What say you?
Posted on 07/11/2004 4:03:45 PM PDT by lulu21
I bet the Mods View on trolls isn't that contradictory either.
I don't like child abuse, either. But my religion tells me that child abuse is wrong, so I guess we can't have a law against it.
Moron.
Really? There's something call "Freedom of Conscience," in the Catholic Church? And it applies to abortion? Does it apply to adultery and murder too? I don't know. You see, I am a Jew, and I wish you wouldn't deign to protect me.
The notion of "separation" that you refer to is nonexistent except amongst pea-brained liberals and Communists. The United States of America is, and has always been, a Christian nation; but without an official Federal Church. (States can have official churches. Most of them did when the Constitution was ratified.) This Jew is grateful for the tolerance and freedom that the Founders allowed people such as myself, but I really have a hard time with "Catholics" such as yourself who would legislate morality without agreeing that there is any such thing.
ML/NJ
-From your superb series of JF'nK quotes-
Kerry is so concerned about protecting children from "danger" that he wants the anti-life practice of true fanatics into the mainstream, where he assumes most people of faith support it and could teach tolerance to the "bigoted fringe".
Last I noticed, the Catholic Church was pretty much mainstream in this country, and the bulk of its members here don't give carte blanche to abortion. (Oh, but Catholic Kerry IS against it too, I forgot...)
It sure would be nice if you replied. But, alas, trolls never do.
What is really strange about his abortion view is, that Mr. and Mrs. Kerry forgot to mention her own abortion in 1984! Hypocrates!
Parsing words in not a defense.
The supreme court can and has been wrong. The Supreme court said that slavery was legal at one time.
Kerry says he believes that life begins at conception, if he does not vote against all measures that support abortion he is condoning murder.
If you do not vote your beliefs and only vote political expedience then you are less than a man. You are a sniveling little coward, willing to allow anything that personally benefits your pocket or your position. You are a sack of guts that might as well be dead.
It has absolutely nothing to do with seperation of church and state. This is a slimey, twisting of a moral less politico trying to position himself on both sides of an issue.
I spit in his general direction.
#####His actual words in saying he opposed abortion were, "There is something called freedom of conscience in the Catholic Church. I oppose abortion, personally. I don't like abortion. I believe life begins at conception. But I don't take my Catholic beliefs, my article of faith, and legislate it on a Protestant, on a Jew, or an atheist who doesn't share it. We have separation of church and state in the United States of America."#####
#####I don't think that people understand what he is saying. He is saying that he does NOT like abortion. He PERSONALLY doesn't want it. However, he cannot make a law against something just because his religion does not believe in it.#####
No one's asking him to make a law against something because of his religion. The issue is when a new human life begins. Either it begins at conception or it begins at some other point. Kerry says he believes it begins at conception, which by definition means he is consciously choosing to sanction the killing of human beings when he opposes banning abortion.
But it goes deeper than that. Kerry doesn't just oppose banning abortions. He also favors forcing taxpayers to pay for them. In other words, after lecturing us on his alleged concern for "separation of church & state", he supports forcing people who are Catholic to pay for abortions in violation of their religious faith.
In addition, he opposed the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which provided punishment for someone who harms a WANTED unborn baby. How does he comport that position with his stated views? Is he worried about imposing his Catholicism on violent abusers of women and their unborn babies?
Let's face it....the issue of when a new human life begins isn't a religious issue, it's a scientific one. And a new human life does indeed begin at conception. Period. That's the point that genetic material from two existing human beings comes together to form a new living human being. Life can't begin at any other point. But if it could, why should that be relevant under Kerry's stated position? Should we legalize infanticide up through age two if someone doesn't "believe" life begins until that point?
Life begins where it begins, at that's at conception.
#####He talks of separation of church and state. That is what we are supposed to have in America.#####
Not exactly, but it's too much of a deal to go into that right now.
#####This is why we cannot have organized prayer in schools. It is also why you cannot ban gay marriage on the account of your 'religion' being against it.#####
Odd, but we had organized school prayers until 1963, and banned gay marriage everywhere until very, very recently. How was that accomplished if your view of "separation of church & state" is accurate?
Use your head and think about that and you'll realize how absurd the Kerry "separation of church & state" argument is.
#####I am Catholic as well. I also study medicine. I don't like abortion, either.#####
Then you should know that the point at which a new human life begins is defined by science, not religion, and that point is conception.
#####I wish it was illegal. However, I do understand his point that he cannot make it illegal because he doesn't like it. That would be unconstitutional and totally against 'American' values. I hope everyone can understand that.#####
Then we'll see if Kerry is consistent and drops his support for a law banning employment discrimination against homosexuals. After all, it wouid be unconstitutional for him to ban something just because he doesn't like it. That would be totally against American Values, you know.
One way to try and justify Kerry's position is to frame the issue as competing interests. When the mother’s health is at stake abortion can be justified. The definition of a threat to the mother’s health is too complex to easily legislate. But Kerry’s opposition to any restrictions is impossible to rectify with his professed Catholic faith.
Abraham Lincoln on the newest Kerry position on abortion (Why do you protect a wrong thing?)
"There is something called freedom of conscience in the Catholic Church."
A half lie worthy of Satan himself. Kerry is NOT Catholic. He has excommnicated himself. Evil.
George Bush, the good protestant man is ten times the Catholic that Johnhammed al Qerry is.
"Kerry also claims to believe that lie begins at conception."
Makes for a cute play on words, because Kerry does lie. :-)
Pray for W and Our Awesome Troops
Kerry is touting this 'Freedom of Conscience' line. That's another way that nominal Catholics are trying to justify their active support for abortion. They use the idea that God gave us free will, so that means whatever we think is best is OK with Him. WRONG. God gave us Free Will, and that means the freedom to make WRONG choices as well as right ones. An adult Catholic has the responsibility to learn what the Church teaches about any number of things, abortion, capital punishment, stem cell research, etc. This is what the Church means about having an INFORMED conscience. That Catholic then has the right to NOT agree with that teaching, but they can't go around saying that they are in line with the Catholic Church, if they decide to actively work AGAINST what she teaches.
As I said, Kerry is not opposed to abortion, if he were, he wouldn't work diligently to make sure there are NO restrictions on it in any way. He wouldn't receive the support of the National Abortion Rights Action League, the National Organization for Women, and Planned Parenthood, unless they were sure he supported them unconditionally.
As for his comment about not voting to limit abortion because he represents more than just Catholics, he's lying again because it is more than just Catholics who OPPOSE abortion. If he truly thinks abortion is an evil he WOULD vote against it, as he does with gun rights and changes to affirmative action laws. If he truly believes it is evil, he will vote the way he wants to vote, regardless of his constituents. For example, he voted AGAINST the ban on Partial Birth Abortion. Over 75% of the people in this country are against the procedure, but he still supports it? What happened to representing the majority of the people? Over half of the people of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts support a law stating that marriage should be between one man and one woman. He doesn't support that because it goes against his personal belief in homosexual marriage. He doesn't have any problem voting the opposite of his constituents in this matter, does he?
I'm waiting for someone to present him with the question of what he might have done prior to the Civil War. Would he have voted against slavery, or would have used the lame excuse, "I'm personally opposed to people owning slaves, but I'd never impose my personal beliefs on those Southern plantation owners."
WRONG! An annulment does NOT affect the legitimacy of children from a lawful marriage.
If John Kerry believes that "life begins at conception," then abortion is murder...period. The argument the pro-choice movement makes is that life does not begin at conception, therefore, it's okay. His own statement indicates that he believes abortion is murder. Therefore, he would be violating his oath of office to protect and defend the constitution which has basic protections and rights for all humans (since life has been conceived). In addition, there is no religion, that I'm aware of, that supports the practice of abortion, so I don't see any seperation of church and state conflict.
He obviously KNOWS that abortion is wrong but he's giving everyone the option to "choose" it, "it" being murder. That's kinda like saying: Hey, murderers, rapists, wife beaters etc: They all have their own conscience. I can't tell them not to do that stuff!!
After Kerry made his statement that he believed life begins at conception, he was leaving a Mass service when someone asked him why he voted against the partial birth abortion bill. He said he voted against it because it failed to provide a provision to protect a women's health or life.
In a partial birth abortion a baby is delivered all the way except for the head. Then the baby's head is stabbed with a pair of scissors and the brains are sucked out.
Now, are you willing to tell me that a baby delivered with a brain (able to live) or without a brain (dead) really has an impact on a women's life? If so, then your just as twisted and demented as John Kerry!
What say you?
Admin!! Not two seconds after I ping the rest of the VKs did you pull this thread! Bad moddie, don't scare me like that. ;)
Thanks for alerting me to this, netmilsmom! Good to see you. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.