Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => Politics and World Leaders => Topic started by: 2Vermont on October 17, 2024, 03:43:55 PM

Title: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: 2Vermont on October 17, 2024, 03:43:55 PM
JD Vance is what we would consider a conservative Novus Ordo Catholic here, correct? And he claims to be "Catholic", correct?  And, if so, aren't Novus Ordo Catholics typically against abortion? IVF? I mean, these are a couple of things the Novus Ordo still gets right (at least on paper), no?

I just came to a revelation.  And this could totally change my views at this time. 

As Catholics, perhaps we are focusing on the wrong person on this ticket. Trump does not claim to be Catholic.  He is not expected to have proper Catholic beliefs.  But what about Vance?

Should we decide whether to vote in this election based on him, NOT Trump? When we vote for Trump, we are also voting for him.

How has he handled these issues?
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: Valentine on October 17, 2024, 04:13:39 PM
Vance, like Trump, like hαɾɾιs, like Biden and every member of the federal government is a servant of Israel.
The left and the right might be tossed a bone here and there to keep each group of voters invested in the system but
the lesser of two evils approach has only gotten us more evil, to the point western nations make Sodom seem like
a Sunday school picnic
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: NishantXavier on October 17, 2024, 10:11:53 PM
JD Vance is what we would consider a conservative Novus Ordo Catholic here, correct? And he claims to be "Catholic", correct?  And, if so, aren't Novus Ordo Catholics typically against abortion? IVF? I mean, these are a couple of things the Novus Ordo still gets right (at least on paper), no?

I just came to a revelation.  And this could totally change my views at this time. 

As Catholics, perhaps we are focusing on the wrong person on this ticket. Trump does not claim to be Catholic.  He is not expected to have proper Catholic beliefs.  But what about Vance?


Should we decide whether to vote in this election based on him, NOT Trump? When we vote for Trump, we are also voting for him.

How has he handled these issues?
Yes, 2Vermont, you're exactly right. Not only that, now that Trump has elevated pro life Catholic Vance to national prominence, there's a very real chance that, after being VP for 4 years, James David Vance may be President for 8 during 2028-2036. Now, if that happens, prolifers win big on absolutely everything, the courts will be ours for life, the Supreme Court will have a 7-2 or 8-1 or even 9-0 pro life majority, they can declare unborn children are persons enjoying the legal right to life as guaranteed by the 14th amendment, and we can bring the 50 year war on children inaugarated by Roe v Wade to a complete end with a conclusive victory for pro lifers and the Catholic Church, as we consign abortion as an abomination like slavery to the ash-heap or dustbin of history. I agree Trump's choice of Vance as VP is significant.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: Geremia on October 17, 2024, 11:33:27 PM
every member of the federal government is a servant of Israel
Rep. Thomas Massie doesn't accept AIPAC bribes.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: 2Vermont on October 18, 2024, 06:03:41 AM
Yes, 2Vermont, you're exactly right. Not only that, now that Trump has elevated pro life Catholic Vance to national prominence, there's a very real chance that, after being VP for 4 years, James David Vance may be President for 8 during 2028-2036. Now, if that happens, prolifers win big on absolutely everything, the courts will be ours for life, the Supreme Court will have a 7-2 or 8-1 or even 9-0 pro life majority, they can declare unborn children are persons enjoying the legal right to life as guaranteed by the 14th amendment, and we can bring the 50 year war on children inaugarated by Roe v Wade to a complete end with a conclusive victory for pro lifers and the Catholic Church, as we consign abortion as an abomination like slavery to the ash-heap or dustbin of history. I agree Trump's choice of Vance as VP is significant.
I guess I would like to know how he has proven to be "pro-life" in the past.

I also want to know where he currently stands on the issues with respect to some of the things that Trump has been saying.  Because it seems to me that if he is pro-life (and calls himself Catholic) then he would educate and dissuade Trump from saying some things that he has said about abortion and IVF.

I'm more concerned with his position on these matters during the campaign than Trump because he is supposedly the Catholic.  That is what I meant by my OP.  
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: NishantXavier on October 18, 2024, 06:33:33 AM
I guess I would like to know how he has proven to be "pro-life" in the past.

I also want to know where he currently stands on the issues with respect to some of the things that Trump has been saying.  Because it seems to me that if he is pro-life (and calls himself Catholic) then he would educate and dissuade Trump from saying some things that he has said about abortion and IVF.

I'm more concerned with his position on these matters during the campaign than Trump because he is supposedly the Catholic.  That is what I meant by my OP. 
Ok. I actually prefer the term "abolitionist" to just pro-life, because ultimately abortion like slavery should be abolished. JD Vance has made clear he sees it that way too: "He has supported a federal abortion ban, opposed exceptions for rape and incest, said he wanted to protect life “from the date of conception” and frequently described himself as “100 percent pro-life.” “I think two wrongs don’t make a right; at the end of day, we are talking about an unborn baby,” he told an Ohio radio host in September 2021 before Roe v. Wade was overturned in part by three Supreme Court justices appointed by the man who named him to the Republicans’ 2024 presidential ticket. “It’s not whether a woman should be forced to bring a child to term. It’s whether a child should be allowed to live.” https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/17/us/politics/jd-vance-abortion.html

Also, Vance supported defunded Planned Parenthood: "Vance says a future Trump administration would defund Planned Parenthood. Vance said his view is "consistent" with Trump, whose administration slashed funding for Planned Parenthood and who said in 2016 that he would “defund it because I’m pro-life.” https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/vance-says-future-trump-administration-defund-planned-parenthood-rcna174211 Each time, in 2016 and now in 2024, Trump had a VP who is more pro-life than he was. Pence behind the scenes would have pushed Trump in a more pro-life direction and I believe Vance was chosen by God to play precisely the same role in the next administration. Even if Trump-Vance do no more for the pro-life/abolitionist cause than replace Justices Alito and Thomas with 2 35 year old pro-life conservatives, that's a win imo, because those pro-life Justices will then shape the direction of the court for the next 2 to 3 decades until, as we hope, abortion is completely abolished in law.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: 2Vermont on October 18, 2024, 06:35:35 AM
Yes, 2Vermont, you're exactly right. Not only that, now that Trump has elevated pro life Catholic Vance to national prominence, there's a very real chance that, after being VP for 4 years, James David Vance may be President for 8 during 2028-2036. Now, if that happens, prolifers win big on absolutely everything, the courts will be ours for life, the Supreme Court will have a 7-2 or 8-1 or even 9-0 pro life majority, they can declare unborn children are persons enjoying the legal right to life as guaranteed by the 14th amendment, and we can bring the 50 year war on children inaugarated by Roe v Wade to a complete end with a conclusive victory for pro lifers and the Catholic Church, as we consign abortion as an abomination like slavery to the ash-heap or dustbin of history. I agree Trump's choice of Vance as VP is significant.
I will add that, although this wasn't the intention of my OP, that this is certainly something to consider (assuming he truly is pro-life of course).
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: Ladislaus on October 18, 2024, 06:36:01 AM
I don't see how anything Vance reportedly believed in (he's backtracked now) would determine whether one can vote for Trump.  IMO, it could potentially disqualify a vote for Trump if the VP pick were really bad, since the person MIGHT become President, but you have to proceed under the assumption that Trump will serve out his term.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: 2Vermont on October 18, 2024, 06:37:57 AM
Ok. I actually prefer the term "abolitionist" to just pro-life, because ultimately abortion like slavery should be abolished. JD Vance has made clear he sees it that way too: "He has supported a federal abortion ban, opposed exceptions for rape and incest, said he wanted to protect life “from the date of conception” and frequently described himself as “100 percent pro-life.” “I think two wrongs don’t make a right; at the end of day, we are talking about an unborn baby,” he told an Ohio radio host in September 2021 before Roe v. Wade was overturned in part by three Supreme Court justices appointed by the man who named him to the Republicans’ 2024 presidential ticket. “It’s not whether a woman should be forced to bring a child to term. It’s whether a child should be allowed to live.” https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/17/us/politics/jd-vance-abortion.html

Also, Vance supported defunded Planned Parenthood: "Vance says a future Trump administration would defund Planned Parenthood. Vance said his view is "consistent" with Trump, whose administration slashed funding for Planned Parenthood and who said in 2016 that he would “defund it because I’m pro-life.” https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/vance-says-future-trump-administration-defund-planned-parenthood-rcna174211 Each time, in 2016 and now in 2024, Trump had a VP who is more pro-life than he was. Pence behind the scenes would have pushed Trump in a more pro-life direction and I believe Vance was chosen by God to play precisely the same role in the next administration. Even if Trump-Vance do no more for the pro-life/abolitionist cause than replace Justices Alito and Thomas with 2 35 year old pro-life conservatives, that's a win imo, because those pro-life Justices will then shape the direction of the court for the next 2 to 3 decades until, as we hope, abortion is completely abolished in law.
Can you post the full article at NYT?  You have to subscribe in order to see it.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: NishantXavier on October 18, 2024, 06:45:54 AM
Quote from: 2Vermont (https://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?topic=75243.msg956979#msg956979) 18/10/2024, 17:07:57
Can you post the full article at NYT?  You have to subscribe in order to see it.
Sure, 2Vermont. Please find it below:

"Opposition to Abortion Rights Is at Center of J.D. Vance’s Political Career
As he joins Donald J. Trump’s presidential ticket, Mr. Vance is seeking to play down, and in some cases rewrite, his views.

J.D. Vance previously signed a letter asking the Justice Department to enforce the Comstock Act. He is now softening his language on abortion. Credit...Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times
July 17, 2024

Throughout his brief political career, Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio has been an unapologetic opponent of abortion rights, a view driven by his Catholic faith and one he has cited as a driving force in his agenda.
He has supported a federal abortion ban, opposed exceptions for rape and incest, said he wanted to protect life “from the date of conception” and frequently described himself as “100 percent pro-life.”
“I think two wrongs don’t make a right; at the end of day, we are talking about an unborn baby,” he told an Ohio radio host in September 2021 before Roe v. Wade was overturned in part by three Supreme Court justices appointed by the man who named him to the Republicans’ 2024 presidential ticket. “It’s not whether a woman should be forced to bring a child to term. It’s whether a child should be allowed to live.”

In January 2023, Mr. Vance signed a letter asking the Justice Department to enforce the Comstock Act, a long-dormant law from 1873, to ban the mailing of abortion medication. Such an action could significantly limit access to such medication, which accounts for a majority of abortions in the country.

“While the use of chemical abortion drugs may be legal in some states, and federal law does not currently explicitly prohibit the use of such drugs, federal law does prohibit the mailing or shipping of such items,” read the letter, which was signed by more than two dozen Republican lawmakers. “Despite attempts to downplay this action, the ‘mere mailing’ of these items is expressly what the law has prohibited for nearly 150 years.”

Enforcing the Comstock Act is included in a plan released by a coalition that has been drawing up America First-style policy plans, nicknamed Project 2025 (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/20/us/politics/republican-president-2024-heritage-foundation.html) — though the law is referred to only by the statute number. Mr. Vance has publicly praised those plans as containing “some good ideas,” even as former President Donald J. Trump has tried to distance himself from the effort.
Now, as he joins Mr. Trump’s presidential ticket, Mr. Vance is seeking to play down — and in some cases rewrite — those views, saying he backs Mr. Trump’s support for “reasonable exceptions” and for allowing states to decide their own limits on abortion.
“My view is that Donald Trump is the leader of the Republican Party, and his views on abortion are going to be the views that dominate this party and drive this party forward,” Mr. Vance said on Monday in an interview on Fox News, after he was named to the ticket. “You have to believe in reasonable exceptions because that’s where the American people are. And you’ve got to let individual states make this decision.”
His current position is a clear softening for a candidate who once described staunch opposition to abortion as one of the most crucial litmus tests for conservatives.

Since entering politics in 2022, with his run for a Senate seat in Ohio, Mr. Vance has cast himself as a fierce opponent of abortion rights, supporting a Texas law (https://www.nytimes.com/article/abortion-law-texas.html) that made abortion functionally illegal (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/02/us/supreme-court-texas-abortion-law.html) in the state and that authorizes residents to enforce (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/09/us/abortion-law-regulations-texas.html) the ban. The 2021 law transformed Texas, criminalizing abortion before the Supreme Court overturned the right nationwide.

“I think one of the most important issues for the conservative movement is the right to life,” Mr. Vance told a crowd gathered for a campaign town-hall-style meeting in February 2022. “If you’re not willing to stand on that issue, I think it indicates your character is weak and you don’t have the fortitude to actually serve the interest of our voters.”
He carried those beliefs into the Senate, where he has voted against protecting the right to fertility treatments like I.V.F. He has also opposed judicial nominees with a history of supporting abortion rights and legislation that expressed support for protecting access to abortion.
Mr. Vance has urged Republicans to be not just anti-abortion but “pro-baby and pro-family and pro-people who are raising our families.”
He has cast Democrats as extreme on the issue, saying that the party supports abortion until birth. Abortions so late in pregnancy are very rare, making up less than 1 percent of all procedures. Most Democrats say the issue should be left for women and their doctors to decide.

President Biden’s campaign sees fresh opportunities in Mr. Vance’s past statements. On Wednesday evening, it plans to release an advertisement featuring Hadley Duvall, a Kentucky abortion rights activist (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/13/us/politics/abortion-texas-elections.html) who says she was raped by her stepfather as a girl.
Mr. Vance is fluent in the language of the anti-abortion movement, attacking what followers often call the “abortion lobby” and likening abortion rights to American slavery.
“There’s something comparable between abortion and slavery,” Mr. Vance said, “and that while the people who obviously suffer the most are those subjected to it, I think it has this morally distorting effect on the entire society.”
Mr. Vance was so outspoken in his anti-abortion views that he won a 100 percent rating from Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, a prominent anti-abortion political organization.
“J.D. Vance is an exceptional selection as President Trump’s running mate,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of the group, who praised his “courage” in “exposing the Democrats’ agenda of abortion for any reason.”
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: NishantXavier on October 18, 2024, 06:52:13 AM
I don't see how anything Vance reportedly believed in (he's backtracked now) would determine whether one can vote for Trump.  IMO, it could potentially disqualify a vote for Trump if the VP pick were really bad, since the person MIGHT become President, but you have to proceed under the assumption that Trump will serve out his term.
Friend, we will need the mantle of the men who broke the nαzιs and the Commies to win this war on unborn children. Now is not the time to sit by the sidelines. One should vote for and support pro life candidates every chance one gets in order to roll the ball forward, gain ground for the pro life cause, and push toward the end game of complete legal and judicial abolition of abortion. I have outlined a plan for the next 12 years. What's yours? Double effect more than justifies voting for Trump-Vance based ON THE ONE SINGLE FACT THAT abortion abolitionist and pro-life Catholic JD Vance is on the ticket. 4 years of Trump-Vance and 8 years of Vance after that and we win big on absolutely everything. Wheres your counter strategy? Do nothing for the next 12 years, and expect abolition to come out of nowhere? If so, it's a poor strategy.

Beside the victory for the pro-life cause that would result, it would also probably result in numerous Evangelical Christian conversions to the Roman Catholic Church. Evangelicals, like real pro-life Catholics, have been disgusted, and rightly so, with so-called Catholics and pro-aborts like Biden and Peℓσѕι. Now, for the first time in living memory, a new generation of pro-life Catholics like JD Vance and Ron DeSantis arise to prominence. God and Our Lady have a plan for complete victory and its up to us to discern their holy will carefully and prayerfully and take the required steps we need to win.

Pray and vote. The traditional clergy with moral unanimity tell the faithful to vote for Trump-Vance. It would be good to dutifully fall in line as faithful soldiers behind our commanders the priests and bishops of the Church and do so.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: 2Vermont on October 18, 2024, 07:07:27 AM
Sure, 2Vermont. Please find it below:

"Opposition to Abortion Rights Is at Center of J.D. Vance’s Political Career
As he joins Donald J. Trump’s presidential ticket, Mr. Vance is seeking to play down, and in some cases rewrite, his views.

J.D. Vance previously signed a letter asking the Justice Department to enforce the Comstock Act. He is now softening his language on abortion. Credit...Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times
July 17, 2024

Throughout his brief political career, Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio has been an unapologetic opponent of abortion rights, a view driven by his Catholic faith and one he has cited as a driving force in his agenda.
He has supported a federal abortion ban, opposed exceptions for rape and incest, said he wanted to protect life “from the date of conception” and frequently described himself as “100 percent pro-life.”
“I think two wrongs don’t make a right; at the end of day, we are talking about an unborn baby,” he told an Ohio radio host in September 2021 before Roe v. Wade was overturned in part by three Supreme Court justices appointed by the man who named him to the Republicans’ 2024 presidential ticket. “It’s not whether a woman should be forced to bring a child to term. It’s whether a child should be allowed to live.”

In January 2023, Mr. Vance signed a letter asking the Justice Department to enforce the Comstock Act, a long-dormant law from 1873, to ban the mailing of abortion medication. Such an action could significantly limit access to such medication, which accounts for a majority of abortions in the country.

“While the use of chemical abortion drugs may be legal in some states, and federal law does not currently explicitly prohibit the use of such drugs, federal law does prohibit the mailing or shipping of such items,” read the letter, which was signed by more than two dozen Republican lawmakers. “Despite attempts to downplay this action, the ‘mere mailing’ of these items is expressly what the law has prohibited for nearly 150 years.”

Enforcing the Comstock Act is included in a plan released by a coalition that has been drawing up America First-style policy plans, nicknamed Project 2025 (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/20/us/politics/republican-president-2024-heritage-foundation.html) — though the law is referred to only by the statute number. Mr. Vance has publicly praised those plans as containing “some good ideas,” even as former President Donald J. Trump has tried to distance himself from the effort.
Now, as he joins Mr. Trump’s presidential ticket, Mr. Vance is seeking to play down — and in some cases rewrite — those views, saying he backs Mr. Trump’s support for “reasonable exceptions” and for allowing states to decide their own limits on abortion.
“My view is that Donald Trump is the leader of the Republican Party, and his views on abortion are going to be the views that dominate this party and drive this party forward,” Mr. Vance said on Monday in an interview on Fox News, after he was named to the ticket. “You have to believe in reasonable exceptions because that’s where the American people are. And you’ve got to let individual states make this decision.”
His current position is a clear softening for a candidate who once described staunch opposition to abortion as one of the most crucial litmus tests for conservatives.

Since entering politics in 2022, with his run for a Senate seat in Ohio, Mr. Vance has cast himself as a fierce opponent of abortion rights, supporting a Texas law (https://www.nytimes.com/article/abortion-law-texas.html) that made abortion functionally illegal (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/02/us/supreme-court-texas-abortion-law.html) in the state and that authorizes residents to enforce (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/09/us/abortion-law-regulations-texas.html) the ban. The 2021 law transformed Texas, criminalizing abortion before the Supreme Court overturned the right nationwide.

“I think one of the most important issues for the conservative movement is the right to life,” Mr. Vance told a crowd gathered for a campaign town-hall-style meeting in February 2022. “If you’re not willing to stand on that issue, I think it indicates your character is weak and you don’t have the fortitude to actually serve the interest of our voters.”
He carried those beliefs into the Senate, where he has voted against protecting the right to fertility treatments like I.V.F. He has also opposed judicial nominees with a history of supporting abortion rights and legislation that expressed support for protecting access to abortion.
Mr. Vance has urged Republicans to be not just anti-abortion but “pro-baby and pro-family and pro-people who are raising our families.”
He has cast Democrats as extreme on the issue, saying that the party supports abortion until birth. Abortions so late in pregnancy are very rare, making up less than 1 percent of all procedures. Most Democrats say the issue should be left for women and their doctors to decide.

President Biden’s campaign sees fresh opportunities in Mr. Vance’s past statements. On Wednesday evening, it plans to release an advertisement featuring Hadley Duvall, a Kentucky abortion rights activist (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/13/us/politics/abortion-texas-elections.html) who says she was raped by her stepfather as a girl.
Mr. Vance is fluent in the language of the anti-abortion movement, attacking what followers often call the “abortion lobby” and likening abortion rights to American slavery.
“There’s something comparable between abortion and slavery,” Mr. Vance said, “and that while the people who obviously suffer the most are those subjected to it, I think it has this morally distorting effect on the entire society.”
Mr. Vance was so outspoken in his anti-abortion views that he won a 100 percent rating from Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, a prominent anti-abortion political organization.
“J.D. Vance is an exceptional selection as President Trump’s running mate,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of the group, who praised his “courage” in “exposing the Democrats’ agenda of abortion for any reason.”
Great, thank you.  OK, so he appeared to be solidly anti-abortion (pro-life/abolitionist) before the campaign.  It does appear as if he is softening his views during the campaign/since he's been named on the ticket:

“My view is that Donald Trump is the leader of the Republican Party, and his views on abortion are going to be the views that dominate this party and drive this party forward,” Mr. Vance said on Monday in an interview on Fox News, after he was named to the ticket. “You have to believe in reasonable exceptions because that’s where the American people are. And you’ve got to let individual states make this decision.”

So, I think we're left with wondering whether this is a faux/temporary change to get elected (ie. "because that's where the American people are").
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: NishantXavier on October 18, 2024, 07:18:55 AM
Do you remember when Justice Gorsuch was nominated, 2Vermont?

He said, with emphasis: "Roe v Wade is ABSOLUTELY the law of the land. Its been reaffirmed multiple times"

It threw many people off. But it was necessary to get confirmed. And it was only a statement of fact. And so, when the time for the ruling came, together with the two pro-life Catholics Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Amy Barrett appointed by President Trump/Pence, Justice Gorsuch helped end Roe v Wade and consign it to the dustbin of history.

I strongly suspect and am near 100% certain that this is the case with Vance. With Trump, I cannot say for sure. But Trump is still friendly with and numerous pro-life catholic and evangelical organizations will have influence in his administration. I think and am hopeful they will be able to exert sufficient pressure to ensure continued pro life wins.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: NishantXavier on October 18, 2024, 07:41:30 AM
Another thought occurred to me. If Trump gets in but continues to flip-flop or be liberal on abortion, God may even strike Trump dead e.g. in 2025 or allow an assassination attempt on him to succeed. In that case, Vance would take over immediately, implement Project 2025 (he has praised it) and fight abortionist terrorism (that's what it is) by every legal means possible with a goal toward its ultimate abolition.

Project 2025 is a Christian nationalist platform. Wiki: "Critics have characterized Project 2025 as an authoritarian, Christian nationalist plan to steer the U.S. toward autocracy.[11][13][14][15] Legal experts have said it would undermine the rule of law,[16] separation of powers,[5] separation of church and state,[17] and civil liberties.[5][16][18]". Vance has repeatedly expressed his support of the proposal. Trump is a little lukewarm but mostly only to get the necessary votes to be elected. Vance is a Christian nationalist pro-lifer who rejects separation of Church and State. Traditional Catholics of course know that separation of Church and State is an error condemned by Pius IX.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: Valentine on October 18, 2024, 08:01:03 AM
I don't know how the statistics for the number of abortions performed are compiled but I've read that since Roe V Wade was overturned they have actually increased.
Some have cited the fact that 60+% of abortions are now by means of over the counter pills, which the "Catholic" faction of the Supreme Court recently ruled are permanently legal.
Then there are states like Illinois, ruled by Jєωιѕн billionaire JB Pritzker, who actually uses taxpayer funds to bus/fly women in from neighboring states where abortion is restricted so they can have them for free. They probably get
free hotel rooms and a stipend as well.
There are also disturbing reports that the already low birthrates have plummeted throughout Europe and the US among White women due to a record number of miscarriages. Another gift from Captain Warp speed's  beautiful vaccine.

I think the Supreme Court ruling was an attempt to draw conservative minded voters, who were rightly disillusioned
with the Republican party, back into the uniparty system. Just as a Trump victory might temporarily stem the tide
of migrants, when the damage has largely been done.
Watch as Trump or hαɾɾιs introduce a cyber wall instead of a real border wall, which will involve biometric tracking of everyone. 
 
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: NishantXavier on October 18, 2024, 08:07:59 AM
Posted the stats that some 41 States have banned or restricted abortion thanks to the huge victory of Dobbs that overturned Roe v Wade. Will find it later on if needed and post it here.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: 2Vermont on October 18, 2024, 08:25:31 AM
Another thought occurred to me. If Trump gets in but continues to flip-flop or be liberal on abortion, God may even strike Trump dead e.g. in 2025 or allow an assassination attempt on him to succeed. In that case, Vance would take over immediately, implement Project 2025 (he has praised it) and fight abortionist terrorism (that's what it is) by every legal means possible with a goal toward its ultimate abolition.

Project 2025 is a Christian nationalist platform. Wiki: "Critics have characterized Project 2025 as an authoritarian, Christian nationalist plan to steer the U.S. toward autocracy.[11][13][14][15] Legal experts have said it would undermine the rule of law,[16] separation of powers,[5] separation of church and state,[17] and civil liberties.[5][16][18]". Vance has repeatedly expressed his support of the proposal. Trump is a little lukewarm but mostly only to get the necessary votes to be elected. Vance is a Christian nationalist pro-lifer who rejects separation of Church and State. Traditional Catholics of course know that separation of Church and State is an error condemned by Pius IX.
Something similar has come to my mind as well.  I think, unlike previous recent VP's, he could very well become President before the end of Trump's term.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: josh987654321 on October 18, 2024, 08:29:03 AM
I don't know how the statistics for the number of abortions performed are compiled but I've read that since Roe V Wade was overturned they have actually increased.

Ironic, I read the exact same thing in 2016 from people trying to prevent Trump from overturning Roe v Wade... The democrats used to say 'safe, legal and rare' and the 'rare' part is what naïve Catholics (giving them the benefit of the doubt) would cling to using this same faulty argument, as if we were on the same team but going about it differently... then when they corrupted enough of society and got their numbers up they showed their true colours. 
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: josh987654321 on October 18, 2024, 08:31:16 AM
Something similar has come to my mind as well.  I think, unlike previous recent VP's, he could very well become President before the end of Trump's term.

You could never achieve progress in such a manner, one cannot win like that. Even if the worst were to happen you would respect his wishes for the rest of his term that you were filling in for, then when getting elected for the role you can do as you wish IMO.

God Bless
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: NishantXavier on October 18, 2024, 08:37:23 AM
Agreed, 2Vermont.

I have a confession to make. I prayed for Ginsburg to die. I read a theology manual that says it's permissible to pray for someone's death to be hastened if they are doing evil and provided one also prays for them to repent and die in grace. I did that because I read in an Axios article a source say Justice Amy Barrett, a devout pro life Catholic and mother of 7 (we Catholics had huge role to play in Roe v Wade, so we can rightly take credit in that huge victory; some Evagelicals helped; but only Catholics active in Catholic action, which the Church has always highly encouraged), was being saved to replace Ginsburg. But it was not certain Ginsburg would retire in time. 

So I prayed as I did. Apparently, it worked. I have no regrets. She is dead now. I hope, for her sake, she repented and died in grace and saved her soul. But the wicked witch and abortionist terrorist (for that is what she is) is responsible for the h0Ɩ0cαųst and murder of millions. So are the others enabling the crime and the greatest genocidal h0Ɩ0cαųst of our age along with the persecution of 360 million Christians around the globe which the Jєωιѕн press is deliberately silent about. We must be united, stay strong, stay the course, and fight effectively to complete the beginnings of victory by abolishing abortion.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: josh987654321 on October 18, 2024, 08:45:25 AM
I have a confession to make. I prayed for Ginsburg to die. I read a theology manual that says it's permissible to pray for someone's death to be hastened if they are doing evil and provided one also prays for them to repent and die in grace.

I don't know about that, much better to just pray for their repentance and leave it in God's hands IMO.

I did smirk when she tried to hold out until after the election so Biden could appoint someone pro-abortion and instead she died just in time for Trump to appoint another judge. That was interesting IMO, prevented her from doing more evil before she left.

God Bless
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: NishantXavier on October 18, 2024, 08:50:04 AM
Yes, brother. It was Divine Providence that struck her dead. May God have Mercy on her wicked soul and grant, if it is His will, that she at least made an act of faith in Christ, and contriton for her sins, before she died. St. Padre Pio says we can pray for souls even after their death that they died in grace. As I said, I read a theologian say it is permissible. We are fighting a war. God is with us, and He will ensure our final victory, which will be His, and His Mothers, and the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart will come. Obviously abortion will be abolished when it begins.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: Pax Vobis on October 18, 2024, 09:22:57 AM

Quote
. I read a theology manual that says it's permissible to pray for someone's death to be hastened if they are doing evil and provided one also prays for them to repent and die in grace. 
Correct.  Because praying for death isn’t an evil, as we will all die.  Death is simply a stage of life. 
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: NishantXavier on October 18, 2024, 10:52:02 AM
Correct.  Because praying for death isn’t an evil, as we will all die.  Death is simply a stage of life.
Agreed. And for some, who have lived well, death is the entrance to eternal life and Paradise. For others, who lived poorly but were not totally wicked, it is an entrance into purgatory and to heaven after it. For others, it is a terrible judgment and a sentence to eternal death, i.e. hell.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: 2Vermont on October 18, 2024, 11:49:35 AM
Posted the stats that some 41 States have banned or restricted abortion thanks to the huge victory of Dobbs that overturned Roe v Wade. Will find it later on if needed and post it here.
I see you haven't reposted it, but I think the data is important to share.  So, I am reposting it:

State Bans on Abortion Throughout Pregnancy | Guttmacher Institute (https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/state-policies-abortion-bans)
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: Soubirous on October 18, 2024, 01:26:30 PM
Scroll down to Table 2 on that  Guttmacher Institute webpage. (https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/state-policies-abortion-bans) That's where the salient facts are. Look at each of the columns and their explanatory headings as well as the footnotes.

ALL of the states make exception for the life of the mother. However, medical intervention in such cases is NOT "abortion" neither in theological nor in bona fide medical terms. See this recent thread (https://www.cathinfo.com/catholic-living-in-the-modern-world/life-of-the-mother/msg955882/#msg955882) for further discussion of that reality.

Onto the next columns. The only jurisdictions that make no other exceptions are Arkansas, Oklahoma, South Dakota. That's it.

Total current US population is around 340 million. Now figure those three states. AR @ 3M + OK @ 4M + SD @ 929K = approx. 8 million of all ages. So right now, (based on general population rather than the more relevant sub-population of women of child-bearing age) abortion is illegal for only 2% of the US population.

That's what we're dealing with. That's what Dobbs got us. Two percent. That's what those few states had ALREADY through the shrewd use of anti-clinic zoning ordinances, waiting periods, heartbeat laws, professional licensing standards, etc.

In those other 47 states plus District of Columbia, opportunistic loopholes for "general health of the mother", "physical health of the mother", rape, incest, and lethal fetal abnormality allow any pro-abortion doctor -- and in some states even a loosely defined/credentialed "health care practitioner" --  in effect to allow it  on demand for the whole of gestation. Can't get a waiver, travel a couple hours and the deed is done. Or order pills legally through the mail.

As for those fetal abnormality diagnoses, look for citations of how often those test results turnout to be inaccurate. Yet that doesn't stop "health care practitioners" who shame mothers who want to do the right thing and carry to term, and lo and behold, the baby's healthy. Oops averted, as when frightened mothers do abort and more conclusive genetic testing finds nothing abnormal at all.

Bottom line, argue all you want amongst yourselves about the pro life vote and its political utility and election season nuances and whether Trump and Vance are disingenuously playing to the middle when they're really at heart in it for the babies, multi-dimensional chess and all that.

Free will opinion is one thing. But letting the pro-abort cynics trick you into ignoring the DATA and repeating their opportunistic terminology?

And abortion's only one issue, for which the data at least is easy to find . If anyone thinks the PTB aren't bamboozling full spectrum to get acquiescent buy-in for whomever they dump on us next month , then there's no helping those folks. TDS has gone horseshoe.

Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: M1913 on October 18, 2024, 01:38:46 PM
Scroll down to Table 2 on that  Guttmacher Institute webpage. (https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/state-policies-abortion-bans) That's where the salient facts are. Look at each of the columns and their explanatory headings as well as the footnotes.

ALL of the states make exception for the life of the mother. However, medical intervention in such cases is NOT "abortion" neither in theological nor in bona fide medical terms. See this recent thread (https://www.cathinfo.com/catholic-living-in-the-modern-world/life-of-the-mother/msg955882/#msg955882) for further discussion of that reality.

Onto the next columns. The only jurisdictions that make no other exceptions are Arkansas, Oklahoma, South Dakota. That's it.

Total current US population is around 340 million. Now figure those three states. AR @ 3M + OK @ 4M + SD @ 929K = approx. 8 million of all ages. So right now, (based on general population rather than the more relevant sub-population of women of child-bearing age) abortion is illegal for only 2% of the US population.

That's what we're dealing with. That's what Dobbs got us. Two percent. That's what those few states had ALREADY through the shrewd use of anti-clinic zoning ordinances, waiting periods, heartbeat laws, professional licensing standards, etc.

In those other 47 states plus District of Columbia, opportunistic loopholes for "general health of the mother", "physical health of the mother", rape, incest, and lethal fetal abnormality allow any pro-abortion doctor -- and in some states even a loosely defined/credentialed "health care practitioner" --  in effect to allow it  on demand for the whole of gestation. Can't get a waiver, travel a couple hours and the deed is done. Or order pills legally through the mail.

As for those fetal abnormality diagnoses, look for citations of how often those test results turnout to be inaccurate. Yet that doesn't stop "health care practitioners" who shame mothers who want to do the right thing and carry to term, and lo and behold, the baby's healthy. Oops averted, as when frightened mothers do abort and more conclusive genetic testing finds nothing abnormal at all.

Bottom line, argue all you want amongst yourselves about the pro life vote and its political utility and election season nuances and whether Trump and Vance are disingenuously playing to the middle when they're really at heart in it for the babies, multi-dimensional chess and all that.

Free will opinion is one thing. But letting the pro-abort cynics trick you into ignoring the DATA and repeating their opportunistic terminology?

And abortion's only one issue. If anyone thinks the PTB aren't bamboozling full spectrum to get acquiescent buy-in for whomever they dump on us next month , then there's no helping those folks. TDS has gone horseshoe.
This needs to be a post.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: 2Vermont on October 18, 2024, 02:28:41 PM
Ironic, I read the exact same thing in 2016 from people trying to prevent Trump from overturning Roe v Wade... The democrats used to say 'safe, legal and rare' and the 'rare' part is what naïve Catholics (giving them the benefit of the doubt) would cling to using this same faulty argument, as if we were on the same team but going about it differently... then when they corrupted enough of society and got their numbers up they showed their true colours.
I guess I'm confused as to why overturning Roe v Wade was the wrong thing to do when pro-lifers fought so hard to make it happen for decades.  Now that it happened, pro-lifers are upset?  :confused:
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: NishantXavier on October 18, 2024, 09:54:21 PM
I guess I'm confused as to why overturning Roe v Wade was the wrong thing to do when pro-lifers fought so hard to make it happen for decades.  Now that it happened, pro-lifers are upset?  :confused:
Yes, it defies credibility. The overturning of Roe v Wade was a colossal victory. I knew many good pro lifers who, having fought the good fight for decades, nevertheless thought and never dared to dream that Roe v Wade would be overturned in their lifetimes. Now, it has and they're very happy. Everyone should be. There should be rejoicing in the streets and a holy resolve to complete the initial victory by pushing on to complete victory.

I would push for a 15 week federal ban from the next administration. Hopefully, Vance can get it done, and Trump (once in office) will reverse himself and get it done. During the primary, Mike Pence cited a statistic that showed 70%+ of the American people are ok with an abortion ban after 15 weeks. Therefore that should be the minimum federal standard. Desantis committed to such a ban. Some others bemoaned the fact that liberal states and liberal democrats were ok with abortion "in the 9th month", after 40 weeks or even after birth, but didn't see the clear solution to that was a minimum federal standard. And although the 60 votes in the Senate required will be tough, that is only 60% of the senate, and the senators must be convinced using that 70% statistic and other facts. If republicans get even 52-55 pro-life republican votes and a few more independent or moderate democratic votes, that number can be reached. Then they must slowly push for more. It is an uphill battle that still remains before us. And the battle must simultaneously be opened on all fronts, that is in the courts as well, both federal and supreme.

So with prayer, perseverance, incremental steps, and patience, that battle can be won, just like the Roe battle was. Step 2 and Step 3 after a 15 week ban is implemented could be a 6 week ban and then Life at conception act.

"Gallup’s writers chose to tout the post-Dobbs shift in favor of abortion in this poll, but even after this shift, here’s a telling fact: only 37% of Americans believe that abortion should be legal in the second trimester, while 55% say it should be illegal. Lindsey Graham’s proposed “national abortion ban” kicked in at 15 weeks. The poll asked about the “second three months of pregnancy,” which begins in the 13th week. Again, this isn’t new. Gallup has always found that a majority believe second-trimester abortions should be illegal"https://www.aei.org/op-eds/gallup-poll-shows-most-americans-would-vote-for-a-15-week-abortion-ban/ And hearts and minds should change also. Let's pray and work for abortion abolition.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: Geremia on October 18, 2024, 10:00:06 PM
State Bans on Abortion Throughout Pregnancy | Guttmacher Institute (https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/state-policies-abortion-bans)
FRC's Pro-life State Policy Map (https://www.frc.org/prolifemaps#map_tab02_base) is good, too.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: Geremia on October 18, 2024, 10:00:49 PM
Desantis committed to such a ban.
Even RFK initially did, too.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: NishantXavier on October 18, 2024, 10:05:22 PM
Even RFK initially did, too.
Yes, brother. That would have been good if it gets done. Unfotunately, his handlers tried to persuade him to change his mind. But once he gets in office, he will have more flexibility and he can do what he wants without them. It's good he's working closely with the Trump administration. RFK is also very strong against the covid death vax. And given what zionists did to JFK, he probably knows quite well about the zionist lobby and its dirty tricks too.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/13/rfk-jr-backs-15-week-federal-ban-on-abortion-00111017
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: NishantXavier on October 20, 2024, 12:57:42 PM
Reminder that Kennedy is on Trump's team and wanted a 15 week ban: "He said he would sign a federal ban on abortion after 15 weeks or 21 weeks of pregnancy if he were elected president." Therefore, once he gets into office and is appointed to Trump's cabinet, it's quite possible he lobbies for and gets precisely such a federal ban passed.
Title: Re: JD Vance vs Trump
Post by: Geremia on October 20, 2024, 07:18:04 PM
Reminder that Kennedy is on Trump's team and wanted a 15 week ban: "He said he would sign a federal ban on abortion after 15 weeks or 21 weeks of pregnancy if he were elected president." Therefore, once he gets into office and is appointed to Trump's cabinet, it's quite possible he lobbies for and gets precisely such a federal ban passed.
Then the U.S. would be on par with Europe (and not China, North Korea, and Canada).