It's worth noting the magnitude of the issue and those who have decision making power over that issue. The death penalty is mostly an activity of the states and not the federal government and therefore is a political issue mostly for Governors more so than the POTUS. There were 37 executions by the states in the year 2008 and there were only 37 federal executions between 1927 and 2003. While every life is significant those numbers pale in comparison to the number abortions each and every year.

 

Also, the abortion issue was "federalized" in Roe v Wade. The POTUS therefore can have a significant impact on the life issue by supporting or opposing the federal funding of abortions, suporting or opposing federal funding of stem cell research, and appointing Supreme Court Justices whose judical philosophy is consistent or inconsistent with a "right" to an abortion.

 

The bottom line is that there are many more abortions than executions and the POTUS has a greater influence on the abortion issue so it's more signficant to allow a pro-abortion president to speak than to allow a pro-death penalty president to speak.

 

Roe v Wade was a state law that was challenged and ruled to be unconsititutional by the supreme court in 1973 over 36 years ago. Its decided law and the President has little if any impact on the issue. Why do you think that nothing has been done about it despite having many years when the GOP controlled the presidency and Congress?? It is an emotional issue that people are very passionate about that drives out the vote and raises money. I would suggest instead of bashing the heck out of democrates for the issue to start holding accountable the GOP members in office for not doing more about it when they are in power. Just my thoughts

Question: if you are pro death penalty or pro abortion, how can you belong to an organization that is totally and diametrically opposed to those positions? Seems very odd to me.

 

I believe that's called the "Catholic Conundrum."

Death penalty has never been the major hot button issue for Catholics that abortion is.

 

True but irrelevant. The Church via the Bishop is the one taking a stance. The Church doesn't have "hot buttons" as far as I know. It is against putting people to death. Period.

 

So, as I said earlier, if you're using the stance of the Church as your justification for opposing the POTUS from speaking you are being hypocritical if you didn't take the same stance when a pro-DP POTUS spoke at ND.

For the record, I don't buy the rationalization of "there are more abortions than executions." I've never seen the Church come out with a ratings system or a threshold.

Roe v Wade was a state law that was challenged and ruled to be unconsititutional by the supreme court in 1973 over 36 years ago. Its decided law and the President has little if any impact on the issue. Why do you think that nothing has been done about it despite having many years when the GOP controlled the presidency and Congress?? It is an emotional issue that people are very passionate about that drives out the vote and raises money. I would suggest instead of bashing the heck out of democrates for the issue to start holding accountable the GOP members in office for not doing more about it when they are in power. Just my thoughts

 

I'm not going to waste my time educating you about Roe v Wade. However, I will say that shooter's statement that the case (not a law as you described it) did, in essence, "federalize" abortion.

Obama is only extremist from an extremist point of view.

 

You can, indeed, rest assured that I am an extremist. I am an extremist when it comes to speaking out to protect innocent human life from those, like your president, who have no regard for the sanctity of human life. I would say that, from my understanding of Christianity, I am in good company. Can your Carpathian-like president say the same?

You can, indeed, rest assured that I am an extremist. I am an extremist when it comes to speaking out to protect innocent human life from those, like your president, who have no regard for the sanctity of human life. I would say that, from my understanding of Christianity, I am in good company. Can your Carpathian-like president say the same?

Gee, do we have to start hearing that stuff again?

For the record, I don't buy the rationalization of "there are more abortions than executions." I've never seen the Church come out with a ratings system or a threshold.

 

 

I'm not saying that one is more serious than that other, but I think that fact that one is more prevelant than the other is why you hear about it more.

I'm not going to waste my time educating you about Roe v Wade. However, I will say that shooter's statement that the case (not a law as you described it) did, in essence, "federalize" abortion.

 

Please don't I have no need or want for your brand of education. The case was a challenge to a law in the state of Texas and if by federalize you mean that the supreme court ruled that laws of this nature are Unconstitutional then I guess we will agree that it is federalized.

You can, indeed, rest assured that I am an extremist. I am an extremist when it comes to speaking out to protect innocent human life from those, like your president, who have no regard for the sanctity of human life. I would say that, from my understanding of Christianity, I am in good company. Can your Carpathian-like president say the same?

 

Got Self Righteousness?

True but irrelevant. The Church via the Bishop is the one taking a stance. The Church doesn't have "hot buttons" as far as I know. It is against putting people to death. Period.

 

So, as I said earlier, if you're using the stance of the Church as your justification for opposing the POTUS from speaking you are being hypocritical if you didn't take the same stance when a pro-DP POTUS spoke at ND.

 

It's completely relevant. You asked why there was no outcry. This is the main reason. Death penalty is simply not the hot button issue that abortion is.

It's completely relevant. You asked why there was no outcry. This is the main reason. Death penalty is simply not the hot button issue that abortion is.

 

I claim its irrelevant not because of the outcry from the people sitting in the pews but , rather, due to the fact that the Bishop, a representative of the Church, has made this into an issue. Therefore, I call hypocrisy because there was not a public stand made when a death penalty advocate spoke at ND or any other Catholic institution.

I claim its irrelevant not because of the outcry from the people sitting in the pews but , rather, due to the fact that the Bishop, a representative of the Church, has made this into an issue. Therefore, I call hypocrisy because there was not a public stand made when a death penalty advocate spoke at ND or any other Catholic institution.

 

Good enough, I thought you were talking about the publicity this has generated from the people. You are right that the Bishop's protest of an abortion advocate should have been mirrored by a protest of a death penalty advocate.

Please don't I have no need or want for your brand of education. The case was a challenge to a law in the state of Texas and if by federalize you mean that the supreme court ruled that laws of this nature are Unconstitutional then I guess we will agree that it is federalized.

 

If you were aware that Roe v Wade was a case rather than a law, why didn't you just say so? Still, I have a bit of reservation in regard to your legal scholarship. Of course, you were probably just testing the rest of us.

Edited March 27, 200917 yr by Wyrostek

Got Self Righteousness?

 

Nope. Just stating a few facts- kind of like I did above in adding information about those treasured lifetime, self-made achievements of your president.

Edited March 27, 200917 yr by Wyrostek