J
- Status
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
No, I did not. You chose not to read this:
and this:(Thank you for reinforcing what I said on one of the two recent “intrinsic evils” threads.)
Government “help” which encourages compromises of any kind to the traditional nuclear family is not in accord with Catholic social teaching.
Not to mention many other posts on many threads in which I re-state Catholic priorities.Correct, i.m.o. Romney has not pledged to try to overturn Roe, or necessarily to limit abortion by supporting legislative initiatves. (Difficult, with Roe as the legal barometer.)
However, here’s my argument “to the Court”:
Romney has not pledged to support SS"M." Romney has not pledged to support contraception distribution in public schools. Those are both indirectly social justice issues in my (very Catholic) book. It is not socially just to further the deconstruction of traditional marriage. It is not socially just to encourage fornication among the very young and most fertile segment of the population, because the mentality which separates sex from marriage is the same mentality which views abortion as the final contraceptive, and because the frequent pregnancies which result from teenage sex (despite contraception availability) typically result in greater poverty and fewer employment opportunities for that population. When that poorly educated mother carries to term, she is either without that mate, indefinitely, or without a suitable replacement mate who can support her emotionally and financially. Or she marries the father of the child, who typically is as poorly educated and ill-prepared economically as she is.
The President’s policies (and really, more accurately, the Democratic Party polices) threaten the dignity of the human person as set out in the social teaching of the Catholic Church. They threaten the economic and family futures of the most poor in this country, who are right now the dominant population in public schools.
So I don’t buy the liberal Catholic view of Obama being more in line with Catholic social justice. He is not. Not when you look at the underpinnings of the theology of social justice: its premises. One of its major premises is the critical role of an unseparated and traditional family. (It’s a concept which informs the statement on migration, for example.)
So then the Catholic voter has to look at other aspects of Romney’s vs. Obama’s (vs. any other candidate’s) economic policies, and project into the possible results of those, comprehensively, not narrowly. Which candidate’s policies are most in line (or least not in line) with the liberation of the human person to achieve economic security? Again, I stress, these have to be looked upon comprehensively. An unstable economy does not promote economic stability for the individual, particularly an individual which few economic options. Most often, the rich can survive unstable economies, because they generally have many resources, monetarily, socially (by position & associations), & educationally.
We should never be sound-bite, bullet-point voters, looking narrowly at how the superficial mainstream media “summarizes” issues. Campaign speeches do not equal issues.
Thanks for not reading.
So I will repeat: it is immaterial whether or not abortion specifically is mentioned. All the rest of the Democratic Party platform also opposes the social teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, as LisaA mentioned earlier, as various bishops have also mentioned, etc. The argument that liberal Catholics like to bring up is that Democrats support Catholic social justice. Overall, they do not, even without the consideration of the intrinsic evil of abortion. That was the point of my post, Robert, not a diferent point, or your point.
Had you followed any of my posts over 3.5 years, you would be clear that I have shown that the so-called Democratic “social justice” platform supports abortion even indirectly, in related policies, not to mention their overt support. I refuse to cite and paste all of my posts here. The argument I was discussing was not an abortion-vote argument but a Catholic social justice argument, in which the Democrats come up short on all counts (vs. supporting social justice on all counts). The position of the “social justice” Catholics is that the Democrats support born life more than the Republicans. And I’ve shown repeatedly how that is flagrantly untrue.
P
Pork_Roll
Guest
According to this article, Romney wants to cut Federal salaries. Every year with a pay freeze is an effective 2-4% pay reduction. According to what Romney and Ryan want to do, total pay cuts would amount to about a 20% pay cut to middle class salaries.
These savings will just be spent somewhere else like with the current pay freeze.
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Not a problem, as they will be able to get private sector jobs in a Romney administation
P
PJD1987
Guest
Not a problem, as they will be able to get private sector jobs in a Romney administation
T
Tampa_Dave
Guest
I am a former federal litigation attorney. Federal salaries and benefits, in particular pensions, are much greater than the private sector, with exception to those in professional fields (lawyers, doctors, engineers, etc.).
“Federal workers made an average $75,296 in pay last year, plus $28,323 in medical, pension and other benefits,” a USA Today analysis from December 28, 2011, found. “That’s about 60 percent more than the average private wage, a difference explained largely by higher education levels and more professional jobs in the federal workforce,” the report adds.
Am I sympathetic to the plight of federal employees? Not much.
meltzerboy
New member
Haven’t both major political parties gone to the extreme, and isn’t that part of the gridlock problem in Congress? I think the days of the centrist and moderate Democrats and Republicans are practically over. The best we can hope for now are intellectual, policy-driven, progressive Democrats and Republicans in the tradition of Daniel Moynihan and Jack Kemp. Maybe Paul Ryan is one of these. Neither Romney nor Obama is in that category.
P
Pork_Roll
Guest
I hope so. I like to point out I work for the federal government and was offered a 40% pay raise to work for the private sector. These federal vs private sector comparisons are riddled with problems because they usually compare apples to oranges.
T
Tampa_Dave
Guest
I hope never to see the terms “progressive” and “Republicans” joined together. Nancy Pelosi is a “progressive”, Paul Ryan is not.
meltzerboy
New member
Haha! I actually did not at first include the word, knowing I would get negative reactions. But Jack Kemp might be described as such, and he was one of Paul Ryan’s mentors. What is meant by the term is the kind of Republican or Democrat who has fresh ideas and a bipartisan approach to politics. According to that definition, Nancy Pelosi is most certainly not a progressive.
L
LisaA
Guest
AARP is FAR LEFT and made a BUNDLE out of Obamacare by throwing seniors under the bus to enrich themselves with their in house Medicare plans. Then the irony, AARP asked for and received a WAIVER from Obamacare.
This is an organization that loves to feather its own nest. Whatever they have to say is about as credible as asking Bernie Madoff how to invest your money.
As to your claim about Ryan being Sarah Palin, you might forget that Sarah Palin revived McCain’s sinking ship. She was not the problem with that campaign. Aside from that even Ryan’s dectractors claim that he’s smart, serious and knowledgable on economic and budget matters particularly.
Good try though!
Lisa
P
PJD1987
Guest
I don’t believe so, Republicans abandoned their conservative principles and went moderate for far too long. They are resetting to their conservative principles, whereas Democrats have been left and drift farther left by the day.
The Democratic leftward movement has been in motion for a long time, the Republicans followed suit, the Republicans now are just resetting to their former position, but because the left continues to go Left it seems they are way Right, when in fact they are not. Our perception has changed of the issues though and thus the perception is skewed, but its skewed by progressive liberals rather than the other way around.
Simply because the conservatives are actually acting conservative again does not mean they have drifted far right, they are reset to where they were and should have been.
God bless.
-Paul
J
jsmith354
Guest
I totally agree Paul. Good comment.
jeannie
jeannie
meltzerboy
New member
Ryan is no Sarah Palin, that’s for sure. And I do think Palin was at least part of the problem with McCain’s campaign after the initial enthusiasm wore off.
Why do I still support Obama, you asked a while ago? I just cannot abide the social conservatism of the Right, for one thing. For a party that wants government off our backs, they are way too concerned with the private decisions of individuals and families on matters of life, love, and death. I actually don’t mind the fiscal conservatism so much, provided it does not undercut the poor, including the working poor. Also, I’m a lifelong Democrat and have always associated the GOP as the party of the status quo rather than change, and the party of the wealthy and corporate business rather than the champions of the middle class and workers’ rights.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I think Ryan is. He and the uber-liberal Ron Wyden (formerly a representative, now a senator) of Oregon jointly crafted a Medicare reform plan. One might argue with the plan, but it was certainly bipartisan in its initiation. It was neither specifically conservative or liberal, but it did propose to save the system.
P
PJD1987
Guest
Well the GOP is the party of Change this time around, meltzer. Real Change!
God bless.
-Paul
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
They’re riddled with problems, but also with opportunities. I’ll never forget having a long and interesting talk with a bank examiner long ago when I was in banking. I was then considering even leaving the bank to run my own business. The examiner talked about all of his GS level stuff and pensions and medical plans and vacation time and all of that. Frankly, I didn’t find that very attractive, though certainly it was security blanket of a very major sort. He did not find my thoughts about striking out on my own attractive either.
Finally, he and I agreed we were like that old painting of the collie dog inside the warm cabin looking out the window at the wolf standing in the snow looking at him. The examiner didn’t want any part of being the wolf, and I didn’t want any part of being the collie dog.
Different people see things different ways, and it’s okay.
L
LisaA
Guest
I can vouch for Wyden’s lefty cred. He’s a product of Oregon (land of fruits nuts and flakes) and pro abortion, pro gay marriage, and pro gun control.
That being said, he may have taken a page from our former and current Governor’s “Oregon Health Plan” which in effect provided… a sort of VOUCHER program for those on Medicaid. In effect this plan pulled together all of the big health care insurance companies and had them take a number of Medicaid patients. So Mrs Smith would come in with her Blue Cross card or her Kaiser insurance and by code we knew it was Medicaid and of course paid poorly. But by spreading the risk (this is what insurance is SUPPOSED TO DO) to all the insurers, it allowed the patients to receive care, face less stigma and less resistence. Although the OHP still paid poorly, it was not nearly the administrative nightmare as the straight Medicaid. We worked with the insurers who were far better able to process bills than the state workers. So while we didn’t get paid much, we got paid. What a concept!
This is why Ryan’s plan was acceptable to Lefty Wyden, because he is somewhat of a specialist and supporter of seniors (I think he may have started the Gray Panthers years ago) and he is at least honest enough to try to fix the problem instead of fixing the blame which is apparently the Obama plan.
Of course Wyden and the Dems are running for the hills now that Ryan is the Veep nominee.
Lisa
D
DeSanto
Guest
“As a constituent of congressman Ryan and a Catholic priest, I am disappointed by his cruel budget plan and outraged that he defends it on moral grounds.”
-Father Thomas Kelly
-Father Thomas Kelly
P
PJD1987
Guest
Father Kelly is a liberal priest that is tied up with NETWORK and Sr. Simone Campbell and other heterodox Catholics and Catholic groups that misrepresent misunderstand and distort the faith to further their agenda.
Fact.
I will take the opinion of Cardinal Dolan and the other Bishops over Father Thomas Kelly, with all due respect.
God bless.
-Paul
- Status