A reader sent me a link to NCAN – Nutty Coalition of American Nuns. Well actually replace Nutty with National – but you get the idea. By their links ye shall know them.
* Call to Action
* Quixote Center
* The Vatican
* Women’s Ordination Conference
* Women-Church Convergence
How did the Vatican instead of the U.N. slip in there? Yes the typical dissenting I-want-to-be-a-priest nuns.
Now owing to the fact that progressives are always talking about dialogue you would expect to see a comment box on their typepad powered blog. Sorry no dialogue box to dialogue in. In their post on world violence I wanted to bring up the fact that the cheapening of life via abortion, ESCR, etc, and factors like broken families leads to a culture of violence. Especially since they listed such lame factors as separation of church and state contributing to world violence. As if the United States becoming more secular will stop world violence. Yes governments that banned religion like the old Soviet Union, North Korea, and China really contributed to world peace – which is a hard sell to the way over the hundred million that died at the hands of these regimes. They also listed not using the mediation powers of the U.N. – Rwanda anyone? U.N. Observers observing genocide and not doing anything about it is really helpful. Of course they also have the boilerplate "use of inflammatory language by religious leaders of all faiths" I remember the Amish declaring a Holy War, don’t you? Or Catholics demanding that people who slander the Pope be beheaded. And don’t forget Billy Graham and his crusades. Number one on their list is "The ready access to guns" So I guess the Swiss with such a high gun count per capita including some 420,000 assault rifles in private homes makes it the most violent country in the world?
But at least they have taken a firm stand on Bottled Water.
In their post Facts That Cannot Be Ignored
* A single Mother with two children working full-time at the minimum wage of $5.15 an hour makes $10,700 a year which is $6,000 below the poverty level.
* The federal minimum wage has been the same since 1997. In those years the salaries of Senators have been raised seven times. These salaries have gone up about $35,000 or three times the yearly income of a minimum wage worker.
* Raising the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour adds up to more than one year of groceries, over 9 months of rent, and full tuition for a community college degree.
Why only $7.25 an hour? This would come to $15,080 which would still be according to them 1,000 dollars below the poverty level. So they are advocating a minimum wage below the poverty level. I really wonder what state you can get 9 months of rent, over a year of groceries and community college tuition for only $4,380? Community colleges averages more that $2,000. So I guess they are talking about a place where rent is way below 200 dollars so that you still can get those grocery prices into that calculation. Facts that can’t be ignored? How about facts that can’t be take seriously. How about the fact that only 2.2 percent of working adults earn the minimum wage and of those 76 percent of those are not heads of households. Anybody who is still making a minimum wage more than likely has a problem other than the setting of the minimum wage.
“By thier links, ye shall know them.”
TOO true! I do the same with modern religious textbooks that give net resources. http://www.catholicculture.org/ has a good database on the fidelity of Catholic links.
They need some tin foil lined habits.
“only 2.2 percent of working adults earn the minimum wage and of those 76 percent of those are not heads of households”
Good to know, because this means the fear that there would be higher prices if the minimum wage is completely unfounded. Thus we can DWJWD (do what jesus would do) without being inconvienced.
Plus, those of us who struggle to survive on barely legal wages would also see a boost.
Also, according to this study (http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/08/2/gr080201.html) I found during a random google search, poor women have more abortions than wealthier women, so by increasing the minimum wage, there will be fewer poor women, and probably less abortions.
Good, I love Obery Hendricks’ version of Jesus, too bad you all were indoctrinated into that belief system.
It seems to me that an individual with such an impressive intellect and the free time to read about an ancient historical figure, read random religious blogs, and comment on them has the means to find monetary compensation beyond the “barely legal wages” category.
Are you implying that there is historical evidence that Jesus of Nazareth existed, let alone enough evidence to determine what his political ideology was? Come on, Shelly..
Hoodlum also needs to actually read what he/she refrences:
“Moreover, while abortion rates for U.S. women overall are currently at their lowest level since 1980 (down 29%, from 29.3 per 1,000 women of reproductive age in 1980 to 20.9 per 1,000 women in 2002), the rate of decline has slowed since the mid-1990s�in part because the abortion rate among poor women rose in the late 1990s. Again, the reasons behind this rise are unclear. The high cost of contraceptives and problems in accessing subsidized services may have played a role.”
So the author admits they don’t know why, and then offers a dubious speculation. Hardly a raise-minimum wage=less abortion proof.
Well Adrian, while many a Christian is alliterate, many of secularites have found that by reading the bible, one can interpret it to determine Jesus’ political views. Of course, like any book, the bible is subject to many interpretations, of which are apparently valid, because the biblegod has yet to inform of us of the correct one.
I’m sure the Holy Spirit will make a nice introduction of Himself to you as you leave this world and enter the next. Sheesh, talk about theological illiteracy.
Yeah, biblegod, as not to be confused with Korangod, Thor, Zues, or the thousands of other invisible friends people have had.
Bottled water, we salute thee! Awnser to the worlds problems, we bow down!
Yup. What would Jesus do?
“Be content with your pay” – Jesus (Luke 3:14)
The cite of statistics about how many workers are earning the minimum wage is a bit, on the sketchy side, since it doesn’t tell the complete story, since those figures aren’t showing the breakdown by minority: 18.1 percent of African American workers and 14.4 percent of Hispanic workers would directly benefit from an increase in the minimum wage.
Of course, I can see why nuns, who are followers of Jesus, would be concerned about those who aren’t as fortunate as the rich.
“Of course, I can see why nuns, who are followers of Jesus, would be concerned about those who aren’t as fortunate as the rich.”
The question of the minimum wage is a prudential one. Does it really serve the poor or will business cut back on personnel in some cases? Very few people work minimum wage for any length of time so raising it is not something that will any effect on the poverty line. When it was raised in the past problems were not cured.
It is not a case that some want to help the poor and some don’t. It is a question of whether changing the minimum wage does more good than harm. Unfortunately too many people want to put this into class warfare about the rich versus the poor instead of arguing why in a market economy it makes good sense for the government to mandate salaries.
“You’re just a bunch of hoodlums, that’s what your are!!”
-Doc, West Side Story
You got me at your Guttmacher reference. A few facts, a whole lot of half truths and a crock load of political ideology.
Sepaking as a specially designated facilitator from NCAN, I urge all to a peaceful resolution of intellectual e-conflict.
Polyester pantsuits for everyone!
Or perhaps a John Dominic Crocheted Peace afghan?
Very interesting. In their section on Catholic voting principles, they discuss gun control, the treatment of immigrants, etc. And I thought, hmm, I wonder if they’ll include anything on abortion – the most important human rights issue today.
Well, it turns out they did:
“3. We encourage respect for the moral adulthood of women and will choose legislators who will recognize the right of women to make reproductive decisions and receive medical treatment according to the rights of privacy and conscience.”
This is Orwellian language used to imply, not opposition, but support, for procured abortion. Anyone familiar with recent UN documents knows well that “reproductive decisions” and “rights of privacy and conscience” is code for abortion on demand.
These are supposed to be Catholic nuns?
But there’s more! They really hone their talent for using vague and ambiguous language in the next point:
“4. We believe that citizens in committed relationships – whether marriages or civil unions – should retain all rights consonant with their state including, but not limited to, adoption of children, ownership of property, inheritance, health, and end-of-life decisions.”
Civil unions? By which they mean, perhaps, same-sex unions? Who knows? End-of-life decisions also sets off warning bells (Terry Schiavo, anyone?).
Finally, in CAPITAL LETTERS, there is this:
“WE INSIST THAT LEGISLATORS AND VOTERS ALIKE CAST THEIR VOTES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR CONSCIENCES AND DEEPLY-HELD VALUES WITHOUT INCURRING SACRAMENTAL PENALTIES BASED ON THEIR VOTING RECORDS.”
Something odd in this: there is nothing on the webpage identifying who belongs to this “coalition”. They have “statements from the board meeting” without saying who is on the board. Ladies – why the secrecy?
Minimum wage isn’t raised in a vacuum. The bread we can’t afford now is just as unaffordable when the wage is raised, it seems. Something ELSE needs to be done, but not being an economic expert,I don’t know what that something is.I do know that low wage earners and the unemployed are not necessarily lazy and or stupid. (job loss can happen to anyone. Underemployment happens to many.)
These are NUNS? Catholic nuns? In that case #’s 3 & 4 are shocking. Everyday I feel more and more like i’m living in the Twilight Zone. And i’m not even conservative!
re Orwellian language: George Orwell wrote the best essay AGAINST euphemistic language that I’ve ever read…so i don’t understand that criticism. His “Politics and the English Language”, (1946) is well worth reading.
Exactly Joanne! That’s why Dave referred to what these nuns are saying as “Orwellian”. The criticism isn’t about Orwell but about the fact that those nuns are using euphemisms and doublespeak to hide their views, which is what Orwell warned against.
I am thinking about buying an iphone, but i am not sure which to get; the click here refurb, or the normal iphone 3g. Can anyone help me?