Why do some Catholics lean politically conservative?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RCIAGraduate
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
www.usccb.org /…/respect-life-program/2014/ poverty - and-abortion .cfm

Yes, it is worth repeating. It was initially posted on 9/5/18

It is informative and meant for the faithful.
 
Poverty is a relative term, you know.

i think a lot of gals are concerned about the cost of raising children nowadays, and don’t believe they can afford the food, clothing, tuition, gymnastics lessons, orthodontic work, medical care and everything else that goes into raising a kid in 2018. I believe there is a lot of reason for them to be concerned.

Add into that, they don’t want to rely on the Baby’s Daddy to do his part, and rely on this man as they don’t really feel comfortable asking the guy for money or going through an ugly court scene.

These women definitely have economic concerns about childbirth, but it doesn’t mean they are suffering poverty by any stretch of the word.
 
TheLittleLady said:
What this document does is to allow us to focus on all of the issues. Pro life is all life.
Click to expand...
As I said, this document provides moral cover for supporting virtually anyone. Sanders, Trump, Clinton, it doesn’t matter. Your local socialist? Sure. I imagine I could find a section that would justify supporting David Duke. It does not provide any direction for choosing one candidate over another; it provides justifications for supporting the one you already prefer.
 
Oh No Dear Lady,

Now they’ve found a socialist in the closet. Sometimes you have to learn to laugh or you’d cry, lol
 
DENNYINMI said:
www.usccb.org /…/respect-life-program/2014/ poverty - and-abortion .cfm

Yes, it is worth repeating. It was initially posted on 9/5/18

It is informative and meant for the faithful.
Click to expand...
I finally found this document. Color me unimpressed. First, like most USCCB documents of this kind, they are produced by staff working for the USCCB, not by the bishops themselves. It carries no more weight than similar documents produced on this topic by other organizations.

Second, I dispute the statistics. While there are any number of studies on this subject, most surveys - and surely the one they cite would fall in this group - allow the respondents to select multiple reasons that contributed to their decision, of which financial concerns is usually one of several selected. To suggest that this is the primary reason distorts the data.

In any event, given that this is nothing more than a dispute about statistics (and not morals), their numbers are subject to dispute. Here are some other numbers that give a better picture of the true nature of who is getting an abortion.
  • 50% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: women aged 20-24 obtain 33% of all abortions; teenagers obtain 17%; …
  • 66% of all abortions are performed on never-married women; married women account for 18% of all abortions; and divorced women obtain 9.4%.
Is it any surprise that when half of all abortions are on women under 25, most of whom are unmarried, that finances would be an issue? What kind of “poverty” programs are going to keep young, unmarried women from getting pregnant?
 
Personally, I have no problem allowing Dreamer aliens stay indefinitely- provided they aren’t a burden on the taxpayers, and are keeping their noses perfectly clean.

But a lot of our liberal friends think they should be allowed to stay even if they are on welfare benefits or getting snooted and going out driving on our roads putting legitimate residents and citizens in danger. That I do not agree with.
 
DUI is definitely a serious offense, should those individuals be allowed to stay?

Let their own nation handle the problem.
 
DENNYINMI said:
I believe their statements to be noteworthy of the faithful!~
Click to expand...
My disputes with the USCCB are not about their goals. What I object to is the overtly political nature of their pronouncements. As I’ve said several times, there are no moral distinctions between (reasonable) policies, regardless of how inane or harmful they may seem to you. We are asked to do our best to do what is right. If we do that, our choices, even our bad ones, satisfy our obligations.
 
When I’m in a foreign country, I am particularly careful to watch my p’s and q’s.

I realize that I am their guest and I don’t impose on them. I sure the heck don’t go out, tie one on, and start driving around- even if I was in the Philippines where I understand they don’t have a law against DUI.
 
Foreign individuals don’t have a legal right to be here, unless they have visa or other documents which are dependent on continued good behavior.
 
Everyone ignore Ordinary. They’re a multiple-times-suspended user. Flag them to alert the moderators and move on.
 
Ender said:
My disputes with the USCCB are not about their goals. What I object to is the overtly political nature of their pronouncements. As I’ve said several times, there are no moral distinctions between (reasonable) policies, regardless of how inane or harmful they may seem to you. We are asked to do our best to do what is right. If we do that, our choices, even our bad ones, satisfy our obligations.
Click to expand...
I still agree with the summation of the Bishops on the issue of Poverty and Abortion. I’ve seen it move from their page into the real world. That being said, I think we should end it here Ender…haha…end it ender, get it? hahaha…Have a good night.
 
midori said:
As far as remaining silent on slavery, it was a deliberate attempt to avoid controversial issues that would have stood in the way of the Colonies uniting in the first place. If the industrial North believed slavery was wrong, and the agrarian South depended on slavery to keep its economy running-- you couldn’t get to a happy agreement with a totally-free or a totally-slave country right off the bat. So they elected to maintain the status quo, and kicked the issue down the road to be addressed in the future, when they were in a better position to hash things out.
Click to expand...
The 3/5 clause in the constitution was included to limit the number of Representatives the southern states would be allocated, since population was the determining factor in determining the number of Representatives each state would have. This was intended to weaken the position of the southern states in the future efforts to end slavery. Even Frederick Douglass recognized this during the abolitionist movement.
 
"DENNYINMI:
  1. Human life and dignity: Uphold the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death with special concern for the poor and vulnerable.
Click to expand...
And there is no one more poor or vulnerable than the unborn child in a woman’s womb.

Therefore, there is no one more worthy of our “special concern” than the very poor and very very vulnerable unborn child.

Thank you for making this point. 😊

Obviously, you are correct that the bishops have special concern for the victims of abortion – the completely dependent and vulnerable child – according to their own words.
 
Last edited:
Government isnt a charity, it’s government. If government “solved” all our problems charity would no longer exist.
 
There is a focus on subsidiarity by politically conservative Catholics.

So that feeding the hungry consists of providing the resources that allow the hungry to feed themselves using locally available foods.

As merely one example, I keep coming back to PlumpyNut … a peanut paste … using plants easily grown nearly everywhere.


Remarkably similar to “peanut butter”, it was resisted for many decades.

In some places, it cannot be called “butter” … because it is not a dairy product.


Right now, PlumpyNut is regarded as an emergency relief product and distributed largely through emergency channels … whereas, in the United States it is merely a normal grocery staple, available at the most local neighborhood [subsidiary] level.
 
Last edited:
But what if the lower tiers such as family, neighborhood, community, charity and local government end up failing? Would that be a good opportunity to warrant higher level intervention such as the national authorities?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top