Top US Republican Rejects Criticism by Catholic Bishops

Reuters ^ | 4/18/12 | Thomas Ferraro

[marshmallow]

WASHINGTON, April 18 (Reuters) - The top Republican in the U.S. Congress on Wednesday defended his party's proposed deficit-cutting federal budget plan against complaints by Roman Catholic bishops that it would hurt the poor and violate certain "moral criteria."

House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner argued that matters would worsen, with the government eventually unable to afford programs for the needy, unless it stops spending more money than it takes in.

Boehner, who is Catholic, acknowledged that the bishops have a "moral argument," but said, "I want them to take a bigger look."

"The bigger look is if we don't make decisions (to slash spending), these programs won't exist, and then they will really have something to worry about," Boehner said at his weekly news conference.

In defending the Republicans' proposed spending cuts, Boehner did not mention another option to help reduce the deficit - raising taxes, which his party opposes.

The spending plan drafted by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, a Republican who has become a hero to many conservatives, has virtually no chance of becoming law because it is opposed by President Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats who control the U.S. Senate.

Yet its proposals to slash spending, particularly by shrinking social safety net programs for the poor, promise to make it a source of debate through the Nov. 6 congressional and presidential elections.

[lazypadawan]

I would tell said bishops: 1. worry more about Emperor Obama forcing the Church to pay for abortions, sex changes, contraceptives, etc. and 2. show me where in the Bible it says a nation must go into insurmountable debt for programs that don’t help anyone.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

Unfortunately, the bishops, like most theologians, receive little training in economics.

The idea that spending “govt” money to help the poor is counterproductive, is counterintuitive, especially for clerics who haven’t spent much time working in govt or business.

With regard to public policy, my otherwise good priest is ruled by emotion.

Still, there are many encyclicals condemning Modernism, Socialism and Communism that the priests should be familiar with.

[PGR88]

And how exactly does bankruptcy and financial collapse of the nation help the poor?

[trappedincanuckistan]

Dear Catholic Bishops

Socialism doesn’t help the poor.

Sincerely

trappedincanuckistan

[trappedincanuckistan]

And

Dear Catholic Bishops

How is forcibly taking money (stealing) from person A to give to person B moral?

Sincerely

trappedincanuckistan

[A.A. Cunningham]

Boehner did not mention another option to help reduce the deficit - raising taxes,(sic)

Most of the Bishops along with this socialist reporter Thomas Ferraro, need to take and successfully pass a decent course in economics preferably taught by either Thomas Sowell or Walter Williams.

[Mrs. Don-o]

This is an unusually incompetent article. At no point in 600 words does it contain a single sentence where the USCCB criticized the Boehner-Ryan budget.

The first reference, several paragraphs in, is: "The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops had no immediate response to Boehner's comments.'

A later reference:

"Every budget decision should be assessed by whether it protects or threatens human life and dignity."

A completely unexceptionable piece of platitude.

If they had something stronger, more pointed, or more partisan than this from the USCCB, they would have put it in the lede.

The bottom line: this is media-manufactured non-conflict.

There's Nothing There.

[trappedincanuckistan]

My messages to the Catholic Bishops were in light of the Churches historical positions on “social justice”.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

-— There’s Nothing There.-—

Thank you. I broke my own rule of only reading what’s between quotation marks.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Fair enough.

[sayuncledave]

In addition to which, congressman Boehner and those allied with him are talking about reducing the degree of spending increase, but NOT reducing the amount of money spent. Just talking about slowing down some in the increases of that amount. In other words: it is a lie to say that the budget is being cut, or that reductions in actual spending are being considered. This is posturing, nothing more.