What are the Real Reasons People Voted for Trump?

Crucible

Crucible

BANNED
Banned
glassjester said:
Or, as in Psalm 51:5, I was sinful from the time my mother conceived me.
Now how could a soulless corpse be sinful?
Click to expand...

How do you all manage to misinterpret verses so plainly :doh:

You should pay more attention to what you are reading, try again :rolleyes:

Again, this is a silly distraction anyway.
A soulless body is a corpse, first of all.
Click to expand...

The Church presumed all matters of ridiculous concepts, including Limbo and even 'dark souls' which never see the light and spend eternity in Purgatory with no ability to get out of it.

That is the madness that came with the concept of 'abortion being murder' because God does not look upon what is not consecrated. That was the whole point of infant baptism, and now there is no theology on the matter other than arbitrary notions- you feel that these aborted unborn should be saved even though they are sinners according to you, and therefore just sabotage your entire standing on the matter of salvation altogether.


I think that you all simply have extreme cognitive dissonance going on- holding to two things that are completely opposed to each other. Half the time, birth was hardly successful and the rate of a child living past the age of three years old was alarmingly low- so much so that it is solely responsible for the average life span to be forty when factored in.
They were used to dead babies, hombre.
 
Crucible

Crucible

BANNED
Banned
Traditio said:
I don't like minorities. I want a white America. I want to get rid of the brown people and strongly encourage the black people to leave.
Click to expand...

hitler276.jpg
 
Lighthouse

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
ok doser said:
he's more right than left
Click to expand...
And that's supposed to make him conservative?

it remains to be seen how conservative his presidency will be - don't forget, he's not a king - he has to work with congress to get legislation passed
Click to expand...
Even with a Republican president and a Republican congress abortion has not been criminalized in any form since Roe v. Wade. And the "decision" has not bee overturned no matter how many times the Republicans were the majority of the SCOTUS. In fact, it was a majority of Republicans that decided Roe v. Wade. And Republican governors that "legalized" abortion in cases of rape/incest to begin with.

And that's just on the issue of the right to life that's laid out in the Constitution.

here's what he planned back in october:

http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501451368/here-is-what-donald-trump-wants-to-do-in-his-first-100-days
Click to expand...
A wall is not the answer. For several reasons; The majority of immigrants come in by plane; including the illegal immigrants, immigrants from south of the border are not the top priority right now as they are not the dangerous ones [though as with all people some of them are], the border is not as set in stone as many would like to think [there are dozens of houses that lie directly on it, and what should happen if the border changes, as it has in the past?], illegal immigration from that region was not a problem until the prohibitions on immigration were implemented [prior to that people came and went on a daily basis, coming here to work and crossing back over the border at the end of the day to go home]. In other words, they didn't stay here until they weren't allowed to leave [because they left their papers at home, in Mexico].

indigenous people feel the same way about them pesky europeans they let in 500 years ago :idunno:

at this point trad, we're all in this together

better figger out a way to get along
Click to expand...
It's best to ignore the racist.

TweetyBird said:
What does pro-life have to do with the election? Why does it matter? We have abortion laws in place. They are not going to go away. A presidential candidate should not be held to either a pro-life or against it.
Click to expand...
Seeing as how the right to life is supported [not granted, because rights are default] by the Constitution and the President is held to said Constitution then yes he should be held to a pro-life stance when it comes to abortion/murder.

TweetyBird said:
TweetyBird said:
I don't need to "cite". It's been all over the news via video since the campaign began. I have watched as friends became more nervous. So a relative of mine went to a Trump rally to see for himself. While he was there, he noticed a friend of ours, a woman of color, a Trump supporter - not a fake, but an "honest-to-God-Trump-supporter". She was standing two rows ahead of my relative, quietly, not speaking. She had no signs, no campaign buttons. Just standing there watching and listening, not with others, alone. Security guards pushed their way through the crowd, grabbed her by the shoulders and forcibly ushered her out of the rally. She is traumatized. She has foreign adopted children and is panic stricken that they will be deported.

You pro-Trump supporters are blind and deaf to reality.
Click to expand...

I gave you a specific incident. A detailed one.
Click to expand...
I didn't vote for him, or for Hillary, but I still see no citation from a verified source of these specific claims against him least of all your "detailed" story. "Somebody I know saw it happen," is not a verified source. And it certainly isn't a citation as it is not verifiable.

And anyone who is "panic-stricken" that legal immigrants will be deported is an idiot.
 
glassjester

glassjester

Well-known member
Crucible said:
How do you all manage to misinterpret verses so plainly :doh:

You should pay more attention to what you are reading, try again :rolleyes:



The Church presumed all matters of ridiculous concepts, including Limbo and even 'dark souls' which never see the light and spend eternity in Purgatory with no ability to get out of it.

That is the madness that came with the concept of 'abortion being murder' because God does not look upon what is not consecrated. That was the whole point of infant baptism, and now there is no theology on the matter other than arbitrary notions- you feel that these aborted unborn should be saved even though they are sinners according to you, and therefore just sabotage your entire standing on the matter of salvation altogether.


I think that you all simply have extreme cognitive dissonance going on- holding to two things that are completely opposed to each other. Half the time, birth was hardly successful and the rate of a child living past the age of three years old was alarmingly low- so much so that it is solely responsible for the average life span to be forty when factored in.
They were used to dead babies, hombre.
Click to expand...

A body without a soul is dead.
Maybe that's a point worth debating separately.

Currently, the legal definition of murder does not depend one bit on the presence or absence of a soul. Does it?
 
Crucible

Crucible

BANNED
Banned
glassjester said:
A body without a soul is dead.
Click to expand...

That's just pulling at straws, playing at semantics.

Life and death become obsolete things when considering the soul away from a vessel. The oldest known Abrahamic belief of souls is that they were created long before man and are put into bodies.

Is a soul alive or dead beforehand? Let's go back to when God breathed life into Adam, and he became a living soul. But let's also consider that Jesus warned of He who can kill the soul.

It is obvious that man has a limited perception of 'life', but one thing that is certain is that pro-lifers hinge on interpretations that are not accurate or really benefit their standing. If the Jews have never historically called abortion murder than it's a strong implication that the notion simply never existed in their culture.
 
glassjester

glassjester

Well-known member
Crucible said:
That's just pulling at straws, playing at semantics.

Life and death become obsolete things when considering the soul away from a vessel. The oldest known Abrahamic belief of souls is that they were created long before man and are put into bodies.

Is a soul alive or dead beforehand? Let's go back to when God breathed life into Adam, and he became a living soul. But let's also consider that Jesus warned of He who can kill the soul.

It is obvious that man has a limited perception of 'life', but one thing that is certain is that pro-lifers hinge on interpretations that are not accurate or really benefit their standing. If the Jews have never historically called abortion murder than it's a strong implication that the notion simply never existed in their culture.
Click to expand...

The legal concept of "murder," does not depend upon the presence or absence (or even existence) of a soul.

Right?
 
Crucible

Crucible

BANNED
Banned
glassjester said:
The legal concept of "murder," does not depend upon the presence or absence (or even existence) of a soul.

Right?
Click to expand...

The concept of murder is killing a body that contains a soul. The earthly idea of death is when the soul departs from it's defective body, which is not really death but the end of one's physical presence.
This is a big part of the conundrum of interpreting 'life' and 'death' in the Bible.
 
G

Gurucam

Well-known member
glassjester said:
Are you saved or not?
Click to expand...

If I answer yes or no, what does that do for you, if we hold different ideas about what it means to be saved.

It is a fact that many people who perceive that they are Christians hold totally different view, about what it means to be saved, even among them.

Caution must be exercise, in order to have complete and correct communication. One liners can never convey correct information.

The least that you must do is, define your term, properly. It is foolish to assume that you and I share/hold the same definition of 'being saved'.

Hope you know what happens to one who ***-um-e. 'Assume is so easily converted to: '...' of 'u' and 'me'

We do want to be like Clinton and her media, pollster and extra political followers who totally misunderstood the U.S.A. population.

Since you asked that question, it was appropriate that I ask, Do you know what it means to be saved?

Then based on your idea, I can respond correctly.
 
glassjester

glassjester

Well-known member
After all, Gurucam, that's the disgusting conclusion you falsely attributed to the Church, as an implication of Catholic theology and moral teaching on abortion.

"If the murdered baby goes to Heaven, then abortion is a good thing." Something like that, wasn't it? Disgusting.

What's the matter with you?
 
G

Gurucam

Well-known member
glassjester said:
I was going to ask if you would consider it a morally good thing to do, if someone went around killing "saved" people, so they would go straight to heaven.
Click to expand...

No one can kill or not kill saved people (those under Grace of God) unless God permits it.

However not every one on earth, is under Grace of God. Some people are under other human leaders (i.e. leaders like Peter and his descendants):

Galatians: 5 KJV N.T.
4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

These humans (who are not under Grace of God) can be kill by an ordinary person (one who is not under grace of God) and God would not be involved. Such people will not be received by Jesus and into the mansion which Jesus has prepared in God's house for His followers.

If an ordinary person is kill through abortion (or other wise) and such a one (like an unborn child or a child) is guaranteed delivery into God's kingdom of heaven, that is nothing short of a blessed act for the following reason:

1. as far as God is concerned the only purpose of life on earth is to earn the right to go to (i.e. qualify for) His heaven after death on earth. If abortion of an unborn child fulfills that purpose then the best result have been achieved, very effortless:

Hebrews 9
27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment.

Galatians: 6 King James Version (KJV)
7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
8 For he that soweth to his flesh (i.e. save his physical life) shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit (give up his physical life, i.e. die in abortion or other wise, for his spirit life) shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

Judgment and dispatched will be as follows (either to heaven or to hell):

Matthew: 25 King James Version (KJV)
31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

If there is a fail-safe way (through aborting unborn children) to get to heaven, then to deny that path to any human is seriously Anti-God and a serious sin.

The question is: Do you believe that aborted unborn children all go to heaven? Do you believe this Catholic position?

If the Catholic position is correct it is totally foolish to let your misguided self serving sadness and wish to have these person stay on earth, when they can go to heaven so effortlessly.

Indeed if (as Catholics say) aborted children go to heaven, guaranteed, then regardless as how cruel abortion may seem to some humans, it is clearly not cruel, at all, it is certainly serving the highest of God's will . . . because among those who are not aborted, only a few make it to heaven. The very very great majority do not make it.

Matthew: 10 King James Version (KJV)
28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Matthew: 7 King James Version (KJV)
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

The above is saying that earthly death is nothing. Why sacrifice a direct path to an eternity in heaven simply for 70 to 80 years on earth, which come with a very slim chance of heaven and therefore a very big chance of going to hell?
 
Last edited:
G

Gurucam

Well-known member
glassjester

Peter had advised Jesus to save His life by not going to Jerusalem where He will be crucified. This identified Peter to be Satan, to Jesus. Peter was identified to be Satan by Jesus because he savourest physical life and not spiritual life:

Matthew: 16 KJV N.T.
21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.
22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

Matthew: 10 KJV N.T.
39 He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

Matthew: 16 King James Version (KJV)
25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.

John: 12 KJV N.T.
25 He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.

Peter & Co. remained committed to saving physical life and loosing spiritual life. That is, Peter & Co. remained committed to 'sauourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men'.

Have no doubt, to savourest physical life is to 'sauourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men'. This is to be Satan, like Peter.

Following Peter & Co. is iffy, to say the least. I would not want to follow Peter & Co. and I would not advise any one to follow Peter & Co.

To deny an unborn child an abortion is to deny him or her a free and guaranteed passage to heaven. This is the Catholic position. This is also to doom him or her to a very very likely passage to hell, with Satan, inside the depth of earth, for all eternity.

Following Peter & Co. seems very 'iffy'. They seem to be recruiting for Satan, in hell . . . with their anti-abortion and anti-delivery to heaven stance.
 
Last edited:
glassjester

glassjester

Well-known member
Gurucam said:
If an ordinary person is kill through abortion (or other wise) and such a one (like an unborn child or a child) is guaranteed delivery into God's kingdom of heaven, that is nothing short of a blessed act for the following reason:

1. as far as God is concerned the only purpose of life on earth is to earn the right to go to (i.e. qualify for) His heaven after death on earth.
Click to expand...

That's sick, Man. Seriously. That's sociopathic.

Do you go around killing saved people, to send them to Heaven? If not, why not?
 
G

Gurucam

Well-known member
glassjester

According to the Lord Jesus, only Satan will put human physical life on a pedestal, as you anti-abortionist are doing.

Matthew: 16 KJV N.T.
21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.
22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

You guys are 'savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men' and you are justifying your Anti-Christ stance with limited human emotional and anti-scriptures arguments and foolishness.

You are posturing like lemon used car salesmen to sell a clearly lemon idea.

The measure of human life, in any democratic country, is a matter for democratically determined laws of the land and a justice system administrated by Saints. There is and can be, no absolute positions . . . Oh foolish one.
 
G

Gurucam

Well-known member
glassjester said:
That's sick, Man. Seriously. That's sociopathic.

Do you go around killing saved people, to send them to Heaven? If not, why not?
Click to expand...

I am not a Catholic. I do not hold the belief that when people die as children or unborn children, they go to heaven. I know of no such revelation in the Holy KJV N.T.

However for Catholics, it cannot be sick to have one's physical body aborted (when one is still an unborn child) so that one has a guaranteed entry to heaven. Is this not a Catholic canon?

1 Corinthians:15 KJV N.T.
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

How is that sick? You who want to prevent that divine act is not only sick. You are also Satanic:

Peter had advised Jesus to save His life by not going to Jerusalem where He will be crucified. This identified Peter to be Satan, to Jesus. Peter was identified to be Satan by Jesus because he savourest physical life and not spiritual life:

Matthew: 16 KJV N.T.
21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.
22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

Why would you want to deny anyone a guaranteed passage to heaven simply because of your foolish emotions and self serving motives?

Is it not true that any one who dies (any which way) as a child or unborn child, goes to heaven? Is this not the Catholic position?

Please leave these aborted children alone and let them go to heaven and you stay here in your sick, suffering, Satanic and hell bent life. Do not grudge them and seek to drag them to your sad, unfortunate and foolish status.

Clearly you have no clue what heaven is like. You perceive heaven to some kind of hell and therefore a sad place.

If one cannot perceive heaven, one cannot go there. One who fear and/or look down on delivery to heaven, goes to hell. One who chooses earth instead of heaven ends inside the earth and not in heaven.

Where ever you treasure, that is where you end.

You foolishly perceive that leaving earth to go directly to heaven is some kind of sad and bad event and lost. Going to heaven is a real big deal. The biggest deal:

Luke: 13 King James Version (KJV)
28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.

Is it not true that any one who dies (any which way) as a child or unborn child, goes to heaven? Is this not the Catholic position?

There is a bad end for those who 'savourest not the things that be of God (spiritual life), but those that be of men (physical life)'.

Hebrews 9
27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment.

Galatians: 6 King James Version (KJV)
7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
8 For he that soweth to his flesh (i.e. save his physical life) shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit (give up his physical life, i.e. die in abortion or other wise, for his spirit life) shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top