to the OP: Be very careful about believing stereotypes about the two main political parties in the U.S.A.
E.g., a lot of people will tell you that the Democrats are for the “common man,” while the Republicans are “for the wealthy.”
This is false.
Another false stereotype is that the Democrats are for civil rights for minorities, while Republicans are for less right for minorities and more privileges for white people.
This is false.
When you hear the polarizing language, don’t trust it.
I would suggest looking at the Official Party Platforms of the U.S. political parties. It’s hard to get a fix on the Platforms because there are so many bloggers online who post commentaries on the Party Platforms. Here is a link to the New Hampshire Republican Party Platform, which is, as far as I can see, representative of many other states in the U.S.:
nhgop.org/pages/detail/96
You can see in the Platform the support for prolife issues, and the opposition to abortion.
Here is a link to the Democratic Party Platform (2008):
s3.amazonaws.com/apache.3cdn.net/8a738445026d1d5f0f_bcm6b5l7a.pdf
Note page 50 and the support for Roe vs Wade and the objection to any impediments to a “woman’s right to choose,” (code words for “abortion on demand”).
The biggest difference in the Party Platforms is the role of federal government. In a nutshell, the Republican Party supports a minimal role of federal government and more involvement by state and local governments, as spelled out in the U.S. Constitution. The Democrat Party supports a larger role for federal involvement.
The concern that many of us have is that paying (taxes) for Democrat Party federal government programs is very expensive. If we were just paying to “help the poor,” that would be fine. But the problem is that we are paying for a huge bureaucracy to “help the poor,” and so by the time our dollar bill gets to the poor, the actual poor person only gets a few cents, while most of our dollar goes to pay the salaries of the receptionists, secretaries, accountants, IS people, managers, etc., as well as the buildings that house all these people who administer the programs that “help the poor.”
I would rather just give money to my local charities, many of which are run by volunteers working under just a few paid staff people, and that way, more of my dollar bill actually helps the poor. My church is one of the organizations that helps the poor, and there is very little overhead. OR–I could just give my money or other goods directly to a poor person or family in need of help–that’s best, because then “the poor” is not just a “label,” but an actual person or family that I know and am friends with.
Someone above made a comment about Republican fiscal policies not being in line with Catholic belief. I would challenge that. The Republicans are not saying that we should ditch the poor and ignore their needs. They just want to keep the “helpline” as local as possible, rather than shipping off tax monies to the federal government and supporting a vast bureaucracy that manages to get very little money to the poor and needy. IMO, that’s pretty Catholic–me, myself, and I helping the poor rather than expecting the government to do it.
I hope this helps you to see the difference.
:twocents::irish2: with them.