Catholics VS Health Care in America: Morally Embarrassing

[MindOverMatter2]

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.

II. RESPECT FOR PERSONS AND THEIR GOODS

2406 Political authority has the right and duty to regulate the legitimate exercise of the right to ownership for the sake of the common good.189

2407 In economic matters, respect for human dignity requires the practice of the virtue of temperance, so as to moderate attachment to this world’s goods; the practice of the virtue of justice, to preserve our neighbor’s rights and render him what is his due; and the practice of solidarity, in accordance with the golden rule and in keeping with the generosity of the Lord, who "though he was rich, yet for your sake . . . became poor so that by his poverty, you might become rich."190

Respect for the goods of others

2408 The seventh commandment forbids theft, that is, usurping another’s property against the reasonable will of the owner. There is no theft if consent can be presumed or if refusal is contrary to reason and the universal destination of goods. This is the case in obvious and urgent necessity when the only way to provide for immediate, essential needs (food, shelter, clothing . . .) is to put at one’s disposal and use the property of others.191

You do not have an absolute right to place private property above the value of human life.

The Church has spoken; Let those who have eyes to see, see.

 

[Ignatius]

Why would any Catholic be Against Free Health Care?

This fake health care plan is a specious pretense. It has already caused a huge increase in the cost of health care and reduced its availability. The exact opposite of what it was claimed it would do. It is a government scam in the disguise of social justice. It is nothing more than a power grab to put 1/6Th of the US economy under the control of unelected bureaucrats.

End this big government scam and repeal Obamacare now!!!

 

[MindOverMatter2]

In 1988, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger published a collection of essays under the title of Church, Ecumenism and Politics. In it, he argued that capitalism is little better than national socialism or communism, in that all three propose false idols (prosperity, the Volk, and the state, respectively). Ratzinger said that to build a humane civilization, the West must rediscover two elements of its past: its classical Greek heritage and its common Christian identity.

ratzingerfanclub.com/blog/2007/09/pope-benedicts-critique-of-capitalism.html

 

[dmelosi]

In 1988, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger published a collection of essays under the title of Church, Ecumenism and Politics. In it, he argued that capitalism is little better than national socialism or communism, in that all three propose false idols (prosperity, the Volk, and the state, respectively). Ratzinger said that to build a humane civilization, the West must rediscover two elements of its past: its classical Greek heritage and its common Christian identity.

ratzingerfanclub.com/blog/2007/09/pope-benedicts-critique-of-capitalism.html

What country are you from?

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Both capitalism and Marxism promised to point out the path for the creation of just structures, and they declared that these, once established, would function by themselves; they declared that not only would they have no need of any prior individual morality, but that they would promote a communal morality. And this ideological promise has been proved false. The facts have clearly demonstrated it. The Marxist system, where it found its way into government, not only left a sad heritage of economic and ecological destruction, but also a painful oppression of souls. **And we can also see the same thing happening in the West, where the distance between rich and poor is growing constantly, and giving rise to a worrying degradation of personal dignity through drugs, alcohol and deceptive illusions of happiness. **

ratzingerfanclub.com/blog/2007/09/pope-benedicts-critique-of-capitalism.html

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Michael Joseph states with conviction:

“It is true without a hesitation that the capitalist ethic is fundamentally at odds with the entire moral tradition of the Catholic faith, and that the capitalist ethic (to use the words of Aladair MacIntyre) is a rival morality to Catholicism. Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI understood this. Of course, the Catholic defenders of capitalism never care to debate its intellectual formulation for they know it is flawed. Instead, they refer us to the “material prosperity” of free market societies in order to justify the good of capitalism. But what else is such an empirical reliance than a consequentialist defense of a system that rejects the dignity of the human person (indeed, there is no person!) and reduces societal interaction to mere exchange!”

ratzingerfanclub.com/blog/2007/09/pope-benedicts-critique-of-capitalism.html

 

[MindOverMatter2]

I can keep going. But I think you are all smart enough to get the gist of what the Churches position is on such matters.

While the church doesn’t necessarily reject the notion of a competitive market, there are clearly moral limitations to what a Catholic or anybody can do in such a market in so far as respecting the the value of other people.

 

[vsedriver]

Most cases of homelessness is only evidence of the fact that society has failed them, because of extreme individualism regarding human welfare and economic indifference.

most cases of homelessness are a result of mental illness or addiction. Since the government made it harder to treat mental illness (not allowed to forcibly hospitalize them or force them to take meds) many mentally ill people live like wild animals. Those who suffer from addictions are also homeless because they can’t keep a job or stay healthy enough to work.

Many mentally ill or addicts refuse aid even when offered. You just can’t help some people and you can’t say society failed them when there are programs in place to help them. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

most cases of homelessness are a result of mental illness or addiction. Since the government made it harder to treat mental illness (not allowed to forcibly hospitalize them or force them to take meds) many mentally ill people live like wild animals. Those who suffer from addictions are also homeless because they can’t keep a job or stay healthy enough to work.

Many mentally ill or addicts refuse aid even when offered. You just can’t help some people and you can’t say society failed them when there are programs in place to help them. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.

Ah…yes…blame the victim. Good job!

 

[dmelosi]

Michael Joseph states with conviction:

“It is true without a hesitation that the capitalist ethic is fundamentally at odds with the entire moral tradition of the Catholic faith, and that the capitalist ethic (to use the words of Aladair MacIntyre) is a rival morality to Catholicism. Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI understood this. Of course, the Catholic defenders of capitalism never care to debate its intellectual formulation for they know it is flawed. Instead, they refer us to the “material prosperity” of free market societies in order to justify the good of capitalism. But what else is such an empirical reliance than a consequentialist defense of a system that rejects the dignity of the human person (indeed, there is no person!) and reduces societal interaction to mere exchange!”

ratzingerfanclub.com/blog/2007/09/pope-benedicts-critique-of-capitalism.html

You are leaving some things about Capitalism out.

Quoted from the article…
*"Depends on your definition of “capitalism”?

If Benedict criticizes “capitalism”, it seems to me he is referring more accurately to neo-liberalism, the worldview which Pope John Paul II described in Ecclesia in America:

More and more, in many countries of America, a system known as “neoliberalism” prevails; based on a purely economic conception of man, this system considers profit and the law of the market as its only parameters, to the detriment of the dignity of and the respect due to individuals and peoples. At times this system has become the ideological justification for certain attitudes and behavior in the social and political spheres leading to the neglect of the weaker members of society. Indeed, the poor are becoming ever more numerous, victims of specific policies and structures which are often unjust.
and condemned as well in Centesimus Annus (in addressing the question of whether ‘capitalism’ could be endorsed by Catholics:

. . . The answer is obviously complex. If by “capitalism” is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”. But if by “capitalism” is meant a system in which freedom in the economic sector is not circumscribed within a strong juridical framework which places it at the service of human freedom in its totality, and which sees it as a particular aspect of that freedom, the core of which is ethical and religious, then the reply is certainly negative.
The necessary corrective to such abuses, according to John Paul II, is “support must be given to all those who are examples of honesty in the administration of public finances and of justice,” and support for “the process of democratization”, which provides for greater control over potential abuses:
“The rule of law is the necessary condition for the establishment of an authentic democracy”. For democracy to develop, there is a need for civic education and the promotion of public order and peace. In effect, “there is no authentic and stable democracy without social justice. Thus the Church needs to pay greater attention to the formation of consciences, which will prepare the leaders of society for public life at all levels, promote civic education, respect for law and for human rights, and inspire greater efforts in the ethical training of political leaders”.*

The current administration is trying to take the “religion” out of the country. Look at his radical views on abortion, look at how the judges he has appointed are ruling against religion. You also fail to note that he does indicate that capitalism is better than socialism.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

You are leaving some things about Capitalism out.

Quoted from the article…
*"Depends on your definition of “capitalism”?

If Benedict criticizes “capitalism”, it seems to me he is referring more accurately to neo-liberalism, the worldview which Pope John Paul II described in Ecclesia in America:

More and more, in many countries of America, a system known as “neoliberalism” prevails; based on a purely economic conception of man, this system considers profit and the law of the market as its only parameters, to the detriment of the dignity of and the respect due to individuals and peoples. At times this system has become the ideological justification for certain attitudes and behavior in the social and political spheres leading to the neglect of the weaker members of society. Indeed, the poor are becoming ever more numerous, victims of specific policies and structures which are often unjust.
and condemned as well in Centesimus Annus (in addressing the question of whether ‘capitalism’ could be endorsed by Catholics:

. . . The answer is obviously complex. If by “capitalism” is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”. But if by “capitalism” is meant a system in which freedom in the economic sector is not circumscribed within a strong juridical framework which places it at the service of human freedom in its totality, and which sees it as a particular aspect of that freedom, the core of which is ethical and religious, then the reply is certainly negative.
The necessary corrective to such abuses, according to John Paul II, is “support must be given to all those who are examples of honesty in the administration of public finances and of justice,” and support for “the process of democratization”, which provides for greater control over potential abuses:
“The rule of law is the necessary condition for the establishment of an authentic democracy”. For democracy to develop, there is a need for civic education and the promotion of public order and peace. In effect, “there is no authentic and stable democracy without social justice. Thus the Church needs to pay greater attention to the formation of consciences, which will prepare the leaders of society for public life at all levels, promote civic education, respect for law and for human rights, and inspire greater efforts in the ethical training of political leaders”.*

The current administration is trying to take the “religion” out of the country. Look at his radical views on abortion, look at how the judges he has appointed are ruling against religion. You also fail to note that he does indicate that capitalism is better than socialism.

Its really besides the point. The fact is that you either refuse or fail to acknowledge the greater value of human life when compared to private property… and everything else that was said on the article. But of course this is what you do.

In any case I did not argue against capitalism as purely an economic theory, but rather I criticised it as it relates to the intrinsic value of human beings. Clearly Capitalism alone is insufficient in terms of providing for everybody needs; and this is clearly what I have been arguing about and what is made evident in the article. State intervention is clearly necessary, and I have sufficiently backed up my claim with the Catechism.

Unless of course you want to call them liars.

 

[Al_Moritz]

Ah…yes…blame the victim. Good job!

Yes, the moral callousness of the Neo-Con Catholics here is shocking. Well, are they even Catholics?

 

[dmelosi]

You fail to note the value of human life compared to private property… and everything else that was said on the article. But of course this is what you do.

In any case I did not argue against capitalism as purely an economic theory, but rather I criticised it as it relates to the intrinsic value of human beings. Clearly capitalism alone is insufficient in terms of providing for everybody needs; and this is clearly what I have been arguing about and what is made evident in the article. State intervention is clearly necessary, and I have sufficiently backed up my claim with the catechism

Unless of course you want to call them liars to.

There you go again, the threat of being against the church if anyone disagrees with you. Don’t you realize that it is getting to the point that no one listens to you because all you want to do is to try to cut people down? Do you try to bully people in real life if they disagree with you too?

 

[dmelosi]

Ah…yes…blame the victim. Good job!

You twist yet again, the poster did not blame the victim.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

There you go again, the threat of being against the church if anyone disagrees with you. Don’t you realize that it is getting to the point that no one listens to you because all you want to do is to try to cut people down? Do you try to bully people in real life if they disagree with you too?

Its not my fault that you feel threatened by the truth.

 

[dmelosi]

Its not my fault that you feel threatened by the truth.

What truth? All you do is twist what people say, then accuse as if the twisted account is true.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

You twist yet again, the poster did not blame the victim.

He did just that by implying that nobody has a responsibility to homeless people because most of them are their because they put themselves their. Classic avoidance of reality. Nothing is taken in to account about why such people get into drugs and drinking in the first place. There was something about that on the article I quoted. If you care you can go and find it.

All I have heard from you guys is red-herrings and strawmen.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

What truth? All you do is twist what people say, then accuse as if the twisted account is true.

Feel free to read the catechism I quoted again, and also the article. You are evidently not interested in anything that suggest that you have a responsibility to give to the poor. If you don’t want to give. The government has a right to take it from you.

 

[dmelosi]

He did just that by implying that nobody has a responsibility to homeless people because most of them are their because they put themselves their. Classic avoidance of reality. Nothing is taken in to account about why such people get into drugs and drinking in the first place. There was something about that on the article I quoted. If you care you can go and find it.

All I have heard from you guys is red-herrings and strawmen.

All you do is twist what people say.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

All you do is twist what people pay.

Personally I would rather spend what people pay.

There, you go, at least this time your accusation about twisting words will actually reflect reality