5 Non-Negotiable Issues

[graciew]

This reminds me of something else I heard.

*“I have never understood the expression non-negotiable values. Values are values, and that is it. I can’t say that, of the fingers of a hand, there is one less useful than the rest. Whereby I do not understand in what sense there may be negotiable values.” *- Pope Francis

If the pope doesn’t get it, I think you are on solid ground not understanding it as well.

Technically , values are non negotiable in a dispute for ex.
Non negotiable is that over which we are not willing to make concessíons.
" In the battlefield"money can be a " value ". And sacred…

   How does one explain the priceless ? Our children for example ? Their safety ?
     I believe sometimes " non negotiable" sounds loud and clear on the "ground ": you just do not go there. Period.Off limits.
I can t help thinking about paradise...we had to go to that one tree when we could enjoy everything else...
  How does the list sound to you ?

 

[pnewton]

  How does the list sound to you ?

I find it unequal. Abortion is not on the same level as gay marriage for me. Few things can vie with abortion as few things take more lives. Immigration and poverty is on a higher level than homosexual legislation, as they affect the value of life more.

 

[Lost_Sheep]

Another election with no one to vote for. Sad.

I don’t want to drift off topic, but I respectfully suggest that not voting at all is not a good decision.

Like it or not, one of these candidates is going to be the next President of the United States whether you vote or not so you might as well take the opportunity to help decide who that will be. Stop looking for the *perfect *candidate and just vote for whoever you think is the best candidate.

For example, supposed you have two candidates running for the same office. Candidate A is Pro-Abortion and Pro-Gay Marriage. Candidate B is Anti-Abortion but Pro-Gay Marriage.

Both have positions that are against Church teachings but since one of them is going to win anyway, you might as well vote for the one whose positions are closest to Church teachings; in this case, Candidate B.

Just a thought…

 

[commenter]

Responses like this make me embarrassed to be a Catholic.

No. There is no wiggle room on helping the poor. Read the Gospel again.

Yes, there is “wiggle room” on helping the poor: yes we obligated to do it, but there are different possible approaches. Sincere, informed Christians have taken very different positions both in terms of personal actions, actions by the Church, and as citizens, all of which are aimed at helping the poor and preventing poverty.

Abortion is different. Yes, there are lots of other activities we can and should do besides making abortion illegal. But making it illegal is non negotiable. On that, there is no discretionary choices. We have to do that specific thing.

We just have to do other things in addition, for expectant moms, for poor families, etc.

 

[jediliz]

Awke, here is an organization i support that helps the working poor, near homeless and homeless.

mtkserves.org

It is not government run. That’s my point… Jesus asks us to help, he doesnt say to make the government do EVERYTHING…since they won’t even help our homeless vets before allowing 10,000 more refugees in. Why can’t we help our own citizens as well? And our country’s safety and security should also be top priority.

 

[KathleenGee]

Leaf…

Gay couples cannot conceive children, and it is a statement of truth in the Natural Law that one human being on the entire planet comes from a mother and a father.

There were some children who went before Congress who were raised in same sex homes, and they spoke of the difficulties they had.

We have to recognize as well the reality of our own psycho sexual identity.

Otherwise, we are reducing such reality to the tyranny of subjective relativism, and the culture of death…that does not bring forth life. This is what Pope Benedict is also directing.

Any Catholic should not claim to be Catholic and privately be against abortion but work to pass laws to, in essence, allow pre birth infanticide, any more a Catholic should support and uphold gay marriage. There has never been such a precedent in human history, except the bath houses of perverted emperors and their entourage.

In the end, authentic Catholicism becomes counter cultural, and then that is when persecution begins.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Leaf…

Gay couples cannot conceive children, and it is a statement of truth in the Natural Law that one human being on the entire planet comes from a mother and a father.

There were some children who went before Congress who were raised in same sex homes, and they spoke of the difficulties they had.

I agree completely. I was not defending same sex marriage. My comments were directed at the statement that lesser issues are moot if these five are not addressed first.

 

[Mulligan2]

Any and all Catholics should recognize that neither of the major parties in the US is aligned with Catholic teachings.

Sadly, with this being an election year, I suspect we’ll see a plethora of threads arguing the opposite.

 

[graciew]

I find it unequal. Abortion is not on the same level as gay marriage for me. Few things can vie with abortion as few things take more lives. Immigration and poverty is on a higher level than homosexual legislation, as they affect the value of life more.

I see.
Election times are usually difficult.
I agree with the bishops . It is forbidden territory and we cannot even fathom its consequences.
I do not know if thisbis written before every election ,every four years.
When a candidate grasps the value if life ,the rest would come naturally.
But I understand you have your candidates ,and your issues.
What I do not understand is how under a flag of freedom , a candidate might leave his christian view aside. That ,I do not understand .
Thanks for answering.

 

[graciew]

I agree completely. I was not defending same sex marriage. My comments were directed at the statement that lesser issues are moot if these five are not addressed first.

Not completely addressed as you pointed out.
But if the line is not drawn at those points ,the rest of the message may be easily manipulated and ultimately become distorted or eventually lost.
An NGO without God.
But I have little idea of your options and God knows your struggles

 

[pnewton]

What I do not understand is how under a flag of freedom , a candidate might leave his christian view aside. That ,I do not understand .

This assumes candidates with Christian values to begin with. I fear these are in a minority these days.

 

[graciew]

This assumes candidates with Christian values to begin with. I fear these are in a minority these days.

Thank you .

 

[KathleenGee]

Grace and Newton…

Thanks for your sharing! I live in a most hostile secular environment. I just wrote a letter to a public institution and gave a copy to my parish priests and our local Catholic newspaper. As people are so quiet, all I could reference was myself, so it probably sounded edgey and me focused…but it spoke the truth.

People are afraid to speak out.

I think there is still too much silence on the genocide of Christians in America. And many Catholics are caving into accepting gay marriage.

 

[graciew]

I value Mr Newton’s perspectives a lot ,as I do all of yours who live and struggle daily there. Only that I have been reading his for years and we happened to share many threads.
It is not same sex attraction I am.messing with. We all have our struggles and God knows His children. It is marriage that was out of boundaries.
We grew up knowing for example that a married man and a priest were forbidden territory , and that was it . A few healthy NO did not make us stupid or totalitarian. And we obeyed. Period.
Now we “need” to “know” or " understand" everything.
Where has trust gone ? If Mr Newton knows his job and I trust him ,under particular situations ,for ex.I just obey
Guess I am ageing…it shows in old concepts…
Bless you.

 

[commenter]

Originally Posted by gracepoole View Post
"Maybe because they were identified as “non-negotiables” by a Republican.

Any and all Catholics should recognize that neither of the major parties in the US is aligned with Catholic teachings".
(end, quote from gracepoole)

Certain issues were identified as non-negotiables by Catholic laity involved in social justice, in consultation with bishops. That does not mean the list made by Catholic Answers and others is the only Catholic way of assessing the situation, but it is a Catholic viewpoint, not any one party. The non negotiables of Catholic Answers were Catholic belief long before any US political party supported or opposed them.

It is true, and always has been true, that neither US political party totally embraces Catholic Social Teaching. That does not mean they are both equally opposed to Catholic Social Teaching. One party may be more compatible to Catholic Social Teaching than the other. There are individuals in both parties that are more, or less, compatible to Catholic Social Teaching than their party as a whole.

There also are regional complications, but on the whole it makes sense to support one (imperfect) party rather than the other. The most important parts of Catholic social teaching are those that are not already being supported by the Media. The Church’s job often is to affirm whatever truths are currently being forgotten.

 

[Genesis315]

Any proposed law that prescribes or gives official sanction to a moral evil should never be voted for. Likewise, while some evils can be tolerated for a greater good, there are some evils where there ordinarily is no greater good to be had by tolerating it (take murder, for example). These intolerable evils would also be “non-negotiable.”

Then there are broader issues, like caring for the poor. There are many morally licit ways to care for the poor. Catholics can certainly argue and, since we are not omniscient, disagree about which way is the most effective way given the circumstances (provided certain fixed principles are maintained).

Furthermore, the way our system is set up and given the state of our society, most candidates seem to support a mix of goods and evils. It can definitely be difficult to choose the least problematic candidate. I guess the best we can do is measure and compare the number and gravity of the evils and the number and merit of the goods they each support and do the best we can to determine who will advance the common good more.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

It can definitely be difficult to choose the least problematic candidate. I guess the best we can do is measure and compare the number and gravity of the evils and the number and merit of the goods they each support and do the best we can to determine who will advance the common good more.

This is a good start, but I would add one more consideration, and that is the probability that each of the goods or evils at stake will come to pass. A high probability for a medium good might be better than a lower probability for a greater good. And similarly for evils.

 

[commenter]

This is a good start, but I would add one more consideration, and that is the probability that each of the goods or evils at stake will come to pass. A high probability for a medium good might be better than a lower probability for a greater good. And similarly for evils.

Except, with God all things are possible. The secular world tells us we should set goals based on our probability of success - pick the “low hanging fruit”. For Christians, of course, it is different. It may be tempting to spend all our lobbying effort on what will likely be popular - nicer sidewalks, say - rather than the seemingly impossible task of overturning abortion in the USA. But some things are a matter of life and death.

There usually is a partial measure of progress. Abortion is much harder to obtain in some places in the USA than in others. There are partial legal and political defeats every year on abortion, and the same will happen on Same Sex Marriage. Ultimate victory won’t come about in one fell swoop, but as an accumulation of smaller victories combined with gradual change in attitudes and information. The US government might, or might not, seek to impose abortion and same sex marriage on poor countries in years to come; depends on which party gets elected. The biggest enemy of prolife is the attitude that, well that issue may have been important in the 1970s, but now it is resolved, so let’s move on to 2016 issues. Not so!

Many babies have been saved as a result of partial victories in the courts, in politics, and on the sidewalks.

Christ never said His followers would be honored as relevant or significant by secular society.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Except, with God all things are possible. The secular world tells us we should set goals based on our probability of success - pick the “low hanging fruit”. For Christians, of course, it is different. It may be tempting to spend all our lobbying effort on what will likely be popular - nicer sidewalks, say - rather than the seemingly impossible task of overturning abortion in the USA. But some things are a matter of life and death.

There usually is a partial measure of progress. Abortion is much harder to obtain in some places in the USA than in others. There are partial legal and political defeats every year on abortion, and the same will happen on Same Sex Marriage. Ultimate victory won’t come about in one fell swoop, but as an accumulation of smaller victories combined with gradual change in attitudes and information. The US government might, or might not, seek to impose abortion and same sex marriage on poor countries in years to come; depends on which party gets elected. The biggest enemy of prolife is the attitude that, well that issue may have been important in the 1970s, but now it is resolved, so let’s move on to 2016 issues. Not so!

Many babies have been saved as a result of partial victories in the courts, in politics, and on the sidewalks.

Christ never said His followers would be honored as relevant or significant by secular society.

It is incorrect to say that only the secular world recognizes probabilities. The Catholic Church also recognizes probabilities, for example in justifying when it is permissible to attempt an armed rebellion against an unjust ruler. The Church says that one of the criteria is that you must have a reasonable expectation of success. This expresses the idea of probability in just the way you said is only done by the secular world.

 

[graciew]

It is incorrect to say that only the secular world recognizes probabilities. The Catholic Church also recognizes probabilities, for example in justifying when it is permissible to attempt an armed rebellion against an unjust ruler. The Church says that one of the criteria is that you must have a reasonable expectation of success. This expresses the idea of probability in just the way you said is only done by the secular world.

Could this reasonable expectation of success be related to the chance people might be easily killed or imprisoned by the attempt? In other words,to protect persons that might risk their lives with little preparation or thought ?
So I mean,probabilities in relation to life .
I do not know,just asking. I’ d never heard of this before,Leaf.