Biden says Catholic faith guides policies but gets hit on abortion, religious freedom

[civilwarbuff]

Biden says Catholic faith guides policies but gets hit on abortion, religious freedom
On the issue of abortion, which Biden didn't mention Thursday discussing his devout faith, Lila Rose, founder and president of Live Action, an anti-abortion organization, tweeted a clear-cut message to the Democratic nominee.

"You cannot claim to be a practicing Catholic and support the slaughter of children in the womb. To do so is heinous and despicable. And you cannot claim you 'didn’t know' when your faith, and basic moral law, is telling you loud and clear: You shall not kill," Rose wrote.

What say you Joe?

 

[durangodawood]

I think a person can be against abortion but also think its not for them to impose their value upon a woman.

Its clearly one of those gray areas in life.

 

[rambot]

Biden says Catholic faith guides policies but gets hit on abortion, religious freedom
On the issue of abortion, which Biden didn't mention Thursday discussing his devout faith, Lila Rose, founder and president of Live Action, an anti-abortion organization, tweeted a clear-cut message to the Democratic nominee.

"You cannot claim to be a practicing Catholic and support the slaughter of children in the womb. To do so is heinous and despicable. And you cannot claim you 'didn’t know' when your faith, and basic moral law, is telling you loud and clear: You shall not kill," Rose wrote.

What say you Joe?

That she is radically incorrect.

 

[JackRT]

I think a person can be against abortion but also think its not for them to impose their value upon a woman.

Its clearly one of those gray areas in life.

To be pro-choice does not mean that one is pro-abortion. It simply means that a woman has total and exclusive right to what is happening in her body. That is why the position is called "pro-choice". That is not to support abortion in all circumstances but simply to recognize that it is a choice that
not ours to make.

On the other hand, those who are so adamantly pro-life are often just pro-birth and do not care about what happens to either the woman or the baby after birth. There are proven ways of reducing the abortion rate but most pro-birthers are also adamantly against them.

 

[Ezana]

I think a person can be against abortion but also think its not for them to impose their value upon a woman.

Its clearly one of those gray areas in life.

I do get where you're coming from, but it's either unrealistically ignorant or demonic in nature for a politician to claim that his devout Catholic faith guides a policy of infanticide. It's unconscionable, incredibly deceptive and not a grey area in the slightest.

"In an op-ed for the Christian Post, Biden wrote that his Catholic faith guides his policies, including...doing 'everything in our power to ensure that all God’s children have the hope and future they so rightfully deserve.'"

To shamelessly say this as possibly the most "pro-choice" presidential candidate in history is simply antichrist. Let the pagans claim their "right" to murder their children and deny them the hope and future they so rightfully deserve. But to sit back and let a potential president throw gasoline on the fire of this nation's sacrifice to Molech—while claiming to do so in the name of Christ—is nothing less than denial of Christ Himself.

 

[Under One King]

I think a person can be against abortion but also think its not for them to impose their value upon a woman.

Its clearly one of those gray areas in life.

It's clearly not. Abortion is either wrong or it isn't.

 

[Under One King]

To be pro-choice does not mean that one is pro-abortion. It simply means that a woman has total and exclusive right to what is happening in her body. That is why the position is called "pro-choice". That is not to support abortion in all circumstances but simply to recognize that it is a choice that is ours to make.

On the other hand, those who are so adamantly pro-life are often just pro-birth and do not care about what happens to either the woman or the baby after birth. There are proven ways of reducing the abortion rate but most pro-birthers are also adamantly against them.

The rights one person has end when they impose on the rights of another. Every human being God creates is intended to live and it has a right to life. You can't justify taking that right to life away only for the idea that a women has the right to carry a baby or not. It isn't up to a women whether she becomes pregnant or not, it's up to God. If God creates a life, no one has the right to take it away in the name of choice.

And to say that those who are pro life are only about the birth and don't care about the baby afterward is simply false. I do not know a single person who is like that, nor have I spoken to or heard of one. No doubt there might be some, but that is certainly not the majority.

 

[JosephZ]

What say you Joe?

"My religion defines who I am. And I've been a practicing Catholic my whole life. And it has particularly informed my social doctrine. Catholic social doctrine talks about taking care of those who can't take care of themselves, people who need help. With regard to abortion, I accept my church's position that life begins at conception. That's the church's judgment. I accept it in my personal life. But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews and--I just refuse to impose that on others..." -- Joe Biden

"My position is that I am personally opposed to abortion, but I don’t think I have a right to impose my few on the rest of society. I’ve thought a lot about it, and my position probably doesn’t please anyone. I think the government should stay out completely." -- Joe Biden

 

[durangodawood]

...... There are proven ways of reducing the abortion rate but most pro-birthers are also adamantly against them.

That's almost what disturbs me the most.

 

[durangodawood]

It's clearly not. Abortion is either wrong or it isn't.

I can easily rephrase what I said: a person may hold that abortion is wrong, but not hold that they can use the state to coerce that opinion on others.

Thats because its clearly not obvious that the early term fetus is in fact a person. If it was obvious, most people would be certain about it. And they just arent.

 

[Under One King]

I can easily rephrase what I said: a person may hold that abortion is wrong, but not hold that they can use the state to coerce that opinion on others.

Thats because its clearly not obvious that the early term fetus is in fact a person. If it was obvious, most people would be certain about it. And they just arent.

In case you didn't know, Satan is the father of lies. Most of the world is not following God, which means most will be listening to satan's lies.
Let's suppose a "fetus" is not a person. Let's suppose it's not a life yet. I still don't see how you can justify ending it. Even if it wasn't a "life" yet, it's still going to be. What right would you have to take it?

 

[durangodawood]

In case you didn't know, Satan is the father of lies. Most of the world is not following God, which means most will be listening to satan's lies.
Let's suppose a "fetus" is not a person. Let's suppose it's not a life yet. I still don't see how you can justify ending it. Even if it wasn't a "life" yet, it's still going to be. What right would you have to take it?

"Going to be" doesnt describe the circumstances now.

If it was obvious that the early term fetus was a person I would be both against abortion and in favor in almost all cases of using the coercive powers of the state to prohibit anyone from doing it.

Given the lack of consensus AND that we're talking about the state having control over another person's body.... I'm leaving it up to the woman.

 

[Under One King]

"Going to be" doesnt describe the circumstances now.

If it was obvious that the early term fetus was a person I would be both against abortion and in favor in almost all cases of using the coercive powers of the state to prohibit anyone from doing it.

Given the lack of consensus AND that we're talking about the state having control over another person's body.... I'm leaving it up to the woman.

It doesn't matter if it is "now" or not. It's wrong either way.
And because I believe that a life begins at conception, abortion is therefore murder. A woman does not have the right to take a life just because it's in her body. And because the state is supposed to condemn and punish wrongdoing, it is not wrong for them to take the position that abortion is unacceptable and that it needs to end.

 

[Albion]

"You cannot claim to be a practicing Catholic and support the slaughter of children in the womb. To do so is heinous and despicable. And you cannot claim you 'didn’t know' when your faith, and basic moral law, is telling you loud and clear: You shall not kill," Rose wrote.

What say you Joe?

The way Joe's lifestyle and his church affiliation could make sense together would be if he's one of those who think that membership in the "one true church" club supersedes everything else--correct doctrine, practice, even righteous living. It's not an uncommon POV.

Other Christians tend to believe that Faith saves, not the right membership card.

 

[Desk trauma]

Oh, look, histrionic screeching about abortion being morally equivalent to murder. If people conducted themselves as if they actually believed as they claimed abortion clinics would have to armed fortified compounds to keep people from forcing their way in to shut them down.

 

[Under One King]

Oh, look, histrionic screeching about abortion being morally equivalent to murder. If people conducted themselves as if they actually believed as they claimed abortion clinics would have to armed fortified compounds to keep people from forcing their way in to shut them down.

Much as I'd like to, forcing my way in to shut it down is not the way to go. I'd end up in jail, and then what good could I do?

 

[Desk trauma]

Much as I'd like to, forcing my way in to shut it down is not the way to go. I'd end up in jail, and then what good could I do?

You could stop multiple “murders”.

 

[Albion]

The point was that he couldn't. Not by the approach you suggested.

 

[Under One King]

You could stop multiple “murders”.

How?

 

[Desk trauma]

How?

By disabling the faculties ability to operate or intimidating clients to the point where they do not return to complete the”murders” you disrupted.