View Full Version : Pence to speak at a Pro Life/anti abortion rally.
Is this appropriate? Regardless of what his personal religious beliefs are, I don't think this is appropriate for a VP. As governor, he always tried to interject his religious beliefs.
This is why people did not want him to be VP - this is just a continuation of what he was doing as governor.
We were so glad to have him gone here in Indiana........but...........be careful what you wish for, right?
ToomuchStuff
1-27-17, 9:56am
Since when has interjecting ones religious belief's not been a part of politics?
While we have a separation of church and state (no one church), we have prayer in Congress, God in the pledge, and people asking politicians if they believe in god, while running for office (part of the reason you see them going to church).
I expect Pence's supporters aren't surprised, and neither are us Agnostics/Atheists.
Speaking of the sanctity of life doesn't necessarily need a religious slant, but even if his speech does and certain groups go apoplectic, that just shows that those groups don't truly understand the concept of separation of church and state.
Speaking of the sanctity of life doesn't necessarily need a religious slant, but even if his speech does and certain groups go apoplectic, that just shows that those groups don't truly understand the concept of separation of church and state.
True. I never understood the establishment clause to be a gag order. Public officials are as free as anyone to express their beliefs.
How would you feel if the VP spoke to a Pro Choice group and got them all fired up? You'd be just as outraged as some might be with the opposite. Even though I might not agree with abortion, I still don't think it's appropriate for the VP to do this.
This is carry-over from Pence making too many of his rulings in Indiana with a religious slant.....and it wasn't very well accepted by many of the people.
ToomuchStuff
1-27-17, 10:46am
How would you feel if the VP spoke to a Pro Choice group and got them all fired up? You'd be just as outraged as some might be with the opposite. Even though I might not agree with abortion, I still don't think it's appropriate for the VP to do this.
This is carry-over from Pence making too many of his rulings in Indiana with a religious slant.....and it wasn't very well accepted by many of the people.
You can only speak for you as far as I know. I wouldn't be surprised by that or outraged either.
How would you feel if the VP spoke to a Pro Choice group and got them all fired up? You'd be just as outraged as some might be with the opposite. Even though I might not agree with abortion, I still don't think it's appropriate for the VP to do this.
This is carry-over from Pence making too many of his rulings in Indiana with a religious slant.....and it wasn't very well accepted by many of the people.Politicians have used the bully pulpit to advance their desires and beliefs forever. People generally don't have a problem with it as long as they agree on whatever the subject at hand may be.
How would you feel if the VP spoke to a Pro Choice group and got them all fired up? You'd be just as outraged as some might be with the opposite. Even though I might not agree with abortion, I still don't think it's appropriate for the VP to do this.
This is carry-over from Pence making too many of his rulings in Indiana with a religious slant.....and it wasn't very well accepted by many of the people.
I wouldn't be particularly upset. I don't think any topic should be taboo,and I can live with people believing differently from me. I prefer to know where officials stand.
I understand. But I saw how far Pence took his tea-party-far right religious beliefs here and it just doesn't seem right to use it in his present job. But.........we're making bigger swings with that pendulum now, so it's not surprising.
My experience with far-right religious people is that they are so very rigid and closed-minded and inflexible and angry.
I'm sure some of you will say all people can be that way, but in IMHO, it happens much more with those people. I don't want to see the U.S. be led in that direction.
"Those people". It's so hard to be open, accepting and happy as long as they're around.
I knew someone would make an issue of "those people". That term just refers to the people I was talking about..but next time, I'll have to spell it out, I guess.
But..........I'm sure you would question it if someone in power was doing something you disagreed with. In my experience, some flexibility is important if we're all going to live here with different beliefs of all kinds.
I realize that abortion/pro choice doesn't really have any flexibility. But when it comes to extreme conservative religious people, I know what I've experienced, and flexibility is not in their vocab.
I understand. "Those people" are simply folks who don't share our opinions. We really should do something about them.
Hmmm.....not quite sure what you're saying Alan. That we should never talk about people who are different from us, or have different plans/ideas? Or are you bringing this up because you're one of those specific types of "those people"? Seriously....I'm not sure what your point is. I'm not saying to put these people to death.......Aren't we here to talk about things?
Hmmm.....not quite sure what you're saying Alan. That we should never talk about people who are different from us, or have different plans/ideas? Or are you bringing this up because you're one of those specific types of "those people"? Seriously....I'm not sure what your point is. I'm not saying to put these people to death.......Aren't we here to talk about things?Sure, talking about things is good for you and I, but not so much for Mike Pence. There outta be a law or something.
I'm not sure if I'm one of "those people" or not, you haven't told me yet.
I still don't know what you're trying to say, Alan. Are you saying it's not nice to disagree with the V.P. or say what I do or don't expect from a V.P.? Or, it's wrong to categorize anyone, even if it is common sense/instinctual to do so?
I still don't know what you're trying to say, Alan. Are you saying it's not nice to disagree with the V.P. or say what I do or don't expect from a V.P.? Or, it's wrong to categorize anyone, even if it is common sense/instinctual to do so?
Nope, not saying any of that. Just questioning why you'd rather not allow the Vice President to talk to a group you don't approve of and wondering what you mean when you talk of 'those people', even asking me if I'm one of 'those people', without defining them clearly enough for me to know. You imply that 'those people' are too close minded to be heard and I wonder if you'd hold yourself to the same standard. That would make a great discussion, don't you think?
I don't know the nature of the speech Pence will be giving, but in general, my gut feel is he isn't out of bounds speaking to an issue he believes in.
In fact, you can't even say that it's breaching the division between church and state because there are secular groups of people who are against abortion: http://www.prolifehumanists.org
I personally am pro-choice, but I respect the right of pro-lifers to keep the discussion open. (Personally, I feel the "sanctity of life" argument falls short when people are against abortion but all for eating animals raised in inhumane conditions or they're for the death penalty, but that's just me. I guess some lives are sacred and others aren't.) OK, off my soapbox now.
Is this appropriate? Regardless of what his personal religious beliefs are, I don't think this is appropriate for a VP. As governor, he always tried to interject his religious beliefs.
What is inappropriate about him speaking at this event, precisely?
Pence is an evangelical "christian" who views everything in terms of that. It makes me very nervous to have everything defined in terms of a religion. Yes, I suppose he has every "right" to do so in public office, but there's just so many of us who don't think like he does. I don't think anyone in the Whitehouse has actually done something like this before........and probably for good reason (since so many might disagree with it).
Maybe I just think the man is dangerous and his speaking at the anti-abortion rally bothers me....then again, him speaking anywhere about anything bothers me. I'm sure I'm in-part reacting from having been raised by a father who was a minister, but hated everyone and insisted that everyone was going to hell, who didn't believe what he believed. Pence, like him, is just too inflexible and dogmatic.
I believe Obama has addressed pro-choice groups before...
Should Pence simply not be allowed to speak in public? To anyone? What is he allowed to do, precisely? Does he have to set aside any personal moral/ethical/religious beliefs, any opinions formed from experience and life, before he's allowed to say a word?
Yes. No, not really. I guess he can say anything he wants. I don't have to like it. Like Trump, he's a dangerous man, but in a different way.
I'm sure I'm in-part reacting from having been raised by a father who was a minister, but hated everyone and insisted that everyone was going to hell, who didn't believe what he believed. Pence, like him, is just too inflexible and dogmatic.
Yes, we ALL have our personal filters.. I'm sorry your father was such a negative force in your life. "Religion" certainly has its share of inflexible, dogmatic adherents. Often "God" is a strong reflection of our upbringing--maybe that's why we refer to God as "God the father." I'm thankful for those religious people who walk the walk and bring joy and hope.
iris lilies
1-27-17, 6:19pm
Yes. No, not really. I guess he can say anything he wants. I don't have to like it. Like Trump, he's a dangerous man, but in a different way.
Thank you for seeing that just because you dont like what he has to say doesnt mean he should not say it. That is a pretty big idea, free speech, and that goes for free spech about religious topics.
I can see where one might want a leader to be more temperate in hot button issues, but I cant see how our leaders can avoid them, either. I dont see any leader, current or future, speaking eloquently enough to bridge the gap between prolife and anti-prolife, so I dont expect a leader to do that. Didnt the
annoited one, President Barak Obama, even say that controversy was "above his pay grade" and shrug his shoulders about it?
Thank you for seeing that just because you dont like what he has to say doesnt mean he should not say it. That is a pretty big idea, free speech, and that goes for free spech about religious topics.
... Didnt the annoited one, President Barak Obama, even say that controversy was "above his pay grade" and shrug his shoulders about it?
President Obama wasn't "anointed," as it might be said Trump was--by the Electoral College, having lost the popular vote. He was elected, fairly, by a good margin. Twice. And he served the country well without saber-rattling or hint of scandal, for eight years. As I've said before, he was better than we deserved.
President Obama wasn't "anointed," as it might be said Trump was--by the Electoral College, having lost the popular vote. He was elected, fairly, by a good margin. Twice. And he served the country well without saber-rattling or hint of scandal, for eight years. As I've said before, he was better than we deserved.
Good post, Jane.
Pence is a "Christian" hypocrite who picks and chooses which parts of the Bible he likes. He's all about the embryos, but not so much about helping real children who might be called "post born," having cut various programs designed to help families in Indiana. His hatred of gays must come from Leviticus, much quoted by his ilk--with its laughable rules about touching pigskin and wearing clothes made of two fibers, because Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. And what about the money-changers? They've been invited into the inner sanctum, rather than being thrown out of the temple. So much posturing, so little actual character.
Thanks Jane. For some reason, I'm unable to say things the way I want, but you did it for me.
catherine
1-28-17, 11:03am
Thanks Jane. For some reason, I'm unable to say things the way I want, but you did it for me.
I agree that Jane nailed it.
I think many, myself included, are looking for leaders who inspire our better selves. That is why I liked Bernie so much. JFK was the same, also Eugene McCarthy, Julian Bond, George Mitchell, and Ralph Nader. Edward R. Murrow in the media, Mike Wallace.
Those leaders inspired me over the years.
Teacher Terry
1-28-17, 3:48pm
I read that Reagan and one other president spoke by video at the same rally so there is a precedent set. When I was a social worker it always amazed me that pro-lifers could give a shit once kids are born. I worked with poor families and you would have these very same people against the programs to feed them, etc. So after a kid is born let it starve. Also occasionally I would have a kid on my caseload with severe developmental delays due to a low IQ that was not present at birth but a result of not getting adequate nutrition. That could not be reversed and was totally preventable.
ToomuchStuff
1-29-17, 10:39am
I think many, myself included, are looking for leaders who inspire our better selves. That is why I liked Bernie so much. JFK was the same,
So, JFK inspires you to do what, have affairs?
I ask because no one is perfect, is the point. To go to a place that I once read all threads seem to go to (yet it is apt, here), Hitler was a terror, yet he started the Autobahn, which inspired Ike for our highway expansion projects. (even someone horrible can do good)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.