Papist Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 People sure know what they don't like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted March 23, 2012 Author Share Posted March 23, 2012 [quote name='Marie-Therese' timestamp='1332470121' post='2405764'] If I might comment here, Hassy isn't talking about peripheral legislative matters or funding issues. He means that the President of the United States, in and of himself, does not have the power or authority to repeal abortion, which, at present, is considered to be a protected activity under the legislation of the country and upheld by multiple rulings of the Supreme Court. [/quote] Right. The Supreme Court. The court in which Obama (aka The President) just appointed two pro-choice judges. The same Supreme Court that would be majority pro-life right now if the The President would have been pro-life. To say that The President has no say in repealing the law is just not true. And I hope that everyone who voted third party and helped get Obama elected understands this very real consequence that actually happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 [quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1332476695' post='2405876'] Right. The Supreme Court. The court in which Obama (aka The President) just appointed two pro-choice judges. The same Supreme Court that would be majority pro-life right now if the The President would have been pro-life. To say that The President has no say in repealing the law is just not true. And I hope that everyone who voted third party and helped get Obama elected understands this very real consequence that actually happened. [/quote] Yet Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Scalia, and Justice Alito are all practicing Catholics. Even more have a history of voting in a constructionist (aka strict) interpretation of the constitution, which is in our favor. But do you [i]honestly[/i] believe that a case overturning Roe v Wade is going to reach the Court anytime soon? Or that overturning Roe would be anything but the [i]final[/i] step in winning the pro-life wars? Sure, the President doesn't have NO say. His say is highly exaggerated by various pro-lifers, though. And it's important to [i]also [/i]consider a candidate's position on issues that he or she would have a large influence over, in addition to strongly weighing a candidate's degree of pro-life-ness. Oh please. Voting Republican doesn't automatically mean you're voting in a Catholic way. You can't berate a Catholic who genuinely believed that a third party candidate best represented Church teaching (best case scenario). And we can't assume that Catholics that vote third party AREN'T doing their best to follow Church teaching. Don't blame Obama on the independents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted March 23, 2012 Author Share Posted March 23, 2012 Da Nile ain't just a river in Egypt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 (edited) [quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1332476695' post='2405876'] Right. The Supreme Court. The court in which Obama (aka The President) just appointed two pro-choice judges. [/QUOTE] And were confirmed by the body that contains a lot of pro-choice democrats and who can filibuster the nominations (aka the Senate). Roberts said that he respects stare decisis and the court has been careful in their recent rulings to argue that their opinions do not conflict with Casey. At best the President would be able to appoint a USSC that would be able [QUOTE] The same Supreme Court that would be majority pro-life right now if the The President would have been pro-life. [/QUOTE] No it wouldn't. Unless there is some world where a democrat controlled Senate would approve judges (nominated by McCain) who would be fervently anti-abortion to strike down 40 years of precedent. At which time the matter would return to the states and abortion would still be legal in much of the country. [QUOTE] To say that The President has no say in repealing the law is just not true. [/QUOTE] He doesn't. He can attempt to set the stage so that at some point in the future there is a chance that somebody that he nominated to the USSC will rule a way that agrees with his pro-life views. I did not state that in my post but I didn't think that was a secret. However Ron Paul would be as likely to appoint a judge who would defer the matter to the states as anyone else (in fact, far more likely), which is why I assumed that you were talking about direct, substantive federal action to make abortion illegal as otherwise your argument against Ron Paul makes no sense. [QUOTE] And I hope that everyone who voted third party and helped get Obama elected understands this very real consequence that actually happened. [/quote] Nothing. Nothing has changed. And it would not have changed had McCain been elected with a democrat controlled Senate. . So the real point of this thread was to make sure that people voted for the republican candidate (who will be Romney, who has super sincerely repudiated his past pro-choice stance) rather than pointing out that Ron Paul Edited March 23, 2012 by Hasan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity. It's irrational and narrow minded to fault Catholics who vote third party, or not at all, as their conscience demands of them. The Church has been quite clear that politics allows a range of acceptable opinions to Catholics in good faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 (edited) [quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1332478690' post='2405908'] Da Nile ain't just a river in Egypt. [/quote] Seeing as you're reduced to writing off my points as just "denial," I'm going to chalk this up as a win. [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1332479180' post='2405914'] In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity. It's irrational and narrow minded to fault Catholics who vote third party, or not at all, as their conscience demands of them. The Church has been quite clear that politics allows a range of acceptable opinions to Catholics in good faith. [/quote] ^ That. And some people forget that the Church allows for a range of acceptable political opinions. Edited March 23, 2012 by Basilisa Marie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1332479596' post='2405919'] Seeing as you're reduced to writing off my points as just "denial," I'm going to chalk this up as a win. ^ That. And some people forget that the Church allows for a range of acceptable political opinions. [/quote] I think you're pretty coo[color=#000000]l[/color]. Edited to bypass f[color=#000000]i[/color]lter. Edited March 23, 2012 by Nihil Obstat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 [url="http://prolifeprofiles.com/mitt-romney-abortion"]http://prolifeprofiles.com/mitt-romney-abortion[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 [quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1332479700' post='2405921'] [url="http://prolifeprofiles.com/mitt-romney-abortion"]http://prolifeprofil...romney-abortion[/url] [/quote] Lulz. Romney isn't even worth discussing as an alternative to Obama. He's the perfect example of different rhetoric, same agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1332479684' post='2405920'] I think you're pretty coo[color=#000000]l[/color]. Edited to bypass f[color=#000000]i[/color]lter. [/quote] Aww, thanks! The feelings are mutual. I'm sure we can find something to disagree on later. But in the meantime, Huzzah! Edit: UGH I have run out of props. Grrr. Edited March 23, 2012 by Basilisa Marie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1332479860' post='2405924'] Aww, thanks! I'm sure we can find something to disagree on later. But in the meantime, Huzzah! [/quote] I seem to remember you disagreeing with Winchester on something. That time you posted about how it was ironic that you were arguing on his side in one thread, and against him in another. Don't remember what the debate was, but Winchester and I usually have pretty similar opinions these days. Oh yeah, and then I did a drive-by and called you some name. That was fun. Edited March 23, 2012 by Nihil Obstat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1332479947' post='2405927'] I seem to remember you disagreeing with Winchester on something. That time you posted about how it was ironic that you were arguing on his side in one thread, and against him in another. Don't remember what the debate was, but Winchester and I usually have pretty similar opinions these days. Oh yeah, and then I did a drive-by and called you some name. That was fun. [/quote] Yup. I think feminism, in the proper context, is pretty razzle dazzle, which is a rather unpopular opinion around here. But I await the day when I can lob some name in your direction and have just as much fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 [quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1332480308' post='2405933'] Yup. I think feminism, in the proper context, is pretty razzle dazzle, which is a rather unpopular opinion around here. But I await the day when I can lob some name in your direction and have just as much fun. [/quote] I have this excellent book called "The Eternal Feminine" by Gertrude von le Fort. I think it was Alice von Hildebrand who wrote a preface for it, which was how I found it in the first place. I haven't had a chance to finish it yet because of other stuff I became more interested in, but it was a really great experience reading the parts I did get to. I'll have to start over again sometime soon. I've read a few of Alice von Hildebrand's essays on authentic femininity in the past too, and they were fascinating. I really love her and her late husband. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 [quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1332480308' post='2405933'] Yup. I think feminism, in the proper context, is pretty razzle dazzle, which is a rather unpopular opinion around here. But I await the day when I can lob some name in your direction and have just as much fun. [/quote] The very word is the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now