ADVERTISEMENT

The pope says abortions and guns are bad

BanjoSaysWoof

HR MVP
Dec 2, 2017
1,747
3,437
113

For the specific subset that defines itself as pro life conservative Catholic, are you going to now join the Democratic Party to fight against guns since you won the abortion fight?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlackNGoldBleeder

For the specific subset that defines itself as pro life conservative Catholic, are you going to now join the Democratic Party to fight against guns since you won the abortion fight?
So abortions with a gun would be the worst?
 
I'm with the pope on this.

It's time to be pro-life. Before birth and after birth. From the womb to the tomb.

Banning abortion is just a small part of this. Another thing is universal healthcare. Preventing unsafe people and criminal people from accessing firearms. We should get rid of the death penalty and stop people from being viewed in utilitarian manner.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: HawkFan1298
I'm with the pope on this.

It's time to be pro-life. Before birth and after birth. From the womb to the tomb.

Banning abortion is just a small part of this. Another thing is universal healthcare. Preventing unsafe people and criminal people from accessing firearms. We should get rid of the death penalty and stop people from being viewed in utilitarian manner.

so First question, are you a “single issue” voter? (I.e abortion, guns, taxes, etc?)

if so, and pro-life is that issue, does allegiance/alliance/alignment shift from the gop (since it’s won the abortion battle) to the democrats who are more in line with the “womb to tomb” benefits? And def more aligned on gun violence to a Catholic pro life position?
 
The pope doesn't represent the American Jesus.

jesusrifle090915_465_401_int.jpg
 
so First question, are you a “single issue” voter? (I.e abortion, guns, taxes, etc?)

if so, and pro-life is that issue, does allegiance/alliance/alignment shift from the gop (since it’s won the abortion battle) to the democrats who are more in line with the “womb to tomb” benefits? And def more aligned on gun violence to a Catholic pro life position?

Ok a lot to clear up here. First of all I want to clarify that I'm not Roman Catholic. I'm LCMS Lutheran. I just agree with the Roman Catholic's on life issues. I wish the LCMS fleshed out it's life issues as much as the RCC does. However most other churches in the US are highly US based and not international (like the RCC and Eastern Orthodox) and therefore they flesh out their views in order to fit with one of the two political parties rather than trying to fit scripture.

I could almost be a Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox but there are some unrelated theological sticking points that prevent me from being one with those churches. However I generally have a great deal of respect for them because they don't create their views to fit into American politics.

I'm not a single issue voter. I kind of flip flopped between the parties and I think I tried even harder to fit in to one when I just really didn't fit in to either. . . my presidential ticket looks like this.

'00 Gore
'04 Kerry
'08 McCain

'12 Johnson (in hindsight this was a dumb vote that I only did because I didn't like Obama or Romney at the time. At this point I'd kill to be able to vote for either one of them. In terms of political views

'16 Maturen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Maturen)

'20 Biden - Because of Trump, I would have preferred to vote for Brian Carroll (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_T._Carroll)

As for right now because the GOP is currently controlled by the cult of Trump I feel duty bound to vote for the Democrats simply because they are not the group trying to undo democracy. An overturning of Roe is about the only positive thing that I view as having come out of the Trump administration.
 
Ok a lot to clear up here. First of all I want to clarify that I'm not Roman Catholic. I'm LCMS Lutheran. I just agree with the Roman Catholic's on life issues. I wish the LCMS fleshed out it's life issues as much as the RCC does. However most other churches in the US are highly US based and not international (like the RCC and Eastern Orthodox) and therefore they flesh out their views in order to fit with one of the two political parties rather than trying to fit scripture.

I could almost be a Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox but there are some unrelated theological sticking points that prevent me from being one with those churches. However I generally have a great deal of respect for them because they don't create their views to fit into American politics.

I'm not a single issue voter. I kind of flip flopped between the parties and I think I tried even harder to fit in to one when I just really didn't fit in to either. . . my presidential ticket looks like this.

'00 Gore
'04 Kerry
'08 McCain

'12 Johnson (in hindsight this was a dumb vote that I only did because I didn't like Obama or Romney at the time. At this point I'd kill to be able to vote for either one of them. In terms of political views

'16 Maturen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Maturen)

'20 Biden - Because of Trump, I would have preferred to vote for Brian Carroll (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_T._Carroll)

As for right now because the GOP is currently controlled by the cult of Trump I feel duty bound to vote for the Democrats simply because they are not the group trying to undo democracy. An overturning of Roe is about the only positive thing that I view as having come out of the Trump administration.

we’re kinda on the same page. For background….

I am a northeast conservative (give me a balanced budget, all the social issues I am pretty left leaning when it comes to government’s role, but right leaning for myself…. I.e. I wouldn’t want anyone I impregnate to get an abortion, but I realize it’s not the states role to jump in). I spend time on the wrestling side of the forum, and have an appreciation for people from your neck of the woods that I didn’t have before a lot of those interactions. Iowa’s land isn’t my cup of tea but a lot of Iowan people are my tribe.


00 I wasn’t old enough to vote but I would have voted gore.

04- Kerry

08- abstain (I live in a blue state. Obama was too “polished real estate broker” for my liking, and Palin was too nuts. I did love McCain though)

12- Romney

16- abstain

20- sleepy Joe (while holding my nose).


I have a fascination with Iowa politics. For some reason the Iowa primary acts as the bar for presidential candidates. Without y’all’s approval, the other 340mn of us can’t get who we want. For better or worse, it’s important to understand how Iowans intend on voting. This issue has been the core issue of single issue Catholics for a generation. I am wondering if this papal statement would shift those “boots on the ground” to the gun control side.

American evangelism is a whole different animal though.
 
I'm with the pope on this.

It's time to be pro-life. Before birth and after birth. From the womb to the tomb.

Banning abortion is just a small part of this. Another thing is universal healthcare. Preventing unsafe people and criminal people from accessing firearms. We should get rid of the death penalty and stop people from being viewed in utilitarian manner.
Again, America is a secular nation and that's the biggest part of this.
 
while we may not agree on the states role, I genuinely respect that your position is consistent and applies beyond the scope of the womb to guns, healthcare and the like.
I’m now a practicing Catholic. I’ve always liked the Church’s pro-life stance of “from the womb to the tomb.” For me, assuring all Americans have access to affordable healthcare and ending gun violence are just as important as eliminating abortion.
 
Right, but in the developing world?

I understand the church likes the new members most of all but from a practical/environmental/sustainability standpoint a little birth control wouldn’t be a bad thing.
I don’t disagree, but I doubt the Church is going to change its stance in the interest of being more…contemporary.
 
The reality is a lot of modern Catholics use some form of birth control.
To get confirmed as a high schooler, you have to sit through a practicing Catholic couple talking about their experience with NFP. Were they hot? Guy was an Iowa 6.5 gal was Iowa 7. Were they fun? Idk, I was focusing really hard on not getting an erection while this couple was talking about their sex life and I was sitting next to this attractive fellow confirmation candidate from a rival high school.
 
I love it when religious thread run out of oxygen. They always come full circle to WTF?
 
It would be helpful if the Church would reverse course and say contraception is acceptable.

Not really. Pope Paul VI predicted in 1968 what would happen if birth control became widespread when "the pill" came on the scene.

Since sex is decoupled from procreation, he predicted it would result in more STD's, more divorces, more single Mothers, seeing women as sex objects and the general moral decline of society.

He basically predicted contemporary America.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoosierhawkeye
we’re kinda on the same page. For background….

I am a northeast conservative (give me a balanced budget, all the social issues I am pretty left leaning when it comes to government’s role, but right leaning for myself…. I.e. I wouldn’t want anyone I impregnate to get an abortion, but I realize it’s not the states role to jump in). I spend time on the wrestling side of the forum, and have an appreciation for people from your neck of the woods that I didn’t have before a lot of those interactions. Iowa’s land isn’t my cup of tea but a lot of Iowan people are my tribe.


00 I wasn’t old enough to vote but I would have voted gore.

04- Kerry

08- abstain (I live in a blue state. Obama was too “polished real estate broker” for my liking, and Palin was too nuts. I did love McCain though)

12- Romney

16- abstain

20- sleepy Joe (while holding my nose).


I have a fascination with Iowa politics. For some reason the Iowa primary acts as the bar for presidential candidates. Without y’all’s approval, the other 340mn of us can’t get who we want. For better or worse, it’s important to understand how Iowans intend on voting. This issue has been the core issue of single issue Catholics for a generation. I am wondering if this papal statement would shift those “boots on the ground” to the gun control side.

American evangelism is a whole different animal though.

I doubt this shifts views. It's not like the RCC position on these matters is new. I think a lot of people who don't pay much attention to this stuff come across a statement like this and feel like it's some sort of change or shift in their views. When it's really not a shift or change at all. It's just a re-hash of what they have been saying for more then 50 years now.

Anyone who actually cares which would be a very small amount of hardcore Catholics who's views are completely matched with that of the church's already knew this.

FYI I'm not really from Iowa other then having been born there. My mom was from Iowa. My dad never really gave a lick about sports. . . still doesn't. So I was kind of raised watching the Hawkeyes with my mom. Sort of an odd feeling to me because I feel like most people inherit their fandom and love for sports from their dad. But even though my dad was 100% in my life and is still married to my mom, I never really watched sports with my dad, always with my mom from my earliest memories.

As for my dad it's sort of strange I don't think I've met a guy who cares about sports less then him.
 
I’m now a practicing Catholic. I’ve always liked the Church’s pro-life stance of “from the womb to the tomb.” For me, assuring all Americans have access to affordable healthcare and ending gun violence are just as important as eliminating abortion.

Abortion is seen as a more important issue because all rights begin with the right to life.

 
Not really. Pope Paul VI predicted in 1968 what would happen if birth control became widespread when "the pill" came on the scene.

Since sex is decoupled from procreation, he predicted it would result in more STD's, more divorces, more single Mothers, seeing women as sex objects and the general moral decline of society.

He basically predicted contemporary America.


I agree for the most part but the thing that I view as the problem is that easy contraceptives just allowed the not wealthy among us (the wealthy have been doing this stuff for all of human history) permission to have our more base desires and instincts come out.

Getting wealthy doesn't make someone evil it just allows someone to be evil with less consequences.

And the whole idea of a general moral decline I think is relative so I try not to look at it like that. Granted there is a moral decline in terms of sex and marriage. But at the same time racism and hatred which are also sins are being more shunned and condemned then ever before. Prior to the 60's far more people may have been raised in 2 parent households but at the same time open racism and hatred was seen as acceptable.

To me the sins du jour just change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HawkFan1298
I disagree with this part.

Innocent people, sure. But there are a whole lot of bad people in this world whose lives should be terminated as quickly as possible, for the betterment of everyone else.

Only if the only way to contain their evil is via killing them which for the most part is not the case.

The only acceptable reason to take a life is to protect life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HawkFan1298
I agree for the most part but the thing that I view as the problem is that easy contraceptives just allowed the not wealthy among us (the wealthy have been doing this stuff for all of human history) permission to have our more base desires and instincts come out.

Getting wealthy doesn't make someone evil it just allows someone to be evil with less consequences.

And the whole idea of a general moral decline I think is relative so I try not to look at it like that. Granted there is a moral decline in terms of sex and marriage. But at the same time racism and hatred which are also sins are being more shunned and condemned then ever before. Prior to the 60's far more people may have been raised in 2 parent households but at the same time open racism and hatred was seen as acceptable.

To me the sins du jour just change.

Yeah.

I think the Pope in 1968 was completely accurate about what happens when a culture tries to decouple sex from it's natural purpose, which is procreation.

America in 2022 is a full blown pornographic culture.
 
Yeah.

I think the Pope in 1968 was completely accurate about what happens when a culture tries to decouple sex from it's natural purpose, which is procreation.

America in 2022 is a full blown pornographic culture.
I think we're more violent and greedy than lustful.
 
I think greed has gotten better since the 1980's although it's still rampant.

Violent crime was declining dramatically since the 1990's.

Yeah American crime stats. We've also, as citizens of a democracy theoretically in charge of our leadership, killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians since the early 00s who were never a threat to us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HawkFan1298
Yeah American crime stats. We've also, as citizens of a democracy theoretically in charge of our leadership, killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians since the early 00s who were never a threat to us.

Yeah. We did that in WW2 and Vietnam, too.
 

For the specific subset that defines itself as pro life conservative Catholic, are you going to now join the Democratic Party to fight against guns since you won the abortion fight?
First of all, the last time I checked, Andrea Tornielli is not the pope.

Second, as a Catholic, I've learned that contrary to what many non-Catholics believe, not everything that is said by a member of priesthood is unchallengable "doctrine", and thus, we're not actually some army of automatons that just follows a script. Honestly, I sort of thought those kinds of assumptions had gone out the window with turn-of-the-last-century anti-Catholic bigotry.

But third, let's take your point seriously. What the Catholic church does proscribe - and to my knowledge, most Abrahamic faiths proscribe - is fairly simple: thou shall not kill. Now, can guns facilitate killing? Sure, though they do have alternate uses. But, please sleep comfortably (I will), knowing that while I respect our civil (non-Catholic) society's decision and traditions permitting gun ownership, which have actually been incorporated into our foundational law, I have never shot a gun, do not own a gun, and have no interest in doing so - in part because I don't find them interesting, and in part because I'd never actually use one against another human being, no matter how much shit they threatened to take from my house or my life. So, I'm doing my small part, which I hope makes you feel better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HawkFan1298
Ok a lot to clear up here. First of all I want to clarify that I'm not Roman Catholic. I'm LCMS Lutheran. I just agree with the Roman Catholic's on life issues. I wish the LCMS fleshed out it's life issues as much as the RCC does. However most other churches in the US are highly US based and not international (like the RCC and Eastern Orthodox) and therefore they flesh out their views in order to fit with one of the two political parties rather than trying to fit scripture.

I could almost be a Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox but there are some unrelated theological sticking points that prevent me from being one with those churches. However I generally have a great deal of respect for them because they don't create their views to fit into American politics.

I'm not a single issue voter. I kind of flip flopped between the parties and I think I tried even harder to fit in to one when I just really didn't fit in to either. . . my presidential ticket looks like this.

'00 Gore
'04 Kerry
'08 McCain

'12 Johnson (in hindsight this was a dumb vote that I only did because I didn't like Obama or Romney at the time. At this point I'd kill to be able to vote for either one of them. In terms of political views

'16 Maturen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Maturen)

'20 Biden - Because of Trump, I would have preferred to vote for Brian Carroll (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_T._Carroll)

As for right now because the GOP is currently controlled by the cult of Trump I feel duty bound to vote for the Democrats simply because they are not the group trying to undo democracy. An overturning of Roe is about the only positive thing that I view as having come out of the Trump administration.
Dude, you sound like you could be the next Jaroslav Pelikan!!!!
 
Yeah.

I think the Pope in 1968 was completely accurate about what happens when a culture tries to decouple sex from it's natural purpose, which is procreation.

America in 2022 is a full blown pornographic culture.

I think it's what happens when you take away the consequences to some extent.

I don't believe procreation is the only natural purpose of sex, even in a religious context. I do believe that the freedom offered by contraceptives has given people more of a permission to be irresponsible making the whole concept of sexual responsibility seem foreign. But I also don't think that is the only thing that has done that.

The whole culture of individualism needs to be considered.

To me the problem with the RCC's opposition to contraceptives is that while it has given some people more permission to act badly. . . the people that are going to listen anyway are not the ones that you have to worry about.

Someone who's willing to forgo contraceptives because the Church says not to use them is not likely the person who if allowed to use them is going to use them as that permission slip to act badly. If you have a married couple that is listening to the church on contraceptives but you suddenly tell them it's ok to use them. It's not like they are going to suddenly take them and decide to become swingers.
 
I think it's what happens when you take away the consequences to some extent.

I don't believe procreation is the only natural purpose of sex, even in a religious context. I do believe that the freedom offered by contraceptives has given people more of a permission to be irresponsible making the whole concept of sexual responsibility seem foreign. But I also don't think that is the only thing that has done that.

The whole culture of individualism needs to be considered.

To me the problem with the RCC's opposition to contraceptives is that while it has given some people more permission to act badly. . . the people that are going to listen anyway are not the ones that you have to worry about.

Someone who's willing to forgo contraceptives because the Church says not to use them is not likely the person who if allowed to use them is going to use them as that permission slip to act badly. If you have a married couple that is listening to the church on contraceptives but you suddenly tell them it's ok to use them. It's not like they are going to suddenly take them and decide to become swingers.

Well, procreation is the biological purpose of sex. When that is taken off the table through contraception, the other person becomes degraded to a sex object.
 
I’m now a practicing Catholic. I’ve always liked the Church’s pro-life stance of “from the womb to the tomb.” For me, assuring all Americans have access to affordable healthcare and ending gun violence are just as important as eliminating abortion.

I get this vibe from a lot of new/young Catholics.

First of all, the last time I checked, Andrea Tornielli is not the pope.
Second, as a Catholic, I've learned that contrary to what many non-Catholics believe, not everything that is said by a member of priesthood is unchallengable "doctrine", and thus, we're not actually some army of automatons that just follows a script. Honestly, I sort of thought those kinds of assumptions had gone out the window with turn-of-the-last-century anti-Catholic bigotry.

But third, let's take your point seriously. What the Catholic church does proscribe - and to my knowledge, most Abrahamic faiths proscribe - is fairly simple: thou shall not kill. Now, can guns facilitate killing? Sure, though they do have alternate uses. But, please sleep comfortably (I will), knowing that while I respect our civil (non-Catholic) society's decision and traditions permitting gun ownership, which have actually been incorporated into our foundational law, I have never shot a gun, do not own a gun, and have no interest in doing so - in part because I don't find them interesting, and in part because I'd never actually use one against another human being, no matter how much shit they threatened to take from my house or my life. So, I'm doing my small part, which I hope makes you feel better.

I assumed (wrongfully?) a statement from Vatican City is authorized by the pope.

as far as bigotry against Catholics, hold your horses. I was very specific when I said single issue pro life Catholic conservatives. The single issue voter exists, and as they won that battle, do they move on to the next?

I own lots of guns. That’s the reason I believe in gun control/restricting access.

it’s not a Catholic bashing thing at all. If this statement was released by a notable figure (again, statement from Vatican City I assume is authorized by the pope. If not, my bad) from the American Evangelical movement, I would have posed the same question.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT