I have been reeling from some of the comments I read on the Inside Catholic article (last entry on this, I promise). I think it started when I followed an entry Dawn Eden posted on WIC and PP, and I followed it to Michelle Malkin’s blog when Michelle linked to it. One of the first comments I read stated:
Sorry, but I fully support this. I am tired of paying for these morons mistakes (and the “paying” goes on for 18 years then the cycle starts again when that child is an adult). I would much rather see Planned parenthood used to PREVENT the pregnancy in the first place through birth control (and yes that is their main focus), but abortions do have a place in many cases. Frankly, I would like to see the gov’t refuse to increase welfare for every baby. I find it downright selfish and self centered for these women to get pregnant then whine to taxpayers to support them. Especially, when that bundle of joy is an “anchor baby” for the sole pupose of citizenship. Screw that. If this makes me “mean spirited”, then so be it. And yes I understand the gov’t should not be in the business of paying for abortions. But again it is the choice of pay a 1 time cahrge or pay for the 10 generations.
Granted, Michelle Malkin’s blog is far from a Catholic one, but what’s with the anger? For me personally, my husband has to pay taxes or go to jail. Not much of an option. So if we have to pay, I’m cool with it going to programs that keep American citizens from starving. Yes, they are imperfect programs, but it’s what we got. I suppose if I were this angry, I would be more angry at taxing in general. I’m not though. I like roads, I like schools, I like having a military. I think it’s a mark of a civilized society that does not allow people to starve.
But sadly, I saw similar sentiments at Inside Catholic, except instead of birth control and abortion, the method of choice was NFP. I’d rather not link to them.
I know people who are generations of welfare recipients. I do get annoyed that since they receive every type of assistance available, they have more wiggle room with their money. Their kids all have brand new, brand name clothes, and they look down their nose at me because I let my “kids go out looking like anything”. But that is where the benefits begin and end. I think if I were living like that, without the father of my children, no room for advancement, I would try to find reasons as to why I maintain some self-respect such as at least my children are always clean and well-dressed. It’s human nature I suppose.
I also suppose it could be argued that I am over sensitive because I have been in situations where I have had to take advantage of various social services benefits over the years. I have never been on welfare Thank God, but I feel it is because I have lucked out and never been in a position to need it. Frankly, I could care less what mean people think we had to survive and I don’t think I earn any spiritual points by choosing not to accept help when we needed it, (and paid into it) just so I can be smug in a combox and say “well, I never accepted help!” Truly, what makes me sad is the refusal to understand where a person is coming from and that if they were raised in the same exact situation, they would probably be on welfare or whatever.
I am not sure as Catholics we are supposed to publicly look so insensitive and uncaring. I understand what it is to admonish the sinner, but aren’t you supposed to give the sinner guidance and an alternative to do things correctly? Or is the idea to let the world know they are wrong and you are right and you are completely put out by their wrongness? I am just missing where Jesus’ true teaching is in all of this. The liberals put so much focus on social justice, the traditionals on admonishing sins, but aren’t both a part of our faith?
Update: Deal Hudson on charity on the Internet. I have a lot to learn as well.