing for our country...

...and quit posting those pictures of aborted babies.. we don't want to make too much of a big deal about abortion, it isn't the end all and be all... i mean we have starving children and all the born people in our third world country called the U.S.A. that need dear leader's money!!!! in no time he will make our great country into the socialist country rivaled only by North Korea (which this attitude reminds me of...)
[/quote]

Kind of missing the point here. The fact that a liberal president wants to include contraception and abortions (all of which are still legal in this country, btw) as part of health care coverage to every insurance provider is not in any way shocking. The bigger issue here is the fact that religious exemptions seem to have little weight in the debate. The conversation here needs to be about how to argue that conscientious objection to such things should be legally protected, and that those who chose to elect coverage which did not include those things should be able to do so under law.

No one has argued that abortion isn't a big deal, or that it's inconsequential, or that Obama is Jesus Christ. The only posts I read pretty simply stated some objective facts: 1) no president has acted in a manner that is all good or all bad; 2) pro-life issues involve more than just abortion issues; and 3) neglecting any life in favour of any other is not an acceptable choice. The "starving children and all the born people" are just as important as the unborn, believe it or not. All deserve your love, compassion, protection, charity, prayers, and the same tireless energy should go to feeding the starving as it does to ending abortion. For all the arguing over cafeteria Catholics, some people seem to have no problem picking from the buffet of social issues and deciding which they like better. It's much easier to make an emotional argument about a baby than about a homeless person.

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1317603856' post='2314228']
or maybe i should just start posting several high resolution graphic pictures of burnt and mutilated children taken during any of the wars happening when Reagan, Bush sr or G W Bush (or Clinton, but no one here sings his praises) is mentioned in a semi positive way. That would make this forum a lovely place.
[/quote]

This. A million times this.

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1317612381' post='2314369']

But the President can't unilaterally (sp?) overturn Roe vs Wade. It takes either:

1) A constitutional amendment, which requires 2/3 of both houses of Congress to pass and the approval of the state legislatures in 38 states (3/4 of 50); or
2) The Supreme Court must reverse Roe vs. Wade

Neither option will happen quickly, but where Bush 43 did act, he did appoint Roberst and Alitto, who most believe are pro-life.

Additionally, under Bush, federal employees had a wide variety of health insurance options, including one that did not cover contraception. Obama has erased this gain.
[/quote]


this post is probably technically correct, but fairly irrelevant. no one was discussing congressional procedure.

on another note, i think it would be hard to argue that in practical "action taken" type terms that there was a vast difference between Bush and Obama. bush didnt do much to end abortion, and obama hasnt done that much to further it.



Abortion being the large pile of dung in America's back yard, Bush took a shovelful off, then went back inside for lemonade, a few years later Obama put it back with a bit extra, then went back in for lemonade.

Edited October 3, 2011 by Jesus_lol