As if I needed any more reasons for not wanting to have the Catholics as back up on voting issues. The Pope came out today with even more brilliant reason why they are the number one church in favor of wealth redistribution.
Historically the Catholic Church has been a bastion of progressivism, sure they side with conservatives on issues like abortion so naturally one issue voters jump on board and think the grand ol’church is with them on every other conservative issue. If anyone cared to dig deeper they would find that Catholic political doctrine has more in common with modern progressives then modern libertarians or conservatives, the Popes comments today just show that even more. I mean in the picture he is clearly lessoning his carbon foot print by flying commercial.
Speaking to the “wealthy nations of the world” (read here America) it is their responsibility to the environment and the rest of the world to “encourage more sober lifestyles, while reducing their energy consumption and improving its efficiency." Sounds great right? Who doesn’t want to conserve more resources, (heck the more rare they are technically the more money we can make off them J) the problem as with every government program comes in when they decide how to limit resources and who gets what, basically government control over consumption AKA limiting the agency of people. With the Catholic track record of “helping people live up to their standards” I think I might be more inclined to want government control. Just ask any indigenous South American empire how the conversion to Catholicism went…o that’s right you cant ask them…they all died.
I mean take away the fact that this next statement comes from the Pope and you could attribute it to any communist leader through out history and think it fits. "Humanity needs a profound cultural renewal; it needs to rediscover those values which can serve as the solid basis for building a brighter future for all," I would be interested in knowing how the Catholic church would be interested in reshaping society, would they go back to banning certain books and burning heretics? Maybe they don’t want to go that far back?
Here’s another gem “Sad to say, it is all too evident that large numbers of people in different countries and areas of our planet are experiencing increased hardship because of the negligence or refusal of many others to exercise responsible stewardship over the environment," perhaps instead of blaming the downtrodden countries problems on the rich maybe they should look at the traditions they still practice, maybe these “poor countries” need to re-think their socialist paradigm and accept the philosophy of capitalism and individual liberty that made America what it is today?
Before you let me have it remember I’m not saying environment responsibility is a high and important priority, my question is rather, how do we achieve it? The Catholics like every progressive clearly feel unearned guilt for being wealthy is the first step to environmental atonement. Second, submit to the barrel of governments guns for the fix. Of course this is all assuming the premise of the argument that the environment is falling apart. Clearly I reject that out right so I guess the argument is moot point.
Historically the Catholic Church has been a bastion of progressivism, sure they side with conservatives on issues like abortion so naturally one issue voters jump on board and think the grand ol’church is with them on every other conservative issue. If anyone cared to dig deeper they would find that Catholic political doctrine has more in common with modern progressives then modern libertarians or conservatives, the Popes comments today just show that even more. I mean in the picture he is clearly lessoning his carbon foot print by flying commercial.
Speaking to the “wealthy nations of the world” (read here America) it is their responsibility to the environment and the rest of the world to “encourage more sober lifestyles, while reducing their energy consumption and improving its efficiency." Sounds great right? Who doesn’t want to conserve more resources, (heck the more rare they are technically the more money we can make off them J) the problem as with every government program comes in when they decide how to limit resources and who gets what, basically government control over consumption AKA limiting the agency of people. With the Catholic track record of “helping people live up to their standards” I think I might be more inclined to want government control. Just ask any indigenous South American empire how the conversion to Catholicism went…o that’s right you cant ask them…they all died.
I mean take away the fact that this next statement comes from the Pope and you could attribute it to any communist leader through out history and think it fits. "Humanity needs a profound cultural renewal; it needs to rediscover those values which can serve as the solid basis for building a brighter future for all," I would be interested in knowing how the Catholic church would be interested in reshaping society, would they go back to banning certain books and burning heretics? Maybe they don’t want to go that far back?
Here’s another gem “Sad to say, it is all too evident that large numbers of people in different countries and areas of our planet are experiencing increased hardship because of the negligence or refusal of many others to exercise responsible stewardship over the environment," perhaps instead of blaming the downtrodden countries problems on the rich maybe they should look at the traditions they still practice, maybe these “poor countries” need to re-think their socialist paradigm and accept the philosophy of capitalism and individual liberty that made America what it is today?
Before you let me have it remember I’m not saying environment responsibility is a high and important priority, my question is rather, how do we achieve it? The Catholics like every progressive clearly feel unearned guilt for being wealthy is the first step to environmental atonement. Second, submit to the barrel of governments guns for the fix. Of course this is all assuming the premise of the argument that the environment is falling apart. Clearly I reject that out right so I guess the argument is moot point.
Just a side note to the whole Denmark thing, read this article to see the gross amount of all the carbon dioxide that this conference is projecting into the air with all their private jets and entourages.
ReplyDeleteBut well put article M. Galt. It would seem that hypocrisy and pandering to popular ideals spreads pretty far. Even to those who claim divine authority.
This is so ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteYou know, I bet you just hate it when people do this sort of thing to Mormons. Blah blah blah, mormons hate women. Mormons hate gays. Mormons hate blacks. Mormons hate everyone. blah blah blah.
What is your purpose in spreading this sort of ridiculous rhetoric? Hey everyone, I just wanted to let you know, that if you're a Mormon, you should be sure to denounce anything the Catholic Church does or says, because I have a secret: Catholics are. . .wait for it. . . progressives! *GASP!* *SHUDDER*
"Humanity needs a profound cultural renewal; it needs to rediscover those values which can serve as the solid basis for building a brighter future for all." -- How could this possibly sound like a communist? It sounds like a Mormon! You don't think the LDS church is saying this sort of thing aaaall the time? Family, love, respect, and every Christ-like attribute you can think of, could all very well be the "values" Pope is referring to! The LDS church emphasizes rediscovering values to build a brighter future more than anyone!
You decide Catholics sound like progressives, and so then you decide everything that church says must be some sort of evil, even though it is directly in line with what our very own prophet would probably say.
Also, how did you decide that the majority of the poor countries in the world are socialist? You're entirely wrong. That's is an absurd assertion.
Also, I have bad news for you:
The richest countries according to GDP per head in PPP (USA = 100), 2006, looks like this:
1. Luxembourg 172
2. Qatar 160.8
3. Bermuda 159.0
4. Channel Islands 117.9
5. Norway 113.9
6. Brunei 113.5
7. Singapore 101.7
8. Macau and U.S 100
9. Cayman Islands 99.6
10. Kuwait 99.1
USA, behind NORWAY!? And that's in 2006. And we all know that we're going downhill, and getting worse every year (Thanks, Bush)
Source: http://gross-national-product.suite101.com/article.cfm/richest_countries_by_gdp_and_the_poorest_country
Two more things. First, you should probably stop trying to use "progressive" as some sort of derogatory word. The word "Progression" means advancement. It's a positive word. Regression is bad. Doing absolutely nothing (AKA Conservatism) usually turns to regression.
Last, you're posts are incredibly hard to follow. Your ideas seem to come out scatter brained, and you're fluency is awful. You combine sentences that shouldn't be combined, and make following your thoughts excruciatingly painful. While that has nothing to do with conservatism, or capitalism, or the Catholic church, you should probably address that issue.
Hey Reed, I missed you... You abandonded my comments on the other post and never did get back to me with a historical citation where socialism has actually worked. You know the top ten countries with the greatest national debts? Yeah, they just happen to coincide with the top 10 countries that are the most progressive/socialist. Socialism does not work, it does not function. It never has, it never will. It is a pipe dream. Mr. Galt has a fine point, he just happens to be like me and present it in a package that people often take offense at. Regardless that does not change the value or relevance of what is said. History is there to learn from; don't kill jews, don't own slaves, don't hold inquisitions...now it's your turn to learn - don't believe in socialism, it doesn't work, it is a lie.
ReplyDeleteGWH, you'll have to forgive me. I've been pretty busy with finals these days. Christmas break soon though, so I'll get around to it, I promise. ;)
ReplyDeleteI should probably try and be a little less antagonistic too. Sorry about that. After all, you were kind with your advice and suggestions regarding my current struggles. I'll try and keep it straight to the debate, no hard feelings. Debate negates bias (from both sides), and so I believe it's worthwhile.
But for now, please send me a source for that nice little bit you told me about countries debts. Not saying you're wrong, just asking for a reliable source. Thanks.
PS - I really would like to hear response to my comment, rather than just throwing some more facts at me. Negate mine.
I knew you'd ask. Working on it.
ReplyDeleteHahah, am I that predictable? XD
ReplyDeleteCIA World Factbook uses this definition for socialism:
ReplyDeleteSocialism - a government in which the means of planning, producing, and distributing goods is controlled by a central government that theoretically seeks a more just and equitable distribution of property and labor; in actuality, most socialist governments have ended up being no more than dictatorships over workers by a ruling elite
I will admit without shame that I have used my scholarly skills that I got learneded by some teachers n stuff at the University level that I put two and two together to make such a comment that socialist countries are going bankrupt. The source for my statement is part I from:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/56207/list_of_socialist_countries_with_individual.html?cat=37
Now there is no official "top 10" as far as I know of most socialist countries, but here are 10 socialist countries that I believe happen to be more so than others:
Cuba
N. Korea
Venezuela
China
Vietnam
Syria
Belarus
Sweden
Laos
Zambia
China is not bankrupt, but they are prospering as they have loosened state control and have begun to flourish as they accept more capitalist policies with regards to their economy. Venezuela has wealth from oil, but their people have and will suffer under socialism.
So I will not rescind my comment that socialist countries are going bankrupt, but would like to simply modify it by saying, socialism bankrupts countries.
Don't believe me? Read up on Iceland and France. Better yet, take a look at the good 'ole US of A. Trekking down the road to socialism is the underlying cause of our current woes.
Re: Reed Comment "You decide Catholics sound like progressives, and so then you decide everything that church says must be some sort of evil, even though it is directly in line with what our very own prophet would probably say."
ReplyDeleteReed, is the catholic church the true church on the earth or has it been deemed by apostles to be a great and abominable church (see Talmage - Great Apostasy)? Progressive as M. Galt is viewing it is synonymous with permissive. Meaning permissive to the ways of the world. Catholicism has been shedding traditional values year after year after year. To be progressive simply for the sake of worldly acceptance is a sin. Since the term progressive is quite a relative term, it would seem that at some points the church has been considered progressive. Today, not so much. Who cares? The moniker is useless in speaking of a the true church of Jesus Christ.
Reed, I have some bad news for you. You said, "Also, I have bad news for you:
ReplyDeleteThe richest countries according to GDP per head in PPP (USA = 100), 2006, looks like this:
1. Luxembourg 172
2. Qatar 160.8
3. Bermuda 159.0
4. Channel Islands 117.9
5. Norway 113.9
6. Brunei 113.5
7. Singapore 101.7
8. Macau and U.S 100
9. Cayman Islands 99.6
10. Kuwait 99.1"
Now here's the list of the 10 free-est economy (capitalist) countries in the world - Canada, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Ireland, United Kingdom, New Zealand, United States, Singapore, Australia, & Hong Kong.
Source - http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19669 citing the Wall Street Journal.
So the number 1 richest GDP nation per head in the world is Luxembourg which happens to be the most capitalist economy in the world. And the only arguably socialist nation on your list would be Norway. So what was the point you were wanting to make? That the U.S. isn't as high on the list as we all would like? I agree, and I argue that the reason for this is that we have allowed socialist democrats to restrict our freedoms with liberal policies which hinder prosperity both nationally and individually.
Reed I’ll forgive you because you’re a ginger and gingers feel pain quicker then other people and that’s just sad because being ginger and liberal you probably feel sooo much pain all the time. And no I don’t hate it when people say these things about Mormons, I hate it when Mormons try to set themselves apart from truth for the sake of thinking it will separate them from everyone else they live around. Trust me Reed you’re a special little flower of individuality even if you didn’t fall for all the commie stuff. I know everyone in Utah thinks the same but you don’t have to go all Stalinist to set yourself apart.
ReplyDeleteWell to start with progressive is a negative when progressive is defined by those who use it to define themselves these days. I cant believe I’m even going to explain this because you know what I mean, liberals used to call themselves socialist then people woke up to that being a negative, then they became liberal, then people woke up and realized what they where, now they want to call themselves progressive and expect us to believe its what you say “they want social progress” the type of progress you are talking about is retro active back to the dark ages when people lived in harmony on nice little tracks of land working for their local government. So stop trying to define progressive as something new or important, its modern code for socialist, communist or liberal depending on your inclination.
OK to the point that the Popes points sound like Mormons. The question is “cultural renewal” as define by whom and in what terms? You’re a prod liberal so do you want the Catholic definition of social renewal applying to you? I don’t have to go into the detail of what this could look like. Then the Pope calls for government intervention into these areas he defines as important. Government intervention is code of course for force, or “if the people don’t willingly comply, make them comply.” This fly’s in the face of personal liberty and responsibility and supplants these concepts with government management.
If you have any doubt about the Catholics involvement in “progressive” AKA socialist causes around the world then read some history. And the majority of poor countries are socialist; just look at pretty much any African back water, when colonial powers left in came every socialist utopian to set up ideal governments that would help the disadvantaged. Worked out great for pretty much all of them. Then look at South America where the Catholics got their hand in social engineering and government, again great examples of social success and political fairness.
I almost felt a glimmer of hope when I saw that posted a reference for an idea you had which is more then any other commie on the site. That quickly went away when I saw what it actually was, a cheap for profit site with Google adds to generate revenue…I’m guessing because your still in school getting smarter then everyone else that you would know this doesn’t pass as a legitimate source right? Here is what we call “fact checked” sources that contradicts your source. County’s like Bermuda, Cayman Islands, and so on serve as off shore banking locations that process and hold transactions for the rich and powerful. I don’t want to have to explain global economics to you as well so I’ll let you check out the contradictions between your source and a legitimate one. On the second one you will find the USA as second in GDP and PPP…but whatever, you’ll probably keep using faulty sources so you can feel justified in continuing your struggle in Utah for social justice around the world.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html
I'm on a kick for lists of ten, so here's another:
ReplyDeleteTop 10 reasons you might be a progressive:
10. If you are an ACORN employee who tried to organize other ACORN employees into a union but were stopped by ACORN's illegal union busting activities while ACORN fights to unionize OTHER companies... you might be a progressive.
9. If in the year 2009, you belong to a congressional caucus that uses skin color as it's only membership criteria... you might be a progressive.
8. If you are a congress person who belongs to a congressional caucus started by a self described socialist, and you think it is OK... you might be a progressive.
7. If you are a congress person in a "free country" who has a Freudian Slip and tells someone you want to nationalize their whole industry while at the same time you are directing tax payer dollars to save a company you are part owner of... you might be a progressive.
6. If you are the Ohio spokesperson for a Presidential campaign and you vote in that swing state instead of your home state as the law requires... you might be a progressive.
5. If you get an appointment in the Department of Transportation within that winning administration despite your illegal voter fraud activities... you might be a progressive.
4. If an organization you work for is paid almost a million dollars by a Presidential campaign to register voters, the organization endorses that campaign's candidate and only turns in registrations for that candidate's party and that organization is tax exempt... you might be a progressive.
3. If you call people who drive cross-country with hand made signs because they heard there was going to be a protest against big government "astro-turf" but you call the people paid below minimum wage waving professionally printed signs that were handed out to them as they get off a bus paid for by a PAC "grass roots"... you might be a progressive.
2. If you find yourself at a rally chanting that health care is a human right while forgetting that doctors are not slaves and you actually don't have a right to lay claim to their skills and abilities for free... you just might be a progressive.
1. If you think Carbon Dioxide, the gas required by plants to convert solar energy into usable chemical energy in the photosynthetic process, the very source of all food on the planet, is a pollutant... you might be a progressive.
courtesy of Americanthinker.com
Reed, do you know what GDP is? Do you know how it is figured?
ReplyDeleteSo the Pope is too liberal for you??? Bwahahahaha.
ReplyDeleteThe Catholic Church is "the number one church in favor of wealth redistribution"? Um, ever heard of this church?
Surely this post is satire. Right? Right!?
Steve,
ReplyDeleteYea I’m glad you where able to pick up on the satire. As with most things there is a hint of truth or in this case my actual opinion so I’ll detail my opinion a bit more in response to your post.
“The Pope too liberal for you?” Yes the Pope is too liberal for me. But by saying that I’m not saying he needs to fit my conservative world view. I see both extreme liberals and extreme conservatives as a threat to personal liberty and freedom. I no more want the Catholic Church in charge of the country then I want any other religion. If you go back into history you will find that the Catholic Church has supported many of the social welfare programs I appose
The difference between what you linked to and what the Pope advocates is personal choice AKA personal liberty. The Lord through the scriptures commands us to share the wealth so to speak but doesn’t come down and force us to comply; we have a choice, agency. The plan is laid out before us and we have the choice to decide what to do. The Pope is recommending that governments be involved in wealth re-distribution, or the forceful taking of one mans property to give to another. It’s in the force that I draw my line, the Pope advocates force, the Lord doesn’t. When “good works” become a matter of compulsion rather then a choice we personally make then it becomes something different. The Pope feels his morality should be mandated through government intervention…..in no way do I believe the government should force Mormon beliefs on the populace.
So while the environmental “global warming” idea is the current hot trend it serves only as the current vehicle to a battle as old as time, the control of people and spirits destinies. Satan sought the forceful compliance to law the same way the Pope is advocating the forcing of people into what he thinks is morally correct. (Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying the Pope is the devil.)
I heard this quote from someone that said, "Sell the Vatican, feed the world". If the Pope really believes in the redistribution of wealth as he so claims, perhaps he should put his money where his mouth is. Live like Mother Theresa for a while then I will believe that he is not being hypocritical with what he is advocating.
ReplyDeleteIn a way, his statements seem to reek of Osama Bin Laden type philosophy. Everyone else should go and kill themselves for the cause while I sit like a chicken in a cave somewhere. Well Mr. Pope - melt down some of that Gold you got hanging around your neck - your false idols) and do something Christlike for a change.
Oh, and M. Galt nailed the difference. Plus, I find the whole redistribution of wealth idea to be an oxymoronic statement to begin with. If everyone is wealthy then no one is wealthy. wealth is a relative term meaning that you have a certain degree of abundance. I consider myself wealthy, even though to some standards I am poor. But I have a house, cars, food, clothing, freedom to practice religion, everything I need to be happy. But if I only have 2,000 in my bank account many would not consider that to be wealthy.
ReplyDeleteSo this re-dstribution of wealth is just a silly and impossible idea to begin with.