USCCB Urges Catholics to Lobby on Behalf of Anti-Poverty Programs

[seekerz]

The best anti-poverty program is a growing economy and a shrinking national debt. Is this what the bishops are lobbying for?

Ah, that is only if enough drops ‘trickle down’ to the less fortunate to keep their thirst at bay…

 

[Ender]

Why is it that so many of us nit pick the Bishops when it comes to being encouraged to give generously to the poor?

If the position you were defending was sustainable you wouldn’t have to change the conditions of the debate. We haven’t been talking about whether or not we should help the poor; we have been disagreeing about whether the bishops’ comments represented moral guidance or politicking.

If you think they shouldn’t be concerned, or they are unduly pressuring nations or individuals to do their utmost to relieve poverty.Just don’t bother yourself, the Bishops are not holding guns to our heads.

It is one thing to exhort us to do all we can to help the poor but quite another to presume to tell us how that help can best be provided. Determining which proposals will work doesn’t involve any moral calculus, despite the fact that some bishops have given us their opinions on the matter. You’re right that the bishops aren’t holding a gun to our heads; what they are implying is even worse

In the end there will be only one judge, in case you think not,and no one cares have another read of the Sermon on the Mount.

Exactly … “Accept our political solutions or face eternal judgment!”

Peace…

Right. “You’re probably going to hell. Have a nice day.”

Ender

 

[TMC]

Unfortunately, a lot of Christians sound more like Ayn Rand followers than of Jesus.

Perhaps they see something that you dont see.

Following Ayn Rand is better than following Jesus, is that what you are saying? Certainly not possible to do both.

 

[JimG]

Ah, that is only if enough drops ‘trickle down’ to the less fortunate to keep their thirst at bay…

No, I’m simply saying that providing jobs through a growing economy will alleviate poverty more effectively than welfare programs. And a growing economy is stifled at every turn by an exponentially growing deficit.

Providing devalued dollars helps only for a very short time.

I think perhaps the USCCB ought also to contemplate how the supposed anti-poverty programs of the Great Society helped to destroy the poor families, locking them into dependency and making children fatherless.

 

[Carlan]

If the position you were defending was sustainable you wouldn’t have to change the conditions of the debate. We haven’t been talking about whether or not we should help the poor; we have been disagreeing about whether the bishops’ comments represented moral guidance or politicking.
It is one thing to exhort us to do all we can to help the poor but quite another to presume to tell us how that help can best be provided. Determining which proposals will work doesn’t involve any moral calculus, despite the fact that some bishops have given us their opinions on the matter. You’re right that the bishops aren’t holding a gun to our heads; what they are implying is even worse
Exactly … “Accept our political solutions or face eternal judgment!”
Right. “You’re probably going to hell. Have a nice day.”

Ender

Of course , you have a right to your opinion , right or wrong, just as we all do and a good peaceful day to you ! Carlan

 

[rlg94086]

Following Ayn Rand is better than following Jesus, is that what you are saying? Certainly not possible to do both.

I think the vast majority of Catholic conservatives are not Ayn Rand fans…at least those that know what she stands for.

youtube.com/watch?v=5KmPLkiqnO8

 

[Pork_Roll]

I have a problem with these republicans and some democrats who will gladly axe Medicare and social security entitlements but will not touch the ridiculously high defense budget. The military is the republican sacred cow. It’s all about money. They will always use scare tactics to justify our over bloated military budgets. In the end, we have the best government money can buy. Republican, democrat, doesn’t matter. The middle class will always get the short end of it.

The truth is, most conservative catholics are completely ignorant of the catholic church’s teaching on social issues including the economy.

 

[Ender]

Of course , you have a right to your opinion , right or wrong, just as we all do

More accurately, I have a right to my own opinion - correct or incorrect - since there is no question of morality involved in determining the best solutions to economic problems.

Ender

 

[estesbob]

I have a problem with these republicans and some democrats who will gladly axe Medicare and social security entitlements but will not touch the ridiculously high defense budget. The military is the republican sacred cow. It’s all about money. They will always use scare tactics to justify our over bloated military budgets. In the end, we have the best government money can buy. Republican, democrat, doesn’t matter. The middle class will always get the short end of it.

The truth is, most conservative catholics are completely ignorant of the catholic church’s teaching on social issues including the economy.

Nonsense. The truth is that most liberal Catholics seem to believe Catholic social teaching goes arm in arm with the platform of the Democrat party. . . The truth is the Church neither endorses nor opposes either parties approach to solving social problems.The Church tells us we must care for the poor needy-. It does not tell us that we can abdicate our responsibility to care for the poor needy merely by voting for someone who promises to do it for us with taxpayer funds.

 

[rlg94086]

The truth is, most conservative catholics are completely ignorant of the catholic church’s teaching on social issues including the economy.

That is uncharitable and probably inaccurate. I’m well versed on the Social Doctrine of the Church. The approaches to these issues (i.e. the proper level of government involvement) are open to prudential judgement in many, if not most, cases.

 

[Pork_Roll]

Nonsense. The truth is that most liberal Catholics seem to believe Catholic social teaching goes arm in arm with the platform of the Democrat party. .

Most liberal catholics are hardly orthodox. My point is that I see laughable ignorance on the conservative side with a similar bllind following of the republican platform.

You mean to tell me with a straight face that cutting medicare and social security at the expense of our defense budget is perfectly acceptable within the context of our catholic tradition? Look at the economic policies of Paul Ryan and Rick Santorum for example. The pope has been a big advocate for the environment. I doubt most mainline republicans (and democrats) would enact legislation which protects the environment at the expense of some big lobbying groups like oil or coal or defense.

 

[estesbob]

Most liberal catholics are hardly orthodox. My point is that I see laughable ignorance on the conservative side with a similar bllind following of the republican platform.

You mean to tell me with a straight face that cutting medicare and social security at the expense of our defense budget is perfectly acceptable within the context of our catholic tradition? Look at the economic policies of Paul Ryan and Rick Santorum for example. The pope has been a big advocate for the environment. I doubt most mainline republicans (and democrats) would enact legislation which protects the environment at the expense of some big lobbying groups like oil or coal or defense.

I am telling you that the Church neither endorses or opposes either of our approaches to social issues. You claim that conservatives don’t understand Church teaching on social issues has no badis in fact

 

[rlg94086]

Most liberal catholics are hardly orthodox. My point is that I see** laughable ignorance on the conservative side with a similar bllind following of the republican platform**.

I’m glad to see you’ve lightened your verbiage.

Why don’t you try actually bringing up something from the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church that you believe we are wrong about, with citations to back your claim. That would be a start, rather than bomb throwing.

We’ve discussed the Compendium several times on CAF. If you haven’t joined into the discussion previously, now would be a good time.

 

[Pork_Roll]

These processes have led to a downsizing of social security systems as the price to be paid for seeking greater competitive advantage in the global market, with consequent grave danger for the rights of workers, for fundamental human rights and for the solidarity associated with the traditional forms of the social State. Systems of social security can lose the capacity to carry out their task, both in emerging countries and in those that were among the earliest to develop, as well as in poor countries.

This is quoted from “Caritas in veritate”. For starters, our Holy Father is upholding social security programs and unions, both of which are under attack by Paul Ryan and Santorum. Please show me where in catholic tradition are these social justice/wealth distribution instruments ever considered of secondary importance to the industrial military complex who sell arms and technologies across the globe in order to achieve greater profit with a never ending cycle of weapon development.

You have to be crazy to try an dismiss the catholic tradition of just wealth distribution.

 

[estesbob]

This is quoted from “Caritas in veritate”. For starters, our Holy Father is upholding social security programs and unions, both of which are under attack by Paul Ryan and Santorum. Please show me where in catholic tradition are these social justice/wealth distribution instruments ever considered of secondary importance to the industrial military complex who sell arms and technologies across the globe in order to achieve greater profit with a never ending cycle of weapon development.

I didn’t SECAM word a out the so called military industrial complex or Paul Ryan in what you quoted Again the Church leaves the solutions up to our prudential judgement Perhaps when one starts with the premise that anyone who disagrees with them is ignorant of Catholic social teaching it is hard for them to grasp this.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I guess I understand what the USCCB intended by this statement. If you read it literally, it’s saying “don’t cut out the truly needy”. That’s fine, but that train has already left the station, and I don’t think either party is fixing to call it back. In the face of a really heady price inflation, the truly needy are offered absolutely nothing by either party. The current administration and its kindred spirits in congress are only interested in middle class welfare, and the constituency building they think it will engender. The truly poor; those who can’t help themselves, aren’t even given crumbs of the crumbs from the table. During the time the Democrats had total political power, did they, for example, improve SSI; the resort of the disabled needy, worst-off of all? No, they did not. But hundreds of billions went to constituencies of theirs.

Neither party appears ready to cut the truly needy out, or improve their lot, either one. The USCCB might, then, have pleaded with the legislators not to blow up Hoover Dam, for all the real meaning it has.

So why the exhortation by the USCCB? Well, I think some, (including some in here) take it as a charge simply to oppose budget cutting in the social programs carte blanche, whether such cuts would affect only the poor or middle class (or in the case of SS, some of the wealthy) welfare recipients as well.

The USCCB is an organization composed largely of lay bureaucrats with a Democrat orientation. Did they intend to convey that message? Did they intend, with a non-specific and ambiguous statement, intend to appear to support Democrat political goals? I don’t know, but since programs for the truly poor are not even in the current political discussion, it’s difficult to think either that or that their statement was vacuous and irrelevant.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I guess I understand what the USCCB intended by this statement. If you read it literally, it’s saying “don’t cut out the truly needy”. That’s fine, but that train has already left the station, and I don’t think either party is fixing to call it back. In the face of a really heady price inflation, the truly needy are offered absolutely nothing by either party. The current administration and its kindred spirits in congress are only interested in middle class welfare, and the constituency building they think it will engender. The truly poor; those who can’t help themselves, aren’t even given crumbs of the crumbs from the table. During the time the Democrats had total political power, did they, for example, improve SSI; the resort of the disabled needy, worst-off of all? No, they did not. But hundreds of billions went to constituencies of theirs.

Neither party appears ready to cut the truly needy out, or improve their lot, either one. The USCCB might, then, have pleaded with the legislators not to blow up Hoover Dam, for all the real meaning it has.

So why the exhortation by the USCCB? Well, I think some, (including some in here) take it as a charge simply to oppose budget cutting in the social programs carte blanche, whether such cuts would affect only the poor or middle class (or in the case of SS, some of the wealthy) welfare recipients as well.

The USCCB is an organization composed largely of lay bureaucrats with a Democrat orientation. Did they intend to convey that message? Did they intend, with a non-specific and ambiguous statement, intend to appear to support Democrat political goals? I don’t know, but since programs for the truly poor are not even in the current political discussion, it’s difficult not to think either that or that their statement was vacuous and irrelevant.

 

[rlg94086]

This is quoted from “Caritas in veritate”. For starters, our Holy Father is upholding social security programs and unions, both of which are under attack by Paul Ryan and Santorum.

The Church does support unions, as do I. That said, I don’t agree with everything that unions do. I believe they have overreached in many cases. There is nothing contrary to Catholic teaching in disagreeing with union decisions or actions.

I also support Social Security, but it needs to be reformed. The Church does not take a stance on how to handle social security programs. It can be handled at the state level, instead of federal. It can be privatized, as people have recommended.

Please show me where in catholic tradition are these social justice/wealth distribution instruments ever considered of secondary importance to the industrial military complex who sell arms and technologies across the globe in order to achieve greater profit with a never ending cycle of weapon development.

As soon as I stop beating my wife, I will get to that.
Pork Roll:

You have to be crazy to try an dismiss the catholic tradition of just wealth distribution.

There is balance involved. The Church teaches strongly against the “social assistance state” and “extensive direct intervention.”

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html

**354. **The State can encourage citizens and businesses to promote the common good by enacting an economic policy that fosters the participation of all citizens in the activities of production. Respect of the principle of subsidiarity must prompt public authorities to seek conditions that encourage the development of individual capacities of initiative, autonomy and personal responsibility in citizens, avoiding any interference which would unduly condition business forces.

With a view to the common good, it is necessary to pursue always and with untiring determination the goal of a proper equilibrium between private freedom and public action, understood both as direct intervention in economic matters and as activity supportive of economic development. In any case, public intervention must be carried out with equity, rationality and effectiveness, and without replacing the action of individuals, which would be contrary to their right to the free exercise of economic initiative. In such cases, the State becomes detrimental to society: a direct intervention that is too extensive ends up depriving citizens of responsibility and creates excessive growth in public agencies guided more by bureaucratic logic than by the goal of satisfying the needs of the person.[738]

**355. **Tax revenues and public spending take on crucial economic importance for every civil and political community. The goal to be sought is public financing that is itself capable of becoming an instrument of development and solidarity. Just, efficient and effective public financing will have very positive effects on the economy, because it will encourage employment growth and sustain business and non-profit activities and help to increase the credibility of the State as the guarantor of systems of social insurance and protection that are designed above all to protect the weakest members of society.

Public spending is directed to the common good when certain fundamental principles are observed: the payment of taxes [739] as part of the duty of solidarity; a reasonable and fair application of taxes;[740] precision and integrity in administering and distributing public resources.[741] In the redistribution of resources, public spending must observe the principles of solidarity, equality and making use of talents. It must also pay greater attention to families, designating an adequate amount of resources for this purpose.[742]

 

[Pork_Roll]

I also support Social Security, but it needs to be reformed. The Church does not take a stance on how to handle social security programs. It can be handled at the state level, instead of federal. It can be privatized, as people have recommended.

This is the critical point. No doubt there are more than one way to fund a social security system. However, the reason certain catholic republicans are pushing for it to be cut is because of cost, not because it would be more beneficial or efficient to be handled by privatization. But they don’t want to touch the defense budget. Does this sound just to you? Also, with the culture of death becoming more dominate, we should resist all attempts to dehumanize people by cutting programs which help the most vulnerable, like the poor and elderly.

The Church’s social teaching proposes the goal of “general, balanced and controlled disarmament”.[1067] The enormous increase in arms represents a grave threat to stability and peace. The principle of sufficiency, by virtue of which each State may possess only the means necessary for its legitimate defence, must be applied both by States that buy arms and by those that produce and furnish them.[1068] Any excessive stockpiling or indiscriminate trading in arms cannot be morally justified.

 

[rlg94086]

This is the critical point. No doubt there are more than one way to fund a social security system. However, the reason certain catholic republicans are pushing for it to be cut is because of cost, not because it would be more beneficial or efficient to be handled by privatization. But they don’t want to touch the defense budget. Does this sound just to you? Also, with the culture of death becoming more dominate, we should resist all attempts to dehumanize people by cutting programs which help the most vulnerable, like the poor and elderly.

Catholic Republicans “don’t want to touch the defense budget?” That’s quite a sweeping statement. Equally sweeping, is the charge that Catholics are pushing to cut Social Security. Which Catholics? Enumerate the “cuts.” Who, Catholic or non-Catholic Republican, is calling for a cut in Social Security checks for those who are currently receiving?