Genesis of social justice

[royal_archer]

Just google the stats on welfare rates and length of time on welfare.I’d say it is the studies that were used to generalize about welfare, but I doubt the person who made those conclusions can come up with a cite.

As to the abortion question, if you don’t want to help the lot of the young and uneducated girls, who are most likely to get pregnant, you might as well be prepared for more abortions.

That is because abortions are prevented when that class of most likely to get pregnant girls gets help.

You can’t have your cake and eat it too, as the saying goes. If you don’t help the young and uneducated population who get pregnant, the abortion rate rises.

Again, it speaks to how entwined the least are with us.

The other option is punish those who exploit them and get them pregnant.

 

[Black_Rose]

The redistribution of wealth takes away the opportunity for rich men to practice the corporal works of mercy. They are forced to donate through taxes instead from their heart and free will. The redistribution of wealth takes away an opportunity for men to get closer to God by taking away an opportunity for them to gain grace.

That argument does not make any sense since according to the Gospel; it is not the absolute amount of money to donate that matters (parable of the widow’s mite). They still have money after taxes to donate to charity so their opportunity has not been diminished by taxation even though the amount of money they can donate is lessened. Even if a redistributive welfare state is success at eliminating poverty within its geopolitical borders (of course, you would not be arguing this because of the belief that socialism is inefficient at creating wealth), then one can expand their generosity beyond their respective nation-state or ethnic group (the parable of the good Samaritan).

Eventually everyone ends up poor with their hands out waiting for the government to help them.

The bible says “If anyone will not work, let him not eat.” 2 Thess 3:10

The Catholic Catechism has whole sections on Social Doctrine and Social Justice.

In paragraph 2425 states the “Church has rejected the totalitarianism and atheistic ideologies associated in modern times with communism or socialism.”

Paragraph 2427 states “Human work proceeds directly from persons created in the image of God and called to prolong the work of creation by subduing the earth both with and for one another.” Jesus worked as a carpenter while He was here on earth.

2428 says that “Everyone should be able to draw from work the means of providing for his life and that of his family, and of serving the human community.”

In 2431 in the responsibility of the state one of the responsibilities is to guarantee individual freedom and the right to own private property. “Hence the principal task of the state is to guarantee this security, so that those who work and produce can enjoy the fruits of their labors and thus feel encouraged to work efficiently and honestly…”

Those catechism entries only prohibit authoritarian system of government such as fascism and socialism; they do not condemn milder forms such as social democracy.

 

[catharina]

That argument does not make any sense since according to the Gospel; it is not the absolute amount of money to donate that matters (parable of the widow’s mite). They still have money after taxes to donate to charity so their opportunity has not been diminished by taxation even though the amount of money they can donate is lessened. Even if a redistributive welfare state is success at eliminating poverty within its geopolitical borders (of course, you would not be arguing this because of the belief that socialism is inefficient at creating wealth), then one can expand their generosity beyond their respective nation-state or ethnic group (the parable of the good Samaritan).

Those catechism entries only prohibit authoritarian system of government such as fascism and socialism; they do not condemn milder forms such as social democracy.

Again, I offer another translation of 2 Thess 3:10.
The Catholic translation best known to me states:

**"2 THESS 3:10

“In fact, when we were with you, we instructed you that if anyone was unwilling to work, neither should that one eat.” **

IOW, there are those who might be willing to work
but who do NOT or can NOT work.
There’s a fine distinction there for us.

Blackrose: Is it possible your “tentativeness” is giving up. You sound Catholic.

 

[royal_archer]

That argument does not make any sense since according to the Gospel; it is not the absolute amount of money to donate that matters (parable of the widow’s mite). They still have money after taxes to donate to charity so their opportunity has not been diminished by taxation even though the amount of money they can donate is lessened. Even if a redistributive welfare state is success at eliminating poverty within its geopolitical borders (of course, you would not be arguing this because of the belief that socialism is inefficient at creating wealth), then one can expand their generosity beyond their respective nation-state or ethnic group (the parable of the good Samaritan).

Those catechism entries only prohibit authoritarian system of government such as fascism and socialism; they do not condemn milder forms such as social democracy.

And how does one support those in other countries? by giving to some corrupt multinational “charity” that promotes abortion and supports dictatorships?

Mild evil is still evil.

 

[Black_Rose]

And how does one support those in other countries? by giving to some corrupt multinational “charity” that promotes abortion and supports dictatorships?

If I am not mistaken, Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors without Borders) is an excellent international charity devoid of any corruption.

Mild evil is still evil.

Here are the catechism entries Galnextdoor quoted:

In paragraph 2425 states the “Church has rejected the totalitarianism and atheistic ideologies associated in modern times with communism or socialism.”

Paragraph 2427 states “Human work proceeds directly from persons created in the image of God and called to prolong the work of creation by subduing the earth both with and for one another.” Jesus worked as a carpenter while He was here on earth.

2428 says that “Everyone should be able to draw from work the means of providing for his life and that of his family, and of serving the human community.”

In 2431 in the responsibility of the state one of the responsibilities is to guarantee individual freedom and the right to own private property. “Hence the principal task of the state is to guarantee this security, so that those who work and produce can enjoy the fruits of their labors and thus feel encouraged to work efficiently and honestly…”

The latter three do not preclude a social democratic welfare state, but the former does condemn some manifestations of socialism such as Maoism and Stalinism.

Cat, I do not consider myself fully Catholic, yet, because the content of my last post only displays a rather rudimentary knowledge of the Gospels and their parables. It is not indicative of a mature and loving faith I have yet to acquire.

 

[markbrumbaugh]

Guess you failed to see my comment in Post 106. So, here it is again:

Originally Posted by markbrumbaugh  
"*Nice words, and I don't have anything against personal charity...quite the contrary.
On the other hand, one cannot do good with other people's stolen private property.

Social Justice, as espoused by the USCCB, is not justice at all, it is Democratic Party redistribution of wealth, and it is wrong, wrong wrong. *

**This is according to YOU.** 

*It will kill the golden goose that has provided the opportunity for us to even contemplate such theft*."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sorry to have distracted you with a question.

I thought I had answered it last night, but while it is off topic and none of your business, I will answer your question. I am semi retired as a professional engineer. I do independent engineering for banks, due diligence for prospective purchasers of process plants, safety training and litigation support. I go to many little league games, dance recitals and other activities of my 8 grandkids. I coach high school ice hockey and am a registered referee with USA hockey. I am also an off ice official with the American Hockey League.
I ride with the Patriot Guard and bury veterans, and soldiers KIA. I try to convince liberal minded friends to expand their thinking to include tests of logic and history against seemingly good ideas, that may have pitfalls. I am avowed defender of the consitution of the United States, believe in Capitalism and spend time writing about it on various blogs and newsletters. And I spend a lot of time trying to help one of my sons, whose wife died in childbirth last December. He has a lot challenges raising an infant.

I’m sorry you have such venom for me and do wish you would answer my questions rather than changing the topic. For example you found one of my posts wherein I stated Greed is Good and used it to try to discredit my arguements. I explained what I meant and asked you several questions, one of which I will repeat.

How much do you think I should make to avoid being greedy? Give it in dollars per year. If you can’t aswer this, I will no longer respond to you.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

We are adults here, right?
Remain on topic and cease from personal attacks.

 

[catharina]

If I am not mistaken, Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors without Borders) is an excellent international charity devoid of any corruption.

Here are the catechism entries Galnextdoor quoted:

The latter three do not preclude a social democratic welfare state, but the former does condemn some manifestations of socialism such as Maoism and Stalinism.

Cat, I do not consider myself fully Catholic, yet, because the content of my last post only displays a rather rudimentary knowledge of the Gospels and their parables. It is not indicative of a mature and loving faith I have yet to acquire.

Hi to you. Am I the “Cat” being addressed. That’s never been my name or nickname.
No problem if you were addressing me - but it’s not my name.

 

[catharina]

If I am not mistaken, Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors without Borders) is an excellent international charity devoid of any corruption.

Well - it pays us well to be aware that the term social justice can mask injustice in secular society. For example, Doctors without Borders sounds like a benevolent group. Yet it enters countries with its own agenda. On that agenda is abortion services. The group doesn’t highlight this fact. It might take some research to uncover it. Nonetheless, the group sees abortion as a part of any woman’s right to FULL medical care. I’ll present the following quote; it does not quite reveal the full intent of DWB but it’s close enough.

from its own special report, 2009:

doctorswithoutborders.org/publications/article.cfm?id=3422&cat=special-report

"Conclusion
Sexual violence happens everywhere. It can affect anybody. In conflict, it affects civilians and combatants, displaced and refugee populations, women, men,and children. It may be a consequence of widespread violence or deliberately used as weapon of war.

In stable situations, sexual violence is also pervasive. in MSF’s experience, it often happens within communities and even families, perpetrated by people known to the victim. It frequently involves children.

The impact of rape is devastating. A victim of rape is at risk of HIV/AIDS and other infections. Particularly brutal cases of rape may result in injuries including vaginal fistula, a painful and stigmatizing condition. Where safe abortion services are not available or are unaffordable, women who feel they need to end a pregnancy resulting from rape are at risk of serious complications and even death.

(unspoken here: DWB provides “affordable” abortions to such women.)

The psychological trauma of sexual violence can be equally devastating and may last even longer. Women, men, and children who have been raped may suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. They may have low-self esteem and be unable to trust others or form relationships. They may also not be able to seek and find justice."

These facts were documented by pro-life activists in 2001 and again in 2005.

Again, such a friendly name for such a group. Much like “Planned Parenthood” - it sounds so friendly. One might hope PP would help parents assemble layettes, teach breast-feeding to all women and offer formula.

One might HOPE that - but noooooooooooooo.

My hope at the moment: that Eric H finds this post relevant to the topic of social justice in this thread.

 

[Lypher]

Again, I offer another translation of 2 Thess 3:10.
The Catholic translation best known to me states:

**"2 THESS 3:10 **

**“In fact, when we were with you, we instructed you that if anyone was unwilling to work, neither should that one eat.” **

IOW, there are those who might be willing to work
but who do NOT or can NOT work.
There’s a fine distinction there for us.

Blackrose: Is it possible your “tentativeness” is giving up. You sound Catholic.

Social Justice demands that abusive behavior be addressed. I believe we need to pass laws that prohibit employment of illigals and anyone caught knowingly hiring should lose ALL of their property…We will end the demand for labor and nobody will come.

We need to do something as drastic as that or we need to take care of these workers when WE “collective society” offers them a job picking my apples.

 

[catharina]

Social Justice demands that abusive behavior be addressed. I believe we need to pass laws that prohibit employment of illigals and anyone caught knowingly hiring should lose ALL of their property…We will end the demand for labor and nobody will come.

We need to do something as drastic as that or we need to take care of these workers when WE “collective society” offers them a job picking my apples.

Addressing abusive behavior does not include abusing the poor.
As long as you agree with that fact, so be it.

 

[royal_archer]

Social Justice demands that abusive behavior be addressed. I believe we need to pass laws that prohibit employment of illigals and anyone caught knowingly hiring should lose ALL of their property…We will end the demand for labor and nobody will come.

We need to do something as drastic as that or we need to take care of these workers when WE “collective society” offers them a job picking my apples.

The reason we have so many immigrant workers is that too many Americans are not willing to take those jobs. Americans are not willing to take those jobs because they get more money from the government to do nothing and collect wellfare or unemployment. This relates back to the orriginal post in that we need to recognize that God intends us to work not sit around collecting a check from the government while some illegal alien works our fields and some child in China makes our shoes.

 

[Tigg]

Yes, welfare only fosters perpetual dependency.

…and can stifle any ambition to change.

Here’s a new one on me. Is this considered social justice too? (under the “new” norms)

sayanythingblog.com/entry/safelink_wireless_a_government_welfare_program_for_cell_phones/

 

[Galnextdoor]

that argument does not make any sense since according to the gospel; it is not the absolute amount of money to donate that matters (parable of the widow’s mite). They still have money after taxes to donate to charity so their opportunity has not been diminished by taxation even though the amount of money they can donate is lessened. Even if a redistributive welfare state is success at eliminating poverty within its geopolitical borders (of course, you would not be arguing this because of the belief that socialism is inefficient at creating wealth), then one can expand their generosity beyond their respective nation-state or ethnic group (the parable of the good samaritan).
the taxes that are used to support the other half of society do not come from the rich man’s free will. The money is taken from him and spent how the government sees fit. The pittance that remains for charity after taxes, will not present the same opportunities for performing the corporal works of mercy that a man who has alot of money has. His opportunities will be limited. Jesus said that the poor will always be with us. He says in matthew that "whatever you do for the least of these brothers thine, that you do unto me. He doesn’t say whatever you can get the government to to do for these brothers thine. Common sense shows that if a man has to give 40% of his wages to the government, his opportunities to help others will be impeded.

those catechism entries only prohibit authoritarian system of government such as fascism and socialism; they do not condemn milder forms such as social democracy. socialism, social democracy, soft-despotism…“a rose by any other name…” it’s all the same, one is just a little more aggressive than the other.

 

[cdeterma]

The reason we have so many immigrant workers is that too many Americans are not willing to take those jobs. Americans are not willing to take those jobs because they get more money from the government to do nothing and collect wellfare or unemployment. This relates back to the orriginal post in that we need to recognize that God intends us to work not sit around collecting a check from the government while some illegal alien works our fields and some child in China makes our shoes.

This is false. Americans had these jobs until companies started hiring illegal immegrants for less than half the wages amercians were earning. There are plenty of hard jobs still being performed by Amercians - like Roofing, Masonry, etc. These jobs aren’t easier than picking fruit, landscaping, or meat packing. However the former are paying an equitable wage that allows Amercians to participate in the middle class. That’s the difference and the reason.

 

[markbrumbaugh]

This is false. Americans had these jobs until companies started hiring illegal immegrants for less than half the wages amercians were earning. There are plenty of hard jobs still being performed by Amercians - like Roofing, Masonry, etc. These jobs aren’t easier than picking fruit, landscaping, or meat packing. However the former are paying an equitable wage that allows Amercians to participate in the middle class. That’s the difference and the reason.

 

[Tom_Qualey]

*Hi, Portarica,

Since when does killing people solve problems? Is this an endorsement of Planned Parenthood’s “Final Solution”?*

Actually the statistics on welfare show that the overwhelming majority remain on welfare for a relatively short period of time. There is a group that remain for longer periods of time and they are the young and uneducated at the time of their first inclusion in the system. *I guess you are saying that a lot of people were exposed to welfare as children - and, some have adopted this as a desirable life style. But, have you noticed that since the various ‘rewards’ for staying dependent have evaporated… fewer have joined the ranks? *

So if the right attention was given to this group we could minimize welfare dependence . *This is an excellent idea. Unfortunately, Portarica, your murderous ‘alternative’ misses many points. *

An alternative would be to increase the number and ease of abortions so that the young and uneducated could get on with their lives without the burden of children. *You know, both of us are very fortunate that our parents did not put those words of yours into action!

God bless

Tom*

Peace

 

[Tom_Qualey]

Hi, Black Rose,

That argument does not make any sense since according to the Gospel; it is not the absolute amount of money to donate that matters (parable of the widow’s mite).

I think the “Widow’s Mite” argument is valid - history is filled with examples of people who gave generously while still living in a courtry with well-established taxes and governmental authorities with powers that would make the IRS blush with envy! ,

They still have money after taxes to donate to charity so their opportunity has not been diminished by taxation even though the amount of money they can donate is lessened. Even if a redistributive welfare state is success at eliminating poverty within its geopolitical borders (of course, you would not be arguing this because of the belief that socialism is inefficient at creating wealth), then one can expand their generosity beyond their respective nation-state or ethnic group (the parable of the good Samaritan).

*This is a bit difficult for me to follow - maybe if you were give an example of a country within the past 1,000 that championed socialism and positively demonstrated its success. I am unaware of any.

Additionally, I do not think you will actually find that generosity is a product of any governmental system, much less a method of taxation. Generosity, at least as I understand it, is a personal choice made by individuals who acting from mercy and not from a mere sense of justice. It is true that the works of generous people can truly inspire others to be generous - but, is this the thrust of your argument?

God bless

Tom*

Those catechism entries only prohibit authoritarian system of government such as fascism and socialism; they do not condemn milder forms such as social democracy.

 

[Tom_Qualey]

*Hi, Royal Archer,

I think you have hit the nail squarely on the head!

In addressing this issue, we need to be aware of changing times, however. Illegal immigration coming from Mexico and other countries south of Texas (I just do not hear much coming via Canada) has been rapidly been declining because the job opportunities that were once available have dried up. This may be for several factors (enforced deportation of illegal immigrants, a depressed economy reducing discretionary spending, and US Citizens actually moving away from welfare to work.)

God bless

Tom*

The reason we have so many immigrant workers is that too many Americans are not willing to take those jobs. Americans are not willing to take those jobs because they get more money from the government to do nothing and collect wellfare or unemployment. This relates back to the orriginal post in that we need to recognize that God intends us to work not sit around collecting a check from the government while some illegal alien works our fields and some child in China makes our shoes.

 

[Tigg]

socialism, social democracy, soft-despotism…“a rose by any other name…” it’s all the same, one is just a little more aggressive than the other.

** Additionally, I do not think you will actually find that generosity is a product of any governmental system, much less a method of taxation. Generosity, at least as I understand it, is a personal choice made by individuals who acting from mercy and not from a mere sense of justice. It is true that the works of generous people can truly inspire others to be generous - but, is this the thrust of your argument?

You have hit upon something that is so disturbing to me. The proponents of “soft” socialism (for lack of a better term) or progressives if you prefer, and even certain social justice groups who have bought into the very erroneous “preferential treatment of the poor argument” seem, at the very least, naive to me and oblivious to the dangers of a government that is quickly becoming Machiavellian. In their eagerness to redistribute our wealth and promote their unholy agenda, which is contrary to Christian principles, you would think we would be able to distinguish the subtleties.

Government is not virtuous and the unprecedented corruption we are now seeing should give even the liberals pause for concern.