M
Maximilian75
Guest
It’s hard to feed, give drink to, house, clothe, and visit a fetus that’s been torn limb from limb with forceps…
Last edited:
- Status
O
on_the_hill
Guest
Ok . . . .I’m going to do something I’ve never done before and use the phrase Post hoc ergo propter hoc.YourNameHere:
$21 trillion of Govt spending over 50 years and poverty rate increased from 27% in 1967 to 29% in 2012 (Forbes)
So Govt should not treat poverty.
Last edited:
Z
ZMystiCat
Guest
Charitable giving has also increased year-on-year for the last forty years, excluding three years. (Source) By your logic, then, charitable giving is increasing poverty.
Of course, though, both are wrong assumptions to make given that correlation does not equal causation.
That, of course, is part of the problem. There’s a large political party that, outside of a minor movement within it, is very much for allowing abortion. In fact, of the four well-known parties, the Republicans are the only ones generally opposed to abortion, and even then many Republicans make concessions for certain cases the Church doesn’t make concessions for, and some of them probably cave due to political pressure, because no one wants to be the guy who said abortion is wrong even in cases of rape.
And yes, some Catholics essentially become Republican propagandists over the abortion issue alone, but the politicalization argument cuts both ways, and it is arguably doing more for abortion than against it.
We’ve had discussions on those other issues. Earlier today (or maybe yesterday), I saw something about people with pre-existing conditions getting healthcare.
You mean I can’t just pass a law that outlaws poverty and homelessness and fix the problem?
I think I’m going to be sick, and that isn’t the Chipotle talking…
Perhaps even more interesting, white Evangelicals have us beat here. Granted, some of that is probably the aforementioned politicalization of the issue, but this sobering.
Wouldn’t it be interesting if one of the most notorious gangsters in American history made it to heaven?
O
on_the_hill
Guest
And you have to pay taxes to try to solve them. What baffles me is how unquestioningly willing many conservatives are to spend money to build prisons (“We’re tough on crime, by gar!”) but not willing to spend money to build schools. For many conservatives, new prison = economic development project, whereas new school = higher taxes.
blackforest
Well-known member
Aren’t the unborn among “the least of these?”
Aren’t the women facing crisis pregnancies and feelings of desperation?
Last edited:
O
on_the_hill
Guest
No, but you don’t need to pass that law. You just need to build a wall.
Z
ZMystiCat
Guest
But they’re already in the city, pooping in the streets!
S
stpurl
Guest
“For I was hungry, and you didn’t feed me. You aborted me.
I was thirsty and you didn’t give me a drink, because you had aborted me.
I was a stranger and you didn’t invite me to your home; you aborted me instead. I was naked and you didn’t clothe me; you aborted me. I was sick and you didn’t help me; you aborted me. I was imprisoned without trial and sentenced to death and you didn’t visit me; you aborted me”.
And they replied, “But Lord we didn’t abort YOU, we were trying to help the women being punished with a baby, we were trying to keep those babies from growing up in poverty and unwanted.”
And He said, “As often as you refused to let the least of these live and aborted them instead, you did it to Me.”
I was thirsty and you didn’t give me a drink, because you had aborted me.
I was a stranger and you didn’t invite me to your home; you aborted me instead. I was naked and you didn’t clothe me; you aborted me. I was sick and you didn’t help me; you aborted me. I was imprisoned without trial and sentenced to death and you didn’t visit me; you aborted me”.
And they replied, “But Lord we didn’t abort YOU, we were trying to help the women being punished with a baby, we were trying to keep those babies from growing up in poverty and unwanted.”
And He said, “As often as you refused to let the least of these live and aborted them instead, you did it to Me.”
E
EnglishYew
Guest
Great post, making it real. Thank you so very much.
Last edited:
U
upant
Guest
this is a tired argument. new prisons keep more crooks off the streets. liberal judges can’t release them due to overcrowding if we have hot cots for the crooks. new schools just maintain the failed public system. private schools are where we need to go, fund Catholic schools for example.
Last edited:
J
JamalChristophr
Guest
Abortion in the United States shares too many things in common with the Jewish Holocaust in Nazi Germany.
If anything, it’s not focused on NEARLY enough.
If anything, it’s not focused on NEARLY enough.
Last edited:
A
Aquinas11
Guest
Nope that’s for two separated events not two simultaneous events
A
Aquinas11
Guest
No , by my logic poverty would have increased even more than 2% w/o charitable giving
Last edited:
E
ewohdrol
Guest
I get what the OP is trying to say.
Sometimes pro lifers (and I am one!) seem to have quite harsh views on other issues such as government funded charity, medicare, refugees, helping people out of poverty or any other socialistic service that are designed to help the underpriviliged.
It’s like some people feel we need to fight for babies in utero but once born their parents (often single mothers without means to support themselves) are expected to sort it out with little assisistance. Which is an incredibly ironic and contradictory pov to have.
I strongly feel we address these above issues first the demand for abortion will drop somewhat.
ETA - there are some wonderful outspoken advocates for the unborn who I believe do work tirelessly to increase services for the underpriviliged.
Sometimes pro lifers (and I am one!) seem to have quite harsh views on other issues such as government funded charity, medicare, refugees, helping people out of poverty or any other socialistic service that are designed to help the underpriviliged.
It’s like some people feel we need to fight for babies in utero but once born their parents (often single mothers without means to support themselves) are expected to sort it out with little assisistance. Which is an incredibly ironic and contradictory pov to have.
I strongly feel we address these above issues first the demand for abortion will drop somewhat.
ETA - there are some wonderful outspoken advocates for the unborn who I believe do work tirelessly to increase services for the underpriviliged.
Z
ZMystiCat
Guest
I think you’ve missed the point entirely.
You originally made the claim that $21 trillion of government spending correlating with increased poverty was somehow a sign that it was inept at addressing the problem and causing an increase. I merely took the exact some logic - in this case a spending increase that correlated with the same poverty increase - and applied your logic that it shows an ineptitude leading to increased poverty. It’s just that that spending increase occurred for those you said would fix government’s problem…except it also correlates to the same problem government spending correlates to…
Of course, I could have just said correlation does not imply causation and been done with it, since that’s among the most well-known principles of statistics there is. I just gave an example related to your proposed solution.
And finally, by your logic, I can also say that poverty would have increased more than 2% without government spending.
A
Aquinas11
Guest
Not contradictory because
(1) pro life consistent w thou shalt not kill commandment
(2) opposing government welfare consistent w thou shalt not steal commandment
(a) theft = involuntary charity via taxation
(b) not as effective as voluntary (private) charity since far less waste than govt. People would give far more if less of their money stolen via taxation
(c ) Jesus never forced anyone to engage in moral actions. He only supported voluntary charity and our Church only holds us accountable for voluntary actions.
Last edited:
A
Aquinas11
Guest
No , your assertion requires a $21T increase in private charity, similarly dubbed the “war on poverty”. No such support in your link.
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
Where is the basis for such a serious accusation?
Last edited:
E
EvangelistVictor
Guest
I get this from conservative Catholic’s and Evangelicals all the time. Save the unborn babies, but let their welfare mothers starve, be homeless, and even die.
We must be compassionate for all the earths people’s, for we were created in the image of God.
Last edited:
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
I highly doubt that they would say it that way.
- Status