Paul Ryan, Patheos’ “News and Politics” and “Public Catholic”

Deacon Greg is probably one of the least “political” writers at Patheos, but he is still a newsman and his Catholic perspective has him rounding up articles on Paul Ryan and also culling specific Ryan/Catholic issues from the headlines, like this one: Ryan’s Budget a “Quandary” for some Catholics”

Meanwhile, just in time for the electoral season (and destined to live beyond it), Patheos has created a sort of one-stop landing page for all of your “mixing my faith with my politics” needs, whereby you can just hit one page and deliver unto yourself a plethora of opinion from many different faith traditions (or lack thereof) and perspectives.

Particularly as we begin to add blogs and columns written by politicians, you might want to bookmark our News and Politics page.

Today, for instance, you will make the acquaintance of Oklahoma State Representative Rebecca Hamilton, who also happens to be a Catholic, and brings her blog Public Catholic aboard.

Her current headline is one that should grab your attention: Marriage is a Mess and Homosexuals Didn’t Do It

We focus our national attention on the definition of marriage under the law. We wear out our keyboards writing about it and revile one another over our positions on it. But despite the accusations and counter-accusations that season our debate, we ignore the home truths of marriage in this country today. The truth is, marriage has been a mess for quite some time. And homosexuals weren’t the ones who messed it up.
Homosexuals didn’t set off the epidemic of divorce in this country. Homosexuals didn’t create the millions of feral children who spend most of their time alone, raising themselves on video games, drugs and interactions with their peers. Homosexuals don’t cheat on our spouses. Homosexuals don’t break into our homes and yell and curse at our families. They aren’t the cause of the rising number of unwed births and the global pandemic of abortion. We did these things. Marriage is a mess and it was heterosexuals who messed it up.

We insist that the legal definition of marriage should be a union between one man and one woman. But we behave as if it says that marriage is a union between one man and one woman at a time.

So, yeah, this is not a girl who will be holding back on what she thinks and where she stands, so you’ll want to check her out!. Hamilton is no Simpering Miss.

A few other new arrivals to Patheos that may have slipped by (there are so many coming through so fast, and we have a few surprises in store, here on the Catholic Channel, too!) If you missed it, Real Clear’s Jeremy Lott is now blogging here, (albeit in the Evangelical sector) and we are also grabbing some terrific names for our Patheos Movie Club, including reviews from Daughter of Saint Paul and cinemaphile Sister Rose Pacatte, who will be blogging here at Sister Rose at the Movies. Another bookmark-worthy site, particularly as you try to navigate your family through the pop-culture.

Finally, since we seem to be discussing women with strong wills, strong minds and a habit of not-fainting, let me leave you with this piece by Kathryn Jean Lopez, who has something pretty special about yet another such woman!

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • dry valleys
  • dry valleys

    And then, of course, there’s the substantial part of the righht wing for whom association with this woman and her foul ideas are a badge of pride. I do think it points to the final fact that, while I don’t agree with social conservatives or share their values, nothing in the tendency I belong to has undermined theirr position so much as neoliberalism. This is the real thing which is missing from the otherwise excellent analysis by this Rebecca Hamilton, although it may be awareness of this fact which made her become a Democrat in the first place (then again, many Democrats and members of allegedly left-wing parties worldwide accept neoliberalism, but still).

    It is a bit much after a dissolutee weekend but that link is enough for any interested parties.

  • http://jscafenette.com Manny

    If that’s the biggest skeleton in Ryan’s closet, then he’s smooth sailing. That’s nothing. My worry is that the Obama team will characterize his reform ideas as putting a knife into granny. And we already know they play the most gutter politics of any administration in memory. They said weeks before the campaign started they were going to “kill Romney” and they are doing their best at it. As to the issue with Catholicism, first off, medicare and social security are middle class entitlements, not poverty programs. Second, nothing he’s proposing is going to cause people to starve or lose their housing or medical care. He’s talking about adjusting the cost of growth. Even under Ryan the programs actually increase in funding. We can’t keep spending money this way. The demographics of our aging population require tough decisions. But of course the gutter politics of the Obama team will paint it with the vulgar demogoguery. And negative campaigning apparently works. They punted on every tough decision possible, even when moderate Democrats proposed reasonable solutions. If any administration deserved to be kicked out, it’s this one. And I cannot for the life of me fathom how any Catholic can vote for the most anti Catholic administration in history.

    As to all your new voices here, that’s great, and welcome to them, but I will say I’m overwhelmed already. At what point does the saturation dilute content? That’s a rhetorical question of course.

  • Brian English

    “We can’t keep spending money this way.”

    We can, at least for awhile; but we will be destroying our children’s futures, which suprisingly, according to some people, is consistent with Catholic Social Justice Doctrine.

    “The demographics of our aging population require tough decisions. But of course the gutter politics of the Obama team will paint it with the vulgar demogoguery.”

    Which will include them never explaining how taking $700 billion from Medicare for Obamacare will not affect seniors. And also ignoring the fact that Ryan’s plan will not affect anyone 55 or over.

    “And I cannot for the life of me fathom how any Catholic can vote for the most anti Catholic administration in history.”

    Oh but they will. And you will also have the Holier Than Thou Crew, who will demonstrate how much more pious they are than the rest of us by staying home or voting for some ridiculous third-party candidate, thereby helping Obama.

  • http://jscafenette.com/ Manny

    @Brian
    “Which will include them never explaining how taking $700 billion from Medicare for Obamacare will not affect seniors. And also ignoring the fact that Ryan’s plan will not affect anyone 55 or over.”

    You are quite right Brian. There is only one man who has actually cut real money from Medicare, and that is Obama himself. The audacity of this man to lie through his teeth is breathtaking. I don’t know how the media lets him get away with it.

  • http://jscafenette.com/ Manny

    @Brien again (sorry about two separate replies but this didn’t sink in the first time)
    “Oh but they will. And you will also have the Holier Than Thou Crew, who will demonstrate how much more pious they are than the rest of us by staying home or voting for some ridiculous third-party candidate, thereby helping Obama.”

    I know exactly what you mean. I have fought that fight. Those Catholics make the perfect the enemy of the good. If all Catholics voted in unison at least on the abortion issue, we would force the Democrats to buckle on abortion.

  • ahem

    Ryan’s Budget is a “Quandary” only for those Catholics who somehow believe that is it okay to foist their debts on to the backs of their children. The rest of us know Ryan is right.

  • sam elmore

    link is set wrong to Kathryn Jean Lopez’ column…it is set to Sister Rose’s blog…

  • Brian English

    “I know exactly what you mean. I have fought that fight. Those Catholics make the perfect the enemy of the good. If all Catholics voted in unison at least on the abortion issue, we would force the Democrats to buckle on abortion.”

    We finally have a real Pro-Life Catholic at the national level and people are not going to vote for him because they don’t like the author of some books he read? Unbelievable.

  • dry valleys

    I think it goes a bit further than “not liking some books he read”. It’s the fact that until he started seeing her as a liability he was vociferous in praise of the woman who, as well as being toxic in her own right, was also militantly anti-Christian. And the fact that the division between Ayn Rand and the church is irreconcilable raises, inevitably, the issue of whose side one is on, and Ryan has never given a satisfactory response.

    http://www.thestreet.com/story/11661708/1/paul-ryans-skeleton-in-the-closet.html

    What I notice is that some of the right-wing commentators trying to say that Rand’s militant views (she is more “aggressively secular” than me, and I’m a lifelong atheist) are some kind of regrettable blip from someone of otherwise sound views. No, she was anti-Christian because her “libertarian” worldview is anti-Christian, as well as toxic to just about anyone.

    More broadly speaking, what Ryan and Romney want has been implemented in most of Europe as a response to the recession, and the “austerity” there is a tragic failure. (The main exception is France, and that’s only because the previous French government was aggressively right-wing and failed and was voted out very recently for that reason). Does anyone recall American conservatives saying two years ago that the British government had the right ideas in slashing spending? I’m in Britain and it’s obvious that David Camoron is a disaster, which is why that particular line of “argument” is no longer heard from the Romney tendency.

  • Rhinestone Suderman

    I don’t like Ryan’s fondness for Ayn Rand.

    On the other hand, I don’t like Obama’s fondness for radical Islam, or Marxist writers, either. (Not to mention things such as “Fast and Furious”, trying to jumpstart the economy with stimulus money, etc.

    Six of one, half-dozen-of-the-other, as my father used to say.

    And the perfect is the enemy of the good. It would be nice, say, if we could make some kind of rule that anyone who urged people not to vote for either party, because they’re both equally awful, are forbidden from ever again criticizing anything Obama does (if, God forbid, he gets another four years.)

    As I’ve pointed out before, the Republicans have had since 2008 to come up with a strong, conservative candidate. And, one by one, they’ve eliminated all the possibilities: this one wasn’t presidential enough, that one wasn’t conservative enough, candidate A had too much baggage, candidate B didn’t have enough experience. . .

    Like it or not, Romney or Ryan are what we’ve got. If you don’t want four more years of Obama, they are the ones you will have to vote for.

    And, no, I don’t think Romney is some sort of messiah, who will save the nation. I don’t think any presidential candidate is that.

    The perfect is the enemy of the good.

  • Brian English

    “And the fact that the division between Ayn Rand and the church is irreconcilable raises, inevitably, the issue of whose side one is on, and Ryan has never given a satisfactory response.”

    So the whole Pro-Life Catholic thing is just a clever ruse, meant to fool us into granting power to Ryan so that he can then unleash his Randian worldview on an unsuspecting country?

    “More broadly speaking, what Ryan and Romney want has been implemented in most of Europe as a response to the recession, and the “austerity” there is a tragic failure.”

    Specifically what elements of the Romney/Ryan plan were implemented in Europe? “Broadly speaking” really doesn’t cut it.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X