Pope Francis drives a wedge between Catholic Church, GOP

  • Thread starter Thread starter gracepoole
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Path_Finder said:
Yes, we can know Cuba and Miami, however, when both the Democrat Cuban-American Senator Mendendez and the Republican Cuban-American Senator Rubio are against this bill, that shows a bipartisan consensus, add to that one-half Cuban-American Ted Cruz, all are against it. We can say the Pope knows better but he’s not even Cuban.

.
Click to expand...
If we go by that then neither Rubio or Melendez are Cubans as their nationalities are american and they have never stepped on Cuban soil.
Even worst, Marco Rubik’s parents came to the USA before Fidel took power. They came with Batista so neither Rubio nor his parent have a real idea of what Cubans actually lived during the 59 because they just watched it from TV on their living rooms in the USA. So no they don’t know any better because his parents weren’t even in Cuba when Fidel took pose.

Here we are not discussing the entire deal with Cuba but the article. The article states that Marco Rubio is a practicing catholic which is false. And that the Pope is causing a wedge based on the comment of someone who does not attend the church and only uses the church as political tool to get more votes and from someone who is just watching the interest of a very small circle of people which is not representative of the GOP or the Republican party. I don’t think there is really any wedge. I think the writer of the article isfalling into ythe erroneous assumption that because he is x then everyone else is x.
 
kenmiller said:
No party is the perfect union for Catholics - but the Dems agenda is abortion , gay marriage and every bit as big business as Repub. So not sure your point ? Big Government is the answer maybe
Click to expand...
👍

The Republican interest is greedy business, that’s why they are so popular in Alabama, Mississippi and Tennessee! 🙂
 
marymary1975 said:
If we go by that then neither Rubio or Melendez are Cubans as their nationalities are american and they have never stepped Cuban.
Even worst, Marco Rubik’s parents came to the USA before Fidel took power. They came with Batista so neither Rubio nor his parent have a real idea of what Cubans actually lived during the 59 because they just watched it from TV on their living rooms in the USA. So no they don’t know any better because his parents weren’t even in Cuba when Fidel took pose.

Here we are not discussing the entire deal with Cuba but the article. The article states that Marco Rubio is a practicing catholic which is false. And that the Pope is causing a wedge based on the comment of someone who does not attend the church and only uses the church as political tool to get more votes and from someone who is just watching the interest of a very small circle of people which is not representative of the GOP or the Republican party. I don’t think there is really any wedge. I think the writer of the article isfalling into ythe erroneous assumption that because he is x then everyone else is x.
Click to expand...
msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pope-francis-splits-with-gop/ar-BBhnBTy
Hours after President Obama announced moves to ease trade and travel restrictions to Cuba, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.),** a practicing Catholic** and potential 2016 presidential candidate, criticized the deal and Francis’s role in it.
Click to expand...
Also, it is not clear what the role the Pontiff and advisers played in the deal. Only the President could absolutely cement the deal.

Also, we gave back persons convicted in aiding murder for the American released. No amount of discussion is going to change some basic facts of this deal. That doesn’t seem right and it doesn’t seem right that this deal is more geared at helping the Cuban dictatorship.
 
If anything, policies of this government seemed largely influenced by President Obama’s rich Hollywood friends and those on Rodeo Drive and definitely on Wall Street. Don’t tell me the DNC is the poor man’s party.
 
Path_Finder said:
👍

The Republican interest is greedy business, that’s why they are so popular in Alabama, Mississippi and Tennessee! 🙂
Click to expand...
Obamacare is greedy business, just in 2008 Obama had the most corp donations of any Pres ever . So both parties guilty of that. But like global warming the liberals want a big governement solution just like in handling business.
 
Path_Finder said:
If anything, policies of this government seemed largely influenced by President Obama’s rich Hollywood friends and those on Rodeo Drive and definitely on Wall Street. Don’t tell me the DNC is the poor man’s party.
Click to expand...
Well exactly , It is a fallacy as is man made global warming . Ironic the solution is greater and greater government
 
If we go by that then neither Rubio or Melendez are Cubans as their nationalities are american and they have never stepped Cuban.
Even worst, Marco Rubik’s parents came to the USA before Fidel took power. They came with Batista so neither Rubio nor his parent have a real idea of what Cubans actually lived during the 59 because they just watched it from TV on their living rooms in the USA. So no they don’t know any better because his parents weren’t even in Cuba when Fidel took pose.
Click to expand...
Then we have no African-Americans unless they stepped into Africa, no Irish-Americans unless they step into Ireland and so on. No one uses this logic.

We know plenty about Cuba. You don’t have to live there to know just like you don’t have to live in Canada or Mexico to know what it is like or live in California to know what California is.

therealcuba.com/
 
Sy_Noe said:
👍 If we’re going by the Church definition of “Catholic” (Baptism/Confirmation & OCAC) then I’d fit your description. And in secular elections I vote against far more Republicans than I do Democrats in the 2 party system. Consider myself generally liberal politically and make no apologies for it. I don’t look at the L-word as a dirty word and am unashamed to wear the banner of either liberal or progressive. And I very much welcome this Pope’s tone. And what I believe is his attempt to draw faithful Catholics to follow his example. For them to evangelize in a similar gentler manner and tone. I however am under no naive illusions whatsoever that teaching will change in anyway.
Click to expand...
People see what they want to see, more often than not. I have been called a liberal by some, yet, I believe in church doctrine. I think of myself simply as a Catholic, but echo the Pope on some issues like the DP and suddenly, your a liberal, but I am not here to dredge that issue up.

The Pope has called for a renewed focus on the poor and the homeless. He wants us to focus on things that matter, one of which is to help the poor. There is nothing wrong with wanting to live in comfort, but as Christians, we should strike a balance and look on those who are less fortunate than us. We are here for just a blink of an eye, keeping this in mind we should think about our eternal future and that of others.

I think about the old parable of the empire that had a new king for seven years, and then he was turned out to the forest, where more often then not he was eaten by wild creatures. One wise king knowing this, turned the forest into a grand park for all to enjoy. When he was turned out after his reign, he lived in comfort and happiness.
 
Path_Finder said:
msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pope-francis-splits-with-gop/ar-BBhnBTy

Also, it is not clear what the role the Pontiff and advisers played in the deal. Only the President could absolutely cement the deal.

Also, we gave back persons convicted in aiding murder for the American released. No amount of discussion is going to change some basic facts of this deal. That doesn’t seem right and it doesn’t seem right that this deal is more geared at helping the Cuban dictatorship.
Click to expand...
Marco Rubio is not a practicing Catholic. In fact one of his biggest scandals with regard to that was the fact that he donated thousands of dollars (I think it was 500k yearly if I remember correctly) to that evangelical church he attended weekly in Florida and when he was eventually asked about donations to the archiodicesis of Miami he declined to talk. So unless we are defining being practicing catholic paying 500k each yearto the eevangelical church, no he is not a practicing catholic. He was baptized as catholic ad a grown up (supposedly because baptism should be at an adult age not as an infant according to his “catholicism”) but he doesn’t practice the catholic religion.
 
esieffe said:
There is nothing wrong with wanting to live in comfort, but as Christians, we should strike a balance and look on those who are less fortunate than us. We are here for just a blink of an eye, keeping this in mind we should think about our eternal future and that of others.
Click to expand...
True, but we can only do so much, considering that 80%+ of the world’s population can easily be called poor. Based on the law of distribution and Christ’s own words, the poor will always be with us, and the stats won’t change, but I’ll bet many of the world’s poor are better off than they were 20-30 years ago. Give at least a little credit to where credit is due.
 
ProVobis said:
True, but we can only do so much, considering that 80%+ of the world’s population can easily be called poor. Based on the law of distribution and Christ’s own words, the poor will always be with us, and the stats won’t change, but I’ll bet many of the world’s poor are better off than they were 20-30 years ago. Give at least a little credit to where credit is due.
Click to expand...
I recall reading that if every asset in the U.S., including stocks, bonds, bank accounts, homes, automobiles, furniture, land, machinery and everything else were sold for its present fair market value and distributed evenly over the world population, it would amount to about $1,000 per person. It would soon be gone, of course, and no second distribution. Obviously, too, once the sale started, prices for everything would collapse. But set that aside for the moment.

So, no matter how wealthy anyone thinks Americans are, and no matter how indignant they are about it, there really isn’t all that much to spread around. It really isn’t possible for America to make a significant difference in the financial condition of the rest of the world. So, in truth, those of the more extreme “social justice” persuasion who somehow think massive redistribution will solve much of anything are barking up an empty tree. It’s a romantic, ideological position, not a practical one. It’s a belief that somehow men can, by their own efforts, (force in particular) return to Eden notwithstanding that an angel with a sword of fire (as scripture assures us) guards the gate.

What is possible, however, is for individuals to make decisions based on Church teachings (which are pretty nonspecific) and conscience concerning the ultimate destinations of their resources. In considering that, one must consider those most proximate to him/her first, and according to their stations in life. We do not, for example, deprive our children of a decent education in order to send the cost of it to Haiti. It would be a drop in the bucket in Haiti, and might consign those whose lives we can affect most to a very negative future. But we do not need to send our child to college in a new Corvette when a ten year old Chevy would serve the purpose. If we can then give the difference to charity, we have done what we ought to do, keeping in mind that we need to ensure that our spouse is provided for in his/her old age.

For many of us, charity can’t extend beyond immediate family, and shouldn’t. For many of us, it can extend to neighbor, community, church, charities, as means and other demands of life allow. That can, and for some will, include those in foreign lands.

And I don’t think there is any exact formula for it.
 
WOW, this topic was opened just today and it’s already 7 pages long.

🍿

Jim
 
Ridgerunner said:
… it would amount to about $1,000 per person. It would soon be gone, of course, and no second distribution. Obviously, too, once the sale started, prices for everything would collapse.
Click to expand...
That’s the important point. It goes back to the “give someone a fish, it’s gone, but teach someone to fish, it lasts a lifetime” argument. Education always seems to have longer effects, if one wants to help provide a better life for those not so fortunate. And even for those who are fortunate, for that matter.
 
ProVobis said:
That’s the important point. It goes back to the “give someone a fish, it’s gone, but teach someone to fish, it lasts a lifetime” argument. Education always seems to have longer effects, if one wants to help provide a better life for those not so fortunate. And even for those who are fortunate, for that matter.
Click to expand...
I am not in favor of forced redistribution, but there are certainly many ways assets can be redistributed that would significantly improve people’s lives. For example, we have a lot of wasted assets here in the US, for example, our tax laws encourage overinvestment in housing, which creates no jobs and makes nobody but the owner of the house better off. That same overinvestment transferred into a human capital investment in a less developed country could significantly increase many people’s income. Part of this is our call as Christians to be concerned for the poor we need to think how we are deploying our assets.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
Part of this is our call as Christians to be concerned for the poor we need to think how we are deploying our assets.
Click to expand...
I do agree with this. I have read, at least, that when the economy is creating wealth, people are more generous to charitable causes. The reverse is also true. While it’s certainly possible for some companies to invest in, say, the Dominican Republic and while doing so undoubtedly creates employment there, the products still have to go somewhere where people can afford to buy them and are not afraid to do so. Maybe people in El Salvador all wear Bass Weejuns, but I doubt it. And they’re not really expensive shoes as shoes go, but not cheap either.
 
I think we also need to remember at what point do people think they are poor or needy. It is all a matter of perspective. Not long ago I saw a video of people giving $100.00 to homeless person only to watch him go spend that $100.00 dollars on food which he turned around and gave to other homeless families. Or a video where a home less person was given dinner just to gladly share it with another home less person. That, to me anyway, means much more than someone with a million dollars give $100.00 to a charity, but every little bit means something.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top