Catholic professors target John Boehner over budget

Source: USA Today

More than 75 Catholic college professors sent a publicly released letter to House Speaker John Boehner saying that the budget he supported will hurt the poor, elderly and vulnerable. Boehner, a Catholic Republican, will give the commencement address on Saturday at the Catholic University of America.

"Your record in support of legislation to address the desperate needs of the poor is among the worst in Congress," the letter states. "This fundamental concern should have great urgency for Catholic policymakers. Yet, even now, you work in opposition to it."

Boehner is seeing a similar kind of criticism targeted toward President Obama when honored by a Catholic university, the idea that their policies violate teachings of the Catholic church. The letter criticizes specific aspects of the budget.

It is particularly cruel to pregnant women and children, gutting Maternal and Child Health grants and slashing $500 million from the highly successful Women Infants and Children nutrition program. When they graduate from WIC at age 5, these children will face a 20% cut in food stamps. The House budget radically cuts Medicaid and effectively ends Medicare. It invokes the deficit to justify visiting such hardship upon the vulnerable, while it carves out $3 trillion in new tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy.


Read more: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/Religion/post/2011/05/catholic-professors-target-john-boehner-over-budget-cuts/1

---

I expect that this criticism will largely be ignored. Of course, if the church was criticizing a Democrat, then it would be a headline. Remember President Obama's speech at Notre Dame?

for the religious nuts of any persuasion to think they are in charge!
Enough already! Flowing robes and pointy hats do not an expert make.
Let them use some of their gold at the vatican to feed the poor.

about the Catholic teaching that we have a moral obligation to address the problems of poverty.

If these people are religious nuts, then you're an atheistic nut.

Abortion, I believe, was the issue.

The consensus seemed to be that it was impermissible meddling of church in state.

The two big differences that I can see is that the abortion-related instance was unarguably consistent with doctrine (while the argument can be made that caring for the poor as a church doctrine applies first at the individual level, then at the church level, and only then at the state level; Jesus never said that those who take from the rich and give to the poor are blessed or righteous); and that the first were in the Catholic hierarchy and had authority in the church while the latter are principally bystanders.

Then again, the real difference is one of overarching principle: When they agree with us, it's all good; when they disagree with us, to the guillotine with them. It's an odd little principle, not much of a principle at all to be honest, but it does duty.

have as much right to freedom of speech as anyone has.

And someone needs to remind right-wingers who consider themselves Catholic that Catholic moral teachings require a "preferential" attention to the needs of the poor.

aren't when they treat other teachings of the church with equal respect - concern and care for the poor and the death penalty.

woman's right to choose, I will not take them seriously.

Also, when the "Paulians" support condom use and distribution, they can get on a soap box about harming people.

they have a moral obligation, as Catholics, Christians, and fellow human beings, to address the problems of poverty.

:shrug: