Why don't other religions speak out about social issues?

[puzzleannie]

I’m sorry my perception is much different. For inttance I have known Jews individually, as congregations and as a community to be very outspoken on social issues, political action, charitable outreach on a number of fronts. Perhaps it is just a matter of who you know. For instance the Jewish welfare funds are one point of origin for community organizations that combined in what is now known as United Way. Jewish leadership has been outspoken in many social justice areas especially where there are specific biblical injunctions, such as justice for workers. II don’t see how a general statement such as OP makes can possibly hold water.

Since not all religions or denominations hold the same views on issues like abortion it is not surprising that they all would be activists on those issues. You would expect their activism to express their beliefs. If at least some branches of Judaism allow for abortion in certain cases or at certain times in pregancy, and have a religious justification for their belief, it would not be reasonable to expect them to advocate for a change in civil law unless theri beliefs are endangered. I know many in Jewish leadership who are very outspoken in the anti-death penalty aspect of pro life work, so again a blanket statement is not valuable. I know of Jewish leadership who have spone out on both sides of the gay marriage issue, for instance.

 

[MillTownCath]

I’m sorry my perception is much different. For inttance I have known Jews individually, as congregations and as a community to be very outspoken on social issues, political action, charitable outreach on a number of fronts. Perhaps it is just a matter of who you know. For instance the Jewish welfare funds are one point of origin for community organizations that combined in what is now known as United Way. Jewish leadership has been outspoken in many social justice areas especially where there are specific biblical injunctions, such as justice for workers. II don’t see how a general statement such as OP makes can possibly hold water.

Since not all religions or denominations hold the same views on issues like abortion it is not surprising that they all would be activists on those issues. You would expect their activism to express their beliefs. If at least some branches of Judaism allow for abortion in certain cases or at certain times in pregancy, and have a religious justification for their belief, it would not be reasonable to expect them to advocate for a change in civil law unless theri beliefs are endangered. I know many in Jewish leadership who are very outspoken in the anti-death penalty aspect of pro life work, so again a blanket statement is not valuable. I know of Jewish leadership who have spone out on both sides of the gay marriage issue, for instance.

Thanks for your insight!

 

[thedarknight]

A good number of conservative Catholics seem to pick and choose their battles based on what the Republican party stands for.

They will always talk about how abortion is morally wrong as defined by the Catholic Church.

However, I often ask how they feel about the death penalty or Bush’s war doctrine, and they seem to be more accepting, despite the fact that both are an affront to the Catholic faith and teaching.

I am against the death penalty. However, paragraph 2267 of the Catechism states:

2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined,** the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.** [bold emphasis are mine]

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.”

What do you make of this?

 

[Izdaari]

I am against the death penalty. However, paragraph 2267 of the Catechism states:

What do you make of this?

I am not Catholic, but 2267 sounds like good Christian reasoning to me. I support the State having the death penalty available for use in extreme cases, while opposing its use in the vast majority of cases. I guess that makes me a death penalty mugwump.

 

[MillTownCath]

I am against the death penalty. However, paragraph 2267 of the Catechism states:

What do you make of this?

Yeah I’ve read that before, and it’s sort of goes along the lines of the just war teaching, so it makes sense.

However, in the world’s richest nations, this should never come up.

 

[Cavaradossi]

I am against the death penalty. However, paragraph 2267 of the Catechism states:
Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

[bold emphasis are thedarknight’s]

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.”
What do you make of this?

Honestly? I think the CCC is spot on here. We should have mercy upon them for their crimes as God has had mercy upon us for profaning His glorious creation with our sins. Death should only be the penalty when there is no possible way to prevent convicted murderers from harming others again.

 

[thedarknight]

I agree with your reasoning Izdaari and Cavaradossi; they reflect paragraph 2267.

Yeah I’ve read that before, and it’s sort of goes along the lines of the just war teaching, so it makes sense.

However, in the world’s richest nations, this should never come up.

I don’t quite understand you. Would you please explain further? Do you mean that rich nations cannot have the death penalty but poor nations are allowed to? If so, why?

 

[MillTownCath]

I agree with your reasoning Izdaari and Cavaradossi; they reflect paragraph 2267.

I don’t quite understand you. Would you please explain further? Do you mean that rich nations cannot have the death penalty but poor nations are allowed to? If so, why?

Sorry, I mean Rich nations have the resources to keep convicted murderers off the streets, so there is no need to kill them. Basically I’m saying that there is no justification for having the death penalty in the US at all.

 

[J_Heath]

Sorry, I mean Rich nations have the resources to keep convicted murderers off the streets, so there is no need to kill them. Basically I’m saying that there is no justification for having the death penalty in the US at all.

Many states, especially CA, cannot afford to house all of the convicted population, and plead the cases out early, or release prisoners when the prisons are too overcrowded…

I have also read the CCC about the death penalty, and agree with it.

 

[CMatt25]

Thank you so much for bringing this up. What you’re saying is valuble.

Christians maybe talking about social issues, but their discussing the wrong ones. Christ never once said punch a homosexual or interject yourself into others’ private lives to the point of making a nuisance of yourself.

He *did *say love the Lord your God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself. So while everyone else is trying to break up families, I’ll concentrate my outrage on the 6-hundred-thousand homeless in this country, the nearly 15-million American children who go to bed hungry, or the 46-million uninsured Americans without access to life-saving health care.

And, by the way, if Christians really want to do something to preserve the sanctity of marriage, they’ll save their righteous indignation for shows like the Bachelor who treat the sacrament like a game show and leave loving couples alone.

:clapping: You speak my mind as well. And Peace.

 

[CMatt25]

American Catholics are obsessed with abortion and homosexuality. Maybe you should be asking why this is? Personally I dont think its a healthy life view to take.

These two issues didnt figure highly in the gospels, so this is why they are mentioned less or not at all in other churches. They have never been mentioned in the church I attend. I guess that this fixation is less of an issue for Catholics outside of the US.

It seems that way to me too. And I personally think you make some good points. God bless.

 

[CMatt25]

A good number of conservative Catholics seem to pick and choose their battles based on what the Republican party stands for.

They will always talk about how abortion is morally wrong as defined by the Catholic Church.

However, I often ask how they feel about the death penalty or Bush’s war doctrine, and they seem to be more accepting, despite the fact that both are an affront to the Catholic faith and teaching.

 

[CMatt25]

Sorry, I mean Rich nations have the resources to keep convicted murderers off the streets, so there is no need to kill them. Basically I’m saying that there is no justification for having the death penalty in the US at all.

And what I don’t quite understand is when those who are politically conservative and considered to be among the most faithful practicing Catholics, support the death penalty in what would seem to be more frequently than the rare, if not non existent cases of which CCC 2267 states.

 

[CMatt25]

Many states, especially CA, cannot afford to house all of the convicted population, and plead the cases out early, or release prisoners when the prisons are too overcrowded…

I have also read the CCC about the death penalty, and agree with it.

Depending on the conviction, I can see this. For more henious crimes like a capital murder offfense, perhaps the price we have to pay is more space so as not to be killing people for the crime we are killing them for. Not to mention juries can be wrong and once we execute death upon a human person, it is too late.

 

[formerlysure]

I believe those in other religions do speak out about social issues, sometimes quite loudly. The Jewish community advocates strongly for a Jewish state in Isreal, for example, which is a huge social issue in their community, as they believe that having their state of Isreal restored and resolution of the Gaza Strip issue is Biblically relevant to their entire culture.

Muslims certainly have taken strong stands on the place of women, marriage, premarital sex and more.

I do believe that a great many reborn Christians have taken very strong stances on a variety of social issues from modesty and premarital sex to abortion.

So, I guess I don’t agree with the premise of the question.

 

[seeker57]

Why don’t other faiths speak out? You gotta be kidding, right?

The Unitarian Universalist Association speaks out regularly on many social topics.

Our congregations decide which social issues to speak out about at the local level, including what charities to support, what action to take on what issues, etc.

My congregation is already a Welcoming Congregation, meaning give openly accept and encourage the GLBT community to take part in our faith community, and afford same-sex couples the same recognition we give mixed-sex couples.

Beyond that, we are now beginning to become involved in immigration reform and are working to find out how best to support those disenfranchised by the current immigration laws and their enforcement.

While we don’t operate homeless shelters or food banks, we actively raise money and other donations to help support them.

We are living proof that those who practice a liberal theology can be involved and active in their communities.

I noticed someone posted that since salvation is assured those who believe, in his or her faith system, I presume, deeds are unnecessary.

I would respectfully disagree. I think deeds are the way we live our faith.

Peace,

Seeker.

 

[CMatt25]

Why don’t other faiths speak out? You gotta be kidding, right?

The Unitarian Universalist Association speaks out regularly on many social topics.

Our congregations decide which social issues to speak out about at the local level, including what charities to support, what action to take on what issues, etc.

My congregation is already a Welcoming Congregation, meaning give openly accept and encourage the GLBT community to take part in our faith community, and afford same-sex couples the same recognition we give mixed-sex couples.

Beyond that, we are now beginning to become involved in immigration reform and are working to find out how best to support those disenfranchised by the current immigration laws and their enforcement.

While we don’t operate homeless shelters or food banks, we actively raise money and other donations to help support them.

We are living proof that those who practice a liberal theology can be involved and active in their communities.

I noticed someone posted that since salvation is assured those who believe, in his or her faith system, I presume, deeds are unnecessary.

I would respectfully disagree. I think deeds are the way we live our faith.

Peace,

Seeker.

:tiphat: Seeker, from my outsider’s view, the Unitarian Universalist fellowship does indeed beautifully speak volumes about the vast array of social issues beyond the 2 we sometimes find emphasized in some of the Christian faiths today.

I’m not sure though where the other poster was going with the comment about how if someone believes salvation is assured that they do not express their faith in deeds.

Jesus afterall Himself in Matt 25:35-46 spoke volumes about how showing concerns for the homeless, the hungry and thirsty, for those lacking clothing, for the prisoner, and how caring for the sick, are social issues of the righteous.

Peace and blessings to you.

 

[MillTownCath]

And what I don’t quite understand is when those who are politically conservative and considered to be among the most faithful practicing Catholics, support the death penalty in what would seem to be more frequently than the rare, if not non existent cases of which CCC 2267 states.

I see a lot of double standards created here on the forums.

If a politician is Catholic but they support abortion/gay marriage, all of a sudden they are “Catholic”.

If a politician is Catholic but they support the death penalty, they apparently are still good Catholics.

I think it’s stupid to call someone Catholic/Not a real Catholic depending on their stances on social issues.

The Catholic Church is against sinning. I sin all the time. Am I not still Catholic?

Now, one can make the case that those who do not support the Church’s social stances are not exactly as devout Catholics as they could be. They could be BETTER Catholics. But the essence of being Catholic is not dependent on it, I dont think.

 

[CMatt25]

I see a lot of double standards created here on the forums.

If a politician is Catholic but they support abortion/gay marriage, all of a sudden they are “Catholic”.

If a politician is Catholic but they support the death penalty, they apparently are still good Catholics.

I think it’s stupid to call someone Catholic/Not a real Catholic depending on their stances on social issues.

The Catholic Church is against sinning. I sin all the time. Am I not still Catholic?

Now, one can make the case that those who do not support the Church’s social stances are not exactly as devout Catholics as they could be. They could be BETTER Catholics. But the essence of being Catholic is not dependent on it, I dont think.

I agree. Those quotation marks are unnecessary according to the Church. If you were baptized or confirmed Catholic, then according to the Church, yes you are. Peace.

 

[SnakeMauler]

My question is why can’t we go back to the old days? In the good old days of Jesus, there were very few homosexuals and the focus was on feeding everyone and helping because everyone was poor. Now that people have money enough to sit around in this post-industrial society, they can sit around and entertain sexual thoughts about the same sex which is absolutely repulsive.