bamabound;Viennacon;EBH;livius;bronxville;MadDawg;Mrs.Don-o;STJPII;D-fendr;NotTallTex;
, I beg you to be patient with FReepers
I didn’t realize I was being impatient rather was under the impression it was a discussion on the term Social Justice.
This term encompasses the whole political arena on which road the country is taking - Marxism or Scripture-ism. Yes, Liberalism was also co-opted but it was a clearly delineated meaning word (”gay” is yet another) while on the other hand “social justice” can be two things (Church or Scriptural teaching vs a politically charged buzzword). The two things are blended just enough to cause a calculated confusion.
Here are just a few examples of “social justice” terms and how they are misused:
Human rights and human dignity belong to each and every person by virtue of his being created in the image and likeness of God, and upon the natural law. Marxists now assert that such rights and dignity are determined by the state or the “will of the people.”
Freedom reaches its perfection in seeking what is true and good, which ultimately leads one to God. Marxists now define “freedom” as the license to do whatever one feels like doing (as long as it isn’t illegal), without regard to truth, goodness, or God.
Truth involves correspondence to objective reality. Marxists now claim that “truth” is merely a relative term that can vary from person to person. In the process, they deny objective truth, particularly in the moral realm.
Common good refers to the good of the entire community, as the proper object of a just law, which nonetheless presupposes respect for the individual person (cf. CCC 1907). Marxists now equate the promotion of the common good to the redistribution of wealth, entitlement programs, and an exaggerated deference to the federal government.
Culture of life derives from Pope John Paul II’s 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae. While it provides a coherent presentation of the range of life issues, the document hones in on abortion and euthanasia as the key issues of our time. Marxists use “life” or “culture of life” (without meaning anything in particular) to give credence to their position, even as they persist in their permissive position on abortion and other nonnegotiable issues.
Development involves access to the basic necessities of life, especially for the poor. Marxists use “development,” consciously or otherwise, as code for exporting—or even imposing when necessary—American secular values, most notably an anti-natal agenda.
Taken from:
http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/social-justice-isn%E2%80%99t-left-or-right
Saul Alinsky was an expert at twisting Catholic Social Justice.
Thank you for your response(s). But we have difficulty in not talking past, rather than to, each other.I didn’t realize I was being impatient rather was under the impression it was a discussion on the term Social Justice.
I didn’t intend any complaint, but rather, I had reference to the word “anger” in the thread-starting article/post by bamabound.Saul Alinsky was an expert at twisting Catholic Social Justice.
Saul Alinsky wasn’t particularly leery of the stricture of Isaiah 5:20 KJV):Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!I, OTOH - and I think I speak for most FReepers who are leery of the formulation “social justice” - do not wish to be taken as insensitive on that score. It’s not what I’m trying to do. I’m trying to make the prudential point that there simply has to be a formulation for what you mean by the concept you call “social justice” which does not wave red flags at 3/4 of the bulls in the world.I put it to you that if, for example, even Thomas Sowell doesn’t understand your intellectual argument, you need to find better language. Communication - say nothing of persuasion - has become impossible. In my reference to the term “liberalism,” I tried to suggest that I understand that we are dealing with Newspeak-induced difficulties of thought and communication. But I
thinksure hope you can understand my point about particular term “liberalism” a lot better than I understand your point about the particular formulation “social justice."I may have thought of an example of “social justice” - or the lack thereof: sometimes the government sets tax rates (e.g., the capital gains tax rate in particular) at such high levels that their deleterious effects outweigh their benefit. Mr. Obama has explicitly said that he liked high capital gains taxation even assuming that they damage the economy - just as long as they impact “the evil rich.” The leftist would call that “social justice.” The true liberal, in contradistinction, would call it malicious. Would a Catholic call it “social injustice?” Or something else, positive or negative?