This is very true, so it just makes things worse when the bishops reinforce this approach by doing it themselves.
This reads like any other special interest group pleading to retain deductions important to them. In that long litany however, there was nothing mentioning the overall impact of the entire bill. It is precisely this type of “cut somewhere else, just don’t cut me” approach which makes any progress so difficult. More specifically, it assumes that the overall harm the bishops assert will actually happen. Why is it assumed their understanding is accurate? It’s not clear that they’re not bemoaning the loss of money from their right pocket while ignoring the money being returned to their left.
My comments were neither ad hominem nor unusual. They point to the inevitable problem when the clergy interject their own personal opinions into political issues. Now, if their objections have merit then someone else can make them and that will allow their merit to be discussed, but because the bishops have made them they come with the aura of moral truth, and no merit discussion is possible.
This belief seems so far from reality I hardly know how to respond. I feel it would be like trying to convince someone who claims to have been abducted by aliens that his perceptions are inaccurate.