Posted on 11/11/2005 10:52:44 PM PST by Coleus
Socialism is evil. It is the opposite of Christian charity. It turns productive citizens into slaves, and unproductive citizens into domestic animals.
To the extent that Church leaders encourage "society" or "the state" to take over the duties of individuals, families, churches, and private organizations, they are not on the side of God but of Marx.
("Government is not God" ping, y'all)
Yep. I was just thinking about the the anti-family nature of the welfare system and the problems it spawned.
You must have been on some of the threads where the conjunction of "poor" and "children" brings out a few dozen people yelling, "They're just like animals ... sterilize them!"
Socialism destroys the humanity of everyone involved.
I wish I could believe that it is "socialism" which brings out these responses. I think it's something more fundamental in our nature itself--more like Original Sin. To mention just one example, Rick Santorum's really thoughtful discussion of subsidiarity and social justice is the sort of thing some FReepers cite as evidence that he is a crackpot. What other sort of politician would take seriously the religious principles he professes to believe?
Well, that's certainly true at the rock-bottom level. However, there are some social structures that are more conducive to the operation of Grace upon nature, and some that are less so.
What other sort of politician would take seriously the religious principles he professes to believe?
LOL! Many people have bought the idea that a society can function without reference to moral, that is religious, principles. The outcome in France would be instructive for them, if they're looking closely :-).
Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
I have to take issue with Pope Leo (and the author) on one small point, though:
...it is proper that the individual and the family should be permitted to retain their freedom of action, so far as this is possible without jeopardizing the common good.
Christ said, "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." He did not say, "except where it suits the common good." There can be no exceptions: secular government must be excluded from the construct of the family and from the enforcement of charity. Any other condition is non-Christian and immoral.
I think you're right about the "common good" point, except in the most general sense, since individuals' or families' "freedom of action" has to constrained by general laws against murder, theft, assault, etc.
" I think it's something more fundamental in our nature itself--more like Original Sin."
Well, yes, certainly socialism is a reverberation of Original Sin. "You shall be as gods," the serpent said to Eve. IOW, you need not consult God as to matters of right and wrong; you can decide these things for yourself. Using your godlike intellectual powers you can design a utopia.
Surely "we are as gods" is the uncanny wail of the socialist.
"We can decide for ourselves how people should act, what is moral and immoral, who should have his property taken away and to whom it should be given." (Never mind that "Thou shalt not steal" stuff and that bit about not coveting. That's for the superstitious.)
"We can decide for ourselves what forms marriage should take and what types of sexual activity should be endorsed." (Every form of utopianism for at least the past 500 years, most especially including socialism and communism, has held out a promise of increased sexual license.)
The whole thing positively reeks of Original Sin, which is why I always say that leftism, whatever label it happens to be claiming at any given time, is of and from Satan.
Now, it is to the interest of the community, as well as of the individual, that peace and good order should be maintained; that all things should be carried on in accordance with God's laws and those of nature; that the discipline of family life should be observed and that religion should be obeyed; that a high standard of morality should prevail, both in public and private life; that justice should be held sacred and that no one should injure another with impunity; that the members of the commonwealth should grow up to man's estate strong and robust, and capable, if need be, of guarding and defending their country.
This indicates he takes the common good to be founded on peace and order rather than some elitist vision of "equality." And, of course, Pope Leo cites natural law in his defense of "the common good." The left has hijacked parts of this language to press their agenda, knowing that most of the unwashed masses will not take the time to critically examine the point.
A democracy cannot survive without a free market because the competition between business and government ensures protection of private property rights; limits the government's ability to write restrictive laws and fosters a desire within citizens to create wealth by creating businesses. The creation of wealth results in the creation of legitimate jobs.
Individuals have an overwhelming, innate desire to perform in a job that actually contributes to society.
Off topic, but it had to be said.
Thanks for following up on that. I've always thought Pope Leo XIII was a cutie :-).
I disagree. Capitalism, or let us say, "a free-market economy" is based on the majority of people's making free decisions regarding economic ends and means. Because people are limited in their knowledge and often flawed in their intentions, there is indeed scope for evil. However, the system is not, in itself, based upon immoral premises, as socialism is.
Socialism, as I observed in my earlier post, ultimately removes from people even the opportunity to act out of genuine Christian charity toward their neighbors.
Thanks for saying it :-).
later read/maybe pingout.
ok
This is a good companion article to the one about the government trying to get Amish people enrolled in the food stamp program. They don't accept government largesse; one said the reason is that the consider that they are their brothers' keepers. I'll find a link and post it.
Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
Here's the companion piece:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1721419/posts?page=1
Counties caught in conundrum: getting Amish to take food stamps
"We believe that we are our brother's keeper," Miller said.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.