US Bishops' Conference Largely Disappointed by Debt Ceiling Agreement

[estesbob]

Thanks for putting words in my mouth bob. As usual, your ‘spin’ is noted, and wrong.

This discussion is not about playing a 'trump card, as you do with every issue being discussed, but trying to understand how other issues discussed by bishops are off the table, or open to disagreement, to the point of criticizing the bishops.

There are people who claim others must adhere to certain bishops when it comes to proportionate reasons, but immediately put up arguments on other issues they happen not to agree with and call it ‘prudential judgement’. There seems to be a certain hypocrisy in that, in my honest opinion.

No bishop was quoted in the article nor is there any official Church teaching on what the proper level of funding for social programs is. The same can not be said forabortion, Catholics can disagree on the proper level of ffunding for social programs-they can not for abortion.

 

[JimG]

I didn’t see where ‘borrowing’ was discussed in the article. It seemed more pointed to what ‘cuts’ were targeted.

Quite true. And yet the government must borrow continuously in order to keep up with it’s current level of spending. What’s the morality of that?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

No bishop was quoted in the article nor is there any official Church teaching on what the proper level of funding for social programs is. The same can not be said forabortion, Catholics can disagree on the proper level of ffunding for social programs-they can not for abortion.

I believe, if we checked,. we’d find that bishops actually discuss at bishop conferences.

Yet again, as in so many discussions where you’re reminded, no one has called for abortion.

Also, while Catholics can disagree on the proper level of funding for socials programs, it is not something our Lord every qualified, or limited.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Quite true. And yet the government must borrow continuously in order to keep up with it’s current level of spending. What’s the morality of that?

The approaches are in an attempt to balance. I believe the disagreement arising on this thread is which programs should receive cuts, and how much, to arrive at a balanced budget and avoid ‘borrowing’. Those discussions are about moral decisions.

 

[wynnejj]

Despite this advancement, however, Carr said that ultimately the “deal fell short.”

The legislation “did not reflect the criteria called for by the bishops in their letters to and meetings with policy makers,” which included “fulfilling the demands of justice and moral obligations to future generations; controlling future debt and deficits; and protecting the lives and dignity of those who are poor and vulnerable.”

Carr’s criticism of the deal falls short. Where is the criticism about failure to de-fund Planned Parenthood? Where is the plug to re-institute the Mexico Policy if international aid is to be retained? Social Justice for the born, not the unborn, is the agenda. Consistent life ethic, NOT!

 

[Warrior1979]

I have no problem helping the poor. But the money I donate goes overseas, not to the “poor” in the U.S. The reason is that the “poor” in the U.S. have little in common with the poor in other countries. They aren’t starving (in fact, many are overweight/obese), have TV sets, cars, housing, etc…unlike even the middle class in many other countries.

Secondly, we cannot continue to spend well beyond our means. That will significantly affected everyone, rich and poor alike.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Carr’s criticism of the deal falls short. Where is the criticism about failure to de-fund Planned Parenthood? Where is the plug to re-institute the Mexico Policy if international aid is to be retained? Social Justice for the born, not the unborn, is the agenda. Consistent life ethic, NOT!

See, there are many other issues to be discussed to assure a quality of life for all, from conception to natural death. The bishops have spoken on the single issue that is often discussed on these forums, sometimes because it is the topic of discussion and very often anytime another issue is being discussed. It’s not a ‘trump’ card to show someone else in these discussions doesn’t care. No one on this thread has promoted abortions, or planned parenthood. A quality of life for all, from conception to natural death, is a consistent life ethic.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I have no problem helping the poor. But the money I donate goes overseas, not to the “poor” in the U.S. The reason is that the “poor” in the U.S. have little in common with the poor in other countries. They aren’t starving (in fact, many are overweight/obese), have TV sets, cars, housing, etc…unlike even the middle class in many other countries.

Secondly, we cannot continue to spend well beyond our means. That will significantly affected everyone, rich and poor alike.

Too much generalization in your statement, and without any resources to support such a statement. There are many homeless, and poverty stricken people in nursing homes. I assure you we have hungry right here in the US, and many who do not have TV sets, cars, housing, etc.

It appears that some of us speak of ‘cuts’ and others are speaking of spending beyond our means. The former speaks of being careful with cutting social programs that directly affect the poor. The latter seems to be concerned for the ‘rich’, as well as the poor. Where did Christ teach, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, give shelter to the homeless, care for the sick, AND be watchful not to affect the ‘rich’?

 

[iamrefreshed]

Too much generalization in your statement, and without any resources to support such a statement. There are many homeless, and poverty stricken people in nursing homes. I assure you we have hungry right here in the US, and many who do not have TV sets, cars, housing, etc.

It appears that some of us speak of ‘cuts’ and others are speaking of spending beyond our means. The former speaks of being careful with cutting social programs that directly affect the poor. The latter seems to be concerned for the ‘rich’, as well as the poor. Where did Christ teach, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, give shelter to the homeless, care for the sick, AND be watchful not to affect the ‘rich’?

Where did Christ ask the government to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, give shelter to the homeless and care for the sick?

I’ll answer for you, He didn’t. He asked you to do it.

Atheists pay taxes too.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Where did Christ ask the government to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, give shelter to the homeless and care for the sick?

I’ll answer for you, He didn’t. He asked you to do it.

Atheists pay taxes too.

Oh by all means, let’s watch out for atheists so they will not be affected. Where is that taught by Christ?

It seems to be a concern only to avoid the real issue, that I believe we are called by Christ to achieve, even if it’s through our government.

We are supposed to be a part of His kingdom, Christians, first. The government argument seems to place citizenship first.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Using the Christ didn’t teach us to use government seems like an ‘excuse’ to me, and I question the reasoning to be perfectly honest. If we cannot reach everyone through private, what would Christ say do about using government that can reach many more? Is it acceptable to let people do without because the need outnumbers the private charities? I don’t think it is. With that said, I don’t think government can reach 100%. We should place our spiritual before our secular and do as much as we can to achieve His teachings.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Oh by all means, let’s watch out for atheists so they will not be affected. Where is that taught by Christ?

It seems to be a concern only to avoid the real issue, that I believe we are called by Christ to achieve, even if it’s through our government.

We are supposed to be a part of His kingdom, Christians, first. The government argument seems to place citizenship first.

Not everyone believes in Christ or His teachings. Forcing them to do your charitable work is unChrist-like.

Do your own charity.

When it comes to taxes, it is citizenship first.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Using the Christ didn’t teach us to use government seems like an ‘excuse’ to me, and I question the reasoning to be perfectly honest. If we cannot reach everyone through private, what would Christ say do about using government that can reach many more? Is it acceptable to let people do without because the need outnumbers the private charities?

Give more yourself.

Start by selling everything you have and giving it to the poor as Christ commanded you.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Not everyone believes in Christ or His teachings. Forcing them to do your charitable work is unChrist-like.

Do your own charity.

When it comes to taxes, it is citizenship first.

Then if it is unChrist like to utilize government to force morality, we do we work so hard through the government to end abortion?

I really disagree with your last statement. In ALL instances, we are Christians first.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Then if it is unChrist like to utilize government to force morality, we do we work so hard through the government to end abortion?

I really disagree with your last statement. In ALL instances, we are Christians first.

Why is it so hard for you to understand not everyone is Christian?

Abortion has nothing to do with Christ. It is about allowing murder.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Give more yourself.

Start by selling everything you have and giving it to the poor as Christ commanded you.

I assure you, if private charities and government is overwhelmed, I am most certainly overwhelmed to try and reach everyone. I am willing to give as much as I can, and more through taxes if necessary to reach the most. Taxes seem to be what some have issue with, even if they’re used for sharing with the less fortunate.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Why is it so hard for you to understand not everyone is Christian?

Abortion has nothing to do with Christ. It is about allowing murder.

Christ called us to ‘assist’ everyone. It is hypocritical to say we can use government to force Christian morality on non-Christian with one issue, but it’s really unfair to force another of His teachings. If we cannot ‘force’, through our government, on one issue, we cannot force them on another issue. The whole ‘not everyone is Christian’, argument seems to be an excuse of convenience and for other reasons.

Allowing people to go hungry, naked, without shelter, and healthcare, is the same thing only slower.

 

[iamrefreshed]

I assure you, if private charities and government is overwhelmed, I am most certainly overwhelmed to try and reach everyone. I am willing to give as much as I can, and more through taxes if necessary to reach the most. Taxes seem to be what some have issue with, even if they’re used for sharing with the less fortunate.

Taxes are not charity. Do you donate to charities that spend 90% of the donations on things other than the charity?

Or, maybe, you just don’t want to donate and want someone else to do it for you?

 

[iamrefreshed]

Christ called us to ‘assist’ everyone. It is hypocritical to say we can use government to force Christian morality on non-Christian with one issue, but it’s really unfair to force another of His teachings. If we cannot ‘force’, through our government, on one issue, we cannot force them on another issue. The whole ‘not everyone is Christian’, argument seems to be an excuse of convenience and for other reasons.

Allowing people to go hungry, naked, without shelter, and healthcare, is the same thing only slower.

Are you for real?

No one is forcing Christian morality on anyone except you.

Abortion is not a Christian issue. It’s a murder issue.

 

[Trader]

This is something I hope EVERY Catholic will read so we can understand that we, the Church, must come down on the side of the poor and vulnerable.

That is absolutely correct, and since many, if not most, of the poor in the United States are children, we should be very clear that their parents have the primary obligation to provide for their children, even if they need to give up their drug dealer friends, unhealthy habits, and luxury items like cell phones, jewelry other than a wedding ring, and a $2000 sound system and rims package for a $1500 car.

You may also want to listen to Archbishop Dolan’s interview with Raymond Arroyo on EWTN’s “The World Over” this last week. The good archbishop talked about how the Church has two main pillars of social teaching, solidarity and subsidiarity, and how they have perhaps not stressed subsidiarity enough and have not tackled the moral problem of spending money we don’t have.
ewtn.com/tv/live/worldover.asp

We do the poor no favors by teaching them to continue in immoral lifestyles supported by the immoral taking of money earned by others.