You gotta have faith

Brian Lilley said: “Who Really Cares looks at giving patterns and finds the conservative minded, and voting people, give much more to charity in terms of time and money than their liberal counterpart.”

Brian, those figures are skewed by how much ‘conservative’ charity goes to paying pastors, proselytizing, and building and maintaining church buildings.

The Republicans, over the past 8 years, have structured our economy so that the top few percentages of the population have amassed enormous wealth. The income gap now is as great as it was just before the Great Depression. If this problem isn’t addressed quickly, we are in serious trouble.

We already have an entitlement society. The entitled are the very rich and the corporations. The Republican Party, with some of the Democrats, is bought and paid for. All the recent Republican legislation has been at the expense of the middle class and the poor, and benefits the wealthy and corporations.
It’s written into the prescription drug legislation that the US government isn’t allowed to negotiate with drug companies. The bankruptcy bill was written by the credit card companies and was passed by the Republican legislature without change. The Republicans make noise about illegal immigration but will not prosecute the big farms and corporations that create the jobs that lure these people here. The result is lower wages for all working Americans. Government contractors are allowed to move offshore, stop paying taxes but get government contracts anyway. Enough is enough. The economy should work for everyone, and now, in America, it doesn’t.

There are a number of responses on this thread that seem to be saying, if it wasn’t for abortion, there would be no need to vote for those mean Republicans. I get the sense here, as I get elsewhere, that the underlying assumption is that Democrats are caring and compassionate for those less fortunate while Republicans are not. A book by scholar Arthur C. Brooks does challenge that assumption. Who Really Cares looks at giving patterns and finds the conservative minded, and voting people, give much more to charity in terms of time and money than their liberal counterpart. From a Christian faith perspective, Christ says “I was hungry and YOU fed me.” What is not found in the Bible is Jesus saying “I was hungry and you created an adequately funded social program.”

While there can be a Christian, or specifically a Catholic position on abortion, to claim that there is one preferable position over another in terms of whether government or private charity looks after those in need is a stretch. Voters must decide on economic or sociological terms which party or candidate best handles issues such as poverty, health care and the like. Claiming an entire party, either Democrats or Republicans, don’t care about those less fortunate debases politics and is not supported by facts.

Tom Faranda said: “Please give us the names of some “right wing people” who say poverty is a moral failing.”

Rush Limbaugh implies it all the time, and says it occasionally. Jay Severin, in Boston, does it all the time. He also said that the only Spanish one needs to is “there’s the broom closet and refers to Obama as Yobama. Ronald Reagan said it in 1980 in his speech about a (fictional) welfare queen. In that speech he was also pandering to racists as part of the Republican ‘southern strategy’. Those are just a few examples. I’ll keep an eye out for more.

Tom, I’m pleased that your Lymphoma is in remission and I hope it stays that way.

Tom Faranda said: “morality untested by circumstances is just opinion.” Huh? So for example, bombing civilians deliberately, as both the allies and axis did during WW 2 just depends on circumstances? Is that your position?”

No, what I’m talking about is the difference between saying you are against bombing civilians and actually refusing to do it at personal risk. (obviously the risk would have been far greater for an Axis flier than for an Allied one.)

Tom, I think the difference is between ethics and morals. To my mind, ethics is what you hope to do if faced by a moral crises. Morality is what you actually do in that crises. Of course, there is a third dimension here, and that is charlatanism. The best fictional representation I have read is Camus’ “The Fall”, which contrasts an honorable public image with the reality of personal failing. It’s also true that people are swayed by a perceived consensus. For instance, here in Massachusetts, there were dueling petitions circulating in churches for and against gay marriage. Many people signed these petitions, pro and con, out of conviction, but others signed them to maintain the approval of their respective congregations.

As far as the birth of my daughters is concerned, my wife deserves all the credit. Once she had made the decision, I did everything I could to help her, but it was a harrowing pregnancy that involved more than a couple of medical emergencies. Religious people sometimes try to attribute our good luck to divine intervention, but that would be an insult to all the good people who, when faced with a similar situation, prayed for a good result and were met, instead, by disaster. It implies that we were somehow better than they were. Abortion was never an option for us except in the most dire circumstances, but my wife taught me the difference between talking the talk and walking the walk.

What do you mean, Ron, when you say this election is an up or down vote on America? Does it mean that people who don’t vote your way are Un-American? Do you think you’re more patriotic than Liberals? I’d really like to know.

Sinclair Lewis said: “When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross”.

David

I am certainly glad to read that your wife and twins have done well. As a cancer survivior (so far) myself, I am aware that physicians sometimes paint things a bit worse then they actually are.

Here are some thoughts on the rest of your points.

“morality untested by circumstances is just opinion.” Huh? So for example, bombing civilians deliberately, as both the allies and axis did during WW 2 just depends on circumstances? Is that your position?

Who supports “a punitive approach to the problem” of abortion? The VP candidate for the Republicans is a member of Feminists for Life of America (as is my wife) and while supporting prolife laws, they are opposed to jailing women for having an abortion. When abortion was illegal in all 50 states, there was no record of any woman ever being jailed for having one. Even though we have civil rights laws, no one gets jailed for being a racist (unless they assault someone). The point is, as Thurgood Marshall said about civil rights laws, the law is a moral teacher.

Please give us the names of some “right wing people” who say poverty is a moral failing.

The current presidential election is an up and down vote on America-abortion=patriotisim=family=and American sovereignty.

McCain’s choice of Palin as his VP running mate has turned the November election into an up and down vote on America. On one side are the pro-life candidates and on the other a candidate who who does not support the protection of life even after birth.  On one side are those who support our soldiers in the field and have their own children in harm’s way: the other whose visits to Afghanistan and Iraq were simply a political photo-op.  On one side are those who support the nature of marriage; the other those who would redefine marriage.  On one side are the candidates who believe in the sovereignty of the American people; on the other a candidate who makes himself “citizen of the world” and who would cede the self=government of the American people to international authority and bureaucratic control.

Morality, untested by circumstance, is just opinion. When my wife was pregnant with our twins she was told, because of a fibroid tumor that was growing faster than the babies, that she might die if she tried to continue a pregnancy that was already hopeless. She refused the abortion. The tumor died as it outgrew its blood supply. Our twins were born and, despite some initial heart problems, are healthy and happy today.

I am insulted by people who think I am a fan of abortion because I don’t support a punitive approach to the problem. A problem, by the way, which is exacerbated by the right-wing, survival-of-the-fittest, unchristian idea that poverty is a moral failing. Sometimes it is, but much more often it’s not. It’s certainly not a moral issue for children born into that condition. They don’t get to choose the life they inherit.

Sometimes ‘family values’ is a smoke screen to cover up for elitism, racism, and/or greed. Sometimes it is exactly what it claims to be. I realize that some people are so offended by abortion that it becomes their only issue, but others have accepted the entire right-wing play book. They subscribe to a set of opinions that makes it difficult to believe that they any compassion for anyone who isn’t exactly like them. I think, if you listen to Rush Limbaugh or Michael Savage, and are not offended, you need to spend more time with your Bible.

Yes, Terry, abortion is a very grave evil, always was, and always will be.
May God change, and then bless, the United States of America. America’s decisions affect Australia’s history also.
Regards,
Robyn.

For one, I’m glad that faith and values are emerging to be issues in this election. Even if many may deny it, faith and values affect society at its very roots.

With regard to Sen. Joe Biden, I just do not personally see how someone who cannot make his views consistent with the faith he professes be honestly consistent in other aspects.

Thanks Brian for a thoughtful article.  We have to applaud Archbishop Chaput and Bishop Saltarelli for their steadfastness in upholding the teaching of the Church.  Too few of our Bishops have the courage or fortitude to address politicians who flagrantly violate and/or misrepresent Church teaching.  If the Democrats think that the choice of Senator Joe Biden as a vice-presidential running mate for Obama will bring in Catholic voters it is just one more indication of how out of touch the party is with Faithful Catholics.

The Democrats just don’t get it when it comes to “pro-life” issues (among many other issues; euthanasia, marriage, homosexuality, etc.).  Poor, working class or elite makes no difference; rather it’s where the heart is in defending life ... from the moment of conception to natural death.  That there not be confusion, the implementation of faith based beliefs demand more than tacit agreement, action to meet real life situations is a must.

The maneuvering of the political machines is a thing to marvel at particularly in these election years.  It is a challenge and a frustration attempting to understand, if not know, what the political parties say they will do.  What they can and will do once in office is all together a different matter.  So, we pray Lord that you maximize the efforts of those who seek to do your will and minimize the impact of those who do not.

I am astonished when people claim that the Bush administration has done nothing for the pro-life cause. Truly more could have been done and yes questions about war an a pro-life outlook persist. That being said, the appointments of Justice Roberts and Justice Alito to the court and the support for the ban on partial birth abortions would not have happened under either a Gore or Kerry administration. Instead the courts would have been filled with justices that place no value on the unborn and believe that parents should not be told when their 14 year-old daughter is leaving school for an abortion.

No party matches the faith perfectly and each side offers something appealing but unfortunately the Democrats have sold out their Catholic roots for NARAL and Planned Parenthood. This was supposed to be the year Democrats dealt with faith and abortion issues in a way that would appeal to pro-lifers. I believe Mr. Obama to be sincere in wanting to reach out to pro-lifers but despite his good will and the work of people like Doug Kiemec, the Democrats have enshrined, once again, abortion on demand as a central campaign plank. A party that celebrates its support for abortion and will attack those who oppose abortion cannot get serious consideration from Catholics with a properly formed conscience, not if there is an alternative.

In order to have your poverty alleviated by either charity or government programs, you must first be born. The Democrats do not support that option.

Whew, some interesting comments. But really David, your post reads like a cut and paste job off the Democratic National Committee website.

And as far as number of abortions in the U.S., the rate has been on a steady decline for the past 20 years, including during the Clinton and Bush presidencies. The data is easily available online, from pro-abortion groups like the Guttmacher Institute, so it’s safe to say, David, that you are simply shilling for the Democrat Party. The current rate is about 20% of pregnancies ending in abortion, down from about 25% ten years ago.

As for the Republicans doing nothing for their prolife constituency except talk - well the proabortion people don’t think so. One example - the Mexico City policy which bans money for international groups that perform abortions. Obama will end that ban the day after he gets into office, resulting in additional 100’s of thousands of abortions worldwide. Don’t those babies count?

Last thing - on social and economic justice issues, here are just two examples of the superiority of some Republican initiatives: (1) school choice. Giving parents vouchers to attend the public or private school of their choice - very popular with people in bad school districts - like inner city folks. But Democrats are against it because of pressure from the public school teachers unions. (2) Partial privatization of social security - which would give ownership rights to people. Since over 20% of retirees are entirely dependent on their social security benefits and have no other assets, this would be a tremendous boon to them and their families. It would allow the build-up of intergenerational wealth. Again the Dems hate that idea.

I understand that the Democrats have an entitlement mentality, and at a certain level that’s fine. But not to the point of creating dependency on the government.

I think the Republicans have led pro-life people down the garden path. I realize pro-life people are an honorable part of the Republican coalition, probably the only honorable part. But you hurt your cause when you insist on a moment-of-conception view of abortion. you could save lives almost immediately if you fought for what was actually possible. Instead, you’ve chosen to make common cause with a party that have absolute contempt for people who are not well-off and white. A party that claims to be pro-life but wants every child born into reduced circumstances to be abandoned by the greater society at birth. A party that loves the death penalty and attacked a country that never attacked us. (4,000 Americans and 200,0000 Iraqis dead)

You may see the Republicans as the party of family values but, to me, they are the party of elitism, racism and unfettered greed. Those are not family values. Look at their record. You can’t possibly be proud of it. Abortions in America went down every year under the Clinton administration. They have gone up every year under Bush. Poverty is a big part of the equation. Some abortions are the result of unfeeling, selfish people but others are caused by economic desperation. Still others are the result of societal condemnation of pregnant but unmarried girls and women. Some people are appalled by abortion, but to others it’s just a cut-rate morality which requires nothing from the person who is doing the condemning.

What have you done to end the conditions and circumstances that lead women to make this awful choice? When you elected George Bush did you reduce abortions, or did you help to create the situations that led to more of them? Do you spend as much time examining your own actions as you do examining actions the of others? Maybe you do, but I don’t any evidence of it. You act as if you are all without sin. Perhaps it would be helpful to re-read the Parable Of The Prostitute.