About Catholic News Agency 10349 Articles
Catholic News Agency (www.catholicnewsagency.com)

3 Comments

  1. These were legitimate transactions, and as such they have to be paid, and they will.

    But – Joe has decreed that those who took them out will not have to pay them.

    Leaving the question – who WILL p[ay them?

    Look in the mirror.

    • Spot on, Terence McManus.

      Below are a few pertinent and slightly revised sections of a moral analysis of debt cancellation by the Federal Government that I set forth in my Blog just about a year ago when Biden’s despicable initial effort to unjustly cancel debt obligations was still in play:

      Question 1: Is it morally just for the federal government to provide government loan “cancellations/relief” to any person or groups of persons who have freely entered into a government loan agreement to obtain and pay back all money provided by the taxpaying public?

      Answer: No.

      Analysis: …the federal government acts unjustly when it provides the opportunity for any person or group of persons to shirk his or her or their moral duty in justice to repay borrowed money from the public…. This differs from a privately held debt obligation that a lender can forgive since only his or her money is directly involved, but a debt to the taxpaying public needs each taxpayer’s approval that would allow the government to cancel and/or provide other forms of debt relief since the burden of the unpaid money falls upon the taxpaying public.

      Moreover, there is an extreme likelihood that an even greater tax burden will be placed on the taxpaying public to make up for the lost revenue when many debts are cancelled that add up to hundreds of billions of dollars. This being so, unjustly “cancelling” someone’s debt or a group of people’s debts owed to others is a form of wrongful discrimination in favor of the borrowers, and it is also a form of stealing (misappropriation of funds) that money from those who provided it and have a right to have it paid back.
      ____________________

      Question 2: Given that it is morally unjust for the government to so discriminate and steal from some to give to others as set forth in the question 1 analysis, would it nevertheless still be morally permissible for a person to accept such “debt cancellation/relief” of a debt obligation?

      Answer: No.

      Analysis: …material cooperation with the wrongdoing of the government also comes into play, and so accepting “debt cancellation/relief” arising from the immoral practice of the government would also be immoral. Taking advantage of an immoral action of the federal government in order to obtain financial gain, even if not personally culpable for the government’s discrimination, and even if the immoral action is considered legal, still violates precepts of justice in accepting the temptation to avoid fulfilling a personal obligation toward fellow taxpayers and the common good of society in general, and it also lacks basic charity and empathy toward others who will indeed suffer from the government action. At the same time, cooperating with the government in such a manner weakens individual resolve to fulfill all personal obligations with honor, and it also promotes a wrongful sense of entitlement that works against cultivating one’s humility and solidarity with fellow citizens.

    • Spot on, Terence McManus.

      Below are a few pertinent and slightly revised sections of a moral analysis of debt cancellation by the Federal Government that I set forth in my Blog just about a year ago when Biden’s despicable initial effort to unjustly cancel debt obligations was still in play:

      Question 1: Is it morally just for the federal government to provide government loan “cancellations/relief” to any person or groups of persons who have freely entered into a government loan agreement to obtain and pay back all money provided by the taxpaying public?

      Answer: No.

      Analysis: …the federal government acts unjustly when it provides the opportunity for any person or group of persons to shirk his or her or their moral duty in justice to repay borrowed money from the public…. This differs from a privately held debt obligation that a lender can forgive since only his or her money is directly involved, but a debt to the taxpaying public needs each taxpayer’s approval that would allow the government to cancel and/or provide other forms of debt relief since the burden of the unpaid money falls upon the taxpaying public.

      Moreover, there is an extreme likelihood that an even greater tax burden will be placed on the taxpaying public to make up for the lost revenue when many debts are cancelled that add up to hundreds of billions of dollars. This being so, unjustly “cancelling” someone’s debt or a group of people’s debts owed to others is a form of wrongful discrimination in favor of the borrowers, and it is also a form of stealing (misappropriation of funds) that money from those who provided it and have a right to have it paid back.
      ____________________

      Question 2: Given that it is morally unjust for the government to so discriminate and steal from some to give to others as set forth in the question 1 analysis, would it nevertheless still be morally permissible for a person to accept such “debt cancellation/relief” of a debt obligation?

      Answer: No.

      Analysis: …material cooperation with the wrongdoing of the government also comes into play, and so accepting “debt cancellation/relief” arising from the immoral practice of the government would also be immoral. Taking advantage of an immoral action of the federal government in order to obtain financial gain, even if not personally culpable for the government’s discrimination, and even if the immoral action is considered legal, still violates precepts of justice in accepting the temptation to avoid fulfilling a personal obligation toward fellow taxpayers and the common good of society in general, and it also lacks basic charity and empathy toward others who will indeed suffer from the government action. At the same time, cooperating with the government in such a manner weakens individual resolve to fulfill all personal obligations with honor, and it also promotes a wrongful sense of entitlement that works against cultivating one’s humility and solidarity with fellow citizens.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.


*