US Bishops' Conference Largely Disappointed by Debt Ceiling Agreement

[Prodigal_Son1]

See what I mean about wording it better? It’s not “better dead than underfed” but it is the exact same thing only with a warm fuzzy righteous tone. . :angel1:

It’s not the same thing. I do not find either as acceptable. But no matter how I elaborate, you’ve proven only to find a way to spin it. That also speaks volumes.

 

[SamH]

I gave you two Catholic commentaries showing you are misinterpreting the ‘verse’ you provided. I then requested you provide supporting scriptures; thus reading scriptures, within scriptures. I even suggested it would be more helpful to provide something Jesus said to support the verse I believe you misinterpreted, or we risk placing Him in a position of contradicting, which I don’t believe He ever did. So, it was not me refusing to continue a point…

I actually you didn’t. One passage you quoted referenced another verse and the other was edited to suit your wishes.

haydock1859.tripod.com/id225.html

Ver. 10. Not work. By prying with curiosity into other men’s actions. He that is idle, saith St. Chrysostom, will be given to curiosity. (Witham) — The apostles, like our Lord, were fond of introducing popular saying or axioms. Another, and not unlike the former, is found in one of the Jewish rabbies, Zeror:

Qui non laboraverit in Prosabbato, nè edat in Sabbato.

Ver. 12. Eat their own bread, which they work for, and deserve, not that of others. (Witham)

:blackeye:

I can’t believe you tried that.

2 Thessalonians 3
Request for Prayer
1 As for other matters, brothers and sisters, pray for us that the message of the Lord may spread rapidly and be honored, just as it was with you. 2 And pray that we may be delivered from wicked and evil people, for not everyone has faith. 3 But the Lord is faithful, and he will strengthen you and protect you from the evil one. 4 We have confidence in the Lord that you are doing and will continue to do the things we command. 5 May the Lord direct your hearts into God’s love and Christ’s perseverance.
Warning Against Idleness
6 In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers and sisters, to keep away from every believer who is idle and disruptive and does not live according to the teaching[a] you received from us. 7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you, 8 **nor did we eat anyone’s food without paying for it. On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you. **9 We did this, not because we do not have the right to such help, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you to imitate. 10 **For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.” ** 11 We hear that some among you are idle and disruptive. They are not busy; they are busybodies. 12 Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the food they eat. 13 And as for you, brothers and sisters, never tire of doing what is good.

 

[SamH]

It’s not the same thing. I do not find either as acceptable. But no matter how I elaborate, you’ve proven only to find a way to spin it. That also speaks volumes.

No spin needed - they are your own words and your own sentiments - I simply pointed them out.

 

[4elise]

Free lunches do work to an extent.

But how do we get it so people no longer need free lunches?

Well, having those lunches hopefully helps them do better in school, go on to get a good education, which makes them candidates for better paying jobs, they pay more taxes then, and they can then afford to help others too. Win, win, win!

 

[4elise]

It would be a mistake to believe the liberals do anything for the truly poor. They owned the U.S. government lock, stock and barrel for going on two years and what did they do for the neediest of all, those on SSI; the disabled poor? Nothing. Well, they did cut back on food stamp allotments to SSI recipients in group homes and ISLs. They did do that. Guess maybe it saved a little money that could be spent on abortions here and abroad to prevent the birth of more developmentally disabled people.

I’m confused - From what I’ve read it seems these cuts and even elimination of SSI are more the prevue of the Republican party - please provide something to back up this claim (not just blogs please)- I can only find things like this which point to it being Obama and the Dems working to preserve SSI? topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/u/united_states_economy/economic_stimulus/index.html

 

[4elise]

Even then, I know some people that could work, even part time at menial jobs, but choose not too - because it would drasically affect their government benefits.

How many? Was that number statistically significant? And do you believe that because *‘you knew some people’ *it reflects the reality of all those who could not find work - were therefore just passing up ‘menial jobs’?

 

[4elise]

You or (your parents) didn’t help me as a kid. My father knew I would get fed by someone else so he felt he didn’t need to bother doing it.

You helped him gamble.

So your position is that if you didn’t have free lunches - your father would not have gambled?

 

[4elise]

Computer Geek-
Don’t you know only conservatives are evil, greedy, and selfish? Government and poor people don’t suffer from the Fall.

really - this is the direction you want to take this thread?

Do you believe sarcasm and lack of charity further a discussion?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I actually you didn’t. One passage you quoted referenced another verse and the other was edited to suit your wishes.

haydock1859.tripod.com/id225.html

Ver. 10. Not work. By prying with curiosity into other men’s actions. He that is idle, saith St. Chrysostom, will be given to curiosity. (Witham) — The apostles, like our Lord, were fond of introducing popular saying or axioms. Another, and not unlike the former, is found in one of the Jewish rabbies, Zeror:

Qui non laboraverit in Prosabbato, nè edat in Sabbato.

Ver. 12. Eat their own bread, which they work for, and deserve, not that of others. (Witham)

:blackeye:

I can’t believe you tried that.

2Th 3:10 For also, when we were with you, this we declared to you: that, if any man will not work, neither let him eat.
2Th 3:11 For we have heard there are some among you who walk disorderly: working not at all, but curiously meddling.

No one tried anything and I don’t appreciate the insinuation that I lied. I provided the commentaries, but you’re going to twist the scriptures against what Christ taught, to fit your ‘political’ view.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

No spin needed - they are your own words and your own sentiments - I simply pointed them out.

And as you did the scriptures, you twist them to fit your ‘political’ view. It’s not an honest tactic. I am here to point out the correctness of what I say. That’s just sad.

 

[4elise]

When Obama got elected, several of our workers quit or let themselves get fired. When I expressed regret to one of the workers that got fired because she took off too many days because of her son, she said, “I’m not worried, Obama is gonna take care of me, he’s gonna pay for my car, he’s gonna buy me a house, he’s gonna pay for my gas.” Single mom, pregnant with no 2. No job. Not even the minimum wage job she had when she worked for us.

Working for a company that hires people who have never had jobs and don’t need a high school diploma is a real eye-opener.

Apparently some people not too worried about not having a job. How can that be?

The individual experience like this can make people cynical - that is understandable.

What is IMHO dangerous is to then apply this experience to the many others unemployed - painting with too broad a brush - we are individuals, some of us good, some of us not so good - and this is true among the poor the rich, those with power an those without.

It is great that your company hires people who have not had advantages, I am sure that they also work for much less money, so that is an advantage to the company as well no doubt. I am sure you can also recall other workers who have stayed and done well - perhaps not -

 

[4elise]

In my opinion, Republicans and Democrats alike are united in ignoring what it takes to help people with severe mental illness. Just look at anything psychiatrist E. Fuller Torrey says on the subject. In the 80s hospital beds were closed in huge numbers in a process called deinstitutionalization. Community support was supposed to make the difference; it didn’t. The states never came up with the money.

There are basically two groups of people with severe mental illness; those with enough money to live in stable situations and pursue private treatment, which is far superior to public treatment, and those who don’t have that. The picture is much better if you have money. Compliance is better if you have money b/c your doctors will be better listeners, not as swamped, more respectful and etc. Your access to medication is better if you have money. Your life expectancy is better if you have money given that the atypical antipsychotics are associated with higher diabetes risk and it takes money and access to better foods and medical treatment to deal with that, or with diabetes if you have it.

It can be a catch-22 b/c people with severe mental illness often do better if they can work (paid or volunteer if paid is not possible) at least part-time but if they don’t have effective treatment they remain so ill this is not possible. On the one hand you don’t want to tell people their lives are over b/c they are ill and they can’t go to school or work or do anything to improve. On the other hand a lot of people end up in jail/prison for nonviolent crimes like disturbing the peace b/c they have no where else to go, shelters won’t take them for very long and the psychiatric hospitals for people who can’'t pay much are by and large closed except on very short-term emergency stabilization basis.

The alternative is privately funded treatment and based on personal experience it really upsets me how much worse the prognosis is when you don’t have access to that.

Well said. I have always heard that this began under Regan. Is that your understanding? How do you think taxpayer funding could most benefit those with the greatest need? Would universal healthcare, that included mental health services be the answer?

 

[4elise]

Do you not think that there is a ‘fair bit’ of waste and fraud in private programs?

No one has said that stealing and lying are not wrong. What has been said is that we have to be very careful not to affect those truly in need by across the board cuts based solely on numbers and money available. I also wonder how we can provide more ‘security’ against ‘fraud’ without growing the government to oversee a program to assure it’s going to the truly needy.

It’s not necessarily all people wanting more things than they already have. Some have only because of social programs. Now to decide what is really needed, we have to be careful not to take away what quality of life some may have because of social programs.

I was burnt out yesterday, as I just got off a 24 hour shift on an ambulance. It was a busy shift and the majority of calls we responded to, were for families whose need was truly evident by the conditions of the homes they were in. We had to be careful how we walked through some homes, as the floors sagged beneath our weight and at times felt as if it would give way under our steps. They were bare plywood floors, old and worn. We saw evidence of infestation of roaches. Some of these type homes had small children, because there were three generations of family living in the home. Yes, they had an ‘older’ color TV in the living room and appeared to have cable TV. It might have been the only entertainment the children had. There was very little lighting in the homes. Sometimes we have to utilize flashlights to check vitals and assess patients. In one instance a man had a syncopal episode (loss of consciousness). It may have been because he had not taken his blood pressure medicine. He was out because he couldn’t afford to refill the prescription. He also refused transport to the hospital, because he couldn’t afford the ambulance transport, or the hospital visit. I’m sure he had medicare, but didn’t choose to take advantage of that support. I don’t know why.

This is a rural area and there are not many jobs. People in the condition as described above become locked into where they live. They don’t have the money to relocate and there is not enough assistance to relocate them, train them for other things, etc. The only thing I know for certain is ‘they are poverty stricken’. Where a percentage of what I make would not be devastating to give up, it makes major differences for people who live in these type conditions.

As a first responder you must see a great deal of sadness - yet it doesn’t make you cynical - good for you.

 

[4elise]

I am very sympathetic to the conditions you are seeing.

Yes, I am aware that what people propose is not an easy question to answer. But it is one that has to be addressed. We cannot have people dying the streets. Simply allowing people to remain on “the dole,” with no plan/accountibility to get off it is not charity either.

Simply throwing money at the problems in society isn’t sustainable, as we’re beginning to see in Europe and the US. We will collapse under our own weight.

Many of the private / government partnerships - like Catholic Relief Services - provide the best way to bring in the accountability that is needed (but if their funding gets cut they will not be able to) - I think some people may never be able to be lifted up to move beyond their circumstances - yet they too deserve, by their human nature to be treated with dignity - and regarded as children of God by all of us.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I can’t believe you tried that.

Rather than insinuate I lied, or tried something dishonest by spinning what the commentaries said (ironic you’d do that ) Show us other scriptures that support that we don’t have to care for the poor and that they should be working for themselves?

 

[4elise]

I agree.

Having said that, I don’t see how FEDERAL government helps these people out of there misery in anyway. Many of their problems can be solved with a visit by the local St. Vincent de Paul Society.

We just had a fundraiser BBQ at our parish to help a family with their medical bills. We routinely help people with their electricity bill. We do not help with phone bills, though.

In a world where there are well funded St. Vincent de Paul Societies at every parish - all will be well!

 

[4elise]

Again, instead of just mailing these people a check, we should also be helping them secure the necessary grants, loans and tax breaks to break out of their situation by receiving the neccessary skills and what not to find more meaningful work and/or move.

God forbid we do that. It would make too much sense. But what do I know, I’m a heartless conservative.

Case workers in most locations that try to do such work must also be paid. Adult and Child Protective Services are overburdened with cases, and can only act where the most extreme danger exists - so again - this is the point, who pays for ‘helping them secure the necessary grants, loans, etc…’ and PLEASE stop with the inflammatory language - no one is calling anyone heartless.

 

[4elise]

The flip side of the bold print is “keep entitlements based solely on numbers and money available”, where numbers represents votes and money is the carrot. It seems to me that entitlement programs should be built with a self-destruct measurement system built in by contract that says the entitlement must fulfill its mission in this defined measured way. If the mission is not fulfilled, the entitlement is cancelled automatically. Security against fraud must be done by those employed by the entitlement program as a constant threat of “going under”, just as any small business goes under. There has to be a bottom line that the service works, and federal employees must know that their enterprise will “go under” if the mission is not met. Until these checks & balances become standard procedure, I will be against federal entitlements if convinced that they can be better handled by state & local budgets.

the point I think is that these are not ‘missions’ but people.

 

[tjt3]

The Church has no teaching on the proper level of funding for social programs… Your insistence on viewing the Church as nothing more than another political party happens your ability to understand

Thank you. It`s about time someone mentioned that. I get involved in serious and heavy
debates about liberal bishops paricularly in Rochester and Albany N.Y. and down right
nasty and angry debates about abortion and discussions with some of these priests
that come out of Catholic Theological Union in Chicago and the one sense that I seem
to pick up on all the bogs I comment on, is the common belief that the Church is a
democracy that can be changed according to modern and popular views. I also like your
quote from Ronald Reagan.
Pax
Tom T

 

[iamrefreshed]

So your position is that if you didn’t have free lunches - your father would not have gambled?

He would have fed me. And if he didn’t then the government could have stepped in and removed me.