Paul Ryan and the Catholic vote
Tags
Related Posts
About the author
The contrast between the Catholicism of Vice President Joe Biden and Congressman Ryan perfectly represents the ongoing debate about the Catholic vote going back to the Reagan years. Indeed, the choice between these two types of Catholic politicians could not be any more plain.
Biden is a “social justice” Catholic who claims to know how to connect with blue-collar Democratic Catholics, like those in his hometown of Scranton, Pennsylvania. During four of his last five years in the Senate, he received a 100 percent rating from the pro-choice group NARAL. As Vice President he supported federal funding for abortion, despite voicing opposition to it in 2008, and the Health and Human Services mandate requiring Catholic institutions serving the public to provide insurance coverage for contraception, including abortifacients and sterilisation.
During the 2008 campaign, some of Biden’s remarks on NBC’s Meet the Press defending his position on abortion were publicly criticised by Bishop Robert C Morlino of Madison, Wisconsin, and Archbishop Charles J Chaput, then of Denver, now of Philadelphia. Morlino’s diocese, by the way, includes Paul Ryan’s hometown of Janesville, Wisconsin.
Paul Ryan, it appears, never had a “progressive” phase in the development of either his politics or his Catholic faith. From a fifth-generation Wisconsin family, Ryan attended public schools, graduating in economics and political science from Miami University, Ohio, and developed a liking for the works of individualist philosopher Ayn Rand during his high school years. His interest in politics led him to work as an aide in 1992 to Senator Bob Kasten and as legislative director between 1995 and 1997 for Senator Sam Brownback, both ardent pro-lifers. Ryan worked as a speechwriter for Jack Kemp during the 1996 campaign after spending a few years at Empower America, the think-tank Kemp ran with Bill Bennett.
Since being elected to the House in 1998, Ryan has developed a solid reputation with the grassroots as a pro-life, pro-marriage Catholic, and among Tea Party and fiscal conservatives, he has attained hero status for his extraordinary grasp of economic and budgetary issues. At age 42, Congressman Ryan is now often referred to as the “intellectual leader” of the Republican Party, a description repeated by Mitt Romney in announcing his VP choice.
Biden’s vulnerabilities as the choice for Catholic voters are neither more nor less than those of President Obama; the sitting Vice President will have to continue to defend the expansion of the abortion mandate and the violation of religious liberty at the heart of the HHS mandate. Unless Biden repeats the mistake he made in 2008 on Meet the Press, it is unlikely he will draw any direct fire from the bishops. [More]
SOURCE
The Daily Beast/Deal W Hudson/Telegraph
Leave a Comment
Photo Archive
-
May 22, 2013 1:37
Tornadoes exact deadly toll; region needs ‘a lot of prayers right now’
-
May 22, 2013 1:32
State Dept. report says countries have repressed religious freedom with laws
-
May 22, 2013 1:23
2 lawsuits filed against Maine Catholic church
-
May 21, 2013 1:32
Church Whistle-Blowers Join Forces on Abuse
-
May 20, 2013 5:17
Maine Catholic church closing its doors
-
May 20, 2013 5:14
Muslim leaders in US facing challenges inside and outside the faith
-
May 17, 2013 5:43
Archbishop clarifies remarks about Cuomo
-
May 17, 2013 5:40
Fr. Gary Meier goes public with clergy experience
-
May 17, 2013 5:37
Predator priests paid to pray for unsuspecting families
-
May 16, 2013 1:56
Cleanup of Bridgeport, Conn., diocese begins in earnest
40 Comments
A great Democratic Philosophy is now being brought to light by Paul Ryan, i.e, (Keep the poor, poor. This way they will be dependent upon our form of government and will keep voting us into office.) Could you imagine if the Republicans would be able to reduce the percentage of poor people in the US, how this would effect the base of the Democratic Party? Ryan isn’t heretical at all. He’s bringing to light what needed to be said a long time ago. I find it interesting how liberals who post on this site, when the bishops came out against the HHS Mandate, commented so negatively against them. Now, it seems as if the Bishops are in favor again when it comes to a conservative like Paul Ryan. I, myself, in my younger years was a very head-strong Democratic. It was the party of the poor in the 40′s, 50′s and 60′s. JFK is still one of my favorite presidents. Now the Democratic Party should be renamed what it has become, “The Liberal Socialist Party.” I love to hearing about the limosine liberals like the Obama’s who have such great concern for the poor that they take more vacations than other presidents have and Michelle, spending thousands of tax dollars on cloths and jewelry. NUF SAID.
Yes, I am appalled by all the taxpayer money (our money) Michelle Obama has spent on vacations. It’s like she’s using her position as First Lady for fun and lots of free travel to see the world on the taxpayer’s dime. I feel she should pay all the money back to the taxpayers that she irreponsibly spent on her frivolous trips. I was especially irked when on one holiday she took Airforce One 4 hours out ahead of Obama at double cost to the taxpayers. What an irresponsible, arrogant woman!
I can’t believe I’m in agreement with Jim (for a change) BothJim and Tony are consistent in their religious and spiritual beliefs. Where I differ from Tony on social justice is giving government the responsibility that is ours as individuals. Paul Ryan is not throwing Grandma under the bus but suggesting those 55 and under take personal responsibility for providing for their future and selecting medical plans from the private sector. Look at the details of Ryan’s budget and focus on the whole rather than throwing it away for a single issue. All is negotiable!
Eileen — you always have agreed with me, you just didn’t know it — but I knew it — I could see it in your soul! I look forward to additional agreement in the future.
Regardless of how one feels on this issue, the excerpt from cathnewsusa is a major distortion of the original piece from which it is extracted. This extract has turned a nuanced piece in the Daily Beast into a pro-Ryan editorial. An editorial correction is order, my friends.
Blah, blah, blah,blah, and blah! Amen.
The other side of social justice teaching (which never seems to get mentioned) is the Biblical directive of taking “personal responsibility” for one’s actions in life and the basket of difficulties one ends up with.
It is my openion that Paul Ryan has present a middle of the road plan to address our economic problems. The bishops and the sisters want to care for the poor. Wonderful! where is the money going to come from? Obama wants to make America a socialist country and we all will be poor and dependent on the goverment to exist. Obama doesn’t want to address a budget he want to barrow more money from China. Paul, thanks for speaking out.
Joseph Francis, The bishops have articulated a Social Justice Platform and they have found that Paul Ryan does not agree with it.
Just as they tell us to keep away from the Sisters who do not speak out forcefully enough about abortion and homosexuality we need to keep a way from him
Is someone paying you to trash the Church?
How is stating what the Catholic church’s bishops have said in any way trashing the Catholic church? I don’t understand….
We currently have a Catholic vice president. Major positions on the Cabinet, Congress and Supreme Court are Catholics. Some think.
Jim: Thank you for your charitable and thoughtful responsive comment. You are a model modern Aquinas.
Thank you Thom for your kind words.
But in spite of your kind words, you neglected to respond substantively to what I said: the Church is being required by the HHS mandate to fund things we believe is immoral; the Church is NOT asking non-believers to stop using artificial contraception.
PAUL RYAN IS A DISSEDENT ROMAN CATHOLIC, THE USCCB CLAIMS HE HAS TURNED AWAY FROM THE SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHINGS OF OUR CHURCH. HE IS A VIPER, A DOG, A HERITIC. HE IS NOT AS FULLY ROMAN CATHOLIC AS HE PRETENDS TO BE. LOOK UP WHAT THE BISHOPS HAVE SAID OF HIM.
JUST AS JIM CALLS THE NUNS HERETICS SO SHOULD BE CALL PAUL RYAN A HERETRIC.
Tony — since you are leveling the charge of heretic at Paul Ryan, please inform us of the specific dogma with which he disagrees. Saying he is not adequately in favor of the poor is not a sufficient answer, as he and I and many many others believe his plan actually benefits the poor much much more than anything the fascist party (Democrats) put out there. So, that is a matter of opinion / judgment; and, that does not constxtute heresy. So, again, please specify the specific dogma with which Paul Ryan disagrees.
The USCCB, the Bishops, the Hierachy of Our County,
have declared Ryans budget morally wanting.
I want to trust our Bishops, they are the descentents of the Apostles. They teach wtih the authority of God. They said Ryan was morally bankrupt.
Therefore, in imatation of you I call him a viper, a dog a heretic.
Tony — I never have read that the bishops have called Paul Ryan “morally bankrupt.” Do you remember which bishop said that? Also, with regard to his budget being “morally wanting” — even if that is true (and I believe it is demonstrably not true), that is not the same as spewing false dogma, like the heretical sisters, who, by definition, ARE spewing false dogma.
Jim, if you google “Paul Ryan and the USCCB”. You will find all the information you need. He is a dissenter.
So Tony, I took a quick look at the Google results, and here is what I found (copied and pasted here): “I’m not sure that we have the humility yet not to stray into areas where we lack competence, and where we need to let the laity take the lead,” he (Bishop Boyea) added. “We need to learn far more than we need to teach in this area. We need to listen more than we need to speak. We already have an excellent, fine Compendium [on the Social Doctrine of the Church].”
Following his remarks, Archbishop Allen Vigneron of Detroit called upon the committee to place greater emphasis on the “disintegration of the family” as a factor in the breakdown of the economy.
So, Tony, this selection, found at http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=14639, supports Paul Ryan. I didn’t even bother to click on the Google result from the National Catholic Distorter (otherwise known as National Catholic Reporter) — that’s like watching MSNBC — why would any sane person waste any of their time reading the propaganda they serve up?
But Jim did youreadthe reports of what the USCCB actually said?
Read it Jim please. It goes without saying Jim that I am sure we share a great love for our church and our country. We share different views on how it they can be the best the can be.
Tony, you may have better luck if you link to the USCCB letter directly.
Jim, here is the link to the text of a letter sent by the USCCB to the US Congress (under the “The full statement with signatories is below” sentence, about halfway through the article):
http://www.faithinpubliclife.org/newsroom/press/catholic-leaders-to-rep-paul-ryan-stop-distorting-church-teaching-to-justify-immoral-budget/
In it, the bishops say this, “”"As Catholic social justice leaders, women religious, priests, theologians and other concerned Catholics, we are deeply troubled that Rep. Paul Ryan – chairman of the House Budget Committee – is defending a budget proposal that makes dangerous cuts to food stamps and other vital protections for the most vulnerable as compatible with the teachings of his Catholic faith. Simply put, this budget is morally indefensible and betrays Catholic principles of solidarity, just taxation and a commitment to the common good. A budget that turns its back on the hungry, the elderly and the sick while giving more tax breaks to the wealthiest few can’t be justified in Christian terms.”"”
It is not a long letter, and it is a really good read, so please read the whole thing yourself, but what Tony is says is absolutely true.
Okay, Blag, I did click on that link you offer above — and I’M VERY GLAD I DID. The list is NOT from who you imply: you imply it is the bishops who wrote this Marxism garbage, but look at the list of signatories down below. I knew as soon as I saw the first signatory, heretic Simone Campbell from SNAP, that this was garbage. Now I challenge you, Blag — look at that list of signatories — did you do that? There are no bishops on that list. One person is listed as being a former secretary for the USCCB — so what? He’s not a bishop. So, Blag, please offer some credible evidence in the future if you want me to consume my time following your suggested leads.
Blag — I hope you respond to this post.
I pasted the wrong link Jim, apologies. Here is the correct link:
http://usccb.org/news/2012/12-063.cfm
These were authored in direct response to Rep. Paul Ryan’s proposals to the House.
Tony — no, I did not read what the USCCB actually said, but, as you can see from what I posted, at least some bishops admitted that they are not experts in economics, and that they should speak less and listen more. So, as I’ve said many times, the bishops can get these practical matters wrong; but they do not err in establishing Church dogma.
And Blag, I don’t really have time to read the USCCB statement, but I did read what you posted, and I believe both you and Tony, as it is consistent with my reading elsewhere: the bishops do not like the Ryan budget proposals. But, the bishops are not economists; and, in this secular matter, they are wrong. Like you, they’ve probably been watching do much lame-stream media and have bought into the propaganda.
No time to review something that conflicts with what you would like to believe? I’m sensing a pattern here. It would literally (seriously, literally) take you less than 2 minutes to read the entire text, less time than it took to type out your response, to read the entire letter from them. Next time come to class prepared please.
If they thought it was such a secular matter, then why did they bother to write letters to Congress about it? If it is that easy to trick an entire council of bishops, then why don’t they agree with the “lame-stream media” on issues such as gay marriage or healthcare? Why do you say that economics is a secular issue when the Catholic church’s position on economics is to protect and uplift the poor (read your Catechism Jim)? Why do you say that economics is a secular matter when the legal definition of marriage is as well – why do you respect the Catholic church’s teachings on one but not the other? Why do you ignore the bishops’ teachings about Ryan’s plan because you think they are not experts on the matter, but you trust yourself – are you an economist or expert on the matter because you watch Fox News?
I think you do what you have repeatedly accused many others of doing on this website – picking and choosing what teachings of the church you believe in because you already agree with them. In places like this where you disagree with them you find tiny excuses to ignore their reasoning when you haven’t even taken the time to read it. Please Jim, consult your local Catholic church for spiritual guidance on this matter.
AND I BELEIVE AS YOU DO THE BISHOPS CAN GET THESE PRACTICAL MATTERS REGARDING THE NUNS. LEAVE THEM ALONE.
THE BISHOPS ARE WRONG AND THE NUNS ARE RIGHT.
I know that you Americans enjoy “Freedom of Speech” but in Canada where we also have this freedom, we realize that with freedom comes a certain responsibility. – to quote Carol Burnett; “Words, once they are printed have a life of their own.”
There is no threat to religious liberty. What the proponents of this ridiculous claim are really doing is discriminating against non-believers.
Thom — you must be a fascist Democrat. There is the most grave threat to religious liberty in the USA. The discrimination against non-believers is garbage; the Church is NOT asking non-believers to stop using artificial contraception. All the Church is doing is asking for the liberty to not do something we believe to be immoral.
Jim, not all Democrats are fascist, and not all fascists are Democrats. Furthermore, you have no idea what this person believes beyond your limited discourse on this site, so saying “you must be a fascist Democrat” is probably jumping the gun by a mile. The Catholic church is asking the government for the power to control what perfectly legal and legitimately medical procedures and medicines their Catholic and non-Catholic employees receive that are paid for by the Catholic church. While the Catholic church may believe some of those procedures and medicines to be immoral, it is not the Catholic church’s right to dictate which medical treatments employees receive.
Think about it – because the First Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law, Jehovah’s Witnesses will no longer have to provide healthcare coverage for blood transfusions for their employees, and the Church of Christian Science will no longer have to pay for any scientific/medical treatment at all!
The legal and legitimate medical procedures and prescriptions employees receive is information that should be private and only shared between the patient (read: employee) and their doctor. That’s the only way to have legally fair healthcare under the First Amendment.
It’s either that or we don’t have healthcare paid for by the employer, but their are economies of scale (read: negotiations and lower-cost lock-in deals) that keep healthcare coverage costs lower than otherwise for employees, so in order for that to happen it would have to be written into law, and would _really_ upset the insurance apple cart, and disenfranchise the poor even worse than they already are (because health insurance costs would go up and they would have a more difficult time affording it). This solution seems to have more problems.
Blag — hold onto your hat. Okay, do you have a good grip? I agree with the fact that I probably jumped the gun on Thom, but, I will give you 10:1 odds he is a Democrat, as no Repbulican likely would agree with his post. Further, if you vote for Obama and most Democrats this fall, you really are voting for facism. Obama is the most dangerous man who ever has been president. He issues executive orders to overturn Congressional directives when he wants to override Congress. He truly is a tyranical dictator who wants the government to control virtually every facet of the lives of us Americans — which USED TO BE the land of the free and the home of the brave.
I like how you tell me to hold onto my hat when you were the one jumping the gun. Stop foaming at the mouth about Obama for a second and listen.
I don’t care about odds, and I don’t care what party or political view you think people are. Unless they have explicitly self-identified as something, who cares what party they belong to? To attack people based on their political affiliation is to use guilt by association. That’s not what matters, the ideas they put forward matter. Those ideas we can discuss, and if people feel comfortable enough they can self-identify and we can discuss that. But until they do, nobody (read: you) should be calling them out on it, because their political affiliation DOES. NOT. MATTER.
Here’s one self-identified Republican who is going to vote for Obama. You may disagree that he is a Republican [in a related note, he is also likely not a Scotsman), but that is what he has self-identified as.
http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/vqy9m/i_am_republican_prepared_to_vote_for_obama/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Thom: what the Church is saying is that if you want to eat candy (use contraceptives) go to the store and pay for it out of your own pocket book.
Yeah, and the Jehovah’s Witnesses are saying that if you want a blood transfusion for any reason, pay for it out of your own pocket book. And the Church of Christian Science is just saying that if you want any scientifically sound, perfectly legal, and legitimately medical procedure or prescription, pay for it yourself. I’m not making any of this up – these churches truly do believe these things.
Is that really the world you want to live in? A world where your employer can dictate what medical coverage you receive? Need an invasive appendectomy? Too bad, JW’s aren’t going to pay for it because it would require a blood transfusion. Have cancer? Too bad, Christian Science isn’t going to pay for it because you were obviously not spiritually clean enough, you better pray more.
Medical science exists for a reason. Why should your employer know what legal and legitimate medical treatment you are getting? Heck, why should anybody besides your doctor and supporting medical staff know that information? Doesn’t HIPPA factor into things too?
Oh come on Blag everyone knows that the only conscience that must be respected is a Roman Catholic one.