If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Kos)   Paul Ryan: My budget is based on Catholic values. Bishops: No, it's based on Ayn Rand - now go read this Catholic Social Doctrine and try again   (dailykos.com) divider line 319
    More: Amusing, Paul Ryan, Catholic Social, Ayn Rand, Catholics, Catholic Faith, rich get richer, suede, Health Care, International  
•       •       •

6815 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Apr 2012 at 8:32 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



319 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-26 12:47:06 AM  
Here is a farking idea, lets go with the better plan out of Wisconsin! The plan that has been shown to WORK. The plan that brought this country into a new age with a strong middle class. The plan that has government, the education system and business working together. A plan where as long as businesses fly straight and treat their employees well the government works to ensure them a supply of trained employees and fair taxes. A plan where the government is not viewed as an antagonist but instead as the state actor who interfaces the public and private sectors to build a great nation.

The name of that plan? The Wisconsin Idea from 1912!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconsin_Idea

Wisconsin Idea by harles McCarthy 1912
 
2012-04-26 12:47:32 AM  

Quasar: "Our problem with Representative Ryan is that he claims his budget is based on Catholic social teaching,"

I have a problem with that for entirely different reasons.


I only need one, and it begins thus: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."
 
2012-04-26 12:48:29 AM  

WombatControl: it is a system which systematically robs individuals of their human agency and subordinates them to the state


In what respect is having enough money to feed and clothe your children robbing you of your "human agency," exactly?
 
2012-04-26 12:49:52 AM  
From Ch 1 of the 1912 Wisconsin Idea:

If this has been the course of history, are there not lessons to be learned? Is there not some way of keeping history from repeating itself? Is there not some means by which we can maintain the youth of the nation, keep poverty at a minimum, and wealth, caste and privilege from commanding, conquering and finally destroying the nation?

Let us look at this crude diagram. Perhaps it will show how far-reaching the remedy must be.

www.library.wisc.edu

In the diagram to the left, marked Stage 1, you will notice the word Wealth at the top and the word Poverty at the bottom; between these two extremes is a square representing the American people in 1850. It represents a time in America when the great monopolies had not been formed; when Force in contract did not exist to the extent that it does to-day; there was plenty, and it was not necessary to use force. Was there not free land, oil, minerals, etc.? Wherein lay the advantage of monopoly?

To the right of this is Stage 2, which is intended to represent conditions in 1912. A small rectangle will be seen directly under the heading Wealth. This shows the change that has taken place. One per cent of the people now possess over fifty per cent of the wealth. Yet the strong, independent American spirit is still evident in the class represented halfway between Wealth and Poverty; notice the other small rectangle at the bottom--the very poor. Does any one maintain that this picture is untrue? Some might consider the rectangle representing the very poor too small, but for our purpose--to illustrate the basic conditions of society in relation to the Wisconsin idea--it will serve very well.

On the extreme right is Stage 3. It needs no comment. The sad history of many a country can be pictured by that little diagram because concentrated wealth means power, caste, privilege, corruption and decay of every ideal, whether of manhood, morals or patriotism. Are not the crumbled remains of what were once prosperous cities scattered in the waste places of the earth sufficient proof of all this? We need not exaggerate this picture, and we cannot.
 
2012-04-26 12:52:54 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: In what respect is having enough money to feed and clothe your children robbing you of your "human agency," exactly?


I like how he completely ignores that there are papal encyclicals that talk about how necessary social programs are.
 
2012-04-26 12:54:47 AM  
galileounchained.files.wordpress.com

/hot
 
2012-04-26 01:03:15 AM  

IlGreven: Quasar: "Our problem with Representative Ryan is that he claims his budget is based on Catholic social teaching,"

I have a problem with that for entirely different reasons.

I only need one, and it begins thus: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."


Kinda thick in the head aren't you? Following the values of a particular religion is entirely distinct from establishing that religion.
If a religion says "love thy neighbor as thyself", congress is not prohibited (via the establishment clause) of basing laws on the principle of "loving thy neighbor as thyself".

That a particular religion holds certain social teachings is frankly neither here nor there with respect to what laws congress may pass. If it's too subtle for you, go and buy a nice bottle of wine and invite a smart friend over, to share the wine and to explain it to you.
 
2012-04-26 01:10:06 AM  

wademh: IlGreven: Quasar: "Our problem with Representative Ryan is that he claims his budget is based on Catholic social teaching,"

I have a problem with that for entirely different reasons.

I only need one, and it begins thus: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

Kinda thick in the head aren't you? Following the values of a particular religion is entirely distinct from establishing that religion.
If a religion says "love thy neighbor as thyself", congress is not prohibited (via the establishment clause) of basing laws on the principle of "loving thy neighbor as thyself".


They are if they use that exact wording, and say it's based off of that principle. "Thou shalt not kill" would be a violation; "No person shall purposely cause the death of another or the unlawful termination of another's pregnancy" is not.
 
2012-04-26 01:12:32 AM  
So the GOP plan of cherry picking the worst policies of each religion is getting some backlash.
 
2012-04-26 01:12:38 AM  

zedster: From Ch 1 of the 1912 Wisconsin Idea:

If this has been the course of history, are there not lessons to be learned? Is there not some way of keeping history from repeating itself? Is there not some means by which we can maintain the youth of the nation, keep poverty at a minimum, and wealth, caste and privilege from commanding, conquering and finally destroying the nation?

Let us look at this crude diagram. Perhaps it will show how far-reaching the remedy must be.

[www.library.wisc.edu image 500x212]

In the diagram to the left, marked Stage 1, you will notice the word Wealth at the top and the word Poverty at the bottom; between these two extremes is a square representing the American people in 1850. It represents a time in America when the great monopolies had not been formed; when Force in contract did not exist to the extent that it does to-day; there was plenty, and it was not necessary to use force. Was there not free land, oil, minerals, etc.? Wherein lay the advantage of monopoly?

To the right of this is Stage 2, which is intended to represent conditions in 1912. A small rectangle will be seen directly under the heading Wealth. This shows the change that has taken place. One per cent of the people now possess over fifty per cent of the wealth. Yet the strong, independent American spirit is still evident in the class represented halfway between Wealth and Poverty; notice the other small rectangle at the bottom--the very poor. Does any one maintain that this picture is untrue? Some might consider the rectangle representing the very poor too small, but for our purpose--to illustrate the basic conditions of society in relation to the Wisconsin idea--it will serve very well.

On the extreme right is Stage 3. It needs no comment. The sad history of many a country can be pictured by that little diagram because concentrated wealth means power, caste, privilege, corruption and decay of every ideal, whether of manhood, morals or patriotism. Are not the crumbled rem ...


The little cartoon representing "Stage 1" is an absurd lie. The level of poverty in the US in 1850 was huge. You don't seem to understand the life of a share-cropper in the South to say nothing of slaves. Many a farm family lived in a two room shack, sod houses or tar paper if you were fortunate. Farm children were seldom afforded the luxury of school beyond a few grades. By the same token, there were plenty of very wealthy merchants in the North, plantation owners in the South. We were not dominated by a grand middle class. A strong middle class did grow in the 50s through 70s via the industrial boom, but it has been eroding ever since.
 
2012-04-26 01:12:48 AM  

WhyteRaven74: cameroncrazy1984: In what respect is having enough money to feed and clothe your children robbing you of your "human agency," exactly?

I like how he completely ignores that there are papal encyclicals that talk about how necessary social programs are.


Papal encyclicals = fece.net

Catholicism (and all other religions) = oursurprisingworld.com + X years
 
2012-04-26 01:13:42 AM  

Lexington Craddock: [galileounchained.files.wordpress.com image 584x392]

/hot


Me likee.
 
2012-04-26 01:17:41 AM  

Mrtraveler01: WombatControl: OK, now explain what you think that actually means - because it doesn't contradict what Pope John Paul II wrote later on in that same encyclical. Yes, the Catholic Church teaches that capitalism has to be tempered with moral concerns - but that doesn't tell you anything unless you understand the nuances of that position and what it actually means as applied to the circumstances of the moment.

It's telling us that an unregulated free market will end up hurting us in the long run is basically what I got out of the bolded part. Even though this is what "conservatives" are striving for because they believe that it will help us them in the long run.

In other words the Catholic Church is smart enough to know that an unregulated market will result in some people taking advantage of it and hurting the population as a whole in the long run. A State is needed to ensure that everyone plays fair.



Those at the top don't care if it works as promised, because it most assuredly works like gangbusters for them.

Those on the lower rungs believe it because they're told to by the people they adore, and it gives them the opportunity to spit on people "beneath" themselves, and the opportunity to embrace a position that runs counter to the dreaded "liberals."
 
2012-04-26 01:18:00 AM  
images2.dailykos.com
Facepalm Jesus for Mr. Ryan

http://images2.dailykos.com/i/user/151025/Jesus_is_sad.jpg
 
2012-04-26 01:23:36 AM  
mahuika: Someone saying that Paul Ryan's budget is not based on his religious leanings is the nicest thing anyone could say about Paul Ryan's budget.

Paul Ryan's budget is based precisely on his religious leanings. Paul Ryan's religious leanings, however, are not based on those of his stated religion of choice.

/ Well, "choice" might not be the best word to use in conjunction with the Catholic Church
 
2012-04-26 01:27:31 AM  
Sassy Jesus's reaction:

www.aaanything.net
 
2012-04-26 01:29:36 AM  

IlGreven: wademh: IlGreven: Quasar: "Our problem with Representative Ryan is that he claims his budget is based on Catholic social teaching,"

I have a problem with that for entirely different reasons.

I only need one, and it begins thus: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

Kinda thick in the head aren't you? Following the values of a particular religion is entirely distinct from establishing that religion.
If a religion says "love thy neighbor as thyself", congress is not prohibited (via the establishment clause) of basing laws on the principle of "loving thy neighbor as thyself".

They are if they use that exact wording, and say it's based off of that principle. "Thou shalt not kill" would be a violation; "No person shall purposely cause the death of another or the unlawful termination of another's pregnancy" is not.


A fascinating personal interpretation. Now all you need to do is cite a court ruling to support this "novel" assertion of yours.
 
2012-04-26 01:48:34 AM  
Here's the section from the document in question that is most directly relevant to the question at hand:

351. The action of the State and of other public authorities must be consistent with the principle of subsidiarity and create situations favourable to the free exercise of economic activity. It must also be inspired by the principle of solidarity and establish limits for the autonomy of the parties in order to defend those who are weaker.[733] Solidarity without subsidiarity*, in fact, can easily degenerate into a "Welfare State", while subsidiarity without solidarity runs the risk of encouraging forms of self-centred localism. In order to respect both of these fundamental principles, the State's intervention in the economic environment must be neither invasive nor absent, but commensurate with society's real needs. "The State has a duty to sustain business activities by creating conditions which will ensure job opportunities, by stimulating those activities where they are lacking or by supporting them in moments of crisis. The State has the further right to intervene when particular monopolies create delays or obstacles to development. In addition to the tasks of harmonizing and guiding development, in exceptional circumstances the State can also exercise a substitute function".

*Subsidiarity is an organizing principle that matters ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralized competent authority.

I don't see anything there that suggests that Senator Ryan's plans for Medicare and Social Security is either supported or contradicted by Catholic doctrine. It's well known that Catholic social doctrine supports free markets, with only as much government intervention as is necessary to prevent monopoly or the abuse of the weak. A government that intrudes more than it necessary, or at a level higher than is necessary, risks falling into a 'welfare state.'
 
2012-04-26 01:57:57 AM  

Talondel: risks falling into a 'welfare state.'


When you have people who sleep on the streets you don't need to worry about the welfare state thing. Especially when you make it impossible for them to get any sort of assistance to help their situation.
 
2012-04-26 02:28:48 AM  

WhyteRaven74: Talondel: risks falling into a 'welfare state.'

When you have people who sleep on the streets you don't need to worry about the welfare state thing. Especially when you make it impossible for them to get any sort of assistance to help their situation.


What does that have to do with the the Ryan quote that Kos is criticizing? Ryan's argument is that Catholic social doctrine teaches that the government that governs best is that which is the smallest and closest to the people. Meaning that issues of healthcare and social safety nets are better addressed at the state and local level than at the federal level. The quote in question:

"To me, the principle of subsidiarity, which is really federalism, meaning government closest to the people governs best, having a civil society of the principal of solidarity where we, through our civic organizations, through our churches, through our charities, through all of our different groups where we interact with people as a community, that's how we advance the common good. By not having big government crowd out civic society, but by having enough space in our communities so that we can interact with each other, and take care of people who are down and out in our communities."

Not that the language of the quote closely matches the language of sec 351 of the document the bishops refer to.

WhyteRaven74: WombatControl: The point of Rep. Ryan's budget is that we already have a welfare state, and it isn't working.

How can social programs work when they are badly underfunded, many of the most needy are excluded and we seek to demonize those who receive benefits? And we don't have a welfare state. We barely have anything resembling a social safety net. And no charities aren't the answer, they can't manage even simple problems. Also it goes beyond social programs, like working conditions. How do you defend someone having to work two jobs to keep a roof over the head? How do you defend people working 70 hours a week with no overtime, crap ass health insurance, almost no vacation etc? How do you defend that CEOs in many companies receive benefits that aren't available to other employees? Why should a CEO get 6 weeks of paid vacation when no non-exec at the company gets any paid vacation? Why should a kid working at McDonalds not have top shelf health insurance?


According to Ryan, you can make them work better by making them more accountable, by returning those functions to state and local governments, following the Catholic principal of subsidiarity. You can agree or disagree with that statement, but Ryan's assertion that his belief in small and decentralized government programs, including welfare programs, is in fact supported by Catholic doctrine. There is nothing to dispute on that point, as the section I already quoted demonstrates.
 
2012-04-26 02:40:51 AM  
So does this mean some religions are tired of being used as talking points for politics? Maybe if some of the people in politics who won't shut up about god and such could actually read the farking bible. Jesus would be the first one to kick them in the nuts.
 
2012-04-26 02:45:12 AM  

A Terrible Human: So does this mean some religions are tired of being used as talking points for politics? Maybe if some of the people in politics who won't shut up about god and such could actually read the farking bible. Jesus would be the first one to kick them in the nuts.


I would actually say the Catholic Church tends to have a consistent ideological consistency on social welfare. I know it is easy to hate on the Church for a number of reasons, but they do understand the writings of Jesus, and the Jesuits are not to be farked with.
 
2012-04-26 02:48:56 AM  

Talondel: What does that have to do with the the Ryan quote that Kos is criticizing?


Everything. Ryan doesn't want to help anyone, he doesn't give a damn if people suffer. Cities lack funds to do much, many states do as well. Yet he's offering nothing to help them in order to help people. Also he wants to cut off assistance for people who have no alternatives. And the whole argument Ryan is relying assumes a few things, all of which he's happy to overlook. The whole thing with subsidiarity is that it is what is preferred, when it's actually workable. There are plenty of things, where it's not and that's that. But more fundamentally, as a man who holds power and a Catholic, he bares fully responsibility for anyone who suffers as a result of his choices. Also, supporting an increased defense budget, favoring the death penalty and some other things don't exactly speak very well for him as a Catholic, or even a decent human being.
 
2012-04-26 02:51:09 AM  
I was just thinking, if I was a Jesuit at Georgetown, I'd troll Ryan, hard. I'd go around finding every needy person I can find, and there's lots of them in DC, and send them to Ryan's office asking where they could find assistance for whatever issue they have. If Ryan is such a wonderful Catholic as he claims to be, he'll make sure everyone gets help.
 
2012-04-26 02:52:52 AM  

Harry_Seldon: I would actually say the Catholic Church tends to have a consistent ideological consistency on social welfare. I know it is easy to hate on the Church for a number of reasons, but they do understand the writings of Jesus, and the Jesuits are not to be farked with.


I think I worded my post poorly. I was more meaning that this backlash against a politician who uses religion as a talking point could be the start of religions distancing themselves from political loonies.
 
2012-04-26 02:54:32 AM  

A Terrible Human: I think I worded my post poorly. I was more meaning that this backlash against a politician who uses religion as a talking point could be the start of religions distancing themselves from political loonies.


You weren't around much during the late 70s and 80s, were you.
 
2012-04-26 02:55:22 AM  

Lenny_da_Hog: You weren't around much during the late 70s and 80s, were you.


Considering I was born in '89 that would be a no.
 
2012-04-26 02:59:56 AM  

A Terrible Human: Lenny_da_Hog: You weren't around much during the late 70s and 80s, were you.

Considering I was born in '89 that would be a no.


Yeah.

Just take it for granted that your situation has been tested in the real world, and the outcome was not as you'd hope.
 
2012-04-26 04:39:09 AM  
I'm a gay liberal atheist, and nothing would make me happier than if the United States became a Christian nation. Not so fast, Churchie - I mean Christian in the sense of actually following the teachings of Jesus Christ: love, compassion, patience, forgiveness, charity - you know, that sort of thing.
 
2012-04-26 05:13:47 AM  
It's nauseating when teatards rhapsodize about how faith-based charities and municipal governments would magically solve all of our social ills, if we'd simply get the federal government out of the picture and make recipients grovel and beg for their gruel.

It doesn't work. That's why we've ended up in the situation where the feds administer the programs.
 
2012-04-26 05:40:14 AM  

A Terrible Human: So does this mean some religions are tired of being used as talking points for politics?


Religion is politics.
 
2012-04-26 05:44:30 AM  

Huggermugger: It's nauseating when teatards rhapsodize about how faith-based charities and municipal governments would magically solve all of our social ills, if we'd simply get the federal government out of the picture and make recipients grovel and beg for their gruel.

It doesn't work. That's why we've ended up in the situation where the feds administer the programs.


Yeah.

I failed gym class in 8th grade because I couldn't afford gym shoes. A local church had an annual charity drive for children's shoes, but the woman who administered the program hated my mother.
 
2012-04-26 05:54:46 AM  

Lenny_da_Hog: Huggermugger: It's nauseating when teatards rhapsodize about how faith-based charities and municipal governments would magically solve all of our social ills, if we'd simply get the federal government out of the picture and make recipients grovel and beg for their gruel.

It doesn't work. That's why we've ended up in the situation where the feds administer the programs.

Yeah.

I failed gym class in 8th grade because I couldn't afford gym shoes. A local church had an annual charity drive for children's shoes, but the woman who administered the program hated my mother.


Religion isn't about worship, it's about power. This is an excellent example of it.
 
2012-04-26 06:17:15 AM  

WhyteRaven74: WombatControl: Everyone is expected to help others. Personally

Everyone is expected to have compassion and empathy for all others at all times. And you are expected to help others by those means you personally have. Ergo, if you're a legislator you don't cut off assistance to those in need. Nor do you demonize those in need, or minorities, or women etc etc. Basically what Catholic teachings say is that if you're a CEO and take a bonus for yourself while cutting bonuses for your employees, you fail. If you're a legislator and allow people to go without help, you fail.


There's a reason I have you favourited!
 
2012-04-26 07:21:57 AM  
Pointless argument. A religion believes what anybody self-identifying as a member of that religion says it believes on any given day, adjusting for wind velocity and barometric pressure - seeing as how it's all arbitrary bullshiat, made up as one goes along. How the hell can you even HAVE a proper argument about something like that?
i18.photobucket.com
 
2012-04-26 07:30:01 AM  
Paul Ryan and his budget are the living embodiment of Republican doctrine... Callous, mean-spirited avarice draped in hypocrisy and platitudes.
 
2012-04-26 07:43:15 AM  
Callous, mean-spirited avarice draped in hypocrisy and platitudes.

And how.
 
2012-04-26 07:56:36 AM  
The Paul Ryan budget is the congressional economic equivalent of this:

t2.gstatic.com
 
2012-04-26 07:58:11 AM  
Ahh, hearing a right-winger lie through his teeth lets me know that all is well this morning.
 
2012-04-26 08:02:22 AM  

grotto_man: Ryan's right - http://www.crisismagazine.com/2012/rose-delauro-cns-and-the-disorient e d-catholic-left .


Grey6ed. Farkied "Ryan's right".

That was easy.

Crisis magazine?

[hahahaohwow]
 
2012-04-26 08:04:13 AM  
To: SeekAndFind
Dear Bishop Stephen Blaire,

"Shared Sacrifice" is simply lipstick for the pig, that is Marxism.
Obama's policies prove this, by the fact that they have only resulted in more poor people.
Stealing more from the job creators will only increase the rate of growth among the poor, as fewer jobs and opportunities will be available, and the governments ability to "help" the poor is abysmal!
Paul Ryan's plan SHARES the growth and prosperity, by motivating job creation and providing the poor and underemployed with a path to self sufficiency.
The world needs more "Shared Opportunity", NOT more government handouts, aimed at maintaining a dependent class!
26 posted on Tuesday, April 24, 2012 1:22:09 PM by G Larry (Criminals thrive on the indulgence of society's understanding)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
 
2012-04-26 08:15:31 AM  
The Catholic bishops and 'scholars' can all go fark themselves, but at least it is good to see that they aren't just in lock-step with their anti-choice political bedfellows.
 
2012-04-26 08:27:02 AM  

WombatControl: Once again, it's the left that gets Catholic Social Doctrine right. If you want to know the real position of the Church, don't trust a group of politicized bishops, read what the Popes have to say.


Not exactly. The Church promotes social welfare but does so with an eye towards promoting individual virtue rather than an emphasis on the end result. That is, the Church would rather see the needy fed by charities and perhaps still go a little hungry than be fed by the state and not go hungry at all. The latter resolves the problem of hunger but does not promote individual virtue.

It's important to remember that the Church's goals are not focused on the alleviation of suffering in this world but the promotion of virtues that will win souls for some hypothetical afterlife. Fostering compassion is a goal but the alleviation of suffering is a means, not the end.
 
2012-04-26 08:30:59 AM  
A'ight, it's almost 5:30 in the morning and I'm a l'il sleepy but did I just read an entire thread full of trolls who not only wanted to suggest that reducing money for welfare was good idea but also a moral idea backed up by Catholic doctrine?

Cos the former notion is just batshiat insane and the latter one is the kinda thing one goes straight to hell for without passing go or collecting 200 dollars.

No social justice, no peace.
 
2012-04-26 08:40:51 AM  

MrEricSir: Faith is a very shiatty economic policy.


so is bleeding the consumer base to give it all to the top 1% so they can send it overseas.
 
2012-04-26 08:50:36 AM  

quatchi: A'ight, it's almost 5:30 in the morning and I'm a l'il sleepy but did I just read an entire thread full of trolls who not only wanted to suggest that reducing money for welfare was good idea but also a moral idea backed up by Catholic doctrine?

Cos the former notion is just batshiat insane and the latter one is the kinda thing one goes straight to hell for without passing go or collecting 200 dollars.

No social justice, no peace.


For a good illustration, check out Quebec from 1767 to about 1967. The Catholic Church was in control because the British didn't feel like dealing with the Frenchies. For about 200 years the church controlled civic life in Quebec. The people were cheap labor for incoming Anglo-Canadian interests and the church made sure that all the citizens were taken care of from cradle to grave. Once the hydro-power industry was established after the Quiet Revolution in 1967, the state was able to break away from the Church controlled civic life and welfare net.

This is the essence of the Church; charity without state interference. Most other Catholic states had a similar flavor, bit Quebec was by far the strongest example of the church's interaction with the state.
 
2012-04-26 08:52:11 AM  

Quasar: "Our problem with Representative Ryan is that he claims his budget is based on Catholic social teaching,"

I have a problem with that for entirely different reasons.


Ffs. This. So very much this!
 
2012-04-26 08:54:31 AM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: WombatControl: Once again, it's the left that gets Catholic Social Doctrine right. If you want to know the real position of the Church, don't trust a group of politicized bishops, read what the Popes have to say.

Not exactly. The Church promotes social welfare but does so with an eye towards promoting individual virtue rather than an emphasis on the end result. That is, the Church would rather see the needy fed by charities and perhaps still go a little hungry than be fed by the state and not go hungry at all. The latter resolves the problem of hunger but does not promote individual virtue.

It's important to remember that the Church's goals are not focused on the alleviation of suffering in this world but the promotion of virtues that will win souls for some hypothetical afterlife. Fostering compassion is a goal but the alleviation of suffering is a means, not the end.


That in itself is a pretty farked up interpretation of Christianity. I don't know if that's what Catholic church leaders truly believe, but it is absolutely not what Christ taught.
 
2012-04-26 08:55:43 AM  

trotsky: For a good illustration, check out Quebec from 1767 to about 1967. The Catholic Church was in control because the British didn't feel like dealing with the Frenchies. For about 200 years the church controlled civic life in Quebec. The people were cheap labor for incoming Anglo-Canadian interests and the church made sure that all the citizens were taken care of from cradle to grave. Once the hydro-power industry was established after the Quiet Revolution in 1967, the state was able to break away from the Church controlled civic life and welfare net.

This is the essence of the Church; charity without state interference. Most other Catholic states had a similar flavor, but Quebec was by far the strongest example of the church's interaction with the state.


Excellent example C'est bon! Merci Beaucoup.
 
2012-04-26 09:08:34 AM  
fark.upi.comfark.upi.comfark.upi.comfark.upi.comfark.upi.comfark.upi.com
 
Displayed 50 of 319 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report