Paul Ryan!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chrish1975
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Elizabeth, there is a video of Ryan as late as 2009, praising Ayn Rand and her economic philosophy, which was shown last evening on MSNBC’s “The Last Word.” Try as he might, Ryan cannot run away from his support of Rand, nor should he, as Romney is wont to doing. Let Ryan defend his position and be honest with the public, unlike the typical politician, because his ideas are interesting.
***** My Mud Slinging Alert System just went off *****

What you are about to read is true:

nytimes.com/2012/08/15/opinion/ayn-rand-wouldnt-approve-of-paul-ryan.html

Peace,
Ed
 
Without a doubt! Of course, you won’t find such hogwash coming from CAF regulars such as Estes Bob, rlg, Scott LaFrance, et cetera. People who spout off that garbage end up banned. sooner, if not later.
Might depends on the definition of regulars. I can’t possibly take the time to search every post. But here’s one saying Obama’s party is completely at odds with Christian morals. Completely? Really? I’m going out on a limb here thinking Obama supports at least some of his party’s platform. So that would make him completely at odds with Christian morals. :rolleyes:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9634719&postcount=232
 
Might depends on the definition of regulars. I can’t possibly take the time to search every post. But here’s one saying Obama’s party is completely at odds with Christian morals. Completely? Really? I’m going out on a limb here thinking Obama supports at least some of his party’s platform. So that would make him completely at odds with Christian morals. :rolleyes:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9634719&postcount=232
He’s saying the President supports things that violate Christian teaching (abortion on demand, the HHS mandate, gay marriage, etc.) That’s a fair point to make. Likewise, you are free to argue that Ryan’s budget violates Christian teaching… however you’ll be expected to back that one up, as budgets (as opposed to abortion, mandating conscience violation, etc.) in and of themselves are not intrinsic evils.
 
He’s saying the President supports things that violate Christian teaching (abortion on demand, the HHS mandate, gay marriage, etc.) That’s a fair point to make. Likewise, you are free to argue that Ryan’s budget violates Christian teaching… however you’ll be expected to back that one up, as budgets (as opposed to abortion, mandating conscience violation, etc.) in and of themselves are not intrinsic evils.
Except that there are Christians who have a diiferent belief as to what violates Christian teaching and who might not subscribe to the Catholic definition of intrinsic evil.
 
Except that there are Christians who have a diiferent belief as to what violates Christian teaching and who might not subscribe to the Catholic definition of intrinsic evil.
Follow what the Popes and the Catechism say and you’ll be fine.
 
Without a doubt! Of course, you won’t find such hogwash coming from CAF regulars such as Estes Bob, rlg, Scott LaFrance, et cetera. People who spout off that garbage end up banned. sooner, if not later.
👍 …or Havard. 🙂
 
Jesus said it will be harder for the rich to enter heaven than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. So now you have me wondering if He thinks most are hypocrites.
Hypocrites? No. It has to do with their attachment to worldly goods…nothing to do with hypocrisy. Of course, you have a solution for that…rather than just influencing them to change their hearts, you recommend taking their money from them. It’s not exactly a Christian way to do things, but it does reflect the views of most lefties.
 
Bellesbane, I can tell by your posting it would appear you must be doing a good job properly catechizing the children you teach in the Catholic faith.
Not if she’s teaching them that Catherine of Siena opposed the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church (which of course anyone well-versed in both their faith and in secularly-sourced history would know instantly is untrue), and/or that a “good Catholic,” – to quote her – is one who feels free
to the point of seriously questioning what the Bishops are saying and doing
and/or that it’s okay for Catholics to judge rashly the piety of other Catholics as
politically motivated hypocrisy masquerading as piety.
Because that is both blasphemy and deeply offensive and disrespectful. How would you have any idea who is and is not guilty of “politically motivated hypocrisy?” For example, why don’t you point out whose souls you can read on this thread?

Catherine of Siena was not an ecclesiastical rebel. She was anything but. She was docile, prayerful, and considered highly virtuous according to the traditional canons of the Roman Catholic Church. Had she not been, she would not have been sought as a papal advisor. There is no comparison between Catherine of Siena and telling CAF users that Paul Ryan worships Ayn Rand., especially since he has been quoted several times here as clearly rejecting Rand’s philsophy, while finding her books interesting (to use his word). Lots of people reject the philosophical arguments of authors they find interesting. Catherine of Siena was a model of charity, not a model of back-biting and name-calling.
🤷
 
Jesus taught to help the poor. The Bishops tell us to help the poor, but the conservatives believe Paul Ryan and Ayn Rand are to be followed by helping the rich and take from the poor. Conservatives who can’t listen to the Catholic Bishops will listen to no one except a Republican.
Jesus taught us … you and me … to help the poor …

Jesus never taught us to turn over the care of the poor to Ceasar and the Roman Empire …

St Paul taught that those who would eat must also work.

This was a response to those who thought the return of Christ was going to be immediate and they stopped working and began living off the toil of others - it did not work in the first century and it does not work now … People must take action and be prudent - yes we care for the poor … but if you strive to be the poor - you lack the means to help the poor …All of our gifts come from our Creator - from Jesus, from the Trinity … All of our blessings are gifts to be used to glorify God and help others.

Our Bishops realize that - do you?

Those who advocate and support the killing of children in the womb are not “good Christians” - Catholic or Other … causing division and establishing a government that confiscates the goods that people earn through work and giving it to those who don’t work and for immoral purposes is a travesty …
 
I am glad Romney chose Ryan. He ticks the top five conscience votes and is an economics guy too… which is not a strong area for Romney.
Too bad all Catholics don’t vote for life before all else. If we can’t put the right to life above our other rights, there are no rights left.
And yay! a double whammy on the HHS mandate:)
 
He’s smart, he’s put forward serious ideas about how to fix our economic and fiscal mess, he can explain himself well and in a way that doesn’t come off as unhinged, he’s popular (including with seniors!), he’s young, he’s in good health, he’s pro-life, and he’s all around a good conservative (although he does have some votes in Congress that I disagree with).

And apparently, many of the women I know find him handsome.
 
Paul Ryan’s Bishop Defends Him Amid Attacks on His Application of Church Teaching
Now, Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison, Ryan’s bishop, has waded into this election-year minefield, clearly concerned that a valued member of his flock is being unfairly attacked by partisan forces.
In a column that will be posted on his diocesan website tomorrow, Aug. 16, Bishop Morlino vouches for Ryan’s Catholic bona fides, but stresses that his remarks should not be viewed as an endorsement of Ryan or any candidate.
“I know him very well. He is in regular communication with his bishop.
“I am defending his reputation because I am the one who, as his diocesan bishop, should have something to say about this, if anyone does,” Bishop Morlino told the Register during an Aug. 15 telephone interview.
“Since others have, I believe, unfairly attacked his reputation, I have to look out for his good name. That is Church law. If someone disagrees with Paul, he is free to do that. But not on the basis of reputation destruction, really calumny,” he added.
“They say things about him that aren’t true. I am not a defender of Paul Ryan; I am a defender of reputations of Catholics in the public sphere whose reputations are unjustly attacked.”
During an Aug. 13 appearance
on the O’Reilly Factor, Sister Simone Campbell, the executive director of Network, the liberal social-justice lobby, criticized the Ryan budget for failing to secure programs that aided the poor and underemployed, while cutting taxes for the rich.

Sister Simone did not issue any personal attacks on the candidate, but asserted that “the Ryan budget shifts money to the top, not to the bottom. So the Ryan budget won’t do anything to stimulate the economy.”

In his column, Bishop Morlino sought to tamp down the rhetoric and encourage the kind of civil discourse that assumes the good intentions of a Catholic in good standing who is arguing about matters on which people of good will are free to disagree.

“Where intrinsic evils are not involved, specific policy choices and political strategies are the province of Catholic lay mission,” he states in a column that emphasizes the distinction between intrinsically evil choices that must always be opposed and policy positions shaped by prudential judgments, which should be guided by the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity with regards to those most in need.

“Vice-presidential candidate Ryan is aware of Catholic social teaching and is very careful to fashion and form his conclusions in accord with the principles mentioned above. Of that I have no doubt,” Bishop Morlino asserted, providing an unusually explicit defense of the candidate.

In a statement that expresses pride in the accomplishments of a “brother in the faith” and promises prayers for a candidate facing “the unbelievable demands of a presidential campaign here in the United States,” the bishop notes the responsibilities and limits of his own role as a teacher of faith and morals.

“It is not for the bishop or priests to endorse particular candidates or political parties. Any efforts on the part of any bishop or priest to do so should be set aside. And you can be assured that no priest who promotes a partisan agenda is acting in union with me or with the universal Church.”

“It is the role of bishops and priests to teach principles of our faith, such that those who seek elected offices, if they are Catholics, are to form their consciences according to these principles about particular policy issues.”



**Bishop Morlino described himself as a bystander in the conference’s internal discussions. But he had clear views about the tendency of some self-described “social justice” Catholics to ignore or even repudiate Catholic teaching on abortion, marriage and religious liberty.

Addressing what he called an “artificial divide” between “life and social justice” issues, he noted during his interview that “there is one group of ‘justice issues,’ and they are placed in a certain hierarchy with regard to how fundamental they are to being Catholic.”**

His column, he said, attempts to bridge that artificial divide by providing a framework with which to approach a range of policies and party platforms.

“The formation of conscience regarding particular policy issues is different depending on how fundamental to the ecology of human nature or the Catholic faith a particular issue is,” he notes in the column.

“Some of the most fundamental issues for the formation of a Catholic conscience are as follows: sacredness of human life from conception to natural death, marriage, religious freedom and freedom of conscience and a right to private property.”

Yet Paul Ryan’s confident references to Catholic social doctrine also serve as a reminder that some Catholics leaders seek to challenge the predictable arguments and politics appropriated by “social justice” Catholics.

Asked during the interview if Ryan represents a uniquely American type of Catholic politician, born and bred in a free-market environment that sharply departed from the European experience, Bishop Morlino paused for a moment and then observed that during a U.S. recession overshadowed and worsened by Europe’s cascading debt crisis, Americans are struggling to compare and contrast the two systems.
“Some say, ‘How can we compare America to Greece?’ Others say, ‘As Greece goes, so America goes.’

"We do have a distinctive way of looking at this,” but Church teaching on a just society transcends the European experience, providing essential moral and practical guidance for all Catholics, he said.

American Catholics are “shaped by an economic culture that fosters, really reinforces, a self-centered ethos,” he said, stressing the vital importance of a properly formed conscience.

“We cannot be complacent about our market system,” he concluded. “Private property is a natural right, but it’s not an absolute right.”

ncregister.com/daily-news/paul-ryans-bishop-defends-him-amid-attacks-on-his-application-of-church-tea

my emphases
 
Jesus said it will be harder for the rich to enter heaven than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. So now you have me wondering if He thinks most are hypocrites.
No, he hates the situation where people love material more than God. That is what the “rich man through the eye of a needle” is all about. People become more attached to their “stuff” than to the idea of eternity in heaven with God.
 
I read an interesting thing written by an economist recently. He said (and demonstrated) that capital in all its forms constitutes approximately 1/3 of gross national income, and always has. If it falls, then national income going to labor also falls, though the relationship remains the same. He graphed it out and it has been true ever since 1929 when they first started keeping records on it.

Some, but not all capital is “consumed”. It’s used up (a machine would be an example) and has to be replaced. It can only be replaced through income received by the person who is willing to replace it or the totality of capital is reduced. Since income from labor depends on that capital/labor ratio, failing to replace consumed capital causes labor income to fall.

That’s easy enough to understand if one thinks of it in terms of a factory machine that wears out. If the factory owner doesn’t replace it, at least some workers get laid off because there’s nothing for them to do. If the factory owner liquidates some other capital (let’s say he sells another machine) to replace the consumed capital, it has the same result, just in a different way. Therefore, consumed capital can only be successfully replaced by income. That’s what Obama wants government to have a greater share of; the source of replacement capital for consumed capital. Maybe he expects that to work out for the best and maybe he doesn’t, but there is absolutely no reason to believe it will not simply consume replacement capital.
Personally, from my reading of industrial trends that is pretty much what is going on for the past 20 odd years since Bush 1 and his air/water reauthorization acts. The only new investments have been in areas where labor can be cost effectively replaced by automation. In fact I stumbled across an article in a waiting room where the author was describing one of the construction operations not affected by the recession was in dismantling old industrial plant’s power houses and shipping them abroad.
In short we are living off a previous generations investment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top