Pro-life Racist

[catholicinsd]

Please explain below.

PS The other canidate is a African American, who is pro-choice.

Edited November 30, 2006 by catholicinsd

[CatholicCid]

I choose the 3rd Option, I refuse to speculate.

Depends on the opposing Canidate.

[ardillacid]

There is no way on God's green earth that this could happen.

[catholicinsd]

[quote name='notardillacid' post='1131617' date='Nov 30 2006, 12:59 AM']
There is no way on God's green earth that this could happen.
[/quote]

And the Holy Bible says "For behold! All things are possible with God." And it has happened.

[ardillacid]

Well in that case, yes I would. Segregation is not going to happen, even if 1 senator gets elected with these views.

[CatholicCid]

It'd be wierd to see an election like this where the canidate is a main stream canidate...

So, to choose between a pro-life and racist or a pro-death canidate...

Looking at just these two issues, I would vote for the pro-life canidate.
I don't think he would have much ability to return segregation unless the rest of the house or whatever agree with him.

(and are you talking about the guy who wanted to redrew public school lines so they basically segregated the schools? saying it'd be easier to learn in)

[catholicinsd]

Notard, let's say, that it isn't senate, (where 1 vote doesn't change anything too much, as you correctly said,) Let's say its another office with the power to re-instate Apartied.

[CatholicCid]

Are you basically trying to make us choose between racism, a degredation of human dignity, or pro-death, an ending of innocent lives?
If so, it'd be easier to phrase the poll like that.

Edited November 30, 2006 by CatholicCid

[catholicinsd]

[quote name='CatholicCid' post='1131627' date='Nov 30 2006, 01:13 AM']
Are you basically trying to make us choose between racism, a degredation of human dignity, or pro-death, an ending of innocent lives?

[/quote]

Basically.

[CatholicCid]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1131628' date='Nov 30 2006, 02:15 AM']
Basically.
[/quote]

Well, which would you regard as the "lesser of two evils", as they say

And, I'd assume that if one can restart segregation, he can also end the culture of death.

Edited November 30, 2006 by CatholicCid

[catholicinsd]

[quote name='CatholicCid' post='1131630' date='Nov 30 2006, 01:18 AM']
Well, which would you regard as the "lesser of two evils", as they say
[/quote]

Well, depending on how extreme the racist canidate was, he would probably be the greater evil, (that if he supported race-murder and the like.) Now he he simply wanted to seperate the whites and the minorities, the pro-abort would be the greater evil.

[CatholicCid]

Then, I'd go with either not vote or go with the lesser of two evils... Or vote Green Party

Also, to your original statement, if the canidate was "pro-life" completely but supported a 'nazi-ish cleansing' thing, then he is no longer pro-life.
Som since he entirely pro-life, You'd probably vote for him? Which also means he can end the Culture of Death by the hypothetical situation.

Edited November 30, 2006 by CatholicCid

[catholicinsd]

[quote name='CatholicCid' post='1131640' date='Nov 30 2006, 01:26 AM']
Then, I'd go with either not vote or go with the lesser of two evils... Or vote Green Party

Also, to your original statement, if the canidate was "pro-life" completely but supported a 'nazi-ish cleansing' thing, then he is no longer pro-life.
Som since he entirely pro-life, You'd probably vote for him? Which also means he can end the Culture of Death by the hypothetical situation.
[/quote]

perhaps in this situation its best to not employ the term "pro-life" but rather "anti-abortion" And a racist shall never receive my vote.

Edited November 30, 2006 by catholicinsd

[CatholicCid]

Then that's a different matter entirely.

In my own mind right now, and it is late, I would have to favor the safety of human life over that of human dignity.
I don't know which canidate that would be, but I would use that as a guiding factor if I must vote.

Edited November 30, 2006 by CatholicCid

[Theoketos]

Actually Racism is a non-negotiable. So it would further depend on who has less non-negotiables.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='CatholicCid' post='1131647' date='Nov 30 2006, 12:31 AM']
Then that's a different matter entirely.

In my own mind right now, and it is late, I would have to favor the safety of human life over that of human dignity.
I don't know which canidate that would be, but I would use that as a guiding factor if I must vote.
[/quote]
But human life has value because of the inherent dignity of the person.


In fact, it just seems totally inconsistent to on one hand espouse the inequity of various races, while on the other hand to say all human life is valuable. "we're all valuable, but some more so than others"? I'd question whether he was truly pro-life.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Sojourner' post='1131761' date='Nov 30 2006, 08:43 AM']I'd question whether he was truly pro-life.
[/quote]
Yeah, me too. Especially considering Planned Parenthood's genocidic history.

[RandomProddy]

I'd not vote or stand myself.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='RandomProddy' post='1131780' date='Nov 30 2006, 09:14 AM']
I'd not vote or stand myself.
[/quote]
I'd probably vote for you over the alternatives....

[Groo the Wanderer]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1131614' date='Nov 30 2006, 12:54 AM']

PS The other canidate is a African American, who is pro-choice.
[/quote]

What the heck is an African-American, pray tell? No such thing. If they are an American citizen, which I must assume, since they are running for office, then they are an American. Period. Regardless of race. This hyphenated carp needs to stop - all it does is serve to divide us.

Groo
Anglo-Scot-Franco-Chicano-American...whatever