The other day, I noted that given his recent comments on the economy, Pope Benedict XVI is unlikely to be invited anytime soon to give a talk at the Acton Institute, the libertarian think tank run by Father Robert Sirico.
I went to their website and found something very, well, curious. Jordan Ballor has a post up that considers the effectiveness of the social safety net in this country. He does not argue with the fact that the net caught six of seven people and kept them from falling into poverty. Instead, somewhat bizarrely, he notes that by providing a disincentive to work, which would also keep people above the poverty line, the safety net is "morally suspect and economically questionable." I can not think of a better example of someone's commitment to ideological purity getting in the way of anything resembling sound moral analysis: Real people, not talking points, are helped by the safety net. It is not morally suspect. The rantings (should they be called "Randings"?) from the Acton Institute are.
