[Jesus Christ through our Church has long exhorted us to maximal participation in public life (CCC, 1915). Indeed, we share the call to claim the world for Jesus Christ. We are called to build the Kingdom. This takes place in the social/political arena. Accordingly, it is incumbent upon us to "speak the language." I am appealing below to commonly accepted principles of "good" and "correct" to address some serious flaws of progressive-liberal thinking. Let's have the conversation.]
1) If contraception is a "personal" and "private" matter, why should the government (the rest of us) be expected to pay for it? How is such expectation not discrimination? Deprivation of my liberty?
2) If impulses are beyond one's control, such that government (the rest of us) should pick up the tab, why discriminate against all the other impulses? Shouldn't the government pay off my credit card? Or the cell phone I chucked at the wall?
Either we can control ourselves or we can not. And if we can, are we not personally responsible and accountable?
3) Across the board, shouldn't one's LIFE interest surpass another's LIBERTY interest? Whether having to stop at a stop sign, or building code requirements, or innumerable laws governing treatment of one's body (medical)... is this not the basis of every law?
Brain waves are detected as early as 18 days after conception. Often before a mother even knows she's pregnant. Where is the logic and humanity of abortion... that has resulted in 55 million lives killed (and their mothers, wounded)? If the "protection of human life and not it's destruction" is not "the first and only legitimate object of good government" (Jefferson), what is?
4) Why is it that virtually every leading liberal was in favor of the border wall prior to Trump? Which of us do not vet areas entrusted to us? Do progressive-liberals not have security for their homes? Places of work?
Are we not living in more dangerous times than ever before-- with enemies bent on doing harm? Has this not already been evidenced among illegal immigrants?
5) If your rising star, Ocasio-Cortez (the ordinary "girl from the Bronx" from a wealthy hood) succeeded in a 70% tax on the wealthy, how does that incentivize pursuit of excellence? And why should Congress be exempted from this?
6) Beyond real needs of those who really fall through the cracks-- for which the local community can not provide, which entitlements should the government (us) provide for? And how are these suppose to be paid for? And by whom? And is it sustainable?
And if you believe in these so much, why don't you voluntarily contribute?
There's no difference between liberals and conservatives in caring for those most in need-- only in how best to do it.
(a) NYC Mayor De Blasio said wealth is in the wrong hands-- what keeps him from dolling out some of his $2 million? (conservatives dramatically surpass their liberal counterparts in terms of giving). (b) What socialist example can you give, anytime, anywhere, surpassing the net benefit of those who live in America?
7) If America is not exceptional, if it is so bad, why are people streaming here?
8) What do the ten most dangerous cities in America have in common? They're run by Democrats. Of the top 25, all but 3 are Democrat. How do you not recognize the decisive difference between policies based on entitlement and those predicated of empowerment? Those that give a hand-out, and those that offer a hand-up?
9) Based upon treatment of visiting speakers in higher education, and the reaction of students, and general dispositions of politicians and media towards their political counterparts... how do you not see that the greatest intolerance and violence are perpetrated by those waving the flags of "tolerance" and "peace"?
10) If traditional marriage and family life, the Judeo-Christian foundation of our nation, are the greatest predictors of a successful community... including economics, education, and health, why do you oppose their promotion? (which entail the greatest respect for individual pursuit of their conception of God)
11) No one is suggesting two consenting adults can't legally choose to do what they want behind closed doors, but if the standard for LEGAL benefits deriving from one's conception of "marriage" is what anyone wants, what have you to say about anyone else's conception... multiple spouses (polyamory), marriage to animals, or inanimate objects? How does questioning these not make you hateful, discriminatory and the like?
12) If you dismiss gender on the basis of anatomy and physiology, if sexuality has nothing to do with body parts belonging in certain places and functioning in certain ways, and not in others... on what basis would you dispute a surgeon putting a heart where, for instance, a colon belongs and calling that "health"?
[No argument surpasses the one the body has already made: Same-sex bodies do not fit together, nor can they ever accomplish what they are undeniably designed to accomplish. If a child was trying to force two, same-shaped puzzle pieces together, we would all regard it as reason to help him put it together and, further, to label it "correct" against the other, "incorrect."]
13) Why are those educated in your beloved public schools, driven by your socialized system of unionized teachers, maintaining your progressive-liberal standards (an icon of your "Amerika")... so undeniably, abysmally failed compared to private sector/home school education?
14) How do you not recognize that it is impossible NOT to judge.... an evaluation of reason? (to disagree is to prove my point-- you'd be judging me) The liberal-progressive regime is intrinsically wrong-- assailing the very premise they need: Conviction in an objective/universal truth. What matters is to judge correctly.