ironmonk Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 Here is a great resource... [url="http://www.virtuousdemocracy.org/democratsnomore/platformscomparison.pdf"]http://www.virtuousdemocracy.org/democrats...scomparison.pdf[/url] In Their Own Words National Party Platforms On Certain Biblical Issues Democrats and Republicans God Bless! ironmonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 I find stuff like this next to worthless. There are folks on both sides who don't stand by the official platform, either in their personal rhetoric or in how they actually vote when push comes to shove. And frankly, I'm pretty leery of politicians who use "biblical" positions to lure in voters. When Christian values become a tool to win votes, that's a problem for me. Like how the Republicans keep bringing up gay marriage. Guaranteed a marriage amendment will come up sometime before the next presidential election -- not in an actual bid to really pass a marriage amendment, but out of a desire to scare conservative voters into voting Republican. In reality, many Republican backers -- including big businesses -- do not want a marriage amendment to pass. I know for a fact that in Indiana, whenever this has been proposed, major businesses in the state, including Eli Lilly, have lobbied heavily against a marriage amendment. But proposing one sure comes in handy to win the conservative vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironmonk Posted August 7, 2007 Author Share Posted August 7, 2007 (edited) [quote name='Terra Firma' post='1351153' date='Aug 6 2007, 02:06 PM']I find stuff like this next to worthless. There are folks on both sides who don't stand by the official platform, either in their personal rhetoric or in how they actually vote when push comes to shove. And frankly, I'm pretty leery of politicians who use "biblical" positions to lure in voters. When Christian values become a tool to win votes, that's a problem for me. Like how the Republicans keep bringing up gay marriage. Guaranteed a marriage amendment will come up sometime before the next presidential election -- not in an actual bid to really pass a marriage amendment, but out of a desire to scare conservative voters into voting Republican. In reality, many Republican backers -- including big businesses -- do not want a marriage amendment to pass. I know for a fact that in Indiana, whenever this has been proposed, major businesses in the state, including Eli Lilly, have lobbied heavily against a marriage amendment. But proposing one sure comes in handy to win the conservative vote.[/quote] Some big companies push against it because they have leftist anti-family people in executive positions - not to mention all the bad unions. Indiana is a union state - unions were needed years ago, now most hurt the economy and are crooked in their tactics. Most big companies are for a marriage amendment... society is based on the family unit consisting of a father and mother. If same sex unions are made legal, it would unjustly cost businesses many thousands of dollars. Maybe if you would research you would see that [b]stuff like this is far from worthless[/b]. I have done the research... I've been reading the bible for about 28 years, studying Church history for about 19 years, and reading the Catechism for about 8 years. I've been watching both parties for 17 years, double checking what each side says from as many sources as I could find. 8 out of 10 times I've seen the left lie about the right. 2 out of 10 times I've seen the right lie about the left... but the minute they lie, they are no longer on the right and drift to the left. To be right one is lawful... lying is unlawful and therefore the opposite of right, which is wrong (but the left have too much pride to admit they're wrong so they call themselves left). Our first priority is the innocent life of unborn children... that is a Catholic's first and foremost priority. The second is the Family. The third priority is Social Justice. All of the leaders of the left of today are baby killers... we don't need to waste time looking at any other criteria, it is our responsibility as Catholics to vote against them.... UNLESS the other person running against them is also a baby killer... then we need to look the stance on Family... ALL leftist presidential runners are for same sex marriage... Boom... two strikes... doubtful that we'll find no one on the right will be supporting same sex marriage (if they did, they wouldn't be on the right because that makes them left - there are some leftist republicans - oust them)... then the third priority is social justice... Social Justice is helping the poor, not giving them a hand out forever, social justice as defined by the Church is helping them help themselves with programs that do not create dependancy... of course there are exceptions to the rule when someone is disabled and cannot work, then they cannot work, we are not talking about those people in this context (this is for those who want to bring that point up). It is frustrating when Catholics do not know their faith and ignorantly cast sinful votes because they think that unending welfare is above unborn babies lives... or that we should let Iraq fall back into the hands of fanatic terrorists when we promised we wouldn't (even knew at the time of voting for it, that it could take over ten years) - over the lives of unborn children. The needs of the spirit outweigh the needs of the body... the needs of the innocent outweigh the needs of the not innocent... the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.... over 5000 babies a day are killed.... in one week about 35,000 people are ripped apart in the womb... LEGALLY... really think about that... that's a city - gone.... Wanna know why there is a social security problem? Social security depends on the growth of the workforce, we've been killing (on average) over 4,000,000 babies a year since 1973. 55,000,000 total I think it is... that's almost half of all the people that vote in a presidential election. I wonder how many doctors and scientist that could have come up with a cure to a disease were killed... With so many innocent baby deaths, how can anyone even consider voting for that with a clear conscience? ... maybe if their conscience is illformed or they are faithless. Anyone who votes for an abortionist over someone who is pro-life has innocent blood on their hands. Edited August 7, 2007 by ironmonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 (edited) Well if your definition of "left" is "liars" then of course those who are on the right and lie "drift to the left." People who have decent points don't need to flaunt their credentials. Oh and before you get on your high horse about voting for baby deaths, let's please note that you've advocated voting for Giuliani in other threads. Who is avowedly pro-choice, no matter how you slice it. Edited August 7, 2007 by Terra Firma Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironmonk Posted August 7, 2007 Author Share Posted August 7, 2007 (edited) [quote name='Terra Firma' post='1351616' date='Aug 6 2007, 11:08 PM']Well if your definition of "left" is "liars" then of course those who are on the right and lie "drift to the left." People who have decent points don't need to flaunt their credentials. Oh and before you get on your high horse about voting for baby deaths, let's please note that you've advocated voting for Giuliani in other threads. Who is avowedly pro-choice, no matter how you slice it.[/quote] [mod]personal attack - Lil Red[/mod] If it came down to hilary or rudy, according to Catholic teaching, rudy would be the one to vote for. If I am wrong, please correct me with Catholic documents... This is worth reading multiple times: [b]Faithful Citizenship: A Catholic Call to Political [u]Responsibility[/u][/b] [url="http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/bishopStatement.html"]http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/b...pStatement.html[/url] First off, I have no credentials... I do not have a degree in theology.... it's pointing out that I know the faith and which group is closest to the faith... I vote the faith. I know proportional reasoning which the Church teaches that we must use in evaluation of who to vote for.... I do not pick sides on a whim, or from what I hear people say, or from just what I see on the news. Second, my point... if you did the research, you would not have called "things like this" worthless. If you want to make an attack, you might want come with something solid other than just a negative opinion. <-this is why I ignore your posts... please forgive me if I have missed a reply to you here or there because I normally do not look at them. God Bless, ironmonk Edited August 7, 2007 by Lil Red personal attack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironmonk Posted August 7, 2007 Author Share Posted August 7, 2007 Gotta add something else.... It's not "my" definition of "Left". The definition of "Left" is the opposite of "Right"... The definition of "Right" is to be lawful. There is no such thing as "Right wing extremist" because the minute they go against the law, they drift towards the left. Left does not mean liberal and right does not mean conservative. The media has confused many many Americans about the correct meaning of the words. "Conservative" means to stay "status quo"... Liberal means "to change". Right means "in accordance with what is good, proper, and just"... also "moral, ethical, etc...". Left means the opposite of right: realativism, radical, etc... [b]Ecclesiastes 10:2 [/b] The wise man's understanding turns him to his right; the fool's understanding turns him to his left. God Bless, ironmonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 (edited) You know, Ironmonk, I've had heated disagreements with many, many people over the years I've been a member here, and not once have I put someone on ignore, blocked them, or refused to read their comments. And if I did, I would not have the poor taste to tell them about it on an open forum. I'm not saying I'm a paragon of virtue or maturity, but come on. We're not in seventh grade here. We can deal with one another as grownups, can't we? Grownups handle their disagreements with maturity rather than hiding behind electronic paraphernalia. You must forgive me about confusing your use of right/left/liberal/conservative, because in my readings you have used right/conservative/Republican as synonymous and left/liberal/Democrat as synonymous. I'm still not entirely clear what the distinction is you make in your own mind when it comes to politics and religion, because frankly I've never seen you advocate any position that would remotely fall within the "left/liberal/Democrat" camp. With regard to your knowledge of faith, I stand by my earlier post that someone who has solid points need not back it up by pointing to the fact that he's read the Bible since the age of 5. And with regard to voting, here's a little quote from your own link: [quote]A Catholic moral framework does not easily fit the ideologies of "right" or "left," nor tthe platforms of any party. Our values are often not "politically correct." Believers are called to be a community of conscience within the larger society and to test public life by the values of Scripture and the principles of Catholic social teaching. Our responsibility is to measure all candidates, policies, parties, and platforms by how they protect or undermine the life, dignity, and rights of the human person?whether they protect the poor and vulnerable and advance the common good.[/quote] I measure the candidates, policies, parties, and platforms by how they protect or undermine the life, dignity, and rights of human persons and find both Republicans and Democrats sadly lacking. I feel totally justified in voting for a candidate more in line with Catholic moral teaching. Edited August 7, 2007 by Terra Firma Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
God the Father Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 History note: The reason that "left" and "right" are used in our political discourse is not because of their respective definitions. It is a legacy of the French revolution, in which certain parties of the General Assembly sat on the left and the right sides of the hall. As such the terms are are purely arbitrary and it's not logical to use the "dictionary" definitions to make judgments about them. Yes, "right" also means correct but you can't make the jump from that to political concerns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desertwoman Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 I don't trust any of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 [quote name='desertwoman' post='1351953' date='Aug 7 2007, 09:35 AM']I don't trust any of them.[/quote] That would be my take as well. None of them stand by their platforms, which is why comparing them is worthless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XIX Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 [quote name='ironmonk' post='1351789' date='Aug 6 2007, 10:57 PM']Gotta add something else.... It's not "my" definition of "Left". The definition of "Left" is the opposite of "Right"... The definition of "Right" is to be lawful. There is no such thing as "Right wing extremist" because the minute they go against the law, they drift towards the left. Left does not mean liberal and right does not mean conservative. The media has confused many many Americans about the correct meaning of the words. "Conservative" means to stay "status quo"... Liberal means "to change". Right means "in accordance with what is good, proper, and just"... also "moral, ethical, etc...". Left means the opposite of right: realativism, radical, etc... [b]Ecclesiastes 10:2 [/b] The wise man's understanding turns him to his right; the fool's understanding turns him to his left. God Bless, ironmonk[/quote] Yeah, because left and right mean the same things they did thousands of years ago. Do you actually mean to propose, that in American politics, the left's official stance is to lie? You might as well try to tell us that all southpaws commit mortal sin--after all, only a foolish person turns to his left. Look--I don't like the political left at all, but this is a bit overboard. Left and right don't mean what they did 50 years ago, let alone several thousand years ago. Neither do conservative/liberal or Democrat/republican. Words change. Conservative does not mean "status quo" anymore; if it did, then conservatives would quickly become pro-abortion, as abortion has become the status quo in American politics. Conservative does mean "right," (as in the opposite of left, not the opposite of wrong.) Liberal means "left." Words pretty much mean what people want them to mean. That is how language evolves--if there are enough people using words with a certain definition, then the words automatically adopt that definition. Language is literally determined by a majority vote. Of course, morality is not determined by a majority vote, but etymology sure as heck is. As is such, liberal means left and conservative means right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XIX Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 [quote name='ironmonk' post='1351773' date='Aug 6 2007, 10:46 PM']Nice leftist way to take something out of context... You get the Michael Moore award.[/quote] Terra Firma...Michael Moore... Erm... I think not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 [quote name='XIX' post='1351976' date='Aug 7 2007, 10:44 AM'] Terra Firma...Michael Moore... Erm... I think not. [/quote] Well, in his defense, he does have me on ignore, so he hasn't really read most things I write. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curtins Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 thanks for the post ironmonk....very informative- and good to see you back around the phorum the plain fact is that the democratic liberal agenda is NOT in line with what we believe as Catholics. We believe in the preservation of values and traditions- the left is obsessed with relativism. They have been conducting a war on poverty for 33 years, any results???? Like Ironmonk said, gov't handouts don't help the poor. Trust me- I've seen it. Go to camden, nj for a week.The poor need to be empowered to change their own situation and change their lives, not remain status quo with a welfare check. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 [quote name='curtins' post='1352051' date='Aug 7 2007, 01:01 PM']the plain fact is that the democratic liberal agenda is NOT in line with what we believe as Catholics.[/quote] And neither is the Republican agenda. 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