(Quote) Gustavo-764558 said: So as long as a candidate is "Pro-Life" they get a blank check? As a friendly remind...
(Quote) Gustavo-764558 said: So as long as a candidate is "Pro-Life" they get a blank check?
As a friendly reminder, our last so-called pro-life administration was responsible for 2 pre-emptive wars (morally unjust), neglect of the poor via tax cuts for the rich (morally unjust), Bush was gov. of TX a state that executes it's criminals. PJII said appropriate use of capital punishment is "virtually non-existent"
Why keep spouting Democrat talking points.
The morality of both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars has been argued among theologians since day one. The general consensus is that they probably qualified as just. I don't know about Afghanistan, but as far as Iraq is concerned, all Bush Jr. did was finish the job his father should have.
The Church laws allow Capital Punishment. So you are in no position to claim their are immoral. Even Pope JP II, who expressed as his personal opinion and not speaking as Pope that in modern society the need for Capital punishment is greatly diminished, DID NOT go so far as to say that it is immoral. Where do you get your authority to declare them as immoral acts. You are perfectly free to oppose execution but you have no basis to declare it to be immoral.
It drives me absolutely crazy when people say the Bush tax cuts only benefited the rich, because it is pure unadulterated rubbish. As a result of the Bush cuts millions of people in the lower income brackets were removed from the income tax rolls altogether. That is a 100% tax cut. Many oif them received even more than that because through other credits they are entitled to, they receive a rebate of the SS and Medicare taxes they pay. No one in their right mind can call that a neglect of the poor.
The majority of income earners had their taxes cut by an average of 33%. And the rich only received an average cut of 10%.
There is no doubt that if the rich had received only a 1% cut, the dollars they would save would be larger than for most taxable income earners. But the dollars they save mean a heck of a lot less to them than the dollars most people saved.
Even more telling. After the tax cuts the percentage of all personal income taxes collected that was paid by the rich has reached the highest level since before WWII. So even though they received a 10% cut, they paid more than ever before.
When, long before you were born, tax rates for the rich were as high as 92%, Government official data shows that on average the rich paid 33% of their income in Federal income tax. Since the Bush cuts the rate has dropped marginally, but the rich still pay an average of close to 1/3rd. of their income in tax.
Chances are that you like most people paid Uncle 10% or less of your income in Federal Income taxes.
Envy the rich all you want, but you cannot rationally argue that Bush's tax cuts neglected the poor and were immoral.
Somehow, I don't think facts will sway you in any way. But your distortion of reality cannot go unchallenged.