JoeRatz16's forum posts

Avatar image for JoeRatz16
JoeRatz16

697

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

11

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 JoeRatz16
Member since 2008 • 697 Posts

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Mk...don't think many people will be voting based on abortion stances this election. sSubZerOo
Heck yeah they will with women's rights.. The next election could decide two seats on the supreme court, and if the Republicans have their way they will strike down Roe V Wade.. Not to mention the entire year state Republicans have attempted to attack abortion with state bills..

Striking down Roe won't be too drastic, it'll just return abortion law to state jurisprudence. As for the bills you mention, they seem mostly to be minor restrictions (denial of state funding, safety and sanitary regulations, prohibitions on abortions when the fetus can feel pain, etc.).

Avatar image for JoeRatz16
JoeRatz16

697

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

11

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 JoeRatz16
Member since 2008 • 697 Posts

1. TC's source is obviously biased

2. The survey size is small, 1,000 people is hardly a good barometer to judge some 60 millions by.

3. Assuming this study is accurate, It says 46% of Catholics support Obama (with 12% undecided, which is enough to potentially give the majority to Romney). If 46% of Catholics do support Obama, that is quite a decline from the 54% of Catholics who voted for Obama in 2008 according to exit polls.

4. Various other polls have found majorities of Catholics supporting banning abortion:

"

An October 2008 poll conducted by Marist College found 63 percent of Catholics say they oppose all abortions, all abortions except to save the mothers life, or all abortions except to save the mothers life or in cases of rape or incest.

That puts nearly two-thirds of Catholics favoring a pro-life position opposing about 98 percent of all abortions, according to Alan Guttmacher Institute information about when abortions are done.

Breaking down the polling data further, 72 percent of practicing Catholics take one of the three pro-life positions opposing all or almost all abortions as do 47 percent of non-practicing Catholics.

Looking at another poll, a September 2008 survey conducted by the National Scientific Survey Center found 78 percent of active Catholics saying abortion is morally wrong along with 66 percent of secular Catholics, who dont attend church services as often.

That poll found 80 percent of active Catholics and 66 percent of secular Catholics saying human life begins at the moment of conception."

In December 2006, a Le Moyne College and Zogby International survey found a majority of Catholics want abortion to be illegal."

Avatar image for JoeRatz16
JoeRatz16

697

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

11

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 JoeRatz16
Member since 2008 • 697 Posts

[QUOTE="Sajo7"][QUOTE="JoeRatz16"]Also of note Pope Benedict XVI has a 74% approval rating and the bishops of the United States have a 70% approval rating among American Catholics, I bet Biden and Ryan wished they had those approval ratings (then the election would be over if one ticket had that much support).Rhazakna
Yeah but you are comparing politicians to religious leaders. We are practically brought up with the notion that politicians are bad/useless/stupid what have you.

You think the pope isn't a politician? Climbing the ranks of any hierarchical organization takes lots of political savvy, whether it's a business a government or a religious organization. Not only that, but the pope is a head of state. His approval rating just proves how beneficial it is for a politician to be tied to a religion. If you represent a religion you're practically beyond reproach, as the papacy has proven.

Actually the current Pope (Benedict XVI, born Joseph Alois Ratzinger) didn't "climb" the ranks in the sense of striving for ecclesiastical "promotion". In fact every time he was met with a "promotion" it was against his will, when Pope Paul VI first appointed Ratzinger as bishop, Ratzinger initially figured he was unfit to be bishop because he was a theologian with little pastoral experience (he only served as a parish priest for one year, most of his priesthood was spent as a theology professor in the universities), but then he decided that the Church needed theologian-bishops. When John Paul II appointed Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, Ratzinger was hesitant to accept the job because he still wanted to publish theological works as a private theologian (i.e. in a non-Magisterial way, as a private scholar presenting his own opinions that would not bind on Catholics), but John Paul II said that he could still do so (Indeed past prefects have done so). When the Conclave elected him Pope, Benedict XVI was hesitant to accept (he wanted to retire and figured a younger man would be more suitable to be pope) until a fellow Cardinal slipped him a note telling him to be faithful to the Lord's calling and Benedict accepted his election to the Papacy.

Avatar image for JoeRatz16
JoeRatz16

697

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

11

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 JoeRatz16
Member since 2008 • 697 Posts

[QUOTE="JoeRatz16"]Also of note Pope Benedict XVI has a 74% approval rating and the bishops of the United States have a 70% approval rating among American Catholics, I bet Biden and Ryan wished they had those approval ratings (then the election would be over if one ticket had that much support).Sajo7
Yeah but you are comparing politicians to religious leaders. We are practically brought up with the notion that politicians are bad/useless/stupid what have you.

good point. There are a lot of negative stereotypes and generalizations about politicians (and clergy as well, but perhaps those stereotypes are only widely held among nonbelievers), which is not very fair to those politicians who are honest and upright Americans trying to do what they think is right.

Avatar image for JoeRatz16
JoeRatz16

697

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

11

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 JoeRatz16
Member since 2008 • 697 Posts

Well I guess here's something you can say if you want to appear smart. The current election in the United States is the first election in which both major vice-presidential candidates (Joe Biden and Paul Ryan) are Catholic.

Also of note Pope Benedict XVI has a 74% approval rating and the bishops of the United States have a 70% approval rating among American Catholics, I bet Biden and Ryan wished they had those approval ratings (then the election would be over if one ticket had that much support).

Avatar image for JoeRatz16
JoeRatz16

697

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

11

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 JoeRatz16
Member since 2008 • 697 Posts

wonder what whipassmt thinksMrPraline
Dave beat you, well kind of.

Avatar image for JoeRatz16
JoeRatz16

697

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

11

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 JoeRatz16
Member since 2008 • 697 Posts

Inb4 some chucklehead brings up whip.dave123321
I've heard of knucklehead's, but never of chucklehead's.

Avatar image for JoeRatz16
JoeRatz16

697

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

11

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 JoeRatz16
Member since 2008 • 697 Posts

Ohio Governor John Kasich recently signed into law an anti-human trafficking bill that would: 1. protect minor victims of trafficking from being prosecuted, and would send them to treatment instead of prosecuting them 2. Seize assets of convicted traffickers and use that money to create a fund to help the victims 3. increase penalties for human trafficking to a first degree felony with a minimum sentence of 15 years in jail 4. This law would possibly make it a felony for a person to knowingly pay to have sexual relations with a minor

Although this bill is not about abortion Ohio Right to Life has helped push for this law because a lot of times human trafficking victims are forced into prostitution and then are forced to have abortions if they get pregnant so that their pimps can get them back on the street quicker.

What do you guys think. I think this is a good law, all the provisions of it that I know of are reasonable.

Avatar image for JoeRatz16
JoeRatz16

697

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

11

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 JoeRatz16
Member since 2008 • 697 Posts

[QUOTE="JoeRatz16"]

to be fair Obama did donate a lot of money to charity (I think about 20% of his income), mostly to groups that help wounded soldiers (which I imagine is somewhat his duty considering that he is the commander in chief, and thus he should be solicitous for the good of his soldiers), although I think he also donated to the United Negro Fund (college scholarships for black kids).

kingkong0124

Obama has done many great things in his life, no doubt about it.

whoa everyone, look what I got KingKong to say>

Avatar image for JoeRatz16
JoeRatz16

697

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

11

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 JoeRatz16
Member since 2008 • 697 Posts

"Thomas More Society attorneys have demanded that the Lake County Fair reverse its rejection of booth applications from Lake County Right to Life and Peters Net, an initiative promoting Lake County Catholic churches.

The Society claims that the Fairs rejection of the groups is based on their respective religious messages, including the promotion of the Catholic Church and Church teaching by Peters Net and the religiously motivated pro-life message and use of a prenatal development display including life size fetal models used by Lake County Right to Life in its Fair booth for the last 37 years.

The actions of the Lake County Fair Association violate the Illinois Human Rights Act, Title II of the federal Civil Rights Act, and the Fairs own stated policy of nondiscrimation, said attorney Peter Breen, Executive Director and Legal Counsel for the Thomas More Society, who is representing both groups."

http://www.lifenews.com/2012/06/27/chicago-pro-life-group-prohibited-from-running-fair-booth/

Is this legal? Do you think the two groups were discriminated against due to their religious or political beliefs?