The politician Ryan proposed a budget plan for the US some time ago and claimed he was inspired by his catholic faith.
The US Bishops have critized the Ryan budget plan and concluded that it "fails to meet these moral criteria." (meaning the moral criteria of the catholic faith as i understand)
See her for background (in case you missed the 20 pages or so thread with hot deabates about the issue):
The question that i am currious about is how one actually could conclude that some budget plan is in line or against catholic faith.
If it would fund abortion, it would be easy, as on abortion there can be no compromise. Since i suspect the US budget is providing funds for abortion since decades and will provide even under the Ryan plan, it is easy to say, that the budget plan is not in accordance with church teaching.
But apparently the Bishops have issue with "unnecessary" and harmful to poor people.
How to conclude that?
The problem is that its pretty hard to determine, which cuts are necessary and which aren't. One has to balance a myriad of issues against each other and therefore any conclusion tends to be a personal opinion and a definitve conclusion in respect to church teaching seems to be hard.
And what harm cutting a government program will do is also a matter of personal opinion, since positive and negative beenfits of increased government spending are hard to estimate, e.g. economists guess often wrong what good stimulus spending can achieve. But even more severe, government spending is cut so seldom, that there is little knowledge about its effects. And most severe with any spending increase and decrease there are unwanted side effects, e.g. take some money from A to give something to B, then A losses the oppurtunity to do something with the money himself, which may or may not be good.
The only clear cut issue i see, is when it comes to starvation, there the effects of spending cuts can be estimated and are severe enough, that a non-opinion dependent conclusion might be achievable. But i suspect that few people in the US are threatened by starvation, if i subsume it correctly the opposite is far more a problem.
So how can one arrive at a definite conclusion as the Bishops seem to have done?