2022 Elections Thread

Political discussions
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by Winterborn »

kalm wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 6:51 am
Winterborn wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 6:35 am

I agree with your first paragraph. While the details are important, messaging (spin) is the key and IMHO why the Dem's are so bad at it has mostly to do with their crappy platform. One can only polish a turd so much.. :poke: :mrgreen:

As for the second paragraph, a economic professor of mine (Democrat) put it quite clear to us in his class and it hold very true I think. Dems are a party of the short term (next election cycle) while Republicans are the party of the long term (3 or 4 election cycles). One has to only look at the last 40 plus years of Republican inroads into the judicial side of things to see this play out.
No doubt. If only both/either party were into long term economic cycles.
Having 15-30 year outlook would be very nice. Maybe we would not be in the energy and infrastructure crises we are in right now if our politicians thought further than their next bribe.
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19949
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by UNI88 »

Winterborn wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 5:33 am
kalm wrote: Mon May 23, 2022 6:38 pm
Economic concerns aside (I agree), Roe goes beyond just the abortion issue but to a control issue. It’s a lower priority when it’s simmering and rights are not at stake. It also becomes a branding issue for the Republicans and they need every bit as much branding help with moderates as Democrats do.
The branding and control issue is intertwined for both parties on this issue. The branding and solution the R’s have been using since pretty much the beginning is that it is a State’s right issue and that Roe v. Wade needs to be overturned due to it’s constitutionality issues. This is why on the national level they have been pretty quite over the whole situation and while some States are gathering news for playing to certain elements of their constituents, this is only going to bother the individuals running in those particular states (believe there is 2 or 3 States that are looking at banning it from conception).

On the flip side, the D’s it started out and continued up until the Obama years, that it is not a State’s right issue but can be nationally (but for some reason (being sarcastic here) they never introduced a bill to codify it but left it up to the judicial system to define it) and that is a woman’s right to choose. Even Ginsberg said the way it was originally decided was a bit of a stretch. Under Obama the D’s stated to change their message from keeping Roe v. Wade to expanding it (while keeping the woman’s right to choose portion) into abortion on demand. The only reason I can think of why they changed is that they had good indications that Obama was going to serve two full terms and that Hillary would be elected, thereby ensuring the SC would stay in their favor. Then Trump was elected. One also has to take into account the States that are doing the opposite of the few red States and codifying abortion on demand (i.e. CA and I think NY).

How I see it is that the Republicans have a much smaller risk of exposure due to the fact that they can push it back on the States and say that they are sticking to their party roots and it is up to the voters in the State’s to make the rules, not the Party. The Democrats have a larger risk mainly due to their adoption of abortion on demand message and the fact this is not supported by the majority of the voting public. Moderate Dems are at risk due to the fact their party does not want moderates anymore, one either toes the line of the progressive side, or gets black-listed. In short, Moderate Dems have a yuuge branding issue here and on other topics. Throw in the “tone” of the democratic party these past few years (defund the police, etc.) and the fact that they have lost touch with the moderates of their base they are in a worse spot than the Republicans. Good news for them is that they have enough control in the media that they can try and whitewash their way out of it. Issue for them here is that all an R has to do is pull up the actual verbiage of the bills Pelosi or State D’s have introduced and ask whey they are more extreme than R v. W when they are on record stating all they want is what Roe v. Wade has outlined. As the recent Congressional hearings demonstrated, Pelosi’s bill for all practical purposes opening the door for infanticide, is a bit hard to explain and does not make for good optics.
Republicans increase their risk by turning off moderates with:
- The more states that outlaw abortion from conception with few or no exceptions for rape, incest, or health of mother.
- Further demonstrating the depths of their hypocrisy by attempting to pass a nationwide ban.
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19949
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by UNI88 »

Winterborn wrote: Mon May 23, 2022 8:50 am Also seems like the Catholic Church is stepping in certain areas over the Demarcates push for unlimited abortion (Pelosi's archbishop orders her to stop receiving communion).
Fair question ...

Pelosi: Why doesn’t Catholic Church punish death penalty supporters?
“I wonder about the death penalty, which I am opposed to,” she said. “So is the church, but they take no action against people who may not share their view.”
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by SeattleGriz »

UNI88 wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 11:55 am
Winterborn wrote: Mon May 23, 2022 8:50 am Also seems like the Catholic Church is stepping in certain areas over the Demarcates push for unlimited abortion (Pelosi's archbishop orders her to stop receiving communion).
Fair question ...

Pelosi: Why doesn’t Catholic Church punish death penalty supporters?
“I wonder about the death penalty, which I am opposed to,” she said. “So is the church, but they take no action against people who may not share their view.”
As I'm not a Catholic, I usually don't weigh in on those discussions, but to me, the death penalty is a consequence of your actions and very few executions happen per year. In contrast, an unborn child is innocent and there are WAY more abortions.

Also, the average person can choose not to have an abortion, but cannot choose to execute someone.

Might have some glaring logic issues in there, but just throwing out my two cents while eating.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19949
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by UNI88 »

SeattleGriz wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:25 pm
UNI88 wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 11:55 am Fair question ...

Pelosi: Why doesn’t Catholic Church punish death penalty supporters?
As I'm not a Catholic, I usually don't weigh in on those discussions, but to me, the death penalty is a consequence of your actions and very few executions happen per year. In contrast, an unborn child is innocent and there are WAY more abortions.

Also, the average person can choose not to have an abortion, but cannot choose to execute someone.

Might have some glaring logic issues in there, but just throwing out my two cents while eating.
What's the position of the catholic church on the death penalty? How does it compare to their position on abortion?

If they are close, should they not apply the same standards to politicians who support they death penalty that they do to politicians who support abortion?
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by SeattleGriz »

UNI88 wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:33 pm
SeattleGriz wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:25 pm

As I'm not a Catholic, I usually don't weigh in on those discussions, but to me, the death penalty is a consequence of your actions and very few executions happen per year. In contrast, an unborn child is innocent and there are WAY more abortions.

Also, the average person can choose not to have an abortion, but cannot choose to execute someone.

Might have some glaring logic issues in there, but just throwing out my two cents while eating.
What's the position of the catholic church on the death penalty? How does it compare to their position on abortion?

If they are close, should they not apply the same standards to politicians who support they death penalty that they do to politicians who support abortion?
Like I said, I'm not Catholic, but I'm sure if they wanted to get rid of the death penalty to get rid of abortions, I'm sure many would be fine with that.

There has to be some Catholics on here who can answer your question.

They should offer that to Pelosi and watch how fast she simply dismisses the idea.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27895
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by BDKJMU »

UNI88 wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 9:50 am
Winterborn wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 5:33 am

The branding and control issue is intertwined for both parties on this issue. The branding and solution the R’s have been using since pretty much the beginning is that it is a State’s right issue and that Roe v. Wade needs to be overturned due to it’s constitutionality issues. This is why on the national level they have been pretty quite over the whole situation and while some States are gathering news for playing to certain elements of their constituents, this is only going to bother the individuals running in those particular states (believe there is 2 or 3 States that are looking at banning it from conception).

On the flip side, the D’s it started out and continued up until the Obama years, that it is not a State’s right issue but can be nationally (but for some reason (being sarcastic here) they never introduced a bill to codify it but left it up to the judicial system to define it) and that is a woman’s right to choose. Even Ginsberg said the way it was originally decided was a bit of a stretch. Under Obama the D’s stated to change their message from keeping Roe v. Wade to expanding it (while keeping the woman’s right to choose portion) into abortion on demand. The only reason I can think of why they changed is that they had good indications that Obama was going to serve two full terms and that Hillary would be elected, thereby ensuring the SC would stay in their favor. Then Trump was elected. One also has to take into account the States that are doing the opposite of the few red States and codifying abortion on demand (i.e. CA and I think NY).

How I see it is that the Republicans have a much smaller risk of exposure due to the fact that they can push it back on the States and say that they are sticking to their party roots and it is up to the voters in the State’s to make the rules, not the Party. The Democrats have a larger risk mainly due to their adoption of abortion on demand message and the fact this is not supported by the majority of the voting public. Moderate Dems are at risk due to the fact their party does not want moderates anymore, one either toes the line of the progressive side, or gets black-listed. In short, Moderate Dems have a yuuge branding issue here and on other topics. Throw in the “tone” of the democratic party these past few years (defund the police, etc.) and the fact that they have lost touch with the moderates of their base they are in a worse spot than the Republicans. Good news for them is that they have enough control in the media that they can try and whitewash their way out of it. Issue for them here is that all an R has to do is pull up the actual verbiage of the bills Pelosi or State D’s have introduced and ask whey they are more extreme than R v. W when they are on record stating all they want is what Roe v. Wade has outlined. As the recent Congressional hearings demonstrated, Pelosi’s bill for all practical purposes opening the door for infanticide, is a bit hard to explain and does not make for good optics.
Republicans increase their risk by turning off moderates with:
- The more states that outlaw abortion from conception with few or no exceptions for rape, incest, or health of mother.
- Further demonstrating the depths of their hypocrisy by attempting to pass a nationwide ban.
And donks do the same with the more states that allow abortion on demand, until the 9th month/birth, no restrictions, taxpayer funding, no parental notification, offering ‘sanctuary’ abortion states if Roe is overturned.
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19949
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by UNI88 »

BDKJMU wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 1:21 pm
UNI88 wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 9:50 am
Republicans increase their risk by turning off moderates with:
- The more states that outlaw abortion from conception with few or no exceptions for rape, incest, or health of mother.
- Further demonstrating the depths of their hypocrisy by attempting to pass a nationwide ban.
And donks do the same with the more states that allow abortion on demand, until the 9th month/birth, no restrictions, taxpayer funding, no parental notification, offering ‘sanctuary’ abortion states if Roe is overturned.
I think that was kind of the gist of WB's post. I was just offering the flipside risk to Republicans.
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18033
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by GannonFan »

SeattleGriz wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:51 pm
UNI88 wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:33 pm

What's the position of the catholic church on the death penalty? How does it compare to their position on abortion?

If they are close, should they not apply the same standards to politicians who support they death penalty that they do to politicians who support abortion?
Like I said, I'm not Catholic, but I'm sure if they wanted to get rid of the death penalty to get rid of abortions, I'm sure many would be fine with that.

There has to be some Catholics on here who can answer your question.

They should offer that to Pelosi and watch how fast she simply dismisses the idea.
Speaking as a Catholic, the Church shouldn't be in the business of determining who should and shouldn't be getting Communion (outside of the question of if you belong to the Church or not). They don't know the relationship between that person and God and they certainly don't know the inner workings of anyone's inner soul and what state that soul is in. The Church shouldn't be trying to throw up roadblocks between a person of the faith and God (in the form of the Eucharist). That's for that person and that person alone to decide. The Church is well within their rights to speak up about things like abortion, but they step far across the line when they try to play political games like this.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by SeattleGriz »

GannonFan wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 1:58 pm
SeattleGriz wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:51 pm

Like I said, I'm not Catholic, but I'm sure if they wanted to get rid of the death penalty to get rid of abortions, I'm sure many would be fine with that.

There has to be some Catholics on here who can answer your question.

They should offer that to Pelosi and watch how fast she simply dismisses the idea.
Speaking as a Catholic, the Church shouldn't be in the business of determining who should and shouldn't be getting Communion (outside of the question of if you belong to the Church or not). They don't know the relationship between that person and God and they certainly don't know the inner workings of anyone's inner soul and what state that soul is in. The Church shouldn't be trying to throw up roadblocks between a person of the faith and God (in the form of the Eucharist). That's for that person and that person alone to decide. The Church is well within their rights to speak up about things like abortion, but they step far across the line when they try to play political games like this.
Sounds good to me.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59295
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by kalm »

GannonFan wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 1:58 pm
SeattleGriz wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:51 pm

Like I said, I'm not Catholic, but I'm sure if they wanted to get rid of the death penalty to get rid of abortions, I'm sure many would be fine with that.

There has to be some Catholics on here who can answer your question.

They should offer that to Pelosi and watch how fast she simply dismisses the idea.
Speaking as a Catholic, the Church shouldn't be in the business of determining who should and shouldn't be getting Communion (outside of the question of if you belong to the Church or not). They don't know the relationship between that person and God and they certainly don't know the inner workings of anyone's inner soul and what state that soul is in. The Church shouldn't be trying to throw up roadblocks between a person of the faith and God (in the form of the Eucharist). That's for that person and that person alone to decide. The Church is well within their rights to speak up about things like abortion, but they step far across the line when they try to play political games like this.
:thumb:
Image
Image
Image
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59295
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by kalm »

BDKJMU wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 1:21 pm
UNI88 wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 9:50 am

Republicans increase their risk by turning off moderates with:
- The more states that outlaw abortion from conception with few or no exceptions for rape, incest, or health of mother.
- Further demonstrating the depths of their hypocrisy by attempting to pass a nationwide ban.
And donks do the same with the more states that allow abortion on demand, until the 9th month/birth, no restrictions, taxpayer funding, no parental notification, offering ‘sanctuary’ abortion states if Roe is overturned.
Shouldn’t that only be a threat if they go beyond Roe?
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27895
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by BDKJMU »

kalm wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 2:43 pm
BDKJMU wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 1:21 pm
And donks do the same with the more states that allow abortion on demand, until the 9th month/birth, no restrictions, taxpayer funding, no parental notification, offering ‘sanctuary’ abortion states if Roe is overturned.
Shouldn’t that only be a threat if they go beyond Roe?
I’m all for letting the states decide. I would be against a national ban (as are a plurality/majority of conks according to one recent poll I saw- think it was Forbes). Constitution doesn’t address abortion, so its clearly a states’ rights issue..
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59295
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by kalm »

BDKJMU wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 4:51 pm
kalm wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 2:43 pm

Shouldn’t that only be a threat if they go beyond Roe?
I’m all for letting the states decide. I would be against a national ban (as are a plurality/majority of conks according to one recent poll I saw- think it was Forbes). Constitution doesn’t address abortion, so its clearly a states’ rights issue..
Ok, but we’re talking about impacts on the mid terms. Conks in general favor state's rights. How does this one issue effect indies?
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by Winterborn »

UNI88 wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 9:50 am

Republicans increase their risk by turning off moderates with:
- The more states that outlaw abortion from conception with few or no exceptions for rape, incest, or health of mother.
- Further demonstrating the depths of their hypocrisy by attempting to pass a nationwide ban.
Salient points.

To Kalm's excellent point in another post it is all about the messaging and so far Republicans are doing a much better job than the Democrats at a national level.

The first one I do not see as an initial issue for the National Republican party, as their stand has been it is a State issue. Now this is something the DNC should bring up and highlight as it is a weakness in Republicans message.

For the second point, I would ask the question is it a push from individuals or the party as a whole? (As I read that it was a couple of people suggesting it, but it is not a consensuses beyond that). Until it hits a full party platform (like abortion on demand has for D's) or the R's get somebody with the ability to pull reporters in for stories like AOC or her colleagues, I do not see it being too big of an issue for the R's.
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by Winterborn »

GannonFan wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 1:58 pm
SeattleGriz wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:51 pm

Like I said, I'm not Catholic, but I'm sure if they wanted to get rid of the death penalty to get rid of abortions, I'm sure many would be fine with that.

There has to be some Catholics on here who can answer your question.

They should offer that to Pelosi and watch how fast she simply dismisses the idea.
Speaking as a Catholic, the Church shouldn't be in the business of determining who should and shouldn't be getting Communion (outside of the question of if you belong to the Church or not). They don't know the relationship between that person and God and they certainly don't know the inner workings of anyone's inner soul and what state that soul is in. The Church shouldn't be trying to throw up roadblocks between a person of the faith and God (in the form of the Eucharist). That's for that person and that person alone to decide. The Church is well within their rights to speak up about things like abortion, but they step far across the line when they try to play political games like this.
As an ex-catholic, who has not been part of the Church in over 2 decades, I was raised that if you belong to the Church you have agreed to the Church's platform. You are free to deviate from that platform, but depending on the topic your priest may have issues with you accepting communion from him due to your disagreement with the Church's stance. Which is why one has confession, to get back in line with the Church's beliefs so one can accept communion.

Now the above could be just what I was taught from our local Priest and not a formal Catholic policy, but it does fit with what a few friends and I have discussed (but they are all from my area). Currently I just think it is interesting that the Catholic church has a stance and a said member of that organization has a radically different stance. To me the logical thing would be to leave an organization that I no longer agree with. Unless of course my objective was to use said organization for political gain.

I do not think one can compare the death penalty (which as an adult committing a consciousness decision) to a baby/fetus who has no way to communicate their choice in the discussion.
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18033
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by GannonFan »

Winterborn wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 9:04 am
GannonFan wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 1:58 pm

Speaking as a Catholic, the Church shouldn't be in the business of determining who should and shouldn't be getting Communion (outside of the question of if you belong to the Church or not). They don't know the relationship between that person and God and they certainly don't know the inner workings of anyone's inner soul and what state that soul is in. The Church shouldn't be trying to throw up roadblocks between a person of the faith and God (in the form of the Eucharist). That's for that person and that person alone to decide. The Church is well within their rights to speak up about things like abortion, but they step far across the line when they try to play political games like this.
As an ex-catholic, who has not been part of the Church in over 2 decades, I was raised that if you belong to the Church you have agreed to the Church's platform. You are free to deviate from that platform, but depending on the topic your priest may have issues with you accepting communion from him due to your disagreement with the Church's stance. Which is why one has confession, to get back in line with the Church's beliefs so one can accept communion.

Now the above could be just what I was taught from our local Priest and not a formal Catholic policy, but it does fit with what a few friends and I have discussed (but they are all from my area). Currently I just think it is interesting that the Catholic church has a stance and a said member of that organization has a radically different stance. To me the logical thing would be to leave an organization that I no longer agree with. Unless of course my objective was to use said organization for political gain.

I do not think one can compare the death penalty (which as an adult committing a consciousness decision) to a baby/fetus who has no way to communicate their choice in the discussion.
The Church does not know the state of grace of every person coming up to take communion. There is no requirement that every person taking communion must go to confession and sign a sheet that they did before getting into the communion line. Heck, depending on the person, you could sin right there in the communion line anyway. The Church, in this case, denying communion to a political figure, is making a political show of communion, and that, in my opinion, is wrong. I'm a Catholic and I don't believe in every single aspect of the Catholic Church, especially political stances taken by the hierarchy of the Church, and I'm no less a Catholic as a result.

Oh, and the capital punishment angle is valid. The Church is against capital punishment (actually, the Church is very consistent - pro-life everywhere - against capital punishment, against abortion, against euthanasia, etc) - the difference rightfully being shown here is that they don't try to publicly shame defenders of capital punishment with refusal of the communion wafer.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19949
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by UNI88 »

GannonFan wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 9:16 am
Winterborn wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 9:04 am
As an ex-catholic, who has not been part of the Church in over 2 decades, I was raised that if you belong to the Church you have agreed to the Church's platform. You are free to deviate from that platform, but depending on the topic your priest may have issues with you accepting communion from him due to your disagreement with the Church's stance. Which is why one has confession, to get back in line with the Church's beliefs so one can accept communion.

Now the above could be just what I was taught from our local Priest and not a formal Catholic policy, but it does fit with what a few friends and I have discussed (but they are all from my area). Currently I just think it is interesting that the Catholic church has a stance and a said member of that organization has a radically different stance. To me the logical thing would be to leave an organization that I no longer agree with. Unless of course my objective was to use said organization for political gain.

I do not think one can compare the death penalty (which as an adult committing a consciousness decision) to a baby/fetus who has no way to communicate their choice in the discussion.
The Church does not know the state of grace of every person coming up to take communion. There is no requirement that every person taking communion must go to confession and sign a sheet that they did before getting into the communion line. Heck, depending on the person, you could sin right there in the communion line anyway. The Church, in this case, denying communion to a political figure, is making a political show of communion, and that, in my opinion, is wrong. I'm a Catholic and I don't believe in every single aspect of the Catholic Church, especially political stances taken by the hierarchy of the Church, and I'm no less a Catholic as a result.

Oh, and the capital punishment angle is valid. The Church is against capital punishment (actually, the Church is very consistent - pro-life everywhere - against capital punishment, against abortion, against euthanasia, etc) - the difference rightfully being shown here is that they don't try to publicly shame defenders of capital punishment with refusal of the communion wafer.
What does a priest do for a stranger? What if I, a non-catholic, attended a catholic service and attempted to take communion? Would I be struck by lightning? ;)

Agree on the consistency of the church, that is something that I admire them for and why I think Pelosi's question was valid.
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18033
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by GannonFan »

UNI88 wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 9:21 am
GannonFan wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 9:16 am

The Church does not know the state of grace of every person coming up to take communion. There is no requirement that every person taking communion must go to confession and sign a sheet that they did before getting into the communion line. Heck, depending on the person, you could sin right there in the communion line anyway. The Church, in this case, denying communion to a political figure, is making a political show of communion, and that, in my opinion, is wrong. I'm a Catholic and I don't believe in every single aspect of the Catholic Church, especially political stances taken by the hierarchy of the Church, and I'm no less a Catholic as a result.

Oh, and the capital punishment angle is valid. The Church is against capital punishment (actually, the Church is very consistent - pro-life everywhere - against capital punishment, against abortion, against euthanasia, etc) - the difference rightfully being shown here is that they don't try to publicly shame defenders of capital punishment with refusal of the communion wafer.
What does a priest do for a stranger? What if I, a non-catholic, attended a catholic service and attempted to take communion? Would I be struck by lightning? ;)

Agree on the consistency of the church, that is something that I admire them for and why I think Pelosi's question was valid.
I go to other churches while on vacation, they don't know who I am, and yet I get communion all the same. Getting between the person of faith and their ability to receive communion is just wrong and the Church should know better.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by Winterborn »

GannonFan wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 9:16 am
Winterborn wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 9:04 am

As an ex-catholic, who has not been part of the Church in over 2 decades, I was raised that if you belong to the Church you have agreed to the Church's platform. You are free to deviate from that platform, but depending on the topic your priest may have issues with you accepting communion from him due to your disagreement with the Church's stance. Which is why one has confession, to get back in line with the Church's beliefs so one can accept communion.

Now the above could be just what I was taught from our local Priest and not a formal Catholic policy, but it does fit with what a few friends and I have discussed (but they are all from my area). Currently I just think it is interesting that the Catholic church has a stance and a said member of that organization has a radically different stance. To me the logical thing would be to leave an organization that I no longer agree with. Unless of course my objective was to use said organization for political gain.

I do not think one can compare the death penalty (which as an adult committing a consciousness decision) to a baby/fetus who has no way to communicate their choice in the discussion.
The Church does not know the state of grace of every person coming up to take communion. There is no requirement that every person taking communion must go to confession and sign a sheet that they did before getting into the communion line. Heck, depending on the person, you could sin right there in the communion line anyway. The Church, in this case, denying communion to a political figure, is making a political show of communion, and that, in my opinion, is wrong. I'm a Catholic and I don't believe in every single aspect of the Catholic Church, especially political stances taken by the hierarchy of the Church, and I'm no less a Catholic as a result.

Oh, and the capital punishment angle is valid. The Church is against capital punishment (actually, the Church is very consistent - pro-life everywhere - against capital punishment, against abortion, against euthanasia, etc) - the difference rightfully being shown here is that they don't try to publicly shame defenders of capital punishment with refusal of the communion wafer.
We are more in agreement than disagreement. :thumb: Especially about the different stances the Church has taken on capital punishment vs. abortion. I was trying to speak from a non-church standpoint and didn't want to start another post. Which I probably should have.

Just wanted to bring up some of my experience being raised Catholic (and very very old school Catholic at that) which was different than yours.
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18033
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by GannonFan »

Winterborn wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 9:34 am
GannonFan wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 9:16 am

The Church does not know the state of grace of every person coming up to take communion. There is no requirement that every person taking communion must go to confession and sign a sheet that they did before getting into the communion line. Heck, depending on the person, you could sin right there in the communion line anyway. The Church, in this case, denying communion to a political figure, is making a political show of communion, and that, in my opinion, is wrong. I'm a Catholic and I don't believe in every single aspect of the Catholic Church, especially political stances taken by the hierarchy of the Church, and I'm no less a Catholic as a result.

Oh, and the capital punishment angle is valid. The Church is against capital punishment (actually, the Church is very consistent - pro-life everywhere - against capital punishment, against abortion, against euthanasia, etc) - the difference rightfully being shown here is that they don't try to publicly shame defenders of capital punishment with refusal of the communion wafer.
We are more in agreement than disagreement. :thumb: Especially about the different stances the Church has taken on capital punishment vs. abortion. I was trying to speak from a non-church standpoint and didn't want to start another post. Which I probably should have.

Just wanted to bring up some of my experience being raised Catholic (and very very old school Catholic at that) which was different than yours.
No worries. Heck, I've been a life-long Catholic so I've been around a little bit. Although, the diocese I grew up in before moving to PA was on the liberal side - lots of guitar and tambourine Masses, and *gasp* girl altar servers - and even after I met my wife we got married in a Jesuit church, and the Jesuits in the past 50-100 years or so have been the social justice wing of the Church. So yes, I probably tack to a more progressive version of the Church than say, the American Catholic Bishops do.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by Winterborn »

GannonFan wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 9:44 am
Winterborn wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 9:34 am

We are more in agreement than disagreement. :thumb: Especially about the different stances the Church has taken on capital punishment vs. abortion. I was trying to speak from a non-church standpoint and didn't want to start another post. Which I probably should have.

Just wanted to bring up some of my experience being raised Catholic (and very very old school Catholic at that) which was different than yours.
No worries. Heck, I've been a life-long Catholic so I've been around a little bit. Although, the diocese I grew up in before moving to PA was on the liberal side - lots of guitar and tambourine Masses, and *gasp* girl altar servers - and even after I met my wife we got married in a Jesuit church, and the Jesuits in the past 50-100 years or so have been the social justice wing of the Church. So yes, I probably tack to a more progressive version of the Church than say, the American Catholic Bishops do.
Yea, my Catholic upbringing was/is different than most. One could probably have dropped our priest back into the 40's with next to nobody noticing. It is one of the reasons my family left, which caused me not to talk to one side of the family for over 10 years as we were pretty much ex-communicated. I shared what I did because I did not know if Pelosi's archbishop came from a more modern side or the old school side.

Having a guitar on stage playing "devils" music would have not gone over well growing up. ND (and SD) is way behind the rest of the Catholic Church and is probably why my cousins and most of the people I know of my generation have left. Or became Lutherans. :D
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by AZGrizFan »

Winterborn wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 10:01 am
GannonFan wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 9:44 am

No worries. Heck, I've been a life-long Catholic so I've been around a little bit. Although, the diocese I grew up in before moving to PA was on the liberal side - lots of guitar and tambourine Masses, and *gasp* girl altar servers - and even after I met my wife we got married in a Jesuit church, and the Jesuits in the past 50-100 years or so have been the social justice wing of the Church. So yes, I probably tack to a more progressive version of the Church than say, the American Catholic Bishops do.
Yea, my Catholic upbringing was/is different than most. One could probably have dropped our priest back into the 40's with next to nobody noticing. It is one of the reasons my family left, which caused me not to talk to one side of the family for over 10 years as we were pretty much ex-communicated. I shared what I did because I did not know if Pelosi's archbishop came from a more modern side or the old school side.

Having a guitar on stage playing "devils" music would have not gone over well growing up. ND (and SD) is way behind the rest of the Catholic Church and is probably why my cousins and most of the people I know of my generation have left. Or became Lutherans. :D
My catholic priest drove a Mach 1 Mustang. :nod: :nod: :nod: The church made him sell it and buy an old pickup. True story.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18033
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by GannonFan »

AZGrizFan wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 12:35 pm
Winterborn wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 10:01 am

Yea, my Catholic upbringing was/is different than most. One could probably have dropped our priest back into the 40's with next to nobody noticing. It is one of the reasons my family left, which caused me not to talk to one side of the family for over 10 years as we were pretty much ex-communicated. I shared what I did because I did not know if Pelosi's archbishop came from a more modern side or the old school side.

Having a guitar on stage playing "devils" music would have not gone over well growing up. ND (and SD) is way behind the rest of the Catholic Church and is probably why my cousins and most of the people I know of my generation have left. Or became Lutherans. :D
My catholic priest drove a Mach 1 Mustang. :nod: :nod: :nod: The church made him sell it and buy an old pickup. True story.
No doubt. Priests don't actually take a vow of poverty, chastity yes, but not poverty. It's always an interesting contradiction when you have a convent at a parish and the nuns (who I think almost all take a vow of poverty) and priests lead much different lives. I'm not saying priests should take a vow of poverty, but I'm one of those rogue Catholics who'd be fine with married priests, allowing contraception (I think God is more powerful than latex so no reason to ban condoms as if they're kryptonite to him) among other things.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: 2022 Elections Thread

Post by AZGrizFan »

GannonFan wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 12:47 pm
AZGrizFan wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 12:35 pm

My catholic priest drove a Mach 1 Mustang. :nod: :nod: :nod: The church made him sell it and buy an old pickup. True story.
No doubt. Priests don't actually take a vow of poverty, chastity yes, but not poverty. It's always an interesting contradiction when you have a convent at a parish and the nuns (who I think almost all take a vow of poverty) and priests lead much different lives. I'm not saying priests should take a vow of poverty, but I'm one of those rogue Catholics who'd be fine with married priests, allowing contraception (I think God is more powerful than latex so no reason to ban condoms as if they're kryptonite to him) among other things.
Same on both those counts. It's the primary reason I left the church....disagreement on many of the basic tenets.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
Post Reply