A question for conservative catholics!

[TEPO]

At this point my friend allow me to return the LOLOLOL

James, that was too funny!

 

[TEPO]

that is simply not true. capitalism favors ignoble practices. in the capitalist world the only thing that matters is profit, how you achieve it is up to you. therefore according to the capitalist world view it is perfectly acceptable to cheat, lie, exploit, as long as you get your profit. a big multi-national knows that by building one of it’s stores in a small town it will destroy the small businesses of the area, yet they do it anyway just to make a few extra bucks.
capitalists are experts at rationalising their greed. my parents are from a poor eastern european country, and currently that nation’s economy is being ruined by multi-national corporations who set up their businesses there. the excuse of the capitalists is “well we give them jobs”, when in reality its basically a mild slavery. not to mention it ruins homegrown businesses so the people are practically forced to buy from the multi-nationals.
its the same way in america, a capitalist wont think twice about laying off his workers just so he can ship their jobs off to india.
to get ahead in the world of capitalism you basically have to con and use people.

thats why im not a communist.
but socialism makes it an objective for the people to have the basics. different types of socialism take different approaches on how to achieve this goal.
but the reason socialism is superior to capitalism is because socialism clearly defines meeting the needs of the people as a set goal, whereas capitalism has no set goal except for accumulating more wealth.

im not saying i support soviet style socialism, but the people were better off under the USSR than the Czar!

please define “creativity” and 'the common good", are light brites and weight loss smoothies really that much of a bonus to human development? and havent you ever heard of planned obsolescence? you see, having no regulations actually stifle and restrict creativity because a business is not interested in making a car which will never break down, on the contrary it wants to make sure that car eventually breaks down so youll have to buy a new one.

someperson555, can you name one example where a purely Socialist state has achieved that which you claim it does?

 

[Arizona_Mike]

Can you point me to those teachings? Perhaps a passage from the Catechism?

ARTICLE 7
THE SEVENTH COMMANDMENT

You shall not steal.186

2401 The seventh commandment forbids unjustly taking or keeping the goods of one’s neighbor and wronging him in any way with respect to his goods. It commands justice and charity in the care of earthly goods and the fruits of men’s labor. For the sake of the common good, it requires respect for the universal destination of goods and respect for the right to private property. Christian life strives to order this world’s goods to God and to fraternal charity.

I. THE UNIVERSAL DESTINATION AND THE PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF GOODS

2402 In the beginning God entrusted the earth and its resources to the common stewardship of mankind to take care of them, master them by labor, and enjoy their fruits.187 The goods of creation are destined for the whole human race. However, the earth is divided up among men to assure the security of their lives, endangered by poverty and threatened by violence. The appropriation of property is legitimate for guaranteeing the freedom and dignity of persons and for helping each of them to meet his basic needs and the needs of those in his charge. It should allow for a natural solidarity to develop between men.

2403 The right to private property, acquired or received in a just way, does not do away with the original gift of the earth to the whole of mankind. The universal destination of goods remains primordial, even if the promotion of the common good requires respect for the right to private property and its exercise.

2404 "In his use of things man should regard the external goods he legitimately owns not merely as exclusive to himself but common to others also, in the sense that they can benefit others as well as himself."188 The ownership of any property makes its holder a steward of Providence, with the task of making it fruitful and communicating its benefits to others, first of all his family.

2405 Goods of production - material or immaterial - such as land, factories, practical or artistic skills, oblige their possessors to employ them in ways that will benefit the greatest number. Those who hold goods for use and consumption should use them with moderation, reserving the better part for guests, for the sick and the poor.

also, from Pope Paul VI:

“Private property or some ownership of external goods confers on everyone a sphere wholly necessary for the autonomy of the person and the family, and it should be regarded as an extension of human freedom” (Gaudium et Spes, 71; emphasis added).

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html

also, from the Blessed Pope John Paul II:

Another important principle is undoubtedly that of the right to “private property.”[16] The amount of space devoted to this subject in the encyclical shows the importance attached to it. The Pope is well aware that private property is not an absolute value, nor does he fail to proclaim the necessary complementary principles, such as the universal destination of the earth’s goods.[17]

On the other hand, it is certainly true that the type of private property which Leo XIII mainly considers is land ownership.[18] But this does not mean that the reasons adduced to safeguard private property or to affirm the right to possess the things necessary for one’s personal development and the development of one’s family, whatever the concrete form which that right may assume, are not still valid today. This is something which must be affirmed once more in the face of the changes we are witnessing in systems formerly dominated by collective ownership of the means of production, as well as in the face of the increasing instances of poverty or, more precisely, of hindrances to private ownership in many parts of the world, including those where systems predominate which are based on an affirmation of the right to private property. As a result of these changes and of the persistence of poverty, a deeper analysis of the problem is called for, an analysis which will be developed later in this document.

osjspm.org/document.doc?id=77

Similarly, the role of private property in achieving the universal destination of goods will only work “provided that a man’s means be not drained and exhausted by excessive taxation…The right to possess private property is derived from nature, not from man; and the State has the right to control its use in the interests of the public good alone, but by no means to absorb it altogether. The State would therefore be unjust and cruel if under the name of taxation it were to deprive the private owner of more than is fair” (Rerum Novarum, 47)

 

[boclucky14]

well that much is true. but the system can prevent certain effects of sin.

I thought I’d chime in on this comment. I don’t know any human system that prevents any effects of sin. Can you tell me what system does this, and how?

 

[amDg0815]

so many catholics on here whom ive argued with about social issues in the past
have opposed socialism. they have an unconditional support for a thatchartist unregulated free market. therefore they like to go by a social darwinist world view. they oppose any sort of nationalisation or redistribution of wealth.

HOWEVER according to catholic teaching, property is a RIGHT of every human being. therefore if catholics want the government to operate on catholic moral principles then it is the moral duty of catholics to oppose capitalism. since capitalism doesnt hold private property to be a “right”. so i dont see how some catholics can justify being free market republicans.
just like people have a right to life, the catholic doctrine clearly states that people have a right to property, so just like its the government’s obligation to guaruntee a citizen his right to life, so it follows that it is a government’s duty to guaruntee it’s citizen’s property.

The so-called Catholics you are arguing with probably have never read THE POPES AGAINST MODERN ERRORS so they are unqualified to answer any questions. These so-called Catholics biggest error is their misunderstanding of the doctrine of infallibility as it pertains to the ordinary and universal magesterium spelled out at the First Vatican Council. Because they think that the pope in union with the bishops when they are speaking on faith or morals can never err they themselves are being led futher and futher into error by the non-infallible authentic magesterium. There is far more to the doctrine of infallibility than merely the topic of faith or morals. They have no idea that there is an infallible magesterium and a non-infallible magesterium. They treat every proposal as if it was proposed as being ‘divinely revealed’ and carried the weight of anathema.

 

[someperson555]

The so-called Catholics you are arguing with probably have never read THE POPES AGAINST MODERN ERRORS so they are unqualified to answer any questions. These so-called Catholics biggest error is their misunderstanding of the doctrine of infallibility as it pertains to the ordinary and universal magesterium spelled out at the First Vatican Council. Because they think that the pope in union with the bishops when they are speaking on faith or morals can never err they themselves are being led futher and futher into error by the non-infallible authentic magesterium. There is far more to the doctrine of infallibility than merely the topic of faith or morals. They have no idea that there is an infallible magesterium and a non-infallible magesterium. They treat every proposal as if it was proposed as being ‘divinely revealed’ and carried the weight of anathema.

 

[JRKH]

that is simply not true. capitalism favors ignoble practices. in the capitalist world the only thing that matters is profit, how you achieve it is up to you.

I am a part of the “Capitalist world” and deny that “the only thing that matters is profit”. Any capitalist worth his salt recognizes this. Yes, profit and loss are the most basic indicator of the health of a company but they are not the only indicators.

therefore according to the capitalist world view it is perfectly acceptable to cheat, lie, exploit, as long as you get your profit.

There are capitalists who believe this and those who do not…This is, as I have repeatedly pointed out, a problem of individuals - not the system.

a big multi-national knows that by building one of it’s stores in a small town it will destroy the small businesses of the area, yet they do it anyway just to make a few extra bucks.

Yes - but they would not do this if the locals continued to buy from their neighbors and ignored the big store…No body forces the local shopper to go to the big box store instead of to the store of their neighbor.
So - where does the fault lie here?? Is it with the multi-national chain? or is it with the local shopper who turns their back on their neighbor’s store and their neighbor’s welfare??

I bolded my answer here because this is one of the core issues…You wish to blame the big capitalist for something that is brought about by the actions of the small capitalists neighbors…

capitalists are experts at rationalising their greed. my parents are from a poor eastern european country, and currently that nation’s economy is being ruined by multi-national corporations who set up their businesses there. the excuse of the capitalists is “well we give them jobs”, when in reality its basically a mild slavery. not to mention it ruins homegrown businesses so the people are practically forced to buy from the multi-nationals.

How are the local businesses ruined??? Is it in some way similar to what I relate above?

its the same way in america, a capitalist wont think twice about laying off his workers just so he can ship their jobs off to india.

There is truth in this - but there are trade offs even in this. Should I, as a Christian, begrudge the people in India the jobs???

to get ahead in the world of capitalism you basically have to con and use people.

This is a flat out not true…Perhaps many people do this…but you do not “have to”…There are a great many good honest people running businesses and most of them emphatically do NOT want more governmental interference in the running of their businesses,

well what do you think they meant?

Arizona Mike seems to have addressed this aspect.
I have not had time to go through all that he provided - it seems to come from several sources…

thats why im not a communist.
but socialism makes it an objective for the people to have the basics. different types of socialism take different approaches on how to achieve this goal.
but the reason socialism is superior to capitalism is because socialism clearly defines meeting the needs of the people as a set goal, whereas capitalism has no set goal except for accumulating more wealth.

So - in your socialist ideal…Who determines what constitutes, “meeting the needs of the people”? This is an easy thing to say…but what does that mean???

im not saying i support soviet style socialism, but the people were better off under the USSR than the Czar!

Those who lived (and died) under Stalin might disagree with you…

please define “creativity” and 'the common good", are light brites and weight loss smoothies really that much of a bonus to human development?

So - in your system would these things not be provided? Would these things…bought and enjoyed by many people with their money never be produced because those in charge decided that they are not necessary to, “meet the needs of the people”?

and havent you ever heard of planned obsolescence? you see, having no regulations actually stifle and restrict creativity because a business is not interested in making a car which will never break down, on the contrary it wants to make sure that car eventually breaks down so youll have to buy a new one.

Again I must chuckle because - having lived for 57 + years, I can well remember when a car with 100,000 miles on it was considered “wore out”. Today cars are regularly kept longer and rack up 200,000 miles or more…Even car items that are expected to wear out are better…years ago a 30,000 mile tire was considered a good tire. Today 60,000 mile tires are more the norm.
These things did not come about because some government agency determined what was necessary to meet the needs of the people. These things occurred through competition. The better car lasted longer and so sold more…more economical…Sales fell for the inferior car make and models…who hustled to improve their product and so forth…
It was the people who determined what was necessary and they voted with their dollars.

socialism does not advocate handouts,

And Capitalism does not advocate lying cheating and exploitation.

what you are referring to is welfare capitalism, which i agree is absurd. healthy people who don’t work should not have access to the basics provided by the government.

When you guarantee to “meet the needs of the people”…you remove the incentive to work. They may show up, they may even put out a “quota” quality suffers and the ability to “meet the needs of the people” suffers as a result…
It is just as bad - maybe worse - than a handout.

however people should also not have to work 9-5 just to survive.

I agree. But again - “just to survive” can mean a number of different things…I know people who think “cable” TV is a necessity of life…People who - no matter how much they might make - is gone within a week and grouse that they “don’t make enough”. Then I’ve seen these same people turn down overtime when offered…a chance to get ahead and they “don’t have the time”…
On the other side, I’ve known those who work low paying jobs, maybe even two jobs and always seem happy, have what they want because they don’t need much. If overtime is offered they grab it because then they can put a little aside for a rainy day. They never complain.

Again - I come back to this idea of yours about “meeting the needs of the people”. I can guarantee that no matter what you provide to the first person I described, they will moan and groan that it is not enough…And they will do a lousy job at their work to boot…

it is the greatest problem of a capitalistic society that instead of spending their time perfecting the arts and sciences,

a) Arts and Science are never perfected.
b) not everyone is cut out for the arts or sciences…Most people are better suited for fishing…

people are slaving away just to pay their mortgage. and why? just so they will have some place to sleep while they are not at work.

And have something to pass on to their children…

well that much is true. but the system can prevent certain effects of sin.

Each system will prevent some effects and aggravate other effects.

I said it before and I will say it again…The problem is not the system. The problem is the people in the system.

Peace
James

 

[Arizona_Mike]

ARTICLE 7
THE SEVENTH COMMANDMENT

You shall not steal.186

2401 The seventh commandment forbids unjustly taking or keeping the goods of one’s neighbor and wronging him in any way with respect to his goods. It commands justice and charity in the care of earthly goods and the fruits of men’s labor. For the sake of the common good, it requires respect for the universal destination of goods and respect for the right to private property. Christian life strives to order this world’s goods to God and to fraternal charity.

I. THE UNIVERSAL DESTINATION AND THE PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF GOODS

2402 In the beginning God entrusted the earth and its resources to the common stewardship of mankind to take care of them, master them by labor, and enjoy their fruits.187 The goods of creation are destined for the whole human race. However, the earth is divided up among men to assure the security of their lives, endangered by poverty and threatened by violence. The appropriation of property is legitimate for guaranteeing the freedom and dignity of persons and for helping each of them to meet his basic needs and the needs of those in his charge. It should allow for a natural solidarity to develop between men.

2403 The right to private property, acquired or received in a just way, does not do away with the original gift of the earth to the whole of mankind. The universal destination of goods remains primordial, even if the promotion of the common good requires respect for the right to private property and its exercise.

2404 "In his use of things man should regard the external goods he legitimately owns not merely as exclusive to himself but common to others also, in the sense that they can benefit others as well as himself."188 The ownership of any property makes its holder a steward of Providence, with the task of making it fruitful and communicating its benefits to others, first of all his family.

2405 Goods of production - material or immaterial - such as land, factories, practical or artistic skills, oblige their possessors to employ them in ways that will benefit the greatest number. Those who hold goods for use and consumption should use them with moderation, reserving the better part for guests, for the sick and the poor.

Sorry, I forgot to cite the source when I quoted this earlier - it is from the Catholic Catechism.

 

[cmforte]

so many catholics on here whom ive argued with about social issues in the past
have opposed socialism. they have an unconditional support for a thatchartist unregulated free market. therefore they like to go by a social darwinist world view. they oppose any sort of nationalisation or redistribution of wealth.

HOWEVER according to catholic teaching, property is a RIGHT of every human being.

The Catechism doesn’t say this

WRONG again. The Catechsim doesn’t say this. It states that governments have the duty to guarantee ACCESS to resources like property.

-Chris

 

[ryecroft]

Hmmm… Where would the government get all this “property” to redistribute? Ahh… from those that have… cool… I’ll take half of your property please.

Sounds like we’d also have ‘required’ charity - that first word - ‘required’ makes it no longer charity - also, what would my purpose of working so hard for my family be if someone is just going to be able to come along and take it - it’s bad enough with taxes! Let me keep my 62% (minus the 8-10% sales tax - whoops plus state tax in some states) - wait a minute - maybe I like this idea - hey buddy - I’ll take half of all your stuff too!

 

[Zosimus41]

There is a common problem with every form of government/social system that has been tried…That common problem is “sin”…
Not really what you are asking about but thought I’d toss it in…

AMEN

And if you dont believe that one just turn on your televsion.

 

[cmforte]

ARTICLE 7
THE SEVENTH COMMANDMENT

You shall not steal.186

2401 The seventh commandment forbids unjustly taking or keeping the goods of one’s neighbor and wronging him in any way with respect to his goods. It commands justice and charity in the care of earthly goods and the fruits of men’s labor. For the sake of the common good, it requires respect for the universal destination of goods and respect for the right to private property. Christian life strives to order this world’s goods to God and to fraternal charity.

I. THE UNIVERSAL DESTINATION AND THE PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF GOODS

2402 In the beginning God entrusted the earth and its resources to the common stewardship of mankind to take care of them, master them by labor, and enjoy their fruits.187 The goods of creation are destined for the whole human race. However, the earth is divided up among men to assure the security of their lives, endangered by poverty and threatened by violence. The appropriation of property is legitimate for guaranteeing the freedom and dignity of persons and for helping each of them to meet his basic needs and the needs of those in his charge. It should allow for a natural solidarity to develop between men.

2403 The right to private property, acquired or received in a just way, does not do away with the original gift of the earth to the whole of mankind. The universal destination of goods remains primordial, even if the promotion of the common good requires respect for the right to private property and its exercise.

2404 "In his use of things man should regard the external goods he legitimately owns not merely as exclusive to himself but common to others also, in the sense that they can benefit others as well as himself."188 The ownership of any property makes its holder a steward of Providence, with the task of making it fruitful and communicating its benefits to others, first of all his family.

2405 Goods of production - material or immaterial - such as land, factories, practical or artistic skills, oblige their possessors to employ them in ways that will benefit the greatest number. Those who hold goods for use and consumption should use them with moderation, reserving the better part for guests, for the sick and the poor.

also, from Pope Paul VI:

“Private property or some ownership of external goods confers on everyone a sphere wholly necessary for the autonomy of the person and the family, and it should be regarded as an extension of human freedom” (Gaudium et Spes, 71; emphasis added).

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html

also, from the Blessed Pope John Paul II:

osjspm.org/document.doc?id=77

Similarly, the role of private property in achieving the universal destination of goods will only work “provided that a man’s means be not drained and exhausted by excessive taxation…The right to possess private property is derived from nature, not from man; and the State has the right to control its use in the interests of the public good alone, but by no means to absorb it altogether. The State would therefore be unjust and cruel if under the name of taxation it were to deprive the private owner of more than is fair” (Rerum Novarum, 47)

I see nothing here that condemns capitalism or free market conservatism (except for the “free” part…it appears the Church advocates legitimate regulation, as do I). Nor does any of it support the government taking one’s property or resources by force and redistributing it to others.

-Chris

 

[yellow8yellowM]

therefore according to the capitalist world view it is perfectly acceptable to cheat, lie, exploit, as long as you get your profit…

You are confusing capitalism with strict libertarianism. Even most libertarians would agree that there should be laws against cheating, lying, and exploitation.

socialism makes it an objective for the people to have the basics…socialism clearly defines meeting the needs of the people as a set goal, whereas capitalism has no set goal except for accumulating more wealth.

Again, I think it is important to draw the line between an economic system and a system of government. Neither socialism nor capitalism have goals as economic systems. A government (or group of people) who favor one or the other may have a goal in mind when they decide to institute one. Because of this, you can never say that socialism nor capitalism “worked” by looking at poverty levels, or GDP, or anything else for that matter. You can only say that something worked if it had a goal; therefore you can only say that a particular government succeeded or failed.

People should also not have to work 9-5 just to survive.

I’m sorry but this is absurd. Since the beginning of human history people have had to work sun-up to sun-down, every day, with no weekends, and no child-labor laws, in order to survive. And when I say survive I mean survive. For the majority of human history we worked so that we wouldn’t die that day or the next. We worked so that we would not freeze to death or starve when winter came.

We should give thanks to God every day that we don’t have to hunt for our meat or grow our own wheat. I could go on and on here with our amenities, but just remember how recent it was that indoor plumbing was common in our country, and keep in mind how uncommon it still is in the rest of the undeveloped parts of the world.

There is nothing more frustrating to me than people who believe they deserve something. Nobody deserves to not have to work 9-5 just to survive. Nobody deserves a weekend. Nobody deserves the unalienable rights that God has given to us: life, liberty, and property/pursuit of happiness. We deserve nothing. God has given us everything. We should be thankful for it. Next, we should be thankful for our ancestors who toiled the fields, fought wars, and died so that we should be have what we have today. We should thank our parents for conceiving us.

 

[JRKH]

People should also not have to work 9-5 just to survive.

Great response…

As I was reading it…I thought of the OT law that afforded ONE day of rest out of every seven…and this in a largely agrarian society with none of the modern conveniences we have to make our lives easier -

Peace
James

 

[Julian0404]

so many catholics on here whom ive argued with about social issues in the past
have opposed socialism. they have an unconditional support for a thatchartist unregulated free market. therefore they like to go by a social darwinist world view. they oppose any sort of nationalisation or redistribution of wealth.

HOWEVER according to catholic teaching, property is a RIGHT of every human being. therefore if catholics want the government to operate on catholic moral principles then it is the moral duty of catholics to oppose capitalism. since capitalism doesnt hold private property to be a “right”. so i dont see how some catholics can justify being free market republicans.
just like people have a right to life, the catholic doctrine clearly states that people have a right to property, so just like its the government’s obligation to guaruntee a citizen his right to life, so it follows that it is a government’s duty to guaruntee it’s citizen’s property.

To correct your misinformed view of property rights in the USA, please be advised that in the USA we operate under an “allodial” system of property ownership - which is an intentional separation from the “feudal” system of ownership from which many founders of America fled in order to secure and own property. Under the allodial system everyone is allowed to own property, and are restricted only in our ability to secure property as equal opportunity does not guarante equal outcome.
And as for the government “guaranteeing” life - we know that is not possible as the government has failed miserably in that regard with abortion - which is a very clear picture of the dangers of a social based government. If a republic such as the USA cannot seat a governement that will perform as the majority of the population desires, then going “socialist” will not bring reforms to the better, but only the worse.

 

[RobbyS]

so many catholics on here whom ive argued with about social issues in the past
have opposed socialism. they have an unconditional support for a thatchartist unregulated free market. therefore they like to go by a social darwinist world view. they oppose any sort of nationalisation or redistribution of wealth.

HOWEVER according to catholic teaching, property is a RIGHT of every human being. therefore if catholics want the government to operate on catholic moral principles then it is the moral duty of catholics to oppose capitalism. since capitalism doesnt hold private property to be a “right”. so i dont see how some catholics can justify being free market republicans.
just like people have a right to life, the catholic doctrine clearly states that people have a right to property, so just like its the government’s obligation to guaruntee a citizen his right to life, so it follows that it is a government’s duty to guaruntee it’s citizen’s property.

There is no such thing as free market capitalism, or at least no government which practices it. There are socialist, and even communist governments. So in actuality, those “conservatives” who believe in economic freedom are resisting government that imposes ever more controls over their businesses and at the same time, over their lives. “Socialism” is short hand for statism: the belief that the only legitimate authority within at state resides in the government and the laws it makes, that no institution within the boundaries of that state has any rights not given it by the state. This applied to the France of the late 19th century and the radical liberals who ran it, who did believe in unfettered capitalism. The Church was pushed aside as a social actor in a way that it is being pushed aside in the USA today, although we have not reached the place where France has been since Napoleon the Great.

 

[ricks1948]

There is, in my opinion, a better alternative than both capitalism and socialism. thevenusproject.com/en/the-venus-project
Let me quote from there: “The problems we are faced with today cannot be solved politically or financially because they are highly technical in nature. There may not even be enough money available to pay for the required changes, but there are more than enough resources. This is why The Venus Project advocates the transition from a monetary-based society to the eventual realization of a resource-based global economy.”

The “Venus project” is a utopian dream, and they don’t believe in God, or any religion, they replace it with some kind of cosmos (let the force be with you) goobogoobly gook.

 

[white_sheep]

I’m sorry but this is absurd. Since the beginning of human history people have had to work sun-up to sun-down, every day, with no weekends, and no child-labor laws, in order to survive. And when I say survive I mean survive. For the majority of human history we worked so that we wouldn’t die that day or the next. We worked so that we would not freeze to death or starve when winter came.

This is wrong. It has never taken that much work to procure the necessities of life. People work more now because either 1) they are underpaid, or 2) they want luxuries.

 

[PrayHarder]

This is wrong. It has never taken that much work to procure the necessities of life. People work more now because either 1) they are underpaid, or 2) they want luxuries.

I know this is getting off topic, but seriously? You think some peasant farmer in the middle ages got the benefit of days off and wage and labor laws? You think the Jews in the Bible worked hard because they wanted luxuries? Let’s look even more recently. My wife grew up behind the Iron Curtain. She and her family had to work hard every day to survive. Because if you messed up, didn’t pay attention to your duties, and didn’t stretch everything you had to its limit, guess what? You didn’t have food. Do you think some villager in India, China, or the Middle East has the luxury of letting someone else take care of things for a day so they can relax?

I’m sorry, but human history makes our 40-hour work week look like a vacation.

 

[yukonbrad]

Firstly, politics are NOT a part of our faith. We are united in our belief in Christ not by any political agenda or ideology. I often find it very disturbing how some in the USA seem to define our faith in terms of politics this is not what it means to be Catholic.