US Bishops: Save SNAP

  • Thread starter Thread starter BigBlueCane
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LiberalPrincess said:
THANK YOU US BISHOPS for standing up for what is right. These are the issues that the Church needs to be at the forefront in, rather than trying to hold back the civil rights for gays.
Click to expand...
Guess you posted without reading the article. :rolleyes:

Hint: It wasn’t the US Bishops.
 
ishii said:
No kidding - what’s up with the deliberately misleading title? Hard to imagine something so deceptive being allowed, but who am I to question.

Ishii
Click to expand...
I think this is incredibly illustrative of much of liberalism. Take the Affordable Care Act. Who could be against “affordable care”? But once you get past the snazzy title and dleve into the details, you find that it’s something completely different than what you thought.
 
DeniseNY said:
I think this is incredibly illustrative of much of liberalism. Take the Affordable Care Act. Who could be against “affordable care” But once you get past the snazzy title delve into the details, you find that it’s something completely different than what you thought.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Liberals and leftists have been manipulating language in order to hide the truth for decades. An unborn baby? Its an “unplanned pregnancy”. Abortion? “emergency contraception.” The only way they can succeed is for gullible people to believe them.

Ishii
 
I posted this in the other thread too, but:

finance.yahoo.com/news/gop-reps-explain-why-went-184112668.html

Namely:
“However… The bill would allow states to impose work requirements on adults with children, including mothers of young children in certain cases. While this would be a state option, the bill would strongly encourage states to place work requirements on adults with dependents by denying states which do not impose these requirements a 50 percent federal match for dollars spent on employment and training activities…
I voted against this legislation due to the high probability that should it be enacted work requirements would be imposed on struggling parents from all walks of life – including mothers of young children who may need or want to be at home to care for them during the day.”
Click to expand...
  • Rep. Richard Hanna (R - NY)
On the supporter’s side:

northdecoder.com/Latest/nd-all-congressman-kevin-cramer-to-people-who-cant-find-jobs-or-arent-able-to-work-dont-eat.html
“2 Thessalonians 3:10 English Standard Version (ESV) 10 For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.”
Click to expand...
  • Rep. Kevin Cramer (R - ND)
I’m pretty sure I know which Republican’s side I’m on (hint: it isn’t the side using Biblical verses to justify the incentivization of starving single mother families of young children).
 
BigBlueCane said:
Just another example where the GOP continues to attack the neediest people in the country. Wanting to cut food stamps for people who are poor is a shameful vote and I’m glad the Bishops are speaking out about this. Thank God there is a Democratically controlled Senate and President.

“According to Bishop Blaire, how the House chooses to address hunger and nutrition programs has “profound moral consequences.” He added, “Struggling people are not seeking a life of government dependency, but rightfully deserve decent paying jobs to provide for them and their families. Even with evidence of a modest economic recovery, the economy still has not improved the standard of living for many people, especially for the poor and the working poor. More than four million people have been jobless for over six months, and that does not include the millions more who have simply lost hope.”

americamagazine.org/content/all-things/us-bishops-save-snap
Click to expand...
Yeah, thank GOD we have the Democrats in charge keeping abortion and gay-marriage safe.
 
Yerusalyim said:
Yeah, thank GOD we have the Democrats in charge keeping abortion and gay-marriage safe.
Click to expand...
Abortion is more serious than economic matters for sure. I disagree with you about gay “marriage.” Abortion leads to a legalized genocide. Economic Republicanism leads to a forced starvation of children. Gay “marriage” leads to adults gravely harming their souls through their own free will choices. I definitely think the order goes abortion/birth control > national security > economics > gay “marriage”/divorce laws.

Sadly, there is no anti-birth control party. Protestants would never let it happen despite it effectively also being legalized abortion.
 
SMGS127 said:
Abortion is more serious than economic matters for sure. I disagree with you about gay “marriage.” Abortion leads to a legalized genocide. Economic Republicanism leads to a forced starvation of children. Gay “marriage” leads to adults gravely harming their souls through their own free will choices. I definitely think the order goes abortion/birth control > national security > economics > gay “marriage”/divorce laws.

Sadly, there is no anti-birth control party. Protestants would never let it happen despite it effectively also being legalized abortion.
Click to expand...
Exactly so. It was the acceptance of contraception that led directly to abortion and gay marriage. It de-linked children from marriage and turned marriage into something less than the basic family unit. From that has flowed a great number of evils.
 
Yerusalyim said:
Yeah, thank GOD we have the Democrats in charge keeping abortion and gay-marriage safe.
Click to expand...
How is this relevant??? Whether you agree or disagree with the bishop on SNAP, the article has nothing to do with abortion or gay marriage.

This is what the Pope was talking about. “It is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.”

americamagazine.org/pope-interview
 
JoeCarpenter said:
How is this relevant??? Whether you agree or disagree with the bishop on SNAP, the article has nothing to do with abortion or gay marriage.

This is what the Pope was talking about. “It is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.”

americamagazine.org/pope-interview
Click to expand...
It’s relevant because the same people who falsely claim republicans want to starve children to death aid and abette the direct killing of 1.2 million children a year
 
estesbob said:
It’s the standard rationale as to why ok to vote for pro abortion candidates or not vote at all
Click to expand...
Yes, I found the statement to be pretty outrageous and of course you are correct. But I surprised to see that coming from that particular poster.

Ishii
 
Personally I hope that they don’t cut food stamps. I am on them and if it were not for food stamps, I would likely starve. I don’t have a job because I am disabled but even with the income I get from that, I still would not be able to feed myself all month long without the food stamps. I also know a lot of people, including several in my family, who have to have food stamps. It is a similar situation with them. If they didn’t have the food stamps, they’d practically starve.

That said, someone said earlier in the thread that they are only slowing down the spending increase on food stamps. I don’t see anything wrong with that so long as it doesn’t end up hurting the poor either in the short run or in the long run. I really don’t think its a good idea to do it though. Many of the people I know, including myself, run out of food before their next month’s worth of food stamps kick in as it is. In other words, the amount of food stamps that a person gets really isn’t enough for most people to be able to feed themselves all month.
 
Holly3278 said:
Personally I hope that they don’t cut food stamps. I am on them and if it were not for food stamps, I would likely starve. I don’t have a job because I am disabled but even with the income I get from that, I still would not be able to feed myself all month long without the food stamps. I also know a lot of people, including several in my family, who have to have food stamps. It is a similar situation with them. If they didn’t have the food stamps, they’d practically starve.

That said, someone said earlier in the thread that they are only slowing down the spending increase on food stamps. I don’t see anything wrong with that so long as it doesn’t end up hurting the poor either in the short run or in the long run. I really don’t think its a good idea to do it though. Many of the people I know, including myself, run out of food before their next month’s worth of food stamps kick in as it is. In other words, the amount of food stamps that a person gets really isn’t enough for most people to be able to feed themselves all month.
Click to expand...
Thank you for sharing your personal plight. Some people are demonizing those that need this assistance as if the whole system is fraudulent. It is people like you who will e hurt most. God bless you, and I hope this congress comes to its senses.
 
Holly3278 said:
Personally I hope that they don’t cut food stamps. I am on them and if it were not for food stamps, I would likely starve. I don’t have a job because I am disabled but even with the income I get from that, I still would not be able to feed myself all month long without the food stamps. I also know a lot of people, including several in my family, who have to have food stamps. It is a similar situation with them. If they didn’t have the food stamps, they’d practically starve.

That said, someone said earlier in the thread that they are only slowing down the spending increase on food stamps. I don’t see anything wrong with that so long as it doesn’t end up hurting the poor either in the short run or in the long run. I really don’t think its a good idea to do it though. Many of the people I know, including myself, run out of food before their next month’s worth of food stamps kick in as it is. In other words, the amount of food stamps that a person gets really isn’t enough for most people to be able to feed themselves all month.
Click to expand...
That is too bad. I do think we need a safety net for those who are in need - as it sound you certainly are. What about things such as food banks? I see them around town - you know when they are full and stocked because there is a long line going around the block to get in.

The only points I am making on this issue are: 1) don’t give out foodstamps to those making $100,000 a year (I know a couple that gets foodstamps because they somehow qualify having taken in their grandchild). 2) Foodstamps should be handled at the state level or lower - not the federal level because then it is “trickle down assistance” in which the bureaucracies end up taking a huge share just to manage the program, and you get people entrenched in their position who see any reduction in their program as a threat to their bureaucrat job.

Ishii
 
99th_Monkey said:
The usual suspects on am radio
Click to expand...
Really? Which ones on AM radio? What did they say, and how did they demonize those who need assistance? And why didn’t you specify you were talking about radio hosts and not your fellow posters on CAF? You really should back up your accusations.

Ishii
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top