Explosive Question…..

Explosive Question: Should Women’s Suffrage Be Abolished?

Facebook
Twitter
Google+
http://angelqueen.org/2016/10/18/explosive-question/
Get AQ Email Updates
AQ RSS Feed

7 comments on “Explosive Question…..

  1. Democracy inevitably leads to total moral corruption and collapse, anyway. America was far gone by 1861 and ceased to be a Republic then and there.

    Aside from the actual rate of chronological events, would it have made any substantial difference in American history had suffrage been denied women, allowing for the fact that hideous harpies’ votes eventually outnumbered those of the Donna Reed / June Cleaver variety?

    Only archaeologists will be able to guess at that one a thousand years hence.

    Considering Pius XII’s command, under penalty of mortal sin if not obeyed, that Italian men AND women vote against a communist takeover in 1946 & 1948, it is a rather moot point to even bring up the question in Catholic circles.

    Ann Coulter even stated that the fastest way to destroy the Democrat party was to revoke the 19th Amendment.

  2. Not that it matters, but don’t take my first response to mean that in any way I disagree with the prelate’s analysis, quoted in the article. He was absolutely right, if even a bit overdrawn in a few assumptions: There have been brilliant and magnificent women heads of state in Church history, even Saints. And, then, there is a book in the OT named ” Judith” and Our Lord’s reference to an heroic female sinner who aided the Israelites when they were still good guys.

    Nevertheless, they were monarchs and that is irrelevant to a discussion of women’s suffrage and the manifest undesirability thereof.

    As even the blogger notes, the whole point is merely academic, now.

    Counter-factual historical fiction is an interesting parlor game but America’s fate was sealed when the Brits kicked the French and Spanish out.

  3. Came here looking for a question about Catholic uses for actual explosives. I’m not gonna lie, I’m a little disappointed.

  4. I’ll posit the idea that only taxpayers should get to vote, i.e., folks whose taxes exceed their sum total of welfare (food, housing) subsidies. States could have their own rules, but Fed elections should only involve taxpayers.

    Racist, you say? Get a job.

    • I;ll take it a step further. I think the founding fathers (and most state constitutions) had it right to begin with.
      Only white landowners could vote in most states (for local state and in federal elections) in the early days of the Republic.
      I would extend that to any landowner regardless of race. today.
      And yes, Catholics were denied voting rights in many states back then, but to be honest It wouldn’t hurt my feelings any to see some “Catholics” today denied voting rights. Including many conciliar bishops of the USCCCP.
      But overall I agree with you

  5. I haven’t read the article, but I remember when Obama ran in 2008. There were ladies interviewed who said they’d vote for him for reasons such as he had a nice smile. One 90 year old black lady was voting for the first time that year because there was a black candidate. Many people this year will probably vote for Hillary because she’s a woman.
    Many people don’t vote even when they can.
    The system should be reworked in some way.

Leave a Reply