- Joined
- Sep 22, 2005
- Messages
- 11,430
- Reaction score
- 2,282
- Location
- Los Angeles
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
No.
You are wrong because you are stating an opinion that has no factual basis (without caveats) as fact.
It is not murder in our society.
Human life begins at conception. Not an opinion. No caveats.
Murder is the wilful termination of human life without just cause. Personal convenience is not a just cause. Practical working definition, no caveats.
Abortion is the wilful termination of human life without just cause. Definition. No caveats.
Abortion is therefore murder. Logical conclusion.
Like I said, people who support the murder of babies are wrong. People who have to warp and distort logic to argue that it isn't wrong are warped and distorted. And wrong.
It's easy being perfect. I'd say you should try it, but there's only one of me.
The Church in this regards should make exceptions because it would be foolish of them to try and force their viewpoint, through a member of their Church, on a voting public who hold an opposite view. That is just wrong.
The Church claims to get it's directions from God.
All Churches do.
So you're arguing that God should change his mind....differently, in every Congressional district....to suit the whims of the voters of that district.
That it an interesting idea...if you're trying to create a jellyfish church.
As far as I am concerned a Catholic who intends to disregard their constituency and vote on issues based on their catholic beliefs, need not run for, or hold, any public office, unless elected on that platform.
Okay, I'm fine with that.
Don't complain if a church kicks a politician out. It's their club, not the politicians. The members follow the rules, or they get booted, if that's what the rules of the club say.
You got a problem with that?
It's clear Pelosi isn't a real catholic, so she should either change the way she votes, or find the ovaries to formally leave the Church.
Please show me where the Bible says the Pope is infallible.
Ask a Catholic that cares. I'm an atheist. I merely repeated what's needed to be an RC.
The Pope is God's Right Hand Man on Earth. You don't agree? Argue it with someone that does.
God's right hand man can't make mistakes, though.
Anyhooo, if Nancy doesn't want to live like a catholic, there's no one locking the doors of the church to keep her in.
That's pretty straightforward, isn't it?
Not at all funny.
The Catholic church is making up rules that the Bible doesn't support.
Can they do it? Sure they can. Is it right? Nope! Not one bit.
That is an abuse of power.
That makes the Catholic Church....exactly like every other self-proclaimed "Christian" religion on earth. You got a problem with that? Take it up with someone that cares.
It's really not relevant to the topic that Nancy doesn't have to be a Catholic if she doesn't want to be, and the Church isn't required to let her in if she refuses to obey their rules.
Not a democratic one, but in it's own right, it is.
Knew you were going to say that.
Doesn't matter.
I said it isn't, because it isn't.
I said it is.
I invented it.
I laid it out for all to see.
Can't help it if you can't see the simplest of metaphors.
To equate a sporting team in a sporting event where the outcome of a players conduct of not following the rules and greatly effects the outcome of who wins or looses is "imprecise and inapplicable".
It's precise and perfectly applicable.
If Pelosi ran as a real Catholic, ie, promising that her firmly held religious beliefs would guide her votes in the House, she wouldn't have been elected. Therefore her false use of the "Catholic Label" greatly affected the outcome of the elections she ran in and thus fraudulently affected the outcome, just as if ole Nancy was catching that ball on the soccer field illegally.
Instead of running as a real catholic, she ran as a baby-murdering tax-and-spend liberal socialist "catholic" with corporate donor owners. Her "catholic" label meant nothing.
If the people that own the label object to her use of it, charging false representation, and revoke her privilege to use that label by revoking her privilege to attend their churches, until such time as she convincingly demonstrates to them her true repentance, that's their right to do so. Under the First Amendment, it's illegal for the Congress to make laws infringing that freedom.
This isn't a game or a sporting event, is it?
Absolutely.
The stakes are life, death, wealth, poverty, freedom, slavery, happiness, and despair.
It's the most exciting game on the planet.
You play it, or you wouldn't be posting here.
The fans didn't elect the player to represent them, did they?
Her fans did.
What Pelosi does or doesn't doas an elected official doesn't equate in a win or a loss like it does in a sporting event, does it?
No.
The Roman gladiators put their own lives on the line.
When Pelosi plays, she helps to kill millions and millions of unborn babies.
Yes, your analogy/comparison has no bearing on said subject.
You only say that because you know you're not telling the truth.
But hey, since you used it the sporting team analogy - most players are not kicked of the team for not following the rules. Get the drift why your analogy doesn't have any bearing?
You mean sporting teams are almost as corrupt as the Catholic Church?
Oh, I'm just SHOCKED! I tell you SHOCKED!!!!
:doh
But when it comes to corruption, the Roman Catholic Church is a little league team compared to the Most Mighty and Awesome Major League Democrat Party, though. I'm sure you can't disagree honestly with that.
I mean...the RC had a Borgia Pope here and there....the Democrats have Bill and Hillary and Obama and Harry and Nancy and William Jefferson and all the rest. Can't pick up a Democrat without the corruption getting your fingers all slimy.