Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Pro-life Supreme Court justice = Not voting for Trump


dUSt

Recommended Posts

I did not vote for Biden, but I have to say that I would not mind seeing Trump losing the election, especially if the GOP retains control of the Senate, which would put an end to the predicted tax hike.

I would say that over the first 3 years Trump was an OK to good president. The tax cut was nice, saved me some money, probably helped keep the economy chugging along, unemployment low, no wars. Public decorum was terrible, but everyone knew that was going to be the case going in.

His handling of the Supreme Court picks was also good.

My main concern about the economy is that the debt ballooned up even more than under Obama, and I didn't even think that was possible. Look folks, if you keep borrowing on your credit card, and some point you are gonna have to file for bankruptcy. I don't think that we'll see the effect of that in the short term, but I think I'll pay for it all when it comes time to retire, and my 401k is worth nothing in real buying power because of the inflation.

Although the first 3 years were good, it's hard not to say that over the past year he has shown himself to be an incompetent leader in times of crisis, and that is exactly when the president is supposed to step in, add calm to a situation, and get things back under control. I thought that his handling of the pandemic and the racial strife over the past year was terrible, to be frank. We may have been better had we turned the country over to Deep Blue, or a highly intelligent monkey, it seems. I would say that at this point this is my main concern with the president. I think his policy has been good (with the above caveats) but his leadership has been as bad as I have ever seen in a candidate elected to a high-public office. I dare to say even worse than Clinton and his cigar shenanigans.

It would be nice if we could get a monkey or a placard to serve as president for 4 years. Just be quiet and do no harm, would be the best bet at this point I think.

Edited by Peace
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel relatively close to where you stand.

For all that Trump has been doing and saying in the last year it has been - and would be - relatively hands off compared to the things Democrats would like to do to interfere directly in your life, if you take a peek at all the bills the House puts through. Some of those bills would kill half my work and tax me more at the same time. Worse interference for anyone with family or anyone who has any employees who likes to remain a practicing Catholic.

I'm a fan of the no new wars thing under Trump. Would be nice to keep it that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I’ve read the Covid vaccine being developed it’s using aborted human fetus.  See: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/06/abortion-opponents-protest-covid-19-vaccines-use-fetal-cells 

The Democrats have equated abortion rights to women’s rights, republicans are opposed to abortion.  Democrats have vilified the Trump administration’s choice for supreme court justices.  

President Trump created the The Human Fetal Tissue Research Ethics Advisory Board in February of 2020.   He appointed Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Alex Azar. 

Secretary Azar has recommendations that 13 of 14 Proposals related to aborted fetal research be rejected, delivered to Azar and Congress today, were the first under a new regime implemented last year by the Trump administration, in which projects by extramural, NIH-funded scientists using human fetal tissue need to pass an extra layer of ethics review.

God save us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, little2add said:

From what I’ve read the Covid vaccine being developed it’s using aborted human fetus.  See: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/06/abortion-opponents-protest-covid-19-vaccines-use-fetal-cells 

The Democrats have equated abortion rights to women’s rights, republicans are opposed to abortion.  Democrats have vilified the Trump administration’s choice for supreme court justices.  

President Trump created the The Human Fetal Tissue Research Ethics Advisory Board in February of 2020.   He appointed Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Alex Azar. 

Secretary Azar has recommendations that 13 of 14 Proposals related to aborted fetal research be rejected, delivered to Azar and Congress today, were the first under a new regime implemented last year by the Trump administration, in which projects by extramural, NIH-funded scientists using human fetal tissue need to pass an extra layer of ethics review.

God save us

I'm pretty sure the experimental vaccine that Trump took for COVID was developed from an aborted fetus, but don't quote me on that.

He may not have known that, but it ain't a good look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read that too. 

President Trump created “the Fetal Tissue Research Ethics AdvisoryBoard“ at least.

joe Biden reversed his long standing support for the Hyde Amendment and  now advocates for abortion including late term.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fourteen months ago, the Trump administration clamped down on federally funded fetal tissue research by requiring that such projects go through an ethics review by a new advisory board  

A Science analysis finds that at least 10 of the 15 board members have spoken publicly against abortion, fetal tissue research, or both. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ash Wednesday

Trump's covid treatment wasn't taken directly from the aborted fetal strain, but it was tested with it. Sadly that's apparently a common practice in pharmaceuticals and it's not widely talked about. 

Though I'm doubtful that any of these circumstances even crossed his mind. I'm inclined to believe he was more likely concerning himself with CNN, ratings or golf.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A number of vaccines have cells descended from an aborted fetal human being somewhere along the chain of production: discovery, testing, manufacture.  The Church came out with a statement on the moral licitness of such vaccines.  Based on my understanding of the principles outlined it seems a covid vaccine would be licit, and according to one of the footnotes that those who refuse may be morally responsible for any deaths that result 

https://www.immunize.org/talking-about-vaccines/vaticandocument.htm

See footnote #15

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The relevant excerpt from @Lilllabettt‘s link above

”As regards the diseases against which there are no alternative vaccines which are available and ethically acceptable, it is right to abstain from using these vaccines if it can be done without causing children, and indirectly the population as a whole, to undergo significant risks to their health. However, if the latter are exposed to considerable dangers to their health, vaccines with moral problems pertaining to them may also be used on a temporary basis. The moral reason is that the duty to avoid passive material cooperation is not obligatory if there is grave inconvenience. Moreover, we find, in such a case, a proportional reason, in order to accept the use of these vaccines in the presence of the danger of favouring the spread of the pathological agent, due to the lack of vaccination of children. This is particularly true in the case of vaccination against German measles15.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lilllabettt said:

A number of vaccines have cells descended from an aborted fetal human being somewhere along the chain of production: discovery, testing, manufacture.  The Church came out with a statement on the moral licitness of such vaccines.  Based on my understanding of the principles outlined it seems a covid vaccine would be licit, and according to one of the footnotes that those who refuse may be morally responsible for any deaths that result 

https://www.immunize.org/talking-about-vaccines/vaticandocument.htm

See footnote #15

Wait you are saying it is a sin if I don't get the annual flu-shot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Peace said:

Wait you are saying it is a sin if I don't get the annual flu-shot?

I think it may be if it’s understood that you’re risking infecting others nd yourself witta potentially deadly disease.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Anomaly said:

The relevant excerpt from @Lilllabettt‘s link above

”As regards the diseases against which there are no alternative vaccines which are available and ethically acceptable, it is right to abstain from using these vaccines if it can be done without causing children, and indirectly the population as a whole, to undergo significant risks to their health. However, if the latter are exposed to considerable dangers to their health, vaccines with moral problems pertaining to them may also be used on a temporary basis. The moral reason is that the duty to avoid passive material cooperation is not obligatory if there is grave inconvenience. Moreover, we find, in such a case, a proportional reason, in order to accept the use of these vaccines in the presence of the danger of favouring the spread of the pathological agent, due to the lack of vaccination of children. This is particularly true in the case of vaccination against German measles15.”

If you go to the actual footnote it states: "This is particularly true in the case of vaccination against German measles, because of the danger of Congenital Rubella Syndrome. This could occur, causing grave congenital malformations in the foetus, when a pregnant woman enters into contact, even if it is brief, with children who have not been immunized and are carriers of the virus. In this case, the parents who did not accept the vaccination of their own children become responsible for the malformations in question, and for the subsequent abortion of foetuses, when they have been discovered to be malformed." 

Which is rather tough if I am understanding it correctly.  People who refuse vaccines "become responsible" for fetal birth defects and the resulting abortions.

1 hour ago, Peace said:

Wait you are saying it is a sin if I don't get the annual flu-shot?

It could be, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ash Wednesday

The primary issue with the situation with Trump, I found, was that there were people on the far left using the pharmaceutical situation as some bizarre reason to support "choice" and make a hit on the Trump campaign about abortion. I think when getting to the bottom of the actual story, it's not really very weighty in the larger political picture in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Credo in Deum
On 9/22/2020 at 9:42 AM, dUSt said:

So, I have a theory.

One of the only lingering justifiable reasons I had for voting for Trump would be his likelihood of putting a pro-life justice in the supreme court.

Ironically, if he DOES succeed at this before the election, I wouldn't have much of a reason to vote for him anymore.

If, for some reason, they aren't able to get a pro-life justice in before the election, it might actually persuade me to begrudgingly vote Trump--for this one specific reason.

Kinda weird to think that it may actually be better for Trump if the Democrats are successful at stalling the nomination.

 

A pro-life Justice doesn't mean anything especially if the person is easily swayed by motives of human respect.

Edited by Credo in Deum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...