Economics and Reducing Abortion?

[jlw]

Thinking some more…

Government has been cooperating with secular forces more than religious forces since the 1960’s.

Government does affect behavior.

When something is subsidized, the basic response from the family provider is “Whew! Don’t have to worry 'bout that. Relax, don’t have to work AS hard. I can depend on that now”. When government-as-provider is either the main income or even the second income for an extended period of time, that’s a problem.

When government outlaws something, its occurance goes down. When government allows something, it becomes pervasive.

“Living wages” are overrated. Living wage EDUCATION is more like it. What do you expect if you can only speak spanish?? Can’t read. Can’t write?? What do you expect if you don’t finish high school?? What do you expect of wages offered to you if you don’t have trade skills or communication skills necessary to compete in the marketplace?? The POOR HAVE ACCESS TO EDUCATION. Do they utilize the opportunities??? Or do their “leaders” (usually rich) blame “the rich”??? Mother Teresa taught poor blind women in Calcutta how to chart their menstual cycle. No government program needed, eh?? Education and responsibility reduces dependancy and poverty, and breeds independence, freedom, and hope.

The Church, marginalized by MSM and academia for 40 years, is on the comeback trail. JPII is heroic in this struggle. We are definitely in a “springtime”.

Did I mention judges???

 

[Richardols]

Brad:

Sowhere around 90% of Catholics think they can work their way to heaven. This is pelagianism - and old heresy condemned by the church. It’s great to help the poor - in fact Jesus said we must. But you can do good deeds until you are blue and it will not earn a place into heaven.

You are correct in saying that one cannot be saved by good works alone. But works are absolutely necessary to salvation for they are what Christ will judge us on - Matt 25:31-48.

 

[Richardols]

jlw:

The Church, marginalized by MSM and academia for 40 years, is on the comeback trail.

You say that the Church is marginalized by the mainstream media. But, isn’t everything the MSM? Whether it’s the ultra-conservative Wall Street Journal and the Fox Network on the right or the New York Times and National Public Radio on the left, it’s all MSM.

Are you claiming that everyone is against the Church? That sounds a bit too paranoid to me.

 

[jlw]

Richardols:

You say that the Church is marginalized by the mainstream media. But, isn’t everything the MSM? Whether it’s the ultra-conservative Wall Street Journal and the Fox Network on the right or the New York Times and National Public Radio on the left, it’s all MSM.

Are you claiming that everyone is against the Church? That sounds a bit too paranoid to me.

The MSM has been CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, BBC and the New York Times, Washington Post, and the LA Times for…

Many, many, many, many, many, many, many years.

Only fairly recently has cable and talk radio come on the scene offering some balance.

Fox News is only 10 years old or less.

The internet and its political influence has only been felt in the last couple of years!

No paranoia. Just the facts. I grew up largely turned-off by Christianity because of the MSM portrayal of christians. How many “expert” theologians on MSM pieces over the years argue pro-life arguments?? How many of them are faithful to the magesterium?? Uh…not many.

ACADEMIA??? 7 out of 10 faculty describe themselves as liberal, and it’s higher among teacher-aides. Did you see that study a couple weeks ago??

 

[Philip_P]

Brad:

Jesus gave us a solution. Preach the truth. There is sin. Unrepentant sin leads to spiritual death. Spritiual death leads to hell. The truth is contraception is wrong. Don’t do it. Abortion is wrong. Don’t do it. Fornication is wrong. Don’t do it. Adultery is wrong. Don’t do it. Homosexual relations are wrong. Don’t do it.

If you continue to do these things and continue to refuse to repent from them then you will go to hell. Jesus said so. Jesus is God so if He says so, then you can bank on it.

Economics have nothing to do with a decision to sin or not sin.

So that’s your solution, just tell everyone they’re going to hell? Come on, this isn’t that difficult of an exercise. Let’s get some public policy solutions from the conservatives out there. I’ll even start you off with some put in place by Pres. Bush, who I dislike as much as I’m sure many of you dislike Kerry:

1. No Child Left Behind Act. Contrary to Jlw’s post of 03:48 PM, not everyone does have equal access to education. Some schools are higher quality than others. Some swim in a superabundance of funds while others struggle to provide textbooks. The move to a uniform set of standards and expectations is a positive one (now if only he would actually fully fund it!).
2. Reducing barriers to funding faith-based organizations. Many faith-based organizations do a stellar job providing for the most vulnerable in our midst. From a religious perspective, they are also appealing as their work itself is a way of evangelizing (nothing gets values across quite like living them). I believe in the establishment clause of the US constitution, don’t believe any religion should be the offical religion, and have no problem with faith-based organizations receiving funding.

Ok, now your turn. Let’s see some proposals to turn society around so that there is not an incentive to have fewer children.

 

[jlw]

1. No Child Left Behind Act. Contrary to Jlw’s post of 03:48 PM, not everyone does have equal access to education. Some schools are higher quality than others. Some swim in a superabundance of funds while others struggle to provide textbooks. The move to a uniform set of standards and expectations is a positive one (now if only he would actually fully fund it!).

So funding is the issue?? Does funding have anything to do with two parent households?? How do kids do when they have two parents at home?? BETTER. Does funding necessarily have anything to do with enforcing classroom decorum and behavior??? Nope. Does funding necessarily translate into REAL curriculums??? Nope. Does funding necessarily translate into QUALITY of education??? Nope. Or does it generally translate in the QUANTITY of dollars going into public employee union pension funds??? Yup.

The whole “fully fund it” argument is silliness. It is just political posturing. No President has increase funding for education more that President Bush—increased by almost half!!!

 

[Lisa_N]

Philip have you ever read the works of Ruby K Payne? She has a number of books on the poverty ‘culture’ and I think she’s spot on with respect to her asssessment of the particular challenges faced by poor in our nation. Unlike folks in the Sudan or South America, our poverty is not a result of things outside of our control. OTOH the culture of poverty has now become so ingrained that even if children are given the opportunity to obtain a good education, they cannot or will not adapt their thinking to take advantage of the opportunity.

I would suspect she is acceptable to those of the liberal bent but she is also realistic about what is keeping people in poverty. Her “aha” process is focused on teachers and is apparently quite successful. She distinguishes between temporary poverty and generational poverty, with the latter being the more serious problem and of course more difficult to overcome. It’s not simply a lack of money but a poverty of values including valuing stable relationships, valuing education, and valuing opportunities.

Unfortunately, because kids are so impacted by their often chaotic lives, there is only so much the education system can do. IOW throwing more money at the problem, and even well intentioned ideas like NCLB, don’t always work because the teacher is fighting against sometimes generations of a particular mind set. Among the problems Payne points to are the lack of stable relationships, lack of marriage, lack of a father in the home, all things that are more personal choice than anything inflicted on us by an oppressive government.

Lisa N

 

[Philip_P]

Lisa N:

Philip have you ever read the works of Ruby K Payne?

I’ll add her to my reading list. In return, may I suggest some reading? Peter Gosselin of the LA Times has a good series on the increasing economic insecurity in America. I don’t think the LA Times is necessarily that great a paper (could just be snobbishness from living in NYC for the last few years), but I found this to be a good read.

latimes.com/business/specials/la-newdeal-cover.special
Lisa N:

Among the problems Payne points to are the lack of stable relationships, lack of marriage, lack of a father in the home, all things that are more personal choice than anything inflicted on us by an oppressive government.

I don’t find our government especiall oppressive; perhaps you’d like to explain?

jlw:

The whole “fully fund it” argument is silliness. It is just political posturing. No President has increase funding for education more that President Bush—increased by almost half!!!

It’s not a question of how much he increased funding by, it’s a question of if the funding increase was enough. A lot of states, from conservative Utah to liberal Connecticut, think not. Obviously you need to fund smartly, but once you have a course of action, you shouldn’t skimp on the money. The appropriate aphorism, I believe, is “penny-wise and pound-foolish”

Let’s get some more conservative policy proposals, though. I only bought up NCLB and the faith-based groups as a couple of examples to get things started. Everyone that’s been criticizing my proposals, here’s you chance to put forward your own superior public policy vision and make your case.

 

[chicago]

Philip P:

Let’s get some more conservative policy proposals, though. I only bought up NCLB and the faith-based groups as a couple of examples to get things started. Everyone that’s been criticizing my proposals, here’s you chance to put forward your own superior public policy vision and make your case.

Many genuine conservatives are actually critical of these kinds of policies promoted by President Bush, believing that he has gone too far to the left. Though his movement in that direction and focus on “compassionate conservativism” is partly what has won him elections by appealing to the sensibilities of some (including many Catholics who do not view “government” as an inherant problem, but are frustrated by how far afield on these matters and morals the Democrats have gone).

 

[Richardols]

jlw:

The MSM has been CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, BBC and the New York Times, Washington Post, and the LA Times for…

Many, many, many, many, many, many, many years.

Only fairly recently has cable and talk radio come on the scene offering some balance.

Fox News is only 10 years old or less.

And the conservative Wall Street Journal and Washington Times and the NY Post have been around for many, many years too. And, yes, now there’s Fox News.

Some lean left, some lean right. Some lean in those directions big time. But they are ALL mainstream media now.

BTW, “talk radio” except for NPR does not offer news. It’s only personality-driven opinion.

 

[Lisa_N]

Richardols:

And the conservative Wall Street Journal and Washington Times and the NY Post have been around for many, many years too. And, yes, now there’s Fox News.

Some lean left, some lean right. Some lean in those directions big time. But they are ALL mainstream media now.

BTW, “talk radio” except for NPR does not offer news. It’s only personality-driven opinion.

I am not sure who posited the theory that talk radio is NEWS. Most of us understand it is basically entertainment and a chance for the public to discuss matters, some of which are very important, with well known hosts and other experts. For example Michael Medved often has very well respected guests on his show giving people the opportunity to talk or spar a bit.

However if you are under the illusion what NPR offers is NEWS, you really need to step back. I used to listen to it daily but became increasingly disenchanted with leftist opinions under the guise of “news.” During the Iraq war you’d have thought we were being steamrollered by the Iraqi troops had you listend to the local NPR station. When they have guests that pontificate in areas where I have personal expertise, I become very aware that what is being said is opinion. So NPR is right in there with Rush and Al Franken, the delivery is just a bit calmer.

Lisa N

 

[Lisa_N]

Philip P:

I’ll add her to my reading list. In return, may I suggest some reading? Peter Gosselin of the LA Times has a good series on the increasing economic insecurity in America. I don’t think the LA Times is necessarily that great a paper (could just be snobbishness from living in NYC for the last few years), but I found this to be a good read.

latimes.com/business/specials/la-newdeal-cover.special

I don’t find our government especiall oppressive; perhaps you’d like to explain?

It’s not a question of how much he increased funding by, it’s a question of if the funding increase was enough. A lot of states, from conservative Utah to liberal Connecticut, think not. Obviously you need to fund smartly, but once you have a course of action, you shouldn’t skimp on the money. The appropriate aphorism, I believe, is “penny-wise and pound-foolish”

Let’s get some more conservative policy proposals, though. I only bought up NCLB and the faith-based groups as a couple of examples to get things started. Everyone that’s been criticizing my proposals, here’s you chance to put forward your own superior public policy vision and make your case.

Phil with all due respect, I have none for the LA Times. After they published a positive article about life in North Korea with “our Dear Leader” I lost even the smidgen of respect I had for the LA Times as journalism.

As to “conservative” proposals, I don’t know how you can do a wholesale change of hearts and minds. However I do think that for example demonstrating benefits to children in not having sex while their teens is probably a pretty good idea. I assure you that my school’s sex education never MENTIONED that this might be a bad idea. They simply handed out cards for Planned Parenthood and suggested going on the Pill. Now I realize that was ages ago but I don’t think much has changed. People seem to think that teens are rutting animals that cannnot be stopped. I don’t think that is true and most teens are totally unaware of the ECONOMIC problems in unwed pregnancy and childrearing. “Scared abstinent” might be a way to go. Discuss the wide spread and dangers of STDs for example. Don’t just hand out condoms. As to encouraging non-married sex whether homo or hetero with clubs and ‘support groups’ that IMO does not belong in schools at all.

I would like to see programs that REWARD good behavior, not bad behavior. Here’s a funny one. A local private charity offered to PAY “meth moms” not to get pregnant. They were provided birth control (obviously not Catholic!) and for every quarter they didn’t get pregnant, they were paid a couple hundred bucks. Who objected? Planned Parenthood! Yep, that’s right, they objected to thwarting these women’s right to procreate (probably hoping for a few abortions). But apparently this program was quite successful. We can argue about birth control another time but the point is that our current system rewards nonproductive behavior, not positive behavior.

Outcomes based funding is another relatively new concept. It used to be that many grants,particularly government grants were passed out simply because someone offered a program. No one was accountable. Eventually someone got wise to this and made funding dependent upon success and outcomes. No longer could you get a grant for “providing drug treatment” the program had to show X% of its graduates did not relapse after a certain period of time. This will help to weed out ineffective programs that are little more than ‘legacies.’

I also like the idea of the faith based programs because they are often successful. To me it’s ridiculous to fund a secular program that isn’t effective but there is no religious aspect to the organization. I understand that prostelytizing is a no no. But a faith based organization can still provide a good program with the religious aspects being toned down.

Here’s a real conservative idea, open the guestworker program and close the borders. The crime resulting from illegals is staggering. Most of the meth in our state comes from Mexico. Most of the property crimes and most child abuse is a result of drugs, particularly meth. Gee, do we think it might be a good idea to stop all the people bringing it over the border? This is so intuitively obvious that I cannot imagine why someone hasn’t done anything.

Well that’s a start!

Lisa N
PS The ‘oppressive govt’ comment was tongue in cheek!

 

[Richardols]

Lisa N:

When they have guests that pontificate in areas where I have personal expertise, I become very aware that what is being said is opinion.

Sure, because “guests” are not delivering what comes over the wires. Of course, that’s opinion.

So NPR is right in there with Rush and Al Franken, the delivery is just a bit calmer.

Right again on their opinion programs. Their news programs provide news.

But, to the extent that they don’t agree with you politically, I can see your aversion to their programs.

Just as I, reading the Wall Street Journal, am turned off by their reactionary editorial positions. Doesn’t mean that their news isn’t news.

 

[Brad]

jlw:

Thinking some more…

Government has been cooperating with secular forces more than religious forces since the 1960’s.

Government does affect behavior.

When something is subsidized, the basic response from the family provider is “Whew! Don’t have to worry 'bout that. Relax, don’t have to work AS hard. I can depend on that now”. When government-as-provider is either the main income or even the second income for an extended period of time, that’s a problem.

When government outlaws something, its occurance goes down. When government allows something, it becomes pervasive.

“Living wages” are overrated. Living wage EDUCATION is more like it. What do you expect if you can only speak spanish?? Can’t read. Can’t write?? What do you expect if you don’t finish high school?? What do you expect of wages offered to you if you don’t have trade skills or communication skills necessary to compete in the marketplace?? The POOR HAVE ACCESS TO EDUCATION. Do they utilize the opportunities??? Or do their “leaders” (usually rich) blame “the rich”??? Mother Teresa taught poor blind women in Calcutta how to chart their menstual cycle. No government program needed, eh?? Education and responsibility reduces dependancy and poverty, and breeds independence, freedom, and hope.

The Church, marginalized by MSM and academia for 40 years, is on the comeback trail. JPII is heroic in this struggle. We are definitely in a “springtime”.

Did I mention judges???

I agree. I firmly believe that we need to start from square one. Everyone should be given an opportunity to be educated. This is where I agree with government funding - but NOT for BROKEN public schools that refuse to recognize that faith and reason belong together, that discipline is paramount, that sex “education” is not primary, and that teachers do not deserve a high salary simply because they’ve been a teacher for 30 years. If the left really wanted to fix poverty, they would allow school kids to attend any school they wanted via government vouchers rather than handing out bucks for food stamps so that the kids can watch 6 hours of TV a day on the big screen.

 

[Brad]

Richardols:

You are correct in saying that one cannot be saved by good works alone. But works are absolutely necessary to salvation for they are what Christ will judge us on - Matt 25:31-48.

Correct. And He will also judge us based on our sins.

 

[Brad]

Richardols:

You are correct in saying that one cannot be saved by good works alone. But works are absolutely necessary to salvation for they are what Christ will judge us on - Matt 25:31-48.

Also, you cannot work your way into heaven. If judgement time comes and the judged attempt to justify themselves by listing their good works, they will fail the test. It is God’s grace through Christ on the Cross that allows us to enter heaven and nothing else.

 

[Brad]

Philip P:

So that’s your solution, just tell everyone they’re going to hell? Come on, this isn’t that difficult of an exercise. Let’s get some public policy solutions from the conservatives out there. I’ll even start you off with some put in place by Pres. Bush, who I dislike as much as I’m sure many of you dislike Kerry:

1. No Child Left Behind Act. Contrary to Jlw’s post of 03:48 PM, not everyone does have equal access to education. Some schools are higher quality than others. Some swim in a superabundance of funds while others struggle to provide textbooks. The move to a uniform set of standards and expectations is a positive one (now if only he would actually fully fund it!).
2. Reducing barriers to funding faith-based organizations. Many faith-based organizations do a stellar job providing for the most vulnerable in our midst. From a religious perspective, they are also appealing as their work itself is a way of evangelizing (nothing gets values across quite like living them). I believe in the establishment clause of the US constitution, don’t believe any religion should be the offical religion, and have no problem with faith-based organizations receiving funding.

Ok, now your turn. Let’s see some proposals to turn society around so that there is not an incentive to have fewer children.

Everyone has “incentive” to have fewer children. You will never eliminate that. It’s called evil.

I agree with both of your posted proposals. Why does the left generally oppose them? In a previous post, I emphasized that our social solutions lie in our education programs, not in handouts to adults.

When I went to grade school and high school, I worked hard while a good many kids goofed off. After I finished college, which I worked my way through (30+ hours/week) I had less than zero dollars. I then used my education to put myself in a better financial position. If I do not start engaging in grave sin, I should be ok. I don’t want to go to hell and I do want to go to heaven because that is what I was made for. Therefore, I practice many defenses against engaging in grave sin. Also, I understand the value of life and am willing to sacrifice so that my children may have that life. Do I have incentive to have less children? Of course. Sacrifice is not fun and games - it’s hard work. But I know the truth - I know what the eternal reward is. I know what the temporal reward is. There is nothing more wonderful than kids - yet there is nothing that requires more sacrifice.

There is not a single person out there that cannot repeat this pattern if they are given a decent education and they apply themselves to it. Part of that decent education is theological, as I’ve laid out. You cannot ignore that theological component as being too simplified. We’ve had programs up to our ears in this country just like the ones you mentioned. And yet the pattern continues. The more sin and depravity, the more poor and uneducated. And if you think everyone in the suburbs is “rich” and educated, think again. Most of them don’t read or continue their education and most of them have a balance sheet that is shows more debts than assets. And many of them abort their kids on a regular basis through surgical abortion or contraceptive techniques.

Sin and evil doesn’t care about someone’s perceived financial status. It will strike at you from every direction. There are plenty of “poor” people that don’t kill their kids and there are plenty of “rich” people that do.

If you think the concept of teaching about sin, heaven, and hell is just way too simple, then I suggest you humor me. Try it. Seems to me that nobody does and the less we’ve talked about these things, the more babies, disabled, and elderly and other “misfits” of society are killed and “marginalized”. No program will work if you ignore the most basic truths about our reality as human beings on this earth.

 

[fix]

It is only too clear that social justice means different things to different people. One essential point that distinguishes the Catholic Church’s notion of social justice from its secular counterpart has to do with the concept of personal virtue. The Church’s great social encyclicals, from Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum to John Paul II’s Centesimus Annus, emphasize again and again that there can be no separation of social justice from personal virtue, as there can be no divorce between the sphere of social responsibility and that of personal responsibility.

The secular world compartmentalizes the personal and the social, holding that what one does in his personal life — whether as a private citizen or as the president of a nation — has little or no relevance to what he does on a social level. The Church understands social justice as a continuity of the personal and the social, the secular world does not.

“I am personally opposed, but cannot impose my private values on the public” is a catch phrase that appears only too often on the lips of a secular politician. The truth about anything, however, is not the kind of thing that literally imposes itself. The Second Vatican Council has put the matter this way: “The truth cannot impose itself except by virtue of its own truth, as it wins over the mind with both gentleness and power.”

The Church maintains that, in order to have social justice, we must first have virtuous people. The secular world maintains that social justice does not require virtuous people, only good programs. For the Church, social justice is a personal virtue; for the secular world, it is a political accomplishment. The Church believes that good people make good social programs; the secular world believes that good social programs make good people. Concerning social justice, the Church and the secular world have very little in common.

catholiceducation.org/articles/social_justice/sj0013.html

 

[Richardols]

Brad:

Correct. And He will also judge us based on our sins.

Indeed. That’s also in Matt 25:31-48, the consequences for those who did not do good works.

 

[fix]

Richardols:

Indeed. That’s also in Matt 25:31-48, the consequences for those who did not do good works.

1 Cor. 6: 9-10