tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post5515396642021302147..comments2024-03-28T09:14:32.869-04:00Comments on southern orders: HUMOR AND CANON LAW DON'T NORMALLY MIX EVEN IN THIS POST BUT I'LL GIVE IT A TRY: I POST; YOU DECIDE!Fr. Allan J. McDonaldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16986575955114152639noreply@blogger.comBlogger153125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-47766386470966191202016-08-07T08:24:07.919-04:002016-08-07T08:24:07.919-04:00Anon 2: actually, please accept my gratitude for t...Anon 2: actually, please accept my gratitude for the discussion and interactive examination of this real world dilemma. It seems people understand my opinion of the situation and the exchange has been open and respectful. I Do think this horse is about finished.<br /><br />Anon 8:27 - Good point about the team. What I was trying communicate is that I am not committing to keeping any given party in power, or perpetuating elected offices as careers. <br /><br />I can't just quit because I don't like either choice. Neither do I have to pick a particular pack of fools to join. Success for my country will be difficult with either candidate so now I have to focus on what I can do to overcome the problems they will cause us. rcghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661998350597126663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-51608782579772802652016-08-07T00:58:30.540-04:002016-08-07T00:58:30.540-04:00Rcg:
Please accept my apologies for dragging you ...Rcg:<br /><br />Please accept my apologies for dragging you into this. I mentioned you simply because you articulated one particular point on which I rely in a very effective and clear manner. The context for your observations was in a comment in which you agreed with John Nolan that it is not a mortal sin not to vote. So, you may well have been articulating your observations to support the legitimacy of non-participation and not to suggest the legitimacy of voting for the Democratic candidate. Even so, this does not detract from the point I understand you to be making about the bait being held out to woo the Catholic vote and about it being a fool’s errand to take the bait.<br /><br />Anonymous 2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-27630688027414059552016-08-06T20:27:39.215-04:002016-08-06T20:27:39.215-04:00“37. In making these decisions, it is essential fo...<br />“37. In making these decisions, it is essential for Catholics <b> to be guided by a well-formed conscience that recognizes that all issues do not carry the same moral weight and that the moral obligation to oppose policies promoting intrinsically evil acts has a special claim on our consciences ( Abortion - embryonic stem cell research - same-sex marriage)</b> and our actions. These decisions should take into account a candidate’s commitments, character, integrity, and ability to influence a given issue (in what way, through his commitment and influence, did our current President, on major moral issues such as abortion and same -sex marriage, in whatever he did, conform to Catholic teaching?) . In the end, this is a decision to be made by each Catholic, <b> guided by a conscience formed by Catholic moral teaching.”</b><br /><br />rcg said...<br /><br /> " Perhaps this was the point that got the attention of Anon 2: that is will follow the law as completely as possible until I decide to deliberatley disobey it. " If a law is truly unjust and immoral, then you do not have to follow it ( which is why groups such as the Little Sisters of the Poor are fighting in court against the Obamacare mandate)<br /><br />"I am VOTING not choosing a team." ( for the tax issue you used as an example, that is true. When voting for President and Vice President we are in a way choosing a team).<br /><br />" Whatever we may think of the rest of the platform the Democrats do not demonstrate an ability to prioritize values. If Trump wants to build a wall along the border with Mexico it does not give us leave to ignore the primacy of abortion to the Democrats." (That does not sound like you are agreeing with Anonymous2) <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-10576081994259349802016-08-06T16:32:36.568-04:002016-08-06T16:32:36.568-04:00Rcg:
Thank you for your response. Actually, what ...Rcg:<br /><br />Thank you for your response. Actually, what struck me as particularly to the point was your comment at 9:23 a.m. on July 30 on the thread “Is It Moral Not to Vote out of Disgust.”<br /><br />Specifically, if I may now quote you:<br /><br />“My previous, and greatly respected pastor, advised me that the choice four years ago was to stop clearly evil intentions. So I reluctantly voted. In this election there is bait for Catholics in the form of Supreme Court nominations to overturn Roe v Wade. This is a fools errand. The nested probability of the right sequence of events occuring and the right people being in place and in majority and making the right decision is infinitesmal. Catholic justices led the Court to impose Roe v Wade. The Catholic justices appointed by conservative administrations since then have been terribly unreliable save one, recently deceased.”<br /><br />As I read this comment, it his resonates with the USCCB guidance in paragraph 34 of “Faithful Citizenship”:<br /><br /><br />“37. In making these decisions, it is essential for Catholics to be guided by a well-formed conscience that recognizes that all issues do not carry the same moral weight and that the moral obligation to oppose policies promoting intrinsically evil acts has a special claim on our consciences and our actions. These decisions should take into account a candidate’s commitments, character, integrity, and ability to influence a given issue. In the end, this is a decision to be made by each Catholic, guided by a conscience formed by Catholic moral teaching.”<br />Anonymous 2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-87626635617920076392016-08-06T11:18:00.166-04:002016-08-06T11:18:00.166-04:00Perhaps this was the point that got the attention ...Perhaps this was the point that got the attention of Anon 2: that is will follow the law as completely as possible until I decide to deliberatley disobey it. That does sound like a bishop. I use the example of the tax referendum that I vote against but pay when the vote goes against me. This is a frequent and disturbing real world example. I am VOTING not choosing a team. I pay the tax and intensly dislike it. I support and demand the law be enforced that everyone in the precinct should pay it. I hope to convince people to not renew it and work against that renewal, all the while paying it. Here is the key to my resistance: if I can avoid paying the tax by an alternative behavior, I will. <br /><br />If the law involves killing someone as a government policy I will work more vigorously against it to include avoiding it by helping the target victim avoid being killed. The degree to which the policy, law, government, and society can be severed from each other as actors in this evil act determines how I can justify my actions. Islam suffers from the inability to discriminate. Mohammad, contrasted with his ancestor Abraham, would argue with God to kill everyone in a town along with the one sinner. We must work to save the sinner when possible while accepting the justice of God. <br /><br />When do I abandon this country, or alternatively, take arms against it? Probably when I have exhausted all hope that I can be reconciled to it or that the threat it poses is too great to be allowed to continue. That is latter is a long way off. rcghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661998350597126663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-15573570073036767452016-08-05T23:14:11.352-04:002016-08-05T23:14:11.352-04:00I will concede the lack of plurality of Catholic J...I will concede the lack of plurality of Catholic Justices in the specific decision but maintain my point that Catholic justices as a group have maintained and supported it. I do not, by the way, expect the Catholic justices to interpret law through a Catholic lens, but I do expect them to include that viewpoint in the context of created law, which is what Roe v Wade is. The Constituion would allow for the consideration of abortion law but if during discussion the law acknowledges that another person besides the mother is always involved then the Catholic justice must ensure the other person's position is presented. I am not convinced that the abortion debate is the same civil rights question as slavery except on this point: the Catholic justice is obliged to ensure that person is given a voice before the law. <br /><br />Again, I do not think we need to attempt to resolve the false dillemma by picking flyspecks from Nazi pepper. Damn their trains! If they are on time it only makes my flight planning easier. Neither is it a dillema that we must protect women's health by killing her baby. Killing Jews and killing babies is simply cynical politics. The fact that it would be prominant in a political platform and considered on par with balancing the national budget seems indicative of mental illness. My to do list today: balance the checkbook, mow the lawn, drown a kitten. Whatever we may think of the rest of the platform the Democrats do not demonstrate an ability to prioritize values. If Trump wants to build a wall along the border with Mexico it does not give us leave to ignore the primacy of abortion to the Democrats. rcghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661998350597126663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-70525779999889573842016-08-05T20:16:05.402-04:002016-08-05T20:16:05.402-04:00I will add to my comment @ 7:31 that I will also c...I will add to my comment @ 7:31 that I will also consider the potential judicial appointees of a candidate, should he or she be elected. This is very important, since on so many issues we are losing in the courts.<br />Georgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05809499822558662728noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-49159556875158425892016-08-05T20:12:42.358-04:002016-08-05T20:12:42.358-04:00George:
I would be happy for Rcg to clarify his c...George:<br /><br />I would be happy for Rcg to clarify his comment. The last thing I want to do is to misappropriate or misrepresent someone’s thinking—which is why I asked him to correct what I said about his comment if needed.<br /><br />Your position is perfectly understandable and legitimate. So, I believe, is mine. That is the point. There can be more than one. =)<br />Anonymous 2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-70503520104544741512016-08-05T20:06:28.213-04:002016-08-05T20:06:28.213-04:00Jan:
Well, of course, you would say something lik...Jan:<br /><br />Well, of course, you would say something like that. Often you either will not or cannot understand what people are saying.<br /><br />What I wrote isn’t convoluted. It’s called reasoning. You should try it sometime. =)<br /><br />I was continuing the thought experiment begun by DJR, in order to defend the USCCB Guidelines and those who may decide to vote Democratic, specifically for Hillary.<br /><br />I have already made my position as clear as I can at this point. I care for neither The Donald nor for Hillary and may end up voting for neither. I_do_know I will never vote for Trump. If voting for Hillary were the only way to stop such a disaster, I might be compelled to vote for her. But I hope it will not come to that and that he will self-destruct. Come to that, as I have already said, I hope she does too, and that both parties will select more suitable candidates.<br />Anonymous 2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-81211429922348491672016-08-05T19:31:13.008-04:002016-08-05T19:31:13.008-04:00Anonymous2:
"This said, the distinction that...<br />Anonymous2:<br /><br />"This said, the distinction that weighs most with me draws on a point made by that eminently sensible and wise commentator on this Blog, Rcg. I will not take the liberty of reproducing his comment here. Instead I just refer you to it. See his comment at 9:23 a.m. on July 30 on the thread “Is It Moral Not to Vote out of Disgust.” I read what he says there as quite consistent with the guidance given by the U.S. Bishops in the “Faithful Citizenship.” "<br /><br />I didn't read it in the same way, but rcg can clarify if he did mean it in that way. <br /><br />I did disagree with his comment that "Catholic justices led the Court to impose Roe v Wade." <br /><br />Not true. When Roe was decided, only one of the Justices was Catholic, and that Justice was William Brennan.<br /><br />What can be said is that some of the Catholic justices on the present Court (Kennedy and Sotomayor) have, by their votes, allowed the status quo to remain as it is.<br /><br />My position is that I oppose any candidate who wants to use tax money to subsidize and pay for abortion and abortifacients and also embryonic stem cell research.Georgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05809499822558662728noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-39375039896812916712016-08-05T18:48:08.669-04:002016-08-05T18:48:08.669-04:00Anonymous 2, to me, all that you have stated above...Anonymous 2, to me, all that you have stated above - in a convoluted manner - simply boiled down means that you are going to vote for the Democrat's full steam ahead abortion platform despite the fact you are a Catholic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-69343892892146815982016-08-05T14:52:25.755-04:002016-08-05T14:52:25.755-04:00DJR:
Stated in the way you do, yes, of course, th...DJR:<br /><br />Stated in the way you do, yes, of course, the analogy seems irrefutable, which—again—is why it so compelling. The problem is, it cannot be stated in that way. To make the gassing of the Jews more accurately analogous, you would have to vary it as follows:<br /> <br />(1) The Nazi regime is not gassing the Jews directly; it is permitting private individuals to kill Jews if they choose to do so. This enables those defending Jews to seek to persuade their neighbors not to kill Jews—to battle for their hearts and minds. <br /><br />(2) The other party in the election says that they would repeal the national law that allows this awful persecution of the Jews. However, they have said things like this in the past and when in power do not seem to have been successful in bringing about this change, for whatever reason. <br /><br />(3) Moreover, even if they were to repeal the law, it would not end the permission to kill the Jews. The matter is within the jurisdiction of the different state governments within Germany. Some states would still permit the killing of the Jews; others would prohibit it. Even in those states that prohibit it, the killings are expected to continue clandestinely; and people from those states that continue to permit it will kidnap Jews from protected states to take them back to their own states and kill them there. <br /><br />(4) The candidate heading up the other party in the election is so untrustworthy that one cannot be at all confident that he would in fact seek to repeal the national law permitting the killings, and he is so volatile and unpredictable that he might well be expected to perpetrate other tyrannical actions at home and abroad in the name of “national security.” Indeed, he has said as much.<br /><br />(5) The voter belongs to a huge and influential organization that publicly opposes the killing of the Jews and seeks every_realistic_opportunity, as do other members of the organization, to prevent the killings, including through public relations campaigns, education and persuasion in private interactions with neighbors, etc.<br /><br />So, these are just a few relevant and material distinctions to consider for starters. Doesn’t the choice in the election already look rather different now?<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymous 2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-56286176312462996592016-08-05T13:44:25.757-04:002016-08-05T13:44:25.757-04:00Anon2: thank you for the compliment. If my thoug...Anon2: thank you for the compliment. If my thoughts reflect the guidance of the bishops then it is my good fortune and reason, perhaps, that I should reconsider my position. Seriously, we have the wisdom of the Church concerning war and killing such that it is possible to be in a predicament where the human condition, our fallen state, gives us only evil choices. <br /><br />I also don't want to overstate our position. There have been some pretty bad presidents and incredibly corrupt administrations and civil servants in the history of the Republic. Whatever got us through that is available to get us through this if we can resist sentimental distractions. I still am embarassed that we took so much for granted and fell down in our responsibilities to the rest of the world to be a good steward. Reminds me of the state of the Church, in many ways.rcghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661998350597126663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-55406791294301796042016-08-05T10:48:59.219-04:002016-08-05T10:48:59.219-04:00Anonymous 2 said... This said, the distinction tha...<i>Anonymous 2 said... This said, the distinction that weighs most with me draws on a point made by that eminently sensible and wise commentator on this Blog, Rcg.</i><br /><br />All I did was take your previous point to its logical conclusion: <i>"What you cannot do as a Catholic is vote for a candidate who supports abortion if your intention in so doing is to support abortion yourself. But there is no blanket prohibition against voting for a candidate who supports abortion."</i><br /><br />The fact is that there are disqualifying issues that render a candidate/party unworthy of a Catholic's vote. Abortion is one of those issues.<br /><br />When your basic underlying premise is applied to other situations, you would not agree with your own statement, the Nazi Party example being the easiest to apply.<br /><br />You would never... <i> ever... </i> advocate the voting for a Nazi Party candidate if 99.9% of his platform were completely moral, good, and in accordance with Catholic teaching but that little .1% included the gassing of Jews.<br /><br />Nor would you ever publicly advocate such a position. <br /><br />Nor would the bishops, some of whom vote Democrat.<br /><br />If you were to do so, it would make national news at least, you would be drummed out of academe as an anti-Semite, and your reputation would be completely ruined.<br /><br />So, what we are faced with is a hypocritical double standard. In one instance, people would avow your statement; in the other, they would disavow it.<br /><br />The reason?<br /><br />The unborn are defenseless, invisible, and the majority of people don't care about them; Jewish people are quite visible and, generally speaking, have some clout.DJRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18028761850444888285noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-64444863990414129162016-08-04T21:46:00.353-04:002016-08-04T21:46:00.353-04:00DJR:
I have been familiar with the analogy drawn ...DJR:<br /><br />I have been familiar with the analogy drawn between abortion and the Holocaust for many decades now, at least since becoming aware of the book “Abortion: The Silent Holocaust”:<br /><br />https://www.amazon.com/Abortion-Silent-Holocaust-Joseph-Powell/dp/0895050633<br /><br />Although there are many philosophical distinction that can be drawn between the Holocaust and abortion I do think most of them break down on closer analysis. This is why the analogy is such a powerful one.<br /><br />This said, the distinction that weighs most with me draws on a point made by that eminently sensible and wise commentator on this Blog, Rcg. I will not take the liberty of reproducing his comment here. Instead I just refer you to it. See his comment at 9:23 a.m. on July 30 on the thread “Is It Moral Not to Vote out of Disgust.” I read what he says there as quite consistent with the guidance given by the U.S. Bishops in the “Faithful Citizenship.” Rcg conveys the main point far more eloquently and succinctly than I have been able to do.<br /><br />Rcg: I trust that you will correct me if I have misunderstood the import of this comment by you.<br /><br />Anonymous 2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-45307158016747885152016-08-04T11:21:04.636-04:002016-08-04T11:21:04.636-04:00A2: When planning a field operation you ask yourse...A2: When planning a field operation you ask yourself two questions: what is the most likely thing that can happen; what is the most dangerous thing that can happen. Then you prepare to deal with the answers to those questions. If you cannot answer them both, then, as my daughter says, you are actually preparing to fail. Hope is not an option here and it is a fool's errand to try and pick the best, or least of two evils, etc. We must prepare for the election of each and hope that some of the same bandages and ammunition that works for one will work for either result. rcghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661998350597126663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-71620483426163409722016-08-04T10:22:15.713-04:002016-08-04T10:22:15.713-04:00I was remarking to my wife last night that it is a...I was remarking to my wife last night that it is a sad commentary on the American people that these two people are the only viable candidates for election. The stupid Dems could have won over a lot of unhappy Republicans a few years back if they had had the sense to run Sam Nunn or Georgia's Zell Miller, but they chose to go hard Left. The country has been hopelessly divided ever since. Billy the Kidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-23298533092437478232016-08-04T01:21:13.590-04:002016-08-04T01:21:13.590-04:00Rcg:
Perhaps we can entertain the (quixotic?) hop...Rcg:<br /><br />Perhaps we can entertain the (quixotic?) hope that both The Donald and Hillary will self-destruct and that both the Republicans and the Democrats, suitably chastened, will have to go back to the drawing board to find more acceptable candidates. <br />Anonymous 2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-60313206770120460212016-08-03T22:22:41.627-04:002016-08-03T22:22:41.627-04:00Anonymous 2 said... What you_cannot_do, however, i...<i>Anonymous 2 said... What you_cannot_do, however, is to leap immediately to the facile conclusion that voting for a pro-choice candidate is equivalent to voting for the Holocaust.</i><br /><br />I see no reason why a person could not do what you say cannot be done. <br /><br />The fact of the matter is that abortion is a holocaust of epic proportions, greater than THE Holocaust by a factor many, many times over.<br /><br />If you don't believe that, then there is no hope for you. By voting for a person who advocates the biggest holocaust in the history of humanity, you are enabling the holocaust.<br /><br /><i>Although in one sense your implied hypothetical is a thought-provoking one, in another sense it represents yet another playing of the Hitler card that tries to trick us into ignoring all the relevant variables in a rhetorical sleight of hand.</i><br /><br />Obviously it hit a nerve.<br /><br />And the reason it hit a nerve is because you can readily see that the argument you make in favor of your position can be turned against you in a way that you don't want to admit.DJRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18028761850444888285noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-50329170030040617562016-08-03T07:54:57.949-04:002016-08-03T07:54:57.949-04:00John Gotti bought his daughter a pony. Still, he ...John Gotti bought his daughter a pony. Still, he was not a good father. There are some aspects of behaviour, flaws, that overwhelm the package. We have established that the facists make the trains run on time. But what shows up every quarter hour on the nose is so undesirable that we would be better off walking. There is a display of Nazi memorabilia in the infantry museum on Fort Benning. The personal effects of Herman Goering include some field sporting equipment, finely made German items that he carriered birding and relaxing in the country. I felt an actual aura of evil from that display, more real than any weapon on display. The emmense effort and level of craftsmanship devoted to these casual, even pastoral, items proved a mind and soul completely dedicated to evil. Such a person can devote himself to these endevours so completely undistracted by the deeds of the previous day, or the plans for the next, that he could excell in these pleasant tasks. <br /><br />If we must find arguments to rehabilitate the Nazis to justify picking just one of the major candidates, any candidate, from this Fall's campaign then we are truly in a bad way. Abraham would have simply sat down on the side of the road to watch the fireworks. We have packed the house, from floor to ceiling, with superbly selected incompetents. It is a bumper crop. America has failed the world such that the line of succession leads only to more barren earth. A nuclear attack on Washington by Putin would raise the national IQ twenty points. And balance the budget. <br /><br />It does not matter if I vote. I intend to obey the law in toto until I decide not to. But I won't do it in half measures. If the local tax levy passes and I vote againt it, I will pay it. The same goes for the whole body of law including the wretched person we place in the oval office. Is this the end of the Experiment? Is humanity so flawed that the end of the run is always a Moorlockian mess? It would be a shame to cash out now, when the market is so low.rcghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661998350597126663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-30747760326337178182016-08-02T21:46:26.088-04:002016-08-02T21:46:26.088-04:00DJR:
I think you know that my statement was an ab...DJR:<br /><br />I think you know that my statement was an abbreviated one intended to respond to TJM’s (in my view) continual misstatements asserting blanket prohibitions. As you should well know from my many other posts on this subject, one has to go through a very conscientious process of deliberation before one arrives at a decision to vote for a candidate who supports abortion rights or indeed for the Nazi Party. Do I really have to set it all out again? You can read the USCCB guidelines yourself surely. And you would have to ask yourself two questions in applying the Guidelines as you deliberate about your decision in your implied hypothetical about the Nazi Party: <br /><br />(1) How, if at all, is voting for the Nazi Party distinguishable from voting for a candidate who belongs to a party that supports abortion rights (are we talking about voting for the Nazi Party in pre-War Germany or now in the United States, by the way?)?; and <br /><br />(2) To the extent the situations are indeed comparable, are there nevertheless certain circumstances in which it might be permissible to vote even for the Nazi Party?<br /><br />What you_cannot_do, however, is to leap immediately to the facile conclusion that voting for a pro-choice candidate is equivalent to voting for the Holocaust. Although in one sense your implied hypothetical is a thought-provoking one, in another sense it represents yet another playing of the Hitler card that tries to trick us into ignoring all the relevant variables in a rhetorical sleight of hand.<br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymous 2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-77277522002860294302016-08-02T20:16:11.050-04:002016-08-02T20:16:11.050-04:00DJR, excellent summing up!DJR, excellent summing up!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-10017705049090991822016-08-02T20:14:47.453-04:002016-08-02T20:14:47.453-04:00Anonymous 2 - so it is just a big coincidence:
Kh...Anonymous 2 - so it is just a big coincidence:<br /><br />Khizr Khan - works for Hogan Lovells - Hogan Lovells acts for Hillary Clinton and her trust and for Saudis - Khizr Khan involved in business immigration and ties with Saudis - attends Democrat Convention - condemns Trump.<br /><br />Most Americans reading that would doubt the veracity of Khizr Khan and think, like me, that he is nothing more than a willing Clinton Tool. Although others claim he was used by the Clinton camp, I doubt it.<br /><br />The open letter of an active duty soldier to Khizr Khan confirm what I thought right from the start:<br /><br />"http://100percentfedup.com/mother-of-active-duty-soldier-d…/<br /><br />"While your son is a hero, you Sir, are NOT. My son has served three tours of combat in the countries you and your family came from. Iraq and Afghanistan were his introduction to adulthood and service to something bigger than our individual selves. He was blown up by an IED set by your countrymen. His Purple Heart is a testament to his love of America and our freedoms. I have suffered through his multiple combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan….never knowing from moment to moment if he would return home in a flag draped coffin. It is torture when a mother wakes up to this day after day and sees the atrocities happening over there on the news and being helpless to change a thing. My comments to you will probably offend you. I do not apologize. These things need to be said. Unlike you, I could NEVER use my son’s death as a pawn piece in support of a woman that left “America’s treasure” (Hillarys words) to die unaided in Benghazi."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-66945694388977130212016-08-02T20:09:50.637-04:002016-08-02T20:09:50.637-04:00The whole thing with Khan was a Democtatic set-up....The whole thing with Khan was a Democtatic set-up. I don't even think Muslims should be allowed to serve in the US armed forces, anyway. How dumb can we get?Genehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06672484450736725268noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-74628521376843406252016-08-02T15:32:49.917-04:002016-08-02T15:32:49.917-04:00Anonymous 2 said... What you cannot do as a Cathol...<i>Anonymous 2 said... What you cannot do as a Catholic is vote for a candidate who supports abortion if your intention in so doing is to support abortion yourself. But there is no blanket prohibition against voting for a candidate who supports abortion.</i><br /><br />That's why it is okay to support Nazi Party candidates even though one of their unfortunate side issues is the extermination of Jewish people, among others. <br /><br />As long as one votes for the Nazi Party candidate with the intention of supporting the good things he does (fighting unemployment, opposing communism, et cetera), but not with the specific intention of acquiescing in the snuffing out of Jewish lives, it's fine.DJRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18028761850444888285noreply@blogger.com