Jump to content
Join our Facebook Group ×
An Old School Catholic Message Board
Join our Facebook Group

If Hillary Clinton Makes Also Makes A Transparently Insincere Claim To Be Pro-Life Can Catholics Vote For Her

4588686

By 4588686
in Catholic Open Mic

 Share

Recommended Posts

KnightofChrist

KnightofChrist

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, PhuturePriest said:

The one time Trump *should* use strong language and unequivocally condemn something, and he doesn't do it.

The question becomes, why? He was using strong language when speaking about the 2nd amendment and foreign policy, so why not abortion? It's either he's too afraid of what people think about it (in which case we can't really trust him to do much for pro-life legislation), or he doesn't care about it and it's way down on his list (in which the same principle applies).

He stated he would appoint pro-life judges, overturning Roe Vs Wade, moving it back to the states. I guess that's not as strong as it could be but it's not really weak either. And his condemnation of Late term abortion was strong.

"Trump: I think it's terrible if you go with what Hillary is saying in the ninth month you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb of the mother just prior to the birth of the baby.

Now, you can say that that's okay, and Hillary can say that that's okay, but it's not okay with me. Because based on what she's saying and based on where she's going and where she's been, you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb in the ninth month, only the final day. And that's not acceptable.

[...]

Trump: And honestly, nobody has business doing what I just said (eta: describing late term abortion), doing that as late as one or two or three or four days prior to birth, nobody has that."

Source: www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2016/10/19/13336894/third-presidential-debate-live-transcript-clinton-trump

mariahLVzJP2

mariahLVzJP2

Posted
Posted

Wow, I'm pretty shocked that Catholics are here on a Catholic site defending Hillary. Her pro-abortion agenda and ties with planned parenthood are so dangerous to society. 

LittleWaySoul

LittleWaySoul

Posted
Posted

No one's defending Hillary; they're saying why Trump is bad. There's a difference. 

Amppax

Amppax

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, LittleWaySoul said:

No one's defending Hillary; they're saying why Trump is bad. There's a difference. 

It really isn't a difficult distinction. 

mariahLVzJP2

mariahLVzJP2

Posted
Posted

Donald Trump may act like a jerk but he's not even near as bad/corrupt as Hillary and her party! Hello Wikileaks!

I will pray that Catholics and others vote for a candidate that doesn't murder the innocent. That is the most important issue.... life.

mariahLVzJP2

mariahLVzJP2

Posted
Posted (edited)

And no I wouldn't vote for Hillary if she was pro-life. She's still evil and corrupt on  many other moral issues.

Edited by mariahLVzJP2
KnightofChrist

KnightofChrist

Posted
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, Amppax said:

It really isn't a difficult distinction. 

Sure it is, when one side offers little to no criticisms of Clinton but continually criticisms of Trump. Clinton strongly stood up in favor of abortion through out all nine months and I see little to no criticisms for her from those who've taken a anti-trump but pro-life position on pm.

After seeing Clinton defend abortion for all nine months and partial birth abortion I think I'll print out the article you posted and line my puppy dog's crapper with it. 

Edited by KnightofChrist
LittleWaySoul

LittleWaySoul

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, KnightofChrist said:

Sure it is, when one side offers little to no criticisms of Clinton but continually criticisms of Trump. Clinton strongly stood up in favor of abortion through out all nine months and I see little to no criticisms for her from those who've taken a anti-trump but pro-life position on pm.

After seeing Clinton defend abortion for all nine months and partial birth abortion I think I'll print out the article you posted and line my puppy dog's crapper with it. 

What do you want from us? Hillary smells of elderberries, Trump smells of elderberries, neither is good for the pro-life movement. 

If you want more of my own criticisms of Hillary I can give you plenty. The reason I and others may seem to be pro-Hillary is that we don't see Trump as easily being the lesser of two evils, so we respond to those who think that he is. This election is not cut-and-dry; I respect people who are voting for Trump because they genuinely believe he's the better option, but I have a difficult time sympathizing with people who paint this as anything other than a horrible election and Trump as anything other than a despicable person. It's possible to vote for Trump without needing to justify every last thing about him.

PhuturePriest

PhuturePriest

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, KnightofChrist said:

Sure it is, when one side offers little to no criticisms of Clinton but continually criticisms of Trump. Clinton strongly stood up in favor of abortion through out all nine months and I see little to no criticisms for her from those who've taken a anti-trump but pro-life position on pm.

After seeing Clinton defend abortion for all nine months and partial birth abortion I think I'll print out the article you posted and line my puppy dog's crapper with it. 

No one is going after Hillary because she hasn't paraded around as the savior of the pro-life movement. We know she is pro-choice up through all nine months. She has never touted otherwise. Trump, however, has flip-flopped on this issue repeatedly. Going after Trump does not make me nor anyone else here a fan of Hillary. It means we're calling BS on Trump over something Hillary has never flip-flopped on.

dominicansoul

dominicansoul

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, Amppax said:

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but here's something to consider: http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/20/trump-presidency-hurt-pro-life-more-than-hillary/

From what I understand, Trump overturning Roe V Wade would give that power back to the states to decide on abortion.  So, the article isn't really well founded.  He's not going to strip liberals of their precious sacrament.  It will be in stages.  

I honestly don't like that.  Texas gave a sweeping blow to Planned Parenthood when we passed laws that shut their clinics down.  It was a victory for the prolife movement even when the Supreme Court overturned some parts of it.  It's too late for those clinics to reopen.  They will never reopen again in our great state.  I don't understand how a softer attack against Roe V Wade is the answer, when that hasn't worked the last 50 years...  

 

Socrates

Socrates

Posted
Posted
On 10/21/2016 at 10:52 PM, Amppax said:

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but here's something to consider: http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/20/trump-presidency-hurt-pro-life-more-than-hillary/

To beat another dead horse, that op-ed piece was fairly nonsensical.  Like other "pro-life" "arguments" in favor of Hillary, it assumes as absolute certain fact that Trump will completely break his promises regarding SCOTUS nominations, and instead nominate persons every bit as pro-abortion and anti-constitutional as Hillary.  I regard this as a possibility, as I don't completely trust the guy (one reason I did not support him in the primary), but definitely don't regard it as a certainty.  If pressured hard enough, he may keep his promises, if not out of sincere principle, at least to keep the support of his base and keep face (as has been explained on here multiple times).  

As for pro-life legislation, that's the job of Congress, not the President.

A Supreme Court filled with Clinton-nominated justices would likely strike down many state laws restricting abortion, as well as further ensure that Roe v. Wade stands for generations.

Again, better to gamble with Trump than ensure certain ruin with the Cackling Witch.  But don't blame me; I voted for Cruz.

Papist

Papist

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Socrates said:

To beat another dead horse, that op-ed piece was fairly nonsensical.  Like other "pro-life" "arguments" in favor of Hillary, it assumes as absolute certain fact that Trump will completely break his promises regarding SCOTUS nominations, and instead nominate persons every bit as pro-abortion and anti-constitutional as Hillary.  I regard this as a possibility, as I don't completely trust the guy (one reason I did not support him in the primary), but definitely don't regard it as a certainty.  If pressured hard enough, he may keep his promises, if not out of sincere principle, at least to keep the support of his base and keep face (as has been explained on here multiple times).  

As for pro-life legislation, that's the job of Congress, not the President.

A Supreme Court filled with Clinton-nominated justices would likely strike down many state laws restricting abortion, as well as further ensure that Roe v. Wade stands for generations.

Again, better to gamble with Trump than ensure certain ruin with the Cackling Witch.  But don't blame me; I voted for Cruz.

i.e. With Trump, there is some uncertainty of what we get.  With Hillary, there is NO doubt what we get. 

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...