Rev. Chuck Currie: Paul Ryan Choice Lifts Up Difficult Moral Questions

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


http://www.alternet.org/story/149721...he_needed_them

I'm not being a smart-alec but who is Chuck Currie and why do I care what he thinks? Serious questions.

Originally Posted by bkcunningham1

I'm not being a smart-alec but who is Chuck Currie and why do I care what he thinks? Serious questions.

Chuck Currie is a religious blogger and Portland, Oregon Minister. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Currie

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-chuck-currie/

The Catholic Bishops and the "Nuns on the Bus" call the Ryan Budget "morally reprehensible".

Originally Posted by janmcn

The Catholic Bishops and the "Nuns on the Bus" call the Ryan Budget morally reprehensible.

I find it that way too as it seems to reflect Ryan's philosophy more than any sound economic policy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ayn-rand/

and his credence is based on what?

We can all find a blog of some sort by somebody that rings what one wants to hear.

If one believes in the message regardless the source that is one thing. To offer a random blog as a credible, game changing knowledge based, acknowledged expert is quite another position.

btk

When other peoples money runs out and the government can no longer give, who is going to call the shoots, the "Nuns on the Bus," the Cathloic Bishops. Its about time that the American slobs who think that taking other peoples money is owed to them, grab their boot strapes, pull themselves up, grow up and take care of themselves.

Originally Posted by billethkid

and his credence is based on what?

We can all find a blog of some sort by somebody that rings what one wants to hear.

If one believes in the message regardless the source that is one thing. To offer a random blog as a credible, game changing knowledge based, acknowledged expert is quite another position.

btk

Give them a little time. Mitt Romney's VP pick of Paul Ryan will stir up a hornet's nest in Catholic and many other religous groups because of his attacks on charity.

I agree. However as a past budget advocate, I would not use words like "attack" on any line item that is a possibility. The terminology suggests (not saying this was/is your intent) creating a negative mind set.

What the American people know and understand is the notion of living within one's means. They fully understand that they must "cut" (attack!) those discretionary items in their budget that enable them to get back to $ out cannot exceed $$ in!!! So if they had been donating big to charities and now had to cut back to make ends meet.........that is what most of us would do.

But if a politician goes after discretionary line items, the action is demonized depending on the message the writer wants to send or parrot (not intended as a negative term, just an action).

An out of control spending situation with no budget does in fact need to be attacked and spending reduced, cut or eliminated. None of which is currently happening in US government. They continue to do business as usual....akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titantic!!!

btk

Originally Posted by janmcn

The Catholic Bishops and the "Nuns on the Bus" call the Ryan Budget "morally reprehensible".

And the Catholic Bishops can be called "morally reprehensible" for their silence on the pedophile priest rapists they kept moving around to other parishes where they'd eventually prey on other innocents. But ungodly statists will use them to support a point anyway.

And the Georgetown faculty, whom United Church of Christ pastor Currie used....oops....I mean "cited" in his column, could be termed "morally reprehensible" for hiding the Christian cross by covering it with drapes when Obama stood at the lectern in front of it and proclaimed HIS wisdom and throne in the Christian "social justice" domain.

Focusing on Paul Ryan's individual catholicity-christianity, nor Georgetown Jesuits' collective liberation theology that emboldens them to hide the cross symbol of Christ's true spiritual mission on earth, is not a path toward developing ideas and solutions to the current imminent collapse of this nation's economy.

It's time to grow up and admit that a BANKRUPT nation will be able to help NOBODY, poor or rich or in between.

This speaks to that concept:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuC3n5Wx0R4#!

Paul Ryan is Catholic. I find it curious that all of a sudden leftist are defending the Catholic Church. The Church is good for its charities but God forbid these people speak out against aboriton, etc.

I am Catholic but always questioned too much charity because it made people totally reliant on others. I felt guilty believeing the Protestant Ethic as it was called back then. The Cathoic Church does some wonderful things but it makes too many people reliant on their kindness and that amounts to slavery in my opinion.

Paul Ryan is spot on and his plan can carry us through this economic crisis and on to revitalized this economy and this country

Okay. Help me out here Taltarzac725. Can you please point me to a source for Paul's attacks on charities?

You had to know that these people would bring out the religious stuff...seems to be standard when they begin the demeaning.


This Rev has a blog and if you read it, it reads like a political blog always. He is a big time supporter of Obama and would love to hear his opinion there but you never will.

This is part of the beginnings of destroying the man....ignore all the issues and get destroy him personally

charity does not come from the govt nor from the church, but from the taxpayers or from the parishioners who donate the funds....it should be up to the individual which charities he or she wants to support. the govt seems to want to take over that role.

A good review of what Christ knew was best for "the poor".....

"Six days before the Passover, Jesus arrived at Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. Here a dinner was given in Jesus’ honor. Martha served, while Lazarus was among those reclining at the table with him.

3 Then Mary took about a pint of pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus’ feet and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.

4 But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, “Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year’s wages.”

6 He did not say this because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.

7 “Leave her alone,” Jesus replied. “[It was intended] that she should save this perfume for the day of my burial.

8 You will always have the poor among you, but you will not always have me."

9 Meanwhile a large crowd of Jews found out that Jesus was there and came, not only because of him but also to see Lazarus, whom he had raised from the dead.

10 So the chief priests made plans to kill Lazarus as well, for on account of him many of the Jews were going over to Jesus and putting their faith in him."

John 12 NIV 1984