The dilemma of being a Catholic Democrat

[docpotter]

A) Paul did know when it was expedient to tone it down and he did so on more than one occasion.

B)You're no Paul or Peter or James.



Yeah, you were never asked to sugar coat the eternal truths of God's word - you were asked by people who are interested in not putting off lurkers with unnecesarry zeal to tone it down. What good is truth without charity?

Do we not have the same challenges of the apostles Mike ? They were chosen by God right ? Are we not also chosen by God ? Do we not live in a sinful world, that hates the truth of the gospel ?

Are we not to be " bold " and speak truth ?

No , no I am not Paul the apostle, but I absolutely believe his words, and Christs words. And we have a duty to be loyal to God , not to people claiming to be Christians and spouting off about how great gay marriage is. We have to defend the faith.

Someone has to

Charity is not leading people to hell by lying about the word of God

 

[docpotter]

Since you are neither, how 'bout playing nice?

I will attempt to seem nicer, lol . Pinky swear

 

[MikeK]

While I applaud you voting for a third party - go you! - aren't they just a branch-off of the most conservative part of the Republican Party?

Not really. Some Republicans likely appreciate some of the Constitutionalist's views - but no Constitutionalists have much love for the Republicans. Constitutionalists are in favor of very strict limitations of government power - they are true conservatives in that sence. Republicans have become far too all-powerful for Constitutionalists to stomach.

Their platform can be found below. They are in opposition to both the Republicans and Democrats on virtually every point.

Constitutionalist Platform

 

[Antigone]

Charity is not leading people to hell by lying about the word of God

Charity is not leading people to hell by lying about the divine repercussions of their political preferences, either.

So far you have given zero evidence of the fact. Until you do, there is neither charity nor truth to your posts.

 

[Antigone]

Not really. Some Republicans likely appreciate some of the Constitutionalist's views - but no Constitutionalists have much love for the Republicans. Constitutionalists are in favor of very strict limitations of government power - they are true conservatives in that sence. Republicans have become far too all-powerful for Constitutionalists to stomach.

Their platform can be found below. They are in opposition to both the Republicans and Democrats on virtually every point.

Constitutionalist Platform

Did they change it recently? I remember reading about them a while back and I seem to recall a lot of talk about theocracies and the evils of women in the armed forces.

Mind you, this must have been four or five years ago.

 

[docpotter]

There's nothing wrong with preaching the Truth without reserve. However, you cannot pidgeon-hole voting for any member of an entire party as 'satanic'. That's too broad of a generalisation and is disingenous to the point you are trying to convey. The end-result is folks will ignore or tune you out, because they get the impression that you are irrational and fit the quintessential stereo-type of foaming-at-the-mouth GOP-er. Kinda like a sort of GOP version of Keith Olbermann --- and no-one wants to come across as that!


Recall the words of St Paul in the First Epistle to the Corinthians, Chapter XIII:

13:2 And if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries, and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

13:4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up;

13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
​

I hear you man. I do . Here is my point .

When a professing Christian , of any denomination, sees a candidate that repeatedly attacks their most sacred beliefs, and they go on voting for him, and similar candidates. Where is the Holy Spirit in them ? Asleep ? I cannot see a spirit filled person, who knows Gods word voting this way. Mainly after what we have seen since 2008.

I blame no one for voting for Barrack Obama 4 years ago. But to back him up now, after the continued attacks on Christianity and the Catholic Church especially, to me is absolute insolence towards God.

You cannot play for both teams. We cannot be of this word with both feet in the world and say we are of God. It does not work.

Am I saying vote republican , yes, but more so I am saying not to vote for a liberal , pagan agenda as a believer.

 

[Trogool]

Do we not have the same challenges of the apostles Mike ?

No, for starters, nobody is trying to stone us to death for blasphemy.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

 

[docpotter]

Charity is not leading people to hell by lying about the divine repercussions of their political preferences, either.

So far you have given zero evidence of the fact. Until you do, there is neither charity nor truth to your posts.

" zero evidence"....

" do you not know that by being friends with the world you have become enemies of God"

" Woe to those who call evil good and good evil .."

When we stand up for the worlds point of view , we are loyal to the world Antigone, and not loyal to God. ok.

When gay marriage , which obviously is anti God, anti Gods word, is an issue, His people cannot openly cheer lead that movement. It doesn't go that way. We have to be truthful to God.

Jesus says " you will know my followers by their fruits". meaning, what they say , what they do , what they are for.

 

[docpotter]

No, for starters, nobody is trying to stone us to death for blasphemy.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

Not yet

 

[Virgil the Roman]

The Constitution Party Platforum

This is the party. I agree with them on most issues. Although, they are little 'different', to be sure.

 

[Antigone]

" zero evidence"....

" do you not know that by being friends with the world you have become enemies of God"

" Woe to those who call evil good and good evil .."

When we stand up for the worlds point of view , we are loyal to the world Antigone, and not loyal to God. ok.

When gay marriage , which obviously is anti God, anti Gods word, is an issue, His people cannot openly cheer lead that movement. It doesn't go that way. We have to be truthful to God.

Jesus says " you will know my followers by their fruits". meaning, what they say , what they do , what they are for.

That is still not absolute proof. One can support unions between same-sex couples for reasons of equality and anti-discriminatory policies without dropping support for the church, for one.

Besides which, you are in a Catholic forum. "Direct proof" consitutes a direct quote from the Cathechism or the Pope himself.

 

[docpotter]

That is still not absolute proof. One can support unions between same-sex couples for reasons of equality and anti-discriminatory policies without dropping support for the church, for one.

Besides which, you are in a Catholic forum. "Direct proof" consitutes a direct quote from the Cathechism or the Pope himself.

Right ..absolute proof is what the atheists always ask for too ...

 

[InfinityandBeyond]

I may not agree with Obama on certain issues, but I think Mitt Romney is an idiot. If they had put up a better Republican candiate, then who knows?

Besides, nobody can predict what will happen between now and November.

I would have voted for George W. Bush over John Kerry, it also has a lot to do with canidate selection.

 

[MKJ]

I may not agree with Obama on certain issues, but I think Mitt Romney is an idiot. If they had put up a better Republican candiate, then who knows?

Besides, nobody can predict what will happen between now and November.

I would have voted for George W. Bush over John Kerry, it also has a lot to do with canidate selection.

Slightly OT, but in the US system, are you voting, in theory, for the candidate or the party?

 

[Antigone]

Right ..absolute proof is what the atheists always ask for too ...

So you have none. Thank you for admitting this. Now please stop implying things that are not true.

 

[AMDG]

I think it's sad that you get so obsessed about what a president does in his private life that you can't see beyond that,

It's not about doing anything in his private life, it's about lying to the American people, under oath *and* disgracing the office. That's an impeachable offence! It is even more of a problem than Teddy Kennedy's "I let that girl drown in the back seat of my car while I escaped". In one the personal instance, the person is going to have to answer to God. It's none of my business However in the lying under oath and disgracing the presidential office, it's that no one (not even foreign countries that do business with us) can have respect for the office again (or tell if someone is lying or not.)

As far as marijuana. It's illegal here. As to cocaine. It is illegal here as well--a felony offense (although Obama laughingly admits to "doing a little blow" too--it seems that like so many, you didn't read his book Dreams From My Father.)

Anyway, I tend to agree with Penn Teller's rant. He notes that Obama wouldn't be laughing about it, if he had been caught. He wouldn't even have had a chance to go to those prestigious schools. He'd be cooling his heels in prison!

 

[docpotter]

So you have none. Thank you for admitting this. Now please stop implying things that are not true.

Read your bible ya knucklehead ..


Good day heathens , gotta run

 

[InfinityandBeyond]

I am somewhere in between democrat and republican, which is why I orginally posted about it being difficult to be democrat in the Catholic church, which I believe was ON, I was just adding to that with that post.

In general I vote for the party, but that does not believe that I 100% support all democratic views. I am pro-life for example.

 

[Antigone]

It's not about doing anything in his private life, it's about lying to the American people, under oath *and* disgracing the office. That's an impeachable offence! It is even more of a problem than Teddy Kennedy's "I let that girl drown in the back seat of my car while I escaped". In one the personal instance, the person is going to have to answer to God. It's none of my business However in the lying under oath and disgracing the presidential office, it's that no one (not even foreign countries that do business with us) can have respect for the office again (or tell if someone is lying or not.)

I understand that and I see where you are coming from, but Clinton having a BJ in the oval office and Obama lighting one up don't automatically turn them into bad presidents.

Immoral, maybe, but if you think that makes them bad presidents, may I remind you what Vladimir Putin, S.O.B. pur sang, has done for Russia? Bad person, yes. Bad ruler, no.

As far as marijuana. It's illegal here. As to cocaine. It is illegal here as well (although Obama laughingly admits to "doing a little blow" too--it seems that like so many, you didn't read his book Dreams From My Father.)

Anyway, I tend to agree with Penn Teller's rant. He notes that Obama wouldn't be laughing about it, if he had been caught. He wouldn't even have had a chance to go to those prestigious schools. He'd be cooling his heels in jail!

Which says more about the unforgiving attitudes of your justice system than about his presidental capabilities.

Read your bible ya knucklehead ..

I have, and have drawn conclusion differently from yours.

 

[Virgil the Roman]

I may not agree with Obama on certain issues, but I think Mitt Romney is an idiot. If they had put up a better Republican candiate, then who knows?

Besides, nobody can predict what will happen between now and November.

I would have voted for George W. Bush over John Kerry, it also has a lot to do with canidate selection.

Try Ron Paul. I have Liberal, Progressive, Moderate, Libertarian, and Conservative folks that I know or are acquitances or friends with that support the gent. He has the broadest and most widespread support out of all three candidates. He'd wipe the floor with Obama and Romney-Face.