Sanders Thread

[mary_bobo]

Well, at least Democrats do care about the poor and make a plan. Catholic ethics demands a preferential option for the poor. I don’t see that coming from the Republicans.

I know some poor people who have benefited from Democratic policies for the poor, and, every life counts.

Perhaps you have not looked very hard. To each his own.

 

[Crossbones]

Party allegiance is irrelevant to those who follow the non-negotiables.

It’s about principle, not the advancement of a political party.

That’s why a lot of conservatives (and libertarians for different reasons) are willing to split the ticket and are less concerned about winning the election.

It’s something I disagree with mainly because of the open SC seat and because I sometimes find people’s reasoning to actually be more self-involved (I’ve heard and seen pretty much every excuse) but some of those will go so far as to even say that maybe America does need to suffer through some tough times under progressive policy to learn their lesson.

It doesn’t sound like the Pope is a big fan of the non-negotiables, so those who follow them don’t seem to be listening to the Pope.

 

[stinkcat_14]

It depends on which republicans one is talking about.

The government has certain duties, like protecting its people whether its from slavery or abortion, and securing the national border.

That’s not big government, that’s adhering to the Constitution.

But if one is talking about farm subsidies or public funding for unionized millionaires and billionaire sports team owners, yes, those are problems, especially some republicans will vote against their values to get these things.

Also, republicans support big government welfare programs like Medicare and social security. Nobody who believes in small government could support those programs. The republicans do a pretty good job of giving lip service to small government, but you look at their behavior you see the opposite.

 

[Peter_J]

Pretty rich coming from Hillary

Let’s hope people remember that. I think I’d die if, a few years hence, a Republican says something in support of Israel and someone remarks “That’s pretty rich coming from a Republican!”

 

[Peter_J]

Maybe take it up with Tim Staples.

Tim Staples?

 

[anon67074017]

I would have a lot of trouble loving my country if Bernie won the general election. I feel like it would be wrong to support the United States since it would have a socialist leader. I have already seen the country deteriorate into liberalism since Obama took office. Bernie getting elected would seal the deal. I would not be very patriotic if Bernie won. I have considered not standing for the national anthem at all.

 

[Sy_Noe]

He said that it is all about the five non-negotiables and religious liberty. Since religious liberty is not included in the 5 non-negotiables it must be negotiable.

I admit it was pure snark but it echoes the words of Pope Francis:

“I have never understood the expression non-negotiable values,” responded the Pope. “Values are values, and that is it. I can’t say that, of the fingers of a hand, there is one less useful than the rest. Whereby I do not understand in what sense there may be negotiable values.”

Catholic Answers came up with the idea of the non-negotiables. It is not Catholic teaching.

Exactly. The link to the voting guide another poster provided plainly shows at the top of the guide: “Copyright © 2004, Catholic Answers”.

Yet the bishops say: “During election years, there may be many handouts and voter guides that are produced and distributed. We encourage Catholics to seek those resources authorized by their own bishops, their state Catholic conferences, and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.”

usccb.org/issues-and-action/faithful-citizenship/forming-consciences-for-faithful-citizenship-part-one.cfm

 

[SuperLuigi]

Also, republicans support big government welfare programs like Medicare and social security. Nobody who believes in small government could support those programs. The republicans do a pretty good job of giving lip service to small government, but you look at their behavior you see the opposite.

What’s interesting is that supporters of those programs will gruffly say they paid into the system, so it’s not necessarily an entitlement.

But once one collects more than they paid in…

 

[SuperLuigi]

=Lily Bernans;13787212]Well, at least Democrats do care about the poor and make a plan. Catholic ethics demands a preferential option for the poor. I don’t see that coming from the Republicans.

I do. Free-market solutions. And Reagan said it best “I believe the best social program is a job”.

Plus, all one has to do is look at Chicago or Detroit to see how great progressives policies are for the poor.

Over 50 years and counting for the War on Poverty…

I know some poor people who have benefited from Democratic policies for the poor, and, every life counts.

The dirty little secret about government programs is that somewhere, someone ALWAYS benefits.

What people don’t like to look at is the overall cost.

The USA is currently 19T in debt and counting.

How will the poor be helped should the checks they get not be worth the paper they are printed on?

That’s the problem with being dependent on dysfunctional government.

 

[mary_bobo]

I do. Free-market solutions. And Reagan said it best “I believe the best social program is a job”.

Plus, all one has to do is look at Chicago or Detroit to see how great progressives policies are for the poor.

Over 50 years and counting for the War on Poverty…

The dirty little secret about government programs is that somewhere, someone ALWAYS benefits.

What people don’t like to look at is the overall cost.

The USA is currently 19T in debt and counting.

How will the poor be helped should the checks they get not be worth the paper they are printed on?

That’s the problem with being dependent on dysfunctional government.

:thumbsup

 

[Peter_J]

Exactly. The link to the voting guide another poster provided plainly shows at the top of the guide: “Copyright © 2004, Catholic Answers”.

Yet the bishops say: “During election years, there may be many handouts and voter guides that are produced and distributed. We encourage Catholics to seek those resources authorized by their own bishops, their state Catholic conferences, and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.”

usccb.org/issues-and-action/faithful-citizenship/forming-consciences-for-faithful-citizenship-part-one.cfm

Sure. But I think that any promoters of Bernie (or Hillary or Donald for that matter) looking for support from those guides will be sorely disappointed.

 

[zz912]

It’s interesting how they so well match up with the Republican Party.

Perhaps it has nothing to do with the Republican Party, and more to do with the fact the DNC has rejected God and Christian morality.

 

[zz912]

**Well, at least Democrats do care about the poor and make a plan. **Catholic ethics demands a preferential option for the poor. I don’t see that coming from the Republicans.

I know some poor people who have benefited from Democratic policies for the poor, and, every life counts.

It’s amazing how much calumny, libel and uncharitable comments can be thrown about on this board.

I guess it’s easier to simply say your political opponent is evil instead of arguing against their positions.

 

[stinkcat_14]

It’s amazing how much calumny, libel and uncharitable comments can be thrown about on this board.

I guess it’s easier to simply say your political opponent is evil instead of arguing against their positions.

I don’t see any calumny or libel in her remarks. She gave an opinion, which you may or may not disagree with. As to charity, when it comes to politicians, no charity is owed. In politics, there is no duty to ever say anything nice about the other side. Otherwise politics would be way too dull.

 

[estesbob]

It’s amazing how much calumny, libel and uncharitable comments can be thrown about on this board.

I guess it’s easier to simply say your political opponent is evil instead of arguing against their positions.

That has Always been the prime rationalization to support evil. Demonize the opposition beyond recognition and basically say that aborted children are necessary collateral damage in the quest for social justice

 

[zz912]

I don’t see any calumny or libel in her remarks. She gave an opinion, which you may or may not disagree with. As to charity, when it comes to politicians, no charity is owed. In politics, there is no duty to ever say anything nice about the other side. Otherwise politics would be way too dull.

I don’t see how you miss the calumny or libel. Stating the GOP does not care about the poor, and has no preferential option for them is patently false and also questions the motivations and beliefs of those in the GOP. It’s saying they don’t like the poor or hate them because the GOP disagrees with the poster about the best policies for alleviating poverty.

And on a Catholic message board, charity is owed. Or at least I thought so.

 

[Crossbones]

Perhaps it has nothing to do with the Republican Party, and more to do with the fact the DNC has rejected God and Christian morality.

Well, Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship seems to cover a wider array of issues. Some would favor Republicans and other Democrats. Then there are those guides that are not endorsed by the Church that seem to only emphasize issues that favor one party or another. I guess that’s why the USCCB doesn’t endorse those guides.

 

[stinkcat_14]

I don’t see how you miss the calumny or libel. Stating the GOP does not care about the poor, and has no preferential option for them is patently false and also questions the motivations and beliefs of those in the GOP. It’s saying they don’t like the poor or hate them because the GOP disagrees with the poster about the best policies for alleviating poverty.

And on a Catholic message board, charity is owed. Or at least I thought so.

I don’t think the republicans care for the poor. Is that calumny? No, that is an opinion. I also don’t think the democrats care for the poor either. That is not calumny either. That is an opinion as well. Whether the republicans or democrats care or don’t care for the poor is not a verifiable fact, so it is subject to our interpretation.

 

[stinkcat_14]

That has Always been the prime rationalization to support evil. Demonize the opposition beyond recognition and basically say that aborted children are necessary collateral damage in the quest for social justice

I would argue that both sides to a pretty good job of demonizing the opposition. As one who finds the republican party way too liberal, I do find it amusing when republicans pretend to be conservative when they are usually much more liberal in practice. For example, Romney had a liberal view on abortion. Not as liberal as Obama, but liberal nonetheless. Yet many actually seemed to imply that there was something virtuous about voting for a pro-abortion politician. In reality, it was a sad day when the best one can do is vote for a lesser evil. And it cannot be denied that his position on abortion was evil.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I don’t see how you miss the calumny or libel. Stating the GOP does not care about the poor, and has no preferential option for them is patently false and also questions the motivations and beliefs of those in the GOP. It’s saying they don’t like the poor or hate them because the GOP disagrees with the poster about the best policies for alleviating poverty.

And on a Catholic message board, charity is owed. Or at least I thought so.

I said I don’t see it, and I don’t see it. It’s not an accusation against any person or any party. It’s just an opinion. And I don’t “hate” the GOP. I’ve voted for GOP candidates in the past, but I won’t this election cycle.

If you can show me specifically how the GOP give preferential treatment to the poor, I would probably change my opinion.