Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for the discussion of current events,cultural issues and politics especially in relation to Catholic values.

Saint Thomas More was martyred during the Protestant Reformation for standing firm in the Faith and not recognizing the King of England as the Supreme Head of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Thomas More

01/29/2013 new

(Quote) Andrea-368827 said: Granted this happens at lower levels of government now. I don't think either of tho...
(Quote) Andrea-368827 said:

Granted this happens at lower levels of government now. I don't think either of those two candidates is a viable choice now.

--hide--
Hi Andrea, I mentioned those two not just because they are women, but because in many ways they show how split the country has become since the anti-Hillarycare House election of 1994.


Clinton does represent the last (?) of the traditional, left, "blue model" politicians. Palin became the default choice for many after a string of "moderates" in her party lost.


Dems have 20+ Senate seats to defend in 2014, some are already dropping out, some will be primaried.


Very few felt in 2005 that Obama was viable....


What do you think of Biden's xhances in 2016 ?

01/29/2013 new

(Quote) Andrea-368827 said: I think these are really moral choices of a nation. (and perhaps should not be so much of a gend...
(Quote) Andrea-368827 said:

I think these are really moral choices of a nation. (and perhaps should not be so much of a gender comparison.)


Is it morally right to put a woman on the front-lines as a child bearing person?

Would an honorable woman fight next to a man in the name of self-defense probably yes. If a man was available instead would that be better?

Is it right to place a gay man next to another man that is under great duress or loneliness in a war situation?

When is war justifiable, that any man is exposed to those situations?

If you have a high suicide rate among the existing military is it right to impose a new moral choice on that army?

Why do you have a high suicide rate already, what is the nation doing wrong now?

Sending young men from divorced homes and a country with high abortion rates into a high male dominated society is there a link to suicides or is the war not justifiable?

The Moral choices of a nation are probably what is the important part. (i.e. Nazi Germany choices, US dropping nuclear bombs on citizens in WWII and why we don't do it anymore.)

(I have hard time picking a side, because I want to pick the love your enemy side. Whether I can that's another matter. )

--hide--
Hi Andrea, all very good points.


I'm not sure I get why women in combat roles would be a specifically moral question.


Are the suicide rates high in US history comparison, or international comparison?

01/29/2013 new

(Quote) Bernie-645443 said: Hi Andrea, I mentioned those two not just because they are women, but because in many ways they ...
(Quote) Bernie-645443 said:

Hi Andrea, I mentioned those two not just because they are women, but because in many ways they show how split the country has become since the anti-Hillarycare House election of 1994.


Clinton does represent the last (?) of the traditional, left, "blue model" politicians. Palin became the default choice for many after a string of "moderates" in her party lost.


Dems have 20+ Senate seats to defend in 2014, some are already dropping out, some will be primaried.


Very few felt in 2005 that Obama was viable....


What do you think of Biden's xhances in 2016 ?

--hide--


In general, I would say that if the opposing party runs a poor candidate in that moment of time 2016 - anyone on the other side can have a chance.

2005 George W. Bush beat John Kerry (Bush orig. won because he was pro-life, he burned the candle at the other end with two unpopular wars but was given a second chance to finish his position.)

2008 Obama beat McCain (no one wanted more war - another life issue, and the society wanted to do a positive bringing an African American into the WH).

2016 No to Biden, not likely. Too old and laughing at people won't work.

Oh, I do believe HC & SP represent the moral split in the country, they would be a spectacle. Life, abortion, war are the moral split. And as baby boomers approach old age and if they try to merge Medicare with the young folk - I see euthanasia on the horizon for the Democratic platform. Life issues are going to continue to be the main issue going forward. The country wants someone who can bridge the divide, you know like God. Obama continued the polarizing. I think God and technological advances are our hope at this point.

Condoleezza Rice is more appealing then those other two in likability.

01/29/2013 new

(Quote) Andrea-368827 said: In general, I would say that if the opposing party runs a poor candidate in that mo...
(Quote) Andrea-368827 said:


In general, I would say that if the opposing party runs a poor candidate in that moment of time 2016 - anyone on the other side can have a chance.

2005 George W. Bush beat John Kerry (Bush orig. won because he was pro-life, he burned the candle at the other end with two unpopular wars but was given a second chance to finish his position.)

2008 Obama beat McCain (no one wanted more war - another life issue, and the society wanted to do a positive bringing an African American into the WH).

2016 No to Biden, not likely. Too old and laughing at people won't work.

Oh, I do believe HC & SP represent the moral split in the country, they would be a spectacle. Life, abortion, war are the moral split. And as baby boomers approach old age and if they try to merge Medicare with the young folk - I see euthanasia on the horizon for the Democratic platform. Life issues are going to continue to be the main issue going forward. The country wants someone who can bridge the divide, you know like God. Obama continued the polarizing. I think God and technological advances are our hope at this point.

Condoleezza Rice is more appealing then those other two in likability.

--hide--



I wasn't going to jump into this discussion until I saw the name Condoleezza Rice. America, or what will be left of America after Obama finishes with us, would be in great hands with her in the oval office. I don't know if she could win, but she would have my vote. She would be a tough negotiator and would lead with strength instead of weakness. I put her ability up there with Reagan. I am just not so sure if she has the "like-ability" factor that Reagan had.


- Elizabeth

01/29/2013 new

(Quote) Bernie-645443 said: Hi Andrea, all very good points. I'm not sure I get why women in combat roles wou...
(Quote) Bernie-645443 said:

Hi Andrea, all very good points.


I'm not sure I get why women in combat roles would be a specifically moral question.


Are the suicide rates high in US history comparison, or international comparison?

--hide--

Women in combat roles are a moral question because women bear children and are the weaker sex. It is a continuation of the abortion and life debate.

Is abortion more justifiable because we put a woman on the front lines? Are we culpable because the US put her there? Does the US require women on the front lines to be infertile? Same reason why men have historically put women and children before themselves. Now, are children less valuable, are women less valuable, are men less valuable because their protection of the other two are not valuable? These are my speculations.

The suicide rates are considered high in relation to the actual lives being lost in the war.

More American soldiers took their own lives last year (349) than were killed in combat (310).

Its an ongoing issue for the last few years and continues to be:

www.army.mil

01/29/2013 new

(Quote) Elizabeth-462557 said: I wasn't going to jump into this discussion until I saw the name Condoleezza Rice. Americ...
(Quote) Elizabeth-462557 said:

I wasn't going to jump into this discussion until I saw the name Condoleezza Rice. America, or what will be left of America after Obama finishes with us, would be in great hands with her in the oval office. I don't know if she could win, but she would have my vote. She would be a tough negotiator and would lead with strength instead of weakness. I put her ability up there with Reagan. I am just not so sure if she has the "like-ability" factor that Reagan had.


- Elizabeth

--hide--



There are 109,000 dead Iraqis and some 4,500 dead Americans as a result of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Condoleeza Rice played no small part in that war.

01/29/2013 new

(Quote) Andrea-368827 said: In general, I would say that if the opposing party runs a poor candidate in that mo...
(Quote) Andrea-368827 said:


In general, I would say that if the opposing party runs a poor candidate in that moment of time 2016 - anyone on the other side can have a chance.

2005 George W. Bush beat John Kerry (Bush orig. won because he was pro-life, he burned the candle at the other end with two unpopular wars but was given a second chance to finish his position.)

2008 Obama beat McCain (no one wanted more war - another life issue, and the society wanted to do a positive bringing an African American into the WH).

2016 No to Biden, not likely. Too old and laughing at people won't work.

Oh, I do believe HC & SP represent the moral split in the country, they would be a spectacle. Life, abortion, war are the moral split. And as baby boomers approach old age and if they try to merge Medicare with the young folk - I see euthanasia on the horizon for the Democratic platform. Life issues are going to continue to be the main issue going forward. The country wants someone who can bridge the divide, you know like God. Obama continued the polarizing. I think God and technological advances are our hope at this point.

Condoleezza Rice is more appealing then those other two in likability.

--hide--
Hi Andrea, good points. IIRC, both Bush and Obama placed big emphasis in their first campaigns that each claimed to be the unifier and healer. Which sorta admits that the polarization goes back a ways. Too many felt that when Bush won we could go back to business as usual, and not scrutinize and constantly hold government accountable. So the corrupt, wheelers and dealers, budget busters, and yes, some downright lying scum, won, since very few saw there was even a battle on.


Very good point about God and tech. Just me, I would add the rising awareness level of philosophical discusions of appropriate government limits, and the ongoing breaking of the MSM info monopoly.


Rice would make a great Foreign Policy President. My hunch is that if she runs, the progs will shred her on wealth and elitism as they did Romney. She came close to issuing a Sherman declaration a while back.


I hope you are wrong about euthanasia, but the history of that party, and the logical extrapolation of its current positions, suggest you could be right. The financial numbers are reality. As boomers age, the only way the Dem coalition holds is by cutting older people out of the support loop. Just me, I have serious doubts that the upcoming generations, if they can even find a job, will consent to the destructive taxation levels needed to maintain the blue model. Soylent Green in our future ?

01/29/2013 new

(Quote) Elizabeth-462557 said: I wasn't going to jump into this discussion until I saw the name Condoleezza ...
(Quote) Elizabeth-462557 said:




I wasn't going to jump into this discussion until I saw the name Condoleezza Rice. America, or what will be left of America after Obama finishes with us, would be in great hands with her in the oval office. I don't know if she could win, but she would have my vote. She would be a tough negotiator and would lead with strength instead of weakness. I put her ability up there with Reagan. I am just not so sure if she has the "like-ability" factor that Reagan had.


- Elizabeth

--hide--
Hi Elizabeth, Rice started in the RR JCS staff, and is IMHO one of the best we've had at S O S. en.wikipedia.org Agree on the "likeability".

01/29/2013 new

(Quote) Andrea-368827 said: Women in combat roles are a moral question because women bear children and are the weak...
(Quote) Andrea-368827 said:

Women in combat roles are a moral question because women bear children and are the weaker sex. It is a continuation of the abortion and life debate.

Is abortion more justifiable because we put a woman on the front lines? Are we culpable because the US put her there? Does the US require women on the front lines to be infertile? Same reason why men have historically put women and children before themselves. Now, are children less valuable, are women less valuable, are men less valuable because their protection of the other two are not valuable? These are my speculations.

The suicide rates are considered high in relation to the actual lives being lost in the war.

More American soldiers took their own lives last year (349) than were killed in combat (310).

Its an ongoing issue for the last few years and continues to be:

www.army.mil

--hide--
Hi Andrea, thanks for the questions/responses. Is the military suicide rate greater than the U S population suicide rate ? If so, when did the curves cross ?


Do you feel the increasing suicide rates are directly related to the specific war, its stronger desensitizing techniques and effects, or is it related to the increasing cultural contradictions, and some actual persecutions, boys and men face today ?


About women in combat, do value assessments translate straight across to moral imperatives ? Is there a Church teaching on women taking front line (combat likely) positions ? Just me, I would say on the abortion/front line question that when abortion has become acceptable, it is much more likely that women will be in combat roles, kind of a domino or slippery slope progression. Now the word "put" , to me, means draft. I suspect the demographics of US population will not allow that for quite some time yet, unless we face an overwhelming invasion force.

01/29/2013 new

(Quote) William-607613 said: There are 109,000 dead Iraqis and some 4,500 dead Americans as a result of the 2003...
(Quote) William-607613 said:




There are 109,000 dead Iraqis and some 4,500 dead Americans as a result of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Condoleeza Rice played no small part in that war.

--hide--


Condoleezza Rice is probably too connected to Bush and the war to win an election.

Posts 51 - 60 of 97