"Who would Jesus deny Health Care to?"

[IdaBriggs]

Thanks to the person who came up with this line - I got to use it today at church. Shut the person RIGHT UP who was babbling about not wanting *his* tax dollars to pay for "other people's health care." Then a couple of other folks and I had a discussion about "Sicko" and how companies are using "contractors" who they don't have to provide health insurance for -- engineers, computer professionals, etc. included.

As a positive thing, we did a quick prayer for the leaders of our country, the health care crisis and the economy. I feel like I am making a difference by being the "flaming liberal" who politely won't back down in a roomful of predominantly "Christian Conservatives."

Best, Ida

[bbinacan]

1. Maybe Pontius Pilate?

[GCP]

2. Good for you

Someone should run up a bumper sticker saying that.

[FLDCVADem]

3. Our parish

Had a flyer in the bulletin asking us to call our rep and Senators and ask them to vote against HR 3200 as currently written.

[HarveyDarkey]

7. That should be the end of their tax exempt status

No ifs, ands or buts....

[FLDCVADem]

9. Sorry, but such a suggestion is utterly ridiculous

Tax exempt status can't be revoked for opposing legislation or policy positions. It can be revoked for explicitly opposing a partisan candidate or politcal party.

Whether I agree with the position of the diocese or not (and I don't), the Bishop (and parish priests) have every right under the law to encourage members to oppose legislation that they view as being immoral and/or against the teachings of the church.

[patrice]

19. Correct, but it's opposing OR supporting a candidate or party, isn't it?

What this means is that the laity must become more proactive in their own congregations by whatever means/groups/activities that are available to them. Some of these priests and ministers NEED to be put in their place - which some have CLEARLY forgotten.

[FLDCVADem]

22. Yes, opposing or supporting

a partisan candidate or party can cost a church its tax exempt status. Supporting or opposing a policy, law or proposed legislation can't.


Put in their place in what way? By prohibiting them from talking about the church's positions on issues? I don't have to agree with a position, but I'm certainly not in favor of telling a priest or pastor that they can't or shouldn't discuss it.

[patrice]

23. No. By providing other perspectives on the issue(s). Counter - points.

Priests and ministers are not supposed to decide what's right and wrong for you. That is not their place.

[FLDCVADem]

24. True, they are not supposed to decide what's

right and wrong for me. But they are supposed to decide and discuss what's right and wrong from the perspective of the church, which they did. And that is certainly "their place", whether I agree with them or not.

And it's ludicrous to suggest that any private organization, church or otherwise, should be forced to offer a perspective that is against their beliefs/teachings.

[patrice]

25. That's not what I am suggesting. I think they should encourage the laity to decide for themselves.

It is the congregation who should be taking various perspectives, rather than someone taking their moral authority away from them.

Religious "leaders" should model the moral process, not decide it's outcomes.

[FLDCVADem]

26. Well, that's not how the Catholic Church

works. In fact, I don't know of many churches that would tell people it's OK to do something that the church considers to be wrong.

The diocese is in favor universal healthcare, but the abortion issue is what's causing the opposition to HR 3200 in our diocese.

[patrice]

29. Then they do not want mature moral agents standing on their own two feet. They want dependent

children.

Truth is by definition inevitable. Those who seek it will find it. In desiring the truth above all else, their errors teach them and they become more true. If they are denied this learning, by having "the truth" handed to them and accepting it by authority, how can they ever do what Jesus did? Follow the truth as far as it took him, even away from his own church to a great extent, staking his own soul on how true he could be without any other assurance, other than his desire for the truth, that he was in fact right, through the garden of Gesthemene where he anguished but went on anyway, and even up to those last few minutes on the cross when he wondered why his Father had forsaken him, he threw his soul into the void trying to do right because it was right not because he was told that it was. Had he been obedient to the moral authority of his time and followed without choosing for himself whether he thought the church true or not, none of that would have happened.

[FLDCVADem]

30. They want people that believe

and follow the teachings of the Catholic church. I don't find that to be unusual in religious denominations.

[patrice]

32. One doesn't need a church to believe. People are whos, by the way. nt

[FLDCVADem]

34. Ah yes,

revert to grammar police behavior when all else fails.

***edited to add: bottom line is that there is still absolutely no reason why the parish should have its tax exempt status revoked over this. The priest was well within his rights and within the law to say what he said today.

[patrice]

36. Fails? You are the one who is saying that Christians do not need to follow Christ. The grammar

remark was just a little needle to see what you'd do. I'm not surprised that you are making more of it than you needed to.

I never said to take their tax-exempt status away from them.

[FLDCVADem]

37. Where do you get this stuff?

Where did I say that Christians don't need to follow Christ???

Make up shit much?

[patrice]

39. Christ lived and died on his own moral authority without his church. You say we should be obedient

to the church.

Vulgarity, though not un-acceptable otherwise, is bad manners in religious discussions, by the way.

[patrice]

42. Where? Perhaps from the fact that there were quite a few churches selling War in this country not so

long ago. And I know that for a fact, so maybe I'm a little bitter about the moral authority you see there.

Wouldn't be the first time churches mislead folks and some genuinely good people still come out of them anyway.

[patrice]

35. The point being that you must stake your own soul on it and if you always have a proxy in between

you and accepting that risk, you never actually do that.

[John Q. Citizen]

4. Good work. Speaking out is very important. It give courage to others to do the same.

[pkdu]

5. Rush Limbaugh n/t

[berni_mccoy]

6. I'm glad you got some use out of it. I was attacked for bringing that up here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[madamesilverspurs]

8. To put it another way

[patrice]

16. ROFL! Thanks Madamesilverspurs!

[JonQ]

10. No one, of course he could heal anything with a touch

seriously, if that guy comes back we need to hold on to him, not kill him this time. Instead lock him up and force him to heal our sick.

Maybe figure out a way to extract whatever property it is that does that and put it in a pill form.

[Obamanaut]

11. Or, simply ask Jesus to cure all the sick. Isn't it written in red letters

that whatever we ask in his name, that he will do?

We oould replace all the missing limbs and sightless eyes while we're at it.

[Kaleva]

12. A question some Christains would prefer not to answer

[Lisa0825]

13. I posted a similar quote on my FB recently... "WCWJD"

Whose claim would Jesus deny?

[DailyGrind51]

14. He healed a Roman centurian's kid! They were the occupying power!

[patrice]

15. Talking about values that people claim they live by is good tactics, but expect EVASION.

[patrice]

17. P.S. You're going to have to use an oblique approach.

[patrice]

18. P.P.S. Thank you for doing this. It is Very Important work and not many are doing it in the churches

[NightWatcher]

20. Jesus never asked Lazarus for a co-pay either

profitting from healthcare is immoral

[baldguy]

21. Death would be a pre-existing condition.

[Kaleva]

47. That's a good one!

[Motown_Johnny]

27. Get up, pick up your bed and walk, and pay the girl at the desk on your way out

[Lorien]

28. The bottom line for the opposition IS that they are opposed to helping others

it doesn't matter much to them if they benefit or not, it's not about the cost, it's more about denying care to those that they hate.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

31. Ida, I wouldn't deny healthcare to ANYONE in a country as wealthy as ours.

Thanks for asking!


Oh, and Jesus Christ wouldn't deny healthcare to anyone either. And His opinion holds much greater sway than mine.





--Jesus (but not Christ, obviously)

[mmonk]

33. To those he would torture?

[saltpoint]

38. It's incumbent on liberal Christians, in my opinion, to stare down the

detractors -- as you did today at your church -- (to quell the doubting Thomases, in the hip parlance of the New Testament) -- and ask them if they really believe that the Galilean's ministry would have quibbled over where help and healing came from -- tax monies or otherwise -- when a genuine need presents itself.

It must be said to the fundamentalists who oppose health care reform that if they cannot connect the dots of visible poverty and visible emphasis on healing which were arguably the most visible components of Jesus' ministry, then their "Chrisianhood" isn't worth a bucket of yak piss.

Make that half a bucket.

[patrice]

40. I love the concreteness of this perspective: "visible poverty" &

"visible emphasis on healing". Yes, there are "spiritual dimensions" but I fear some people have separated them from the here and now.

[saltpoint]

41. Hi, patrice. Yep. The far-right fundies who oppose the president's

health care initiatives, I'm guessing, are the same rightwing fundies who thought a war in Iraq was a swell idea.

Not sure which New Testament they're consulting, but SOMEBODY needs a new editor!

[patrice]

43. I absolutely love it that people want to stand up and take their churches back from

some seriously screwed up leadership now. That gives this old (permanently) fallen Catholic hope.

[saltpoint]

44. Agree. On DU I try to make the distinction between the people-directed

and earth-centered Francis of Assisi model of Catholicism versus the upper echelon top-down rule-giving Vatican model.

What a world of difference.

Sounds like you've been fighting that good fight for a while, and I say more power to ya.

[patrice]

45. I learned a lot from the church. I still love the Mass, but I can't lie about what's been going on

with all of this Militarism. It's gotten out of control.

[saltpoint]

46. A bout of earnest roots work might be good. The Republicans need to

get back to Lincoln. The fundies need to get back to the Galilean.

They're drifted awfully far away from their sources.