US Bishops' Conference Largely Disappointed by Debt Ceiling Agreement

[4elise]

Yum, I am not sure you understood what I was trying to say, and would appreciate if my words are not used ‘against’ anyone - it was not how I intended that.

All of us - myself included, always favor the position we see as being the one most supported by our beliefs, the most logical, and we reject that which does not support it - or make excuses, redefine, etc. In this topic - among other Catholics I really find this discouraging.

 

[4elise]

"No, you can never vote for someone who favors absolutely what’s called the ‘right to choice’ of a woman to destroy human life in her womb, or the right to a procured abortion,"

Cardinal Raymond Burke

Yet for thirty-five years I’ve watched prominent “pro-choice” Catholics justify themselves with the kind of moral and verbal gymnastics that should qualify as an Olympic event. All they’ve really done is capitulate to Roe v. Wade

Archbishop Charles Chaput

We are seeing a lot of those moral and verbal gymnastics in this thread.

faithfulcitizenship.org/church/statements

 

[CMatt25]

The rancor in this discussion - among people who share a common faith - is really discouraging, don’t you think?

We are people who follow the teachings of Jesus to put the needs of our brothers and sisters at equal importance with our own needs. I understand that some think this is exclusively the job of the private sector, philanthropy, and somehow this (if we had enough tax relief) there would be enough support by non profit organizations to meet these needs. Some (this is the group I find myself) believe that the government can and should provide a safety net - and those who have more, should do more, and where sacrifice should be spread across the population the larger burden on those who can afford it.

What I am concerned about is - if we people of a common faith - can’t have this discussion, without retreating to well worn corners how can we expect congress to get anything done? Maybe we can’t!

Yes I think it is very discouraging. On this forum and in Congress. We all on both sides can be guilty of retreating to our corners at times. But I look at Congress where cuts were made by both sides. But then where one side would not budge on their refusal to require those who have the most and who can most afford to do more, to share more of the saccifice. And I look at this forum and some seem to think the only sacrifice being made is by those already paying the most in taxes. They seem to overlook the sacrifices being forced upon those most affected by program cuts. In any case let us pray His will be done. God bless you and peace.

 

[JimG]

Reading this thread, it occurs to me that we are going to have to re-write Matthew 25:44ff:

“Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or away from home or naked or ill or in prison and not attend to your needs? And he will answer them, “I assure you, as long as you neglected to establish government programs to attend to their needs, you neglected to establish government programs to attend to me.”

And since this passage is about the last judgment, it will make salvation quite easy. Those who pay taxes will be saved, and the more taxes they pay the higher their place in heaven.

And if the government is still losing money every day, the solution is simple. Take it from the rich, and if that’s not enough, take it from the grandkids. But, we’re already doing that.

 

[Nec5]

And if the government is still losing money every day, the solution is simple. Take it from the rich, and if that’s not enough, take it from the grandkids. But, we’re already doing that.

In the olden days, I think they called that “robbing Peter to pay Paul”, another scripture reference.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Subsidiarity has become a ‘shield/tool’ for some to reject a greater truth, in my opinion. The same group accuses fellow Catholics of not understanding other teachings of the Church, that have not been clarified as they claim it to be for political reasons.

You mean like Christianity has become a tool to ignore states rights, individual freedom, personal responsibility and the Constitution?

 

[ishii]

We the people, are the government, or supposed to be in the US. Those government programs were put into place because of the truth of His teachings. In affect, it is His teachings that some think ‘make things worse for the poor’. Where did Christ say to withhold from the poor because they are sinners?

You’re wrong. The government programs were put in place not because of Jesus’ teachings but because of a liberal belief in statism that prevailed in the LBJ era of the Democrat party. The Great Society programs that were part of the “war on poverty” in large part excacerbated the problem creating larger #'s of poor people. Illigitimacy, drugs, break up of the family, dependence on welfare, etc. are conditions that were made worse with the government programs! Why do you think Jesus would be in favor of government programs that created more sin and poverty???

Ishii

 

[4elise]

Reading this thread, it occurs to me that we are going to have to re-write Matthew 25:44ff:

“Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or away from home or naked or ill or in prison and not attend to your needs? And he will answer them, “I assure you, as long as you neglected to establish government programs to attend to their needs, you neglected to establish government programs to attend to me.”

And since this passage is about the last judgment, it will make salvation quite easy. Those who pay taxes will be saved, and the more taxes they pay the higher their place in heaven.

And if the government is still losing money every day, the solution is simple. Take it from the rich, and if that’s not enough, take it from the grandkids. But, we’re already doing that.

This is a good point - we are as individuals are not supposed to ignore the needs of our brothers and sisters, and we will be called to account for the times we have.

We are however, also a society, formed into governments. Do you think there is a responsibility collectively to do anything? Do you think the Church has this wrong?

 

[rlg94086]

We are 50 states. What’s the difference? Citizens of all states deserve fire and police services. Should we nationalize them? I disagree with your statement that some places “have larger challenges than they can meet on that state and local level.”

The same argument you are making could be made on a global level. The Church teaches that every person on the planet deserves a basic quality of life. Are you in favor of a global government with a global safety net? If not, why not?

Bump

 

[wynnejj]

Reading this thread, it occurs to me that we are going to have to re-write Matthew 25:44ff:

“Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or away from home or naked or ill or in prison and not attend to your needs? And he will answer them, “I assure you, as long as you neglected to establish government programs to attend to their needs, you neglected to establish government programs to attend to me.”

And since this passage is about the last judgment, it will make salvation quite easy. Those who pay taxes will be saved, and the more taxes they pay the higher their place in heaven.

And if the government is still losing money every day, the solution is simple. Take it from the rich, and if that’s not enough, take it from the grandkids. But, we’re already doing that.

Oh, I got a better idea. Let’s take from fewer & fewer kids & grandkids as a future tax base for the sins of their fathers & grandfathers.

We’re trying to fight a war for prosperity and posterity. We’re losing because we are missing an ingredient… morality.

 

[4elise]

You’re wrong. The government programs were put in place not because of Jesus’ teachings but because of a liberal belief in statism that prevailed in the LBJ era of the Democrat party. The Great Society programs that were part of the “war on poverty” in large part excacerbated the problem creating larger #'s of poor people. Illigitimacy, drugs, break up of the family, dependence on welfare, etc. are conditions that were made worse with the government programs! Why do you think Jesus would be in favor of government programs that created more sin and poverty???

Ishii

I looked for statistics that supported your claim that the efforts of the Great Society had led to more sin and poverty - and all I can find in a brief search (except blogs from people who also do not back their comments) countrystudies.us/united-states/history-121.htm / apparently began with tax cuts, and one measurable outcome, “1965 and 1968, for example, black-family income rose from 54 percent to 60 percent of white-family income” (infoplease.com/ipa/A0104552.html in 2006 median income white family: $50,673 / black family $31,969 58.5%)

It seems that one could take any point in history and then say everything ‘bad’ that happened since that point are a result of X - or the same argument could be for everything good that has happened since that point (or action) in history -

I think Johnsons efforts of the Great Society were well intended - and obviously one can argue if effective, but I think on the face of it they were intended to lift up the poor, because he believed if they were lifted up it would be good for everyone.

 

[4elise]

We are 50 states. What’s the difference? Citizens of all states deserve fire and police services. Should we nationalize them? I disagree with your statement that some places “have larger challenges than they can meet on that state and local level.”

The same argument you are making could be made on a global level. The Church teaches that every person on the planet deserves a basic quality of life. Are you in favor of a global government with a global safety net? If not, why not?

If there were states that could not provide their own fire and police that would be needed, then yes - for example the National Guard, the cooperative efforts of state fire departments when there is a large wild fire, we do have federal law enforcement because federal laws are applicable in all states.

The Pope does make this argument on a global level all the time - we are responsible for our brothers and sisters in Kenya who are suffering today - and our nation responds to the humanitarian needs of places around the world all the time, for example President Bush’s PEPFAR efforts to fight HIV/AIDS in Africa.

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0903092.htm

Pope Benedict insisted that the idea of the world’s richest nations scaling back development aid while focusing on their own economic recovery overlooked the long-term economic benefits of solidarity and not simply the human and Christian moral obligation to help the poor.

“In the search for solutions to the current economic crisis, development aid for poor countries must be considered a valid means of creating wealth for all,” the pope said.

 

[wynnejj]

We are however, also a society, formed into governments. Do you think there is a responsibility collectively to do anything? Do you think the Church has this wrong?

If I have a family and my earnings barely feed my family, should I take out a loan to keep up my usual level of charitable contributions domestically and abroad? Should I say… If I can get the loan, what do I care? Either I will not be able to pay it back and the creditor will have to absorb the loss, or worse case my kids will pay for it when times are better (I hope, I hope). Do you think this is what the Church teaches with this national budget debate?

In the context of the OP article, this is the scope of the question. Whether to tax from the rich is a subject for another thread, but it seems to be the crux of how this thread has morphed.

 

[CMatt25]

Reading this thread, it occurs to me that we are going to have to re-write Matthew 25:44ff:

“Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or away from home or naked or ill or in prison and not attend to your needs? And he will answer them, “I assure you, as long as you neglected to establish government programs to attend to their needs, you neglected to establish government programs to attend to me.”

And since this passage is about the last judgment, it will make salvation quite easy. Those who pay taxes will be saved, and the more taxes they pay the higher their place in heaven.

And if the government is still losing money every day, the solution is simple. Take it from the rich, and if that’s not enough, take it from the grandkids. But, we’re already doing that.

Matt 25:35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.

No one has to rewrite anything.

Because when private entities are not able to provide entirely for all the hungry, the homeless, and for the caring of all the sick and for all of us who one day will confront illness and disease, to make certain all then have access to adequate and affordable care, the Christ some of us read about in Scripture would not turn away additional government help, even if from a federal government, for those He spoke of in these verses.

We simply do not believe our Lord would say, "Well alright there is still a need and government has offered a greater role to help, but no I will instead allow those less fortunate still in need to continue to go without. I will allow the sick to go without affordable adequate, guaranteed healthcare. Because not raising taxes on those most able to afford to pay more is of greater importance to Me than the poor and the sick are.

This is simply not the Christ some of us read about in the Gospels. The Christ Whom was such a champion and Advocate for the poor, the downtrodden, and the sick.

And yet I haven’t seen a soul here advocate for government programs only as the sole means to fulfill all of Christ’s call to us. Only that government programs can be an important part of the equation to go along with individuals, faith based groups, and other entities.

It’s really not any more difficult to understand than that. Hope this helps. God bless us all as we strive in faith to walk our lifelong journeys with Him. Peace.

 

[4elise]

If I have a family and my earnings barely feed my family, should I take out a loan to keep up my usual level of charitable contributions domestically and abroad? Should I say… If I can get the loan, what do I care? Either I will not be able to pay it back and the creditor will have to absorb the loss, or worse case my kids will pay for it when times are better (I hope, I hope). Do you think this is what the Church teaches with this national budget debate?

In the context of the OP article, this is the scope of the question. Whether to tax from the rich is a subject for another thread, but it seems to be the crux of how this thread has morphed.

Do you really think one can compare household budgets to national budgets?

I think the differences are too great between the two to make simplistic comparisons - we can’t print money, we don’t sell bonds, (the kind of loan perhaps you are talking about) we do not have the ability to tax, wage wars (funded or not)

So what do you see as the responsibility of government? Are you a safety only libertarian, a support the market Republican, an non partisan who takes one from column A (pro life) B (support strong defense) C ?

so to the scope of the question I think the Church - given the OP and what I’ve grown up with - I believe the Church teaches that not only individuals but nations have a responsibility to care for the poor - that nations made up of people with free will have the ability to make choices as to where we will put our priorities - the church calls us to have an option for the poor - they come first, not last.

 

[wynnejj]

Do you really think one can compare household budgets to national budgets?

I think the differences are too great between the two to make simplistic comparisons - we can’t print money, we don’t sell bonds, (the kind of loan perhaps you are talking about) we do not have the ability to tax, wage wars (funded or not)

So what do you see as the responsibility of government? Are you a safety only libertarian, a support the market Republican, an non partisan who takes one from column A (pro life) B (support strong defense) C ?

so to the scope of the question I think the Church - given the OP and what I’ve grown up with - I believe the Church teaches that not only individuals but nations have a responsibility to care for the poor - that nations made up of people with free will have the ability to make choices as to where we will put our priorities - the church calls us to have an option for the poor - they come first, not last.

We are discussing the article, right? There is nothing in the article about the possibility of printing more money, selling bonds, or additional taxes related to the article. The article is generally about the debt ceiling agreement - loan & spending cuts. Yes, this is as simple as a household budget.

The focal point of the article is cutting of domestic & international social programs in relation to other cuts. It begs the question, should we borrow to provide international charity. The international charity is the primary talking point of the article. My family budget question tracks very well with this issue.

I agree with Church teaching about the need for social programs to provide a safety net domestically. But one can’t kill businesses that fuel the government that provides the safety net. One can’t add the burden of maintaining international charity when charity must begin at home.

And when a spokesman for the bishop’s social justice branch neglects to push for de-funding family planning centers that subsidize abortion services, in the context of the full social justice guidelines, then that spokesman eliminates social justice for the unborn from its portrayal of Catholic social justice.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Watch out Persuader. Or the next thing you’ll know they’ll be judging you of the sin of envy if you get the same judgement as I do when I speak of decency, some fairness, and justice. But and Peace.

How is stealing from one group of people to give it to another group of people with no legitimate claim to it decent or just? I thought stealing was a mortal sin. Particularly when you are stealing from people who haven’t been born yet in order to serve “justice” to entitlement programs that exist today. That is why I cannot tolerate liberal programs, the kill and steal from the most defenseless of our society, the unborn.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Do you really think one can compare household budgets to national budgets?

I think the differences are too great between the two to make simplistic comparisons - we can’t print money, we don’t sell bonds, (the kind of loan perhaps you are talking about) we do not have the ability to tax, wage wars (funded or not)

So what do you see as the responsibility of government? Are you a safety only libertarian, a support the market Republican, an non partisan who takes one from column A (pro life) B (support strong defense) C ?

so to the scope of the question I think the Church - given the OP and what I’ve grown up with - I believe the Church teaches that not only individuals but nations have a responsibility to care for the poor - that nations made up of people with free will have the ability to make choices as to where we will put our priorities - the church calls us to have an option for the poor - they come first, not last.

No one has the right, morally, to steal from future generations to pay for the present. The Church is very clear, we have to support and defend the poor in a FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE MANNER, one that does not bancrupt the future to pay for the present.

 

[iamrefreshed]

You’re not answering the question. I can only guess it is because you don’t understand it.

Oh, it is well understood. He is being intentionally obtuse.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Reading this thread, it occurs to me that we are going to have to re-write Matthew 25:44ff:

“Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or away from home or naked or ill or in prison and not attend to your needs? And he will answer them, “I assure you, as long as you neglected to establish government programs to attend to their needs, you neglected to establish government programs to attend to me.”

And since this passage is about the last judgment, it will make salvation quite easy. Those who pay taxes will be saved, and the more taxes they pay the higher their place in heaven.

And if the government is still losing money every day, the solution is simple. Take it from the rich, and if that’s not enough, take it from the grandkids. But, we’re already doing that.

Catholics who want the government to do their charity work just don’t want to get their hands dirty. It’s much easier, I guess, to step over a homeless man and mutter “Why doesn’t he take advantage of a social program” than it is to stop.