Not according to the Republicans. A poor family saddled with tens of thousands of dollars of medical debt is treated the same as someone who ran up those thousands on a credit card doing some high living.
Uh no! What you are referring to is in the case of two candidates being pro-death it is then permissable as a tie breaker to vote for one that will invoke less harm.
Only if it doesn’t serve to enslave the recipients. Slavery is out.
Family and Medical leave act is an appeasement law due to the failure of society to allow woman to stay at home rather than work. (JPII agrees by the way) I see it as a band-aid approach.
Republicans want to return the decision making to the people - as in “We, the people…”
You mean they’re considering giving up their favored plutocracy? That would be news.
Pro-death as in pro-abortion and pro-death penalty, of course.
Wow—it’s just that simple.
I’d rather see an orthodox episcopacy these days than one that is merely conservative (rightist) or leftist.
I said it was weak, clearly I wasn’t saying it was the best thing since sliced bread. I said even with weak things like this, the abortion rate simultaneously came down. If we were really to support family life properly, who knows how low we can get it through social justice alone.
And these programs work, of course. That’s evidenced by the fact that there is no more poverty, sickness, crime, homelessness, child abuse…
Very true. Certainly orthodoxoy of the faith is more important than one’s political leanings. But in my experience the two often go hand-in-hand. 99% of the orthodox bishops, priests, and seminarians I know are also politically conservative (though they vary in how vocal or politically extroverted they are).
The Pope says not to compare the two. Abortion and Euthanasia stand alone. No other issues are their equal.
No, the Pope allows that the death penalty but under such narrow circumstances as to make its application wholly meaningless.
You may so believe.
He is correct. Abortion and euthanasia are intrinsically evil, the others are not. This is Catholic teaching.
You hit the nail on the head. The “seamless garment” argument flies square in the nose of Catholic teaching. Not all life issues are of equal weight. The pope and bishops have made it clear that the Faithful can disagree on the death penalty and sundry other issues, but abortion and euthanasia are not among them.
How can they possibly disagree in light of John Paul’s statements and the Catechism statement that the circumstances warranting use of the death penalty are so restricted as to make its use effectively unjustifiable? There’s no wiggle room there.
The difference is that there are potential circumstances where the death penalty is allowed—it’s just that those circumstances are not around here and now. JPII and the Catechism made that very clear.
Sure, and absent “those circumstances that are not around here and now,” it’s effectively forbidden.
Your distinction reminds me of the debate over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. You find it straightforward, I find it meaningless.
Not at all. This is when we Catholics ought not to be seen as allowing exceptions to a consistent across-the-board pro-life philosophy.