Chaput: 'It isn't possible to be pro-life and simultaneously forget the cries of the poor' [CNA]

[SunnyslopeIII]

This is something we agree on.

I am struggling to understand why my desire for the government to help its citizens by funding programs is the same thing as abdicating my personal responsibility to feed the poor.

I can help as many people as I can, but the federal government can help exponentially more. I know dirt-poor families, disabled families, families torn apart by sin and violence–and the state helped them, and the church helped them.

We can have both a charitable state, and also be charitable people. It’s not a choice between one or the other, as you have otherwise suggested. You should be more careful with the way in which you characterize (demonize) liberals. Maybe turn off the radio and television and go read a book that wasn’t advertised on Fox News.

“The State which would provide everything, absorbing everything into itself, would ultimately become a mere bureaucracy incapable of guaranteeing the very thing which the suffering person—every person—needs: namely, loving personal concern. We do not need a State which regulates and controls everything, but a State which, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, generously acknowledges and supports initiatives arising from the different social forces and combines spontaneity with closeness to those in need.” - Pope Benedict XVI (Deus Caritas Est)

The federal government is not the right place for government involvement. It is contrary to the Constitution and contrary to Church teaching about subsidiarity and the warnings about bloated bureaucracy and the Welfare State. At a minimum, do your government activism at the state and local level. There is no reason for the Feds to be involved.

 

[1newcatholic]

The federal government is not the right place for government involvement.

Want to try that again?

The Federal Government is the government which guarantees the Constitution. You understand that, right? That whole “life, liberty, pursuit of happiness” stuff is from a federal document. Our states are not independent entities, but interdependent, and it is the federal government which brings a necessary level of legal homogenization to the states, preventing minor violations like… uh, slavery. And prohibition of women voting. And so on.

Tell me again why the federal government has no business providing for poor people?

 

[SunnyslopeIII]

Want to try that again?

The Federal Government is the government which guarantees the Constitution. You understand that, right? That whole “life, liberty, pursuit of happiness” stuff is from a federal document. Our states are not independent entities, but interdependent, and it is the federal government which brings a necessary level of legal homogenization to the states, preventing minor violations like… uh, slavery. And prohibition of women voting. And so on.

Tell me again why the federal government has no business providing for poor people?

The 10th Amendment of the Constitution.

 

[1newcatholic]

Only in the fevered mind of the modern American left does anyone believe the government supports torture

ccrjustice.org/bush-openly-confesses-torture-authorization-no-prosecutions-cia-tape-destruction-why-we-care

In his recently released memoir Decision Points, George W. Bush admitted that he enthusiastically authorized that certain detainees be waterboarded – or tortured, a crime under domestic and international law. When asked if he would authorize the torture of one detainee, former U.S. president Bush declared “!@#$] right!” The release of Bush’s memoir coincides with reports that no one will face criminal charges for the destruction of CIA videotapes which contained interrogations using waterboarding.

 

[ProVobis]

Tell me again why the federal government has no business providing for poor people?

If they did, they’d probably be pocketing about 99% of it in administration costs. I hear the poor guys are still looking for those bills Helicopter Ben was supposed to have tossed at them.

Best to do it at the local level.

 

[1newcatholic]

The 10th Amendment of the Constitution.

The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791.[1] It expresses the principle of federalism, which undergirds the entire plan of the original Constitution, by stating that the federal government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the states or the people. The framers of this amendment had two purposes in mind when they drafted it. The first was a necessary rule of construction. The second was to reaffirm the nature of the federal system.[2]

Do you know what wikipedia is?

 

[1newcatholic]

If they did, they’d probably be pocketing about 99% of it in administration costs. I hear the poor guys are still looking for those bills Helicopter Ben was supposed to have tossed at them.

Best to do it at the local level.

Best? Maybe. But when local communities fail to take care of their own, other actions may have to be taken.

I guess we agree that if the Church was doing its job of helping the poor and needy as part of its global mission, governments wouldn’t have to step in.

 

[estesbob]

ccrjustice.org/bush-openly-confesses-torture-authorization-no-prosecutions-cia-tape-destruction-why-we-care

In his recently released memoir Decision Points, George W. Bush admitted that he enthusiastically authorized that certain detainees be waterboarded – or tortured, a crime under domestic and international law. When asked if he would authorize the torture of one detainee, former U.S. president Bush declared “!@#$] right!” The release of Bush’s memoir coincides with reports that no one will face criminal charges for the destruction of CIA videotapes which contained interrogations using waterboarding.

3 terrorists were waterboarding in an 8 year period.You are welcome to consider that torture.I do not.We can all agree, however, there’s is no moral equivalence between supporting waterboarding 3 terrorists and supporting ambition.

 

[SunnyslopeIII]

The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791.[1] It expresses the principle of federalism, which undergirds the entire plan of the original Constitution, by stating that the federal government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the states or the people. The framers of this amendment had two purposes in mind when they drafted it. The first was a necessary rule of construction. The second was to reaffirm the nature of the federal system.[2]

Do you know what wikipedia is?

I do. I’m glad you now understand why taking care of the poor is not the responsibility of the federal government.

 

[SunnyslopeIII]

Best? Maybe. But when local communities fail to take care of their own, other actions may have to be taken.

I guess we agree that if the Church was doing its job of helping the poor and needy as part of its global mission, governments wouldn’t have to step in.

The federal government is also falling short. According to your reasoning, should the UN step in?

 

[1newcatholic]

The federal government is also falling short. According to your reasoning, should the UN step in?

If America one day falls so low as to need help from the UN, I hope to God that people have the common sense to accept it. But that day is not today.

 

[1newcatholic]

3 terrorists were waterboarding in an 8 year period.You are welcome to consider that torture.I do not.We can all agree, however, there’s is no moral equivalence between supporting waterboarding 3 terrorists and supporting ambition.

Strangely enough we can.

 

[SunnyslopeIII]

If America one day falls so low as to need help from the UN, I hope to God that people have the common sense to accept it. But that day is not today.

You are blind to your own faulty reasoning. You make arbitrary decisions regarding whether the local, state, etc government is falling short, in order to justify the increase of the Welfare State, in opposition to Church teaching. That fits with your preference for the pro-choice, pro-euthanasia, pro-Gay Marriage party. You might as well oppose all Church teaching, I guess.

 

[1newcatholic]

I do. I’m glad you now understand why taking care of the poor is not the responsibility of the federal government.

Explain it to me without deflecting.

 

[1newcatholic]

You are blind to your own faulty reasoning. You make arbitrary decisions regarding whether the local, state, etc government is falling short, in order to justify the increase of the Welfare State, in opposition to Church teaching. That fits with your preference for the pro-choice, pro-euthanasia, pro-Gay Marriage party. You might as well oppose all Church teaching, I guess.

Thanks for clearing that up. Clearly you are the people, and wisdom shall die with you.

 

[ProVobis]

If America one day falls so low as to need help from the UN, I hope to God that people have the common sense to accept it. But that day is not today.

Speaking of which, I believe the International Money Fund dried up a long time ago with the bailout of several hard-hit countries. I wonder if that was all put to good use. We agree on feeling some hostility towards them.

 

[1newcatholic]

Speaking of which, I believe the International Money Fund dried up a long time ago with the bailout of several hard-hit countries. I wonder if that was all put to good use.

I hope so. I suspect there were cases of abuses, and cases where it made a critical difference.

 

[SunnyslopeIII]

Explain it to me without deflecting.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

The Constitution lays out the role of the federal government. Everything not spelled out by the Constitution is the purview of the states or the people. It’s very similar to the way the EU is organized (our states are roughly equivalent to the sovereign governments that make up the EU. The EU does not handle social issues. Those are left to the individual countries (some of which are smaller than some of our states).

 

[1newcatholic]

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

The Constitution lays out the role of the federal government. Everything not spelled out by the Constitution is the purview do the states.

And that means that the federal government cannot legally provide aid to US citizens?

 

[SuperLuigi]

These comments are often twisted as an okay to vote for pro abortion democrats because they are the “party of the poor”

:doh2: :yup:

And the polices of that party long-term hurt a lot of people.