Comments on: The inalienable right of Luigi Taparelli

By: freshlook colors

freshlook colors — Fri, 29 Jun 2012 06:18:14 +0000

Also a thing to mention is that an online business administration study course
is designed for scholars to be able to effortlessly proceed
to bachelor’s degree education. The 90 credit college degree meets the lower bachelor diploma requirements then when you earn your associate of arts in BA online, you’ll have access to the most up-to-date technologies in this particular field. Several reasons why students want to get their associate degree in business is because they are interested in this area and want to find the general training necessary just before jumping to a bachelor college diploma program. Many thanks for the tips you really provide in your blog.

By: kishnevi

kishnevi — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 02:59:42 +0000

You might be. But remember when Jesus asked for that coin and said Render unto Ceasar, etc. he was implying that money was in Ceasar’s realm, not God’s. And that treasure being laid up in Heaven probably can’t be measured in bullion, much less FRNs.

This is one of those places where the Crucifixion happens, because you’re trying to incarnate Love into the World. So there will always be a problem until the end of time, when the World will itself become the incarnation of Love, and never will be a perfect solution until then.

By: jeffreyquick

jeffreyquick — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 17:03:52 +0000

Well, yes, I did read them, and I did notice that he didn’t say that. So what’s CNS and TP doing conflating the two? That’s like reading my last comment and then claiming that I favor eating feces. As for your second paragraph, it implies that there need to be more markets so that we can decide what appropriate payment is.

I’m not trying to make the Church Objectivist (at the thought of which Ayn takes a big whirl on her spit in Hell). But I suppose it’s possible that I’m trying to sanctify my remaining Randian baggage.

By: kishnevi

kishnevi — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 16:33:30 +0000

If you read the actual quotes provided by TP, you’ll see he actually doesn’t call health care an inalienable right, just a moral responsibility. He mentions it together with inalienable rights. Hermeneutically that suggests health care is not an inalienable right in Papa B.’s view. The problem is to decide what is the best method of carrying out that moral responsibility–the best oeconomy (in the theological, especially the Greek Orthodox theological sense)–in practical terms. And it’s not at all clear that government is better or worse than private efforts in this regard.

And there would a natural rights argument for Catholic style “social justice” or just plain charity if you will–your property is yours if it is justly earned. It is not justly earned if you do not give to others appropriate payment in some form for what their efforts allow you to do.

By: jeffreyquick

jeffreyquick — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 13:39:57 +0000

“Saying access to adequate medical care is one of the “inalienable rights” of man, the pope said…” per ThinkProgress, which certainly sounds like that’s what he said. That’s why I have the clickthrough link; if TP said the sky was blue, I’d look up to make sure it wasn’t red and that they were just using anti-conservative boilerplate. Though in this specific case, CNS is no clearer.

It’s not clear either that the Pope is speaking about positive law here. There’s no commandment like “Thou shalt treat thy neighbor’s diseases”, though that’s readily derivable from any number of Scriptural passages. And he’s using natural law language (“inalienable right”), which is not surprising given that Aquinas pretty much invented natural law theory as we know it. Given that the right has been alienated for millennia before Taparelli, perhaps it’s not in fact inalienable, and therefore not a right.

James objects to my description of him as a theocrat on the basis that “universal health care is not charity”. I can conceive of a universal insurance system that is not charitable, where everyone contributes the same amount (with possible variance for risk factors). But the minute that contribution level becomes means-based, you’ve got a charity.

Here’s my problem with Catholic social teaching: I am confronted with 2 pieces of bread with something brown and smelly between them. Is it liverwurst, or is it a shit sandwich? I know that my Father won’t give me a shit sandwich. So Magisterial teaching gets the benefit of the doubt. But there IS a natural resemblance, and there ARE people out there who would take a turd and smear liverwurst over it. And given the ubiquity of shit-sandwich peddlers, I’m suspicious that the fecal coliform levels in my liverwurst sandwiches are slowly and inexorably increasing.

By: kishnevi

kishnevi — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 02:03:22 +0000

Actually, even ThinkProgress doesn’t say he called it an “inalienable right”–he called it a “moral responsibility”.

And everything you’re saying about natural rights and natural law is completely irrelevant, because the Pope isn’t coming from that. He’s coming from the foundation of Scripture–supernatural or supranatural law, if you will–in the eyes of which your right to your personal property (including your very own person) is only conditional, based on you using the property gifted and entrusted to you by God with the aim of using that property to fulfill God’s will. And since that goes as far back as the laws given to Noah, it applies not only to Christians but to all mankind.