"Screw you, I've got mine" is about as un-Christian as it gets.

[RandomGuy]

I have seen no few comments from people who think of themselves as good Christians along the lines of "screw you and everybody else, I've got mine and don't owe you anything".

This is simply put, evil.

It is entirely incompatible with the Christian faith/ethics to say or believe such things.

This kind of thinking puts money ahead of human beings and leads down the road of the worst evils that humanity has ever come up with. Materialism is a total anethema to morals. It is time we realized the truth in this and started acting accordingly.

[101A]

I have seen no few comments from people who think of themselves as good Christians along the lines of "screw you and everybody else, I've got mine and don't owe you anything".



You can't get away with that. Link please.

[xrayzebra]

Well screw you. I do have mine. And God helps those that help themselves.
Everyone is not a victim.

Another little addage: Charity begins at home. There are those that need help,
but more that beg for help and don't need it. The operative word: Help. Not
paying someones bills for everything under the sun.

Now you got something else to call me. Cold hearted. (and other names, I'm sure)
Just remember something friend. You want to help people. Do so and more power
to you. But don't demand that others do through OUR government taxes. That
is not what taxes were designed for or the original intent of taxes.

[2centsworth]

I have seen no few comments from people who think of themselves as good Christians along the lines of "screw you and everybody else, I've got mine and don't owe you anything".

This is simply put, evil.

It is entirely incompatible with the Christian faith/ethics to say or believe such things.

This kind of thinking puts money ahead of human beings and leads down the road of the worst evils that humanity has ever come up with. Materialism is a total anethema to morals. It is time we realized the truth in this and started acting accordingly.
How about self-righteousness, where does that fall? There was nothing that God hated more than the self-righteous from what I can tell.

[ChumpDumper]

You can't get away with that. Link please.http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1248047&postcount=3

[101A]

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1248047&postcount=3

:lol

I was about to post "nevermind", but you beat me to it.

[RandomGuy]

You can't get away with that. Link please.

Read post number three in this thread, and variations on theme.


You worry about it. I am going and doing
some more consuming. Get me a tank of
gas, cut me some trees and eat some of those
animals before they vanish. Anyone got one of
them big old American cars, that ride easy,
steer easy, use lots of gas, that has low mileage
and they want to sell cheap?

Ray is not the only one that echoes similar things when it comes to such things.

I am unable to provide a link to all the comments like this that I have seen, but I think we can all see the materialism inherent in the "all taxes are bad because it is MY money not anybody elses".

[clambake]

This place would be pretty boring without the amoral bums that lurk here.

[johnsmith]

......Let those without sin..........you know the rest.

[JoeChalupa]

That is why I don't wear my religion on my sleeve and I don't believe politicians should either. Saying you are Christian yet supporting war just doesn't make sense to me.

[101A]

Read post number three in this thread, and variations on theme.



Ray is not the only one that echoes similar things when it comes to such things.

I am unable to provide a link to all the comments like this that I have seen, but I think we can all see the materialism inherent in the "all taxes are bad because it is MY money not anybody elses".

How about my rationale:

ALL taxes are bad because, ultimately, they go to a inept, often corrupt, self-interested bloat hog of a United States Government - which is the most inefficient consumer and purchaser of goods and services than any other entity in the history of creation; that sending money to thay obnoxious abyss produces less good, literally, than the heat I could generate by dumping benjamins in an oil-can to heat up an alley full of homeless people - that every single tax dollar collected is spent by Congress, a less popular organization than the ABSC (Association of Baby Seal Clubbers)...Can I hate taxation because it is the means by which over 30% of my family's income is taken and completely wasted; not given to the poor, or the underpriviledged; not used to better my children's schools: IT IS WASTED by congressmen, who then have the audacity to come on MY TV, bloated chests full of hot, smelly air, and boast about how THEY delivered THIS THAT AND THE FUCKING OTHER to OUR DISTRICT!!! BULL FUCKING SHIT!!!!!! Sumbitch shoved his fat assed jowels into the trough and slurped up some of my own damned money and regurgitated for some piece of crap project for some worthless campaign contributor, a small percentage of which ACTUALLY went to provide a couple of jobs for some poor uneducated (thanks governement again) fools to do something which didn't need doing in the first place!!!!

Is it OK with you if I hate taxes because of THAT??!!!

[JoeChalupa]

Taxes are a necessity of government.

[midgetonadonkey]

All Christians are evil.

[RandomGuy]

How about self-righteousness, where does that fall? There was nothing that God hated more than the self-righteous from what I can tell.

It was not my intent to sound self-righteous. I am far from perfect in this regard, as I seek a certain level of material living as well. I am not a monk forgoing all material things. By this admission, I am by definition, NOT self-righteous. I have never pretended to be a pious saint-like figure. I do what I can to be a good person, no more, no less.

I simply wanted to point out the immorality of the excesses of materialism I see. Is that really self-righteous, or are you upset that I have called you on your immoral behavior?

If so, then wouldn't claims of being a good christian, and then turning ones back on the morals of christianity be even more "self-righteous"?

[RandomGuy]

How about my rationale:

ALL taxes are bad because, ultimately, they go to a inept, often corrupt, self-interested bloat hog of a United States Government - which is the most inefficient consumer and purchaser of goods and services than any other entity in the history of creation; that sending money to thay obnoxious abyss produces less good, literally, than the heat I could generate by dumping benjamins in an oil-can to heat up an alley full of homeless people - that every single tax dollar collected is spent by Congress, a less popular organization than the ABSC (Association of Baby Seal Clubbers)...Can I hate taxation because it is the means by which over 30% of my family's income is taken and completely wasted; not given to the poor, or the underpriviledged; not used to better my children's schools: IT IS WASTED by congressmen, who then have the audacity to come on MY TV, bloated chests full of hot, smelly air, and boast about how THEY delivered THIS THAT AND THE FUCKING OTHER to OUR DISTRICT!!! BULL FUCKING SHIT!!!!!! Sumbitch shoved his fat assed jowels into the trough and slurped up some of my own damned money and regurgitated for some piece of crap project for some worthless campaign contributor, a small percentage of which ACTUALLY went to provide a couple of jobs for some poor uneducated (thanks governement again) fools to do something which didn't need doing in the first place!!!!

Is it OK with you if I hate taxes because of THAT??!!!

That is a MUCH better reason to hate taxes than simply "it's my money" :greedy

I don't think government is quite as bad as all that, but not by much. I do agree that our current legislative process is "broken" by all the cash in the process with lobbyists of all sorts and the costs of elections. I also hate all the crappy pork :oink money that is being thrown away as much as you seem to.

I feel the same outrage for companies that spend hundreds of millions of dollars on executive compensation packages that rob shareholders of returns, and arguably don't give any better returns than otherwise. Selfishness of any sort is less than moral.

[RandomGuy]

That is why I don't wear my religion on my sleeve and I don't believe politicians should either. Saying you are Christian yet supporting war just doesn't make sense to me.

That is part of the problem with the Democratic party. It has let the GOP define itself as the "moral" party because Dems tend to attract truly moral people who are low-key about it.

It has let cynical manipulators like the Bush administration ignore basic moral imperatives and completely take for granted that "true" christians will vote for them simply because they are Republicans, while giving lip service to actual ethical issues and snickering about them behind their backs.

[RandomGuy]

All Christians are evil.

Nah, but some sure are self-righteous pricks.

[Phenomanul]

"Render to Ceasar what is Ceasar's and render to GOD what is GOD's" -- JESUS

[Notorious H.O.P.]

Taxes are a necessity of government.

Without taxes, we wouldn't be able to fund Bush's poorly conceived and poorly planned war.

[SA210]

It was not my intent to sound self-righteous.
RG, I don't think he believes that either. I think the accusation is just a scapegoat to avoid the truth of what you said. You made a great thread and it's something I've been saying on here for quite a while.

They hate when they are called on their hypocricy, claiming to be Christians, but going against Christian values. So the easy way for them to get out of the conversation is to bring up that the Bible says "do not judge others" or they try and say you are "self-righteous". It's not that they truly believe those sayings, it's that they don't have anything else to backup their selfishness.

I think the country is starting to see these lies.

Carry on. :tu

[RandomGuy]

RG, I don't think he believes that [you are self righteous] either. I think the accusation is just a scapegoat to avoid the truth of what you said. You made a great thread and it's something I've been saying on here for quite a while.
They hate when they are called on their hypocricy, claiming to be Christians, but going against Christian values. So the easy way for them to get out of the conversation is to bring up that the Bible says "do not judge others" or they try and say you are "self-righteous". It's not that they truly believe those sayings, it's that they don't have anything else to backup their selfishness.

You pegged it exactly. I would add that it is so sadly typical of people like Ray, Yoni, et al. that they can't see the forest for the trees. They spend all their time attacking the messenger as if that somehow makes the message wrong.



I think the country is starting to see these lies.

Carry on. :tu

Thanks, I will do so, and can only hope for a true moral reawakening in our country.

[Crookshanks]

Thanks, I will do so, and can only hope for a true moral reawakening in our country.

Which is far less likely to happen if the Democrats regain power.

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao We got so much more moral with the Republicans in power, didn't we?

[clambake]

^says The Amoral.

[clambake]

you beat me to it chump

[101A]

Taxes are a necessity of government.


A desire for more government (and thus taxes) is a reality of government.

A government, rather than just "hated", ought to be viewed, for this reason, with the utmost suspicion, lest they have the means and wherewithal to begin unnecessary and overpriced programs, and begin unnecessary and overpriced wars.

Re: Christians being vehemently anti-tax; I am Christian, AND I am vehemently anti-tax.

I DO give to Caesar what he demands (more than he's due, however); but I do what I can to lessen that demand. I also give to the Lord what he's due (and get alot more bang for my buck - in terms of good done in the world)

[Extra Stout]

Well screw you. I do have mine. And God helps those that help themselves.
Everyone is not a victim.

Another little addage: Charity begins at home. There are those that need help,
but more that beg for help and don't need it. The operative word: Help. Not
paying someones bills for everything under the sun.

Now you got something else to call me. Cold hearted. (and other names, I'm sure)
Just remember something friend. You want to help people. Do so and more power
to you. But don't demand that others do through OUR government taxes. That
is not what taxes were designed for or the original intent of taxes.
It certainly doesn't have to be through taxes, but practicing charity is not optional for a professing Christian. The idea that God helps those that help themselves comes from Ben Franklin, not the Bible.

[T Park]

We got so much more moral with the Republicans in power, didn't we?

Vote early vote often.

[T Park]

Gotta love people telling me Im evil for wanting to keep more of my own hard worked for money.

[Extra Stout]

A desire for more government (and thus taxes) is a reality of government.

A government, rather than just "hated", ought to be viewed, for this reason, with the utmost suspicion, lest they have the means and wherewithal to begin unnecessary and overpriced programs, and begin unnecessary and overpriced wars.

Re: Christians being vehemently anti-tax; I am Christian, AND I am vehemently anti-tax.

I DO give to Caesar what he demands (more than he's due, however); but I do what I can to lessen that demand. I also give to the Lord what he's due (and get alot more bang for my buck - in terms of good done in the world)
That is the basic fiscal conservative position right there.

The way a Christian society should work is that communities take care of their own people in need. Now, if the community is indifferent to its needy, then if nobody else will care for them, I'd rather the state do it than have them suffer.

By this I mean the truly needy. I don't mean the shiftless, the lazy, or the criminal. Of course, when government takes on the role, those folks find it a lot easier to game the system. Government care for the indigent is much less efficient, much more expensive, and much more corrupt than authentic charity.

But RG is right in that given a choice between feeding the poor and buying a 52" HDTV, for most Americans, are you ready for some football?

[T Park]

That is the basic fiscal conservative position right there.

The way a Christian society should work is that communities take care of their own people in need. Now, if the community is indifferent to its needy, then if nobody else will care for them, I'd rather the state do it than have them suffer.

By this I mean the truly needy. I don't mean the shiftless, the lazy, or the criminal. Of course, when government takes on the role, those folks find it a lot easier to game the system. Government care for the indigent is much less efficient, much more expensive, and much more corrupt than authentic charity.

But RG is right in that given a choice between feeding the poor and buying a 52" HDTV, for most Americans, are you ready for some football?


Spot on.

[101A]

...
But RG is right in that given a choice between feeding the poor and buying a 52" HDTV, for most Americans, are you ready for some football?

...and not just the "rich" ones, for those of you fond of throwing stones.

(btw: in MY living room is the only TV in the house - a 20" picture tube number w/only an antennae driving it).

[Spurminator]

Taxation shouldn't be argued on moral grounds. It's not the government's duty to coerce morality. I favor taxation and welfare, but as a necessary component of any government that imposes legislation that limits the means by which its citizens can acquire food or shelter.

I have serious issues with the ways that many entitlements are handed out, but I believe the concept of welfare is a good thing... and not because feeding the poor and the homeless is the Christian thing to do.

[T Park]

Agree 1000% percent Spurm.

Well said.

[101A]

Taxation shouldn't be argued on moral grounds. It's not the government's duty to coerce morality. I favor taxation and welfare, but as a necessary component of any government that imposes legislation that limits the means by which its citizens can acquire food or shelter.

I have serious issues with the ways that many entitlements are handed out, but I believe the concept of welfare is a good thing... and not because feeding the poor and the homeless is the Christian thing to do.

Almost any true conservative would agree with you: to an extent. The problem is, the government takes ALL of the onus on itself for this, ostensibly, and thus demands enormous sums of money to "solve" a problem that could be alleviated with far less. The end result is a system that fosters and even encourages that which it is attempting to aid; requiring yet more funding, etc. etc...

[JoeChalupa]

Tax the rich, feed the poor.

[101A]

Tax the rich, enrich and empower the politicians.

fixed.

[RandomGuy]

Gotta love people telling me Im evil for wanting to keep more of my own hard worked for money.

Not exactly. We all want that, and a desire for responsible, efficient government is far from evil.

What IS evil is when people abdicate all social responsibility.

A society is a web of interconnections. You can't separate yourself from everybody else.

If you think about it, "money" is only possible in the first place because we have an organized government to provide the rules and framework for a functioning economy.

[JoeChalupa]

I want to keep more of my money too but I also realize taxes are a necessity and live by my take home pay. EVERYONE benefits from taxes.

[RandomGuy]

It's not the government's duty to coerce morality.

Hmmm, does "morality" include murder, robbery, rape, etc? If so, then we should stop "coercing" the 3 million jail inmates.

[Spurminator]

Those crimes fall under a different umbrella. Murder isn't against the law because it's morally wrong, it's against the law because you're taking a life against someone's will.

Obviously this doesn't work with all of our laws, but in a perfect world....

[101A]

I want to keep more of my money too but I also realize taxes are a necessity and live by my take home pay. EVERYONE benefits from taxes.


Did you pay over $6,000 for each member of your family in income taxes last year? If not: YOU'RE ON THE TAKE! Not helping no-one; just dragging us down. (not ragging on you, just pointing out how incredibly much money the government spends)

[T Park]

Yeah we need 4 check and balance to come in and cut out alot of BS pork crap and just spend it on whats needed.

Rock and roll hall of fames and other BS like that do NOT need funding.

[sandman]

That is part of the problem with the Democratic party. It has let the GOP define itself as the "moral" party because Dems tend to attract truly moral people who are low-key about it.

It has let cynical manipulators like the Bush administration ignore basic moral imperatives and completely take for granted that "true" christians will vote for them simply because they are Republicans, while giving lip service to actual ethical issues and snickering about them behind their backs.

Good God, can you paint with any broader strokes? "truly moral" people are low-key Dems? Repubs are immoral manipulators of those with religious persuasions? Let's have a reality check. Neither party or their membership have a lock on being truly moral or immoral manipulators. You are sadly mistaken if you think either party leadership is concerned with morality, but I believe that many of the rank and file of the membership of both groups are good, moral people. Who happen to be stuck with some sorry-ass options for their leadership.

[T Park]

yeah the whole we are more moral than the other debate reallllly needs to be brought to a screeching halt.

[101A]

yeah the whole we are more moral than the other debate reallllly needs to be brought to a screeching halt.


Then they'd be left to debate the issues: god knows they don't want THAT to happen.

[T Park]

Heaven for friggen bid :lol

Actually getting all viewpoints and other things out there :lol

[sandman]

Then they'd be left to debate the issues: god knows they don't want THAT to happen.

Define "they" without using unsupported generalizations

I doubt that I would easily fit into your preconcieved bias. God knows you don't want THAT to happen.

[T Park]

I would think he means the ones who are apart of the my side is more moral than your side.

[SA210]

I would think he means the ones who are apart of the my side is more moral than your side.
Is it me, or did you guys miss the point about people claiming to be Christian, but actually going against true Christian values?

[101A]

Define "they" without using unsupported generalizations

I doubt that I would easily fit into your preconcieved bias. God knows you don't want THAT to happen.

I just meant politicians - all politicians, geez.

[T Park]

Is it me, or did you guys miss the point about people claiming to be Christian, but actually going against true Christian values?

Yeah i saw that, and I take offense to christians labeling others as bad just because of how they like to spend their money.

Once again, mind your own business is a good thing to hold onto.

[sandman]

I just meant politicians - all politicians, geez.

Thanks for the clarification. I thought you meant all of us immoral conspirators at the grass roots level. :lol

[SA210]

Yeah i saw that, and I take offense to christians labeling others as bad just because of how they like to spend their money.

Once again, mind your own business is a good thing to hold onto.
What does Christ say about your money?

[xrayzebra]

...and not just the "rich" ones, for those of you fond of throwing stones.

(btw: in MY living room is the only TV in the house - a 20" picture tube number w/only an antennae driving it).


Hey 101, you must be a first on this board. I often
wonder why all the liberals, I don't consider you one,
think that everyone is entitled to what everyone
else has. How about you live within your means.

I mean, like, I don't have a private jet, like say:
the Donald or even Rush Limbaugh. So should
the government provide one for me?

So should everyone have cable TV, hi-speed
Internet, a computer, a telephone, A/C, central
heating and the taxpayers pay for it.

Yeah, I am a conservative. I didn't have the
above mentioned things for years and may even
lose them again. But why should I and YOU pay
for someone to have them that cant afford to
pay for them?

So now, you want to argue about my statement
have at it. I pay my own bills, always have, and
hope to always do so. I don't expect anyone on
this board or country to pay them.

Now tell me how wonderful you are by asking
everyone else to pay for someone else bills
through their taxes. You want their bills paid
by others, then pay the bills. Don't demand that
everyone else pay them. Come on you damn
liberals dig deep in your own pockets and show
us your stuff.. :drunk

[Spurminator]

Is it me, or did you guys miss the point about people claiming to be Christian, but actually going against true Christian values?


By "going against Christian values," do you mean voting Republican?

[sandman]

Is it me, or did you guys miss the point about people claiming to be Christian, but actually going against true Christian values?

You mean people being fallible human beings that allow their physical nature to dominate their spiritual nature? Or are you referring to people who claim a Judeo-Christian identity that is based purely on familial or nationalistic heritage?

You know, like all the Catholics who only go to Mass on every other Easter, but have a sticker of the Virgin Mary in the back window of their Chevy truck?

Or your neighbor who says he is Baptist but mows his lawn or goes fishing every Sunday morning?

Just because someone claims to be something does not mean that they adhere steadfastly or even occasionally to the tenants of what they claim to believe.

[SA210]

By "going against Christian values," do you mean voting Republican?
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b381/livindeadboi/bush_jesusad.jpg

[Spurminator]

I take that overused image as a yes response, and I also take it to mean you are in favor of Theocracy. Curious.

[01Snake]

So does having 5 cars for a two person family make me a bad person? :lol

[xrayzebra]

So does having 5 cars for a two person family make me a bad person? :lol

Not in my book. Do you have one with low mileage,
American, rides easy, uses lots of gas and steers
real easy you want to sell at a good price. I love
the old mushy ride, lots of leg room and I can get
into instead of putting on.

[sandman]

So does having 5 cars for a two person family make me a bad person? :lol

Only if you are a Republican

[01Snake]

Not in my book. Do you have one with low mileage,
American, rides easy, uses lots of gas and steers
real easy you want to sell at a good price. I love
the old mushy ride, lots of leg room and I can get
into instead of putting on.

Haha. I've got 2 that get less than 10 mpg. Gotta have my speed fix!

[sandman]

Haha. I've got 2 that get less than 10 mpg. Gotta have my speed fix!

I almost went broke keeping my truck gassed up over the last 18 months, but I'll be damned if I give it up just to drive what the Asian car companies are passing off as "cars" these days. I've had bigger RC cars than what they are putting on the road today.

[01Snake]

I almost went broke keeping my truck gassed up over the last 18 months, but I'll be damned if I give it up just to drive what the Asian car companies are passing off as "cars" these days. I've had bigger RC cars than what they are putting on the road today.

Hey! One of those sub 10mpg cars is a Toyota. :lol

[PixelPusher]

So does having 5 cars for a two person family make me a bad person? :lol
It certainly make you the darling of whatever car insurance company you use.

[RandomGuy]

Good God, can you paint with any broader strokes? "truly moral" people are low-key Dems? Repubs are immoral manipulators of those with religious persuasions? Let's have a reality check. Neither party or their membership have a lock on being truly moral or immoral manipulators. You are sadly mistaken if you think either party leadership is concerned with morality, but I believe that many of the rank and file of the membership of both groups are good, moral people. Who happen to be stuck with some sorry-ass options for their leadership.

Not quite what I meant.

I meant that the Dems are just as "moral" as the Republicans, but those moral people tend to be a bit less overtly pious, ala Jerry Falwell on the GOP. Moral Dems don't tend to shout their religion from the rooftops.

I did, however, exactly mean that the GOP at the top is a bunch of immoral manipulators.

There is a new book out by a guy who was highly ranked in the office of Faith Based Initiatives, who lists new few number of times that the White House staffers would give lip service to the Evangelicals and other religious types that would call or visit and then make fun of them behind their backs, then go on to pretty much ignore their concerns, as well as never give this cabinet level agency the funding it needed to do anything it was supposed to do.

The GOP takes these people for granted, just as the Dems take the black and hispanic votes for granted.

[RandomGuy]

Those crimes fall under a different umbrella. Murder isn't against the law because it's morally wrong, it's against the law because you're taking a life against someone's will.

Obviously this doesn't work with all of our laws, but in a perfect world....

Letting people starve to death is also morally wrong, is it not?

Ignoring the poor when you can help is also morally wrong is it not?

[101A]

Not quite what I meant.

I meant that the Dems are just as "moral" as the Republicans, but those moral people tend to be a bit less overtly pious...

Maybe not pious, but they certainly have self-righteous indignation down pat.

[101A]

Letting people starve to death is also morally wrong, is it not?

Yes.


Ignoring the poor when you can help is also morally wrong is it not?

Yes.

But the lord would also, IMO, look unfavorably at the person who supports higher taxes to feed the starving, pays those taxes to help the poor, but stops there, and doesn't recognize that those taxes, in fact, did not feed that many starving, or help that many poor.

I fight, and vote, for lower taxes, so that, in part, I can keep more of my own, so that I have more to give to organizations that will actually do some good - and help people to not be poor and starving anymore.

Please remember that all of these Christians who you condemn for not wanting to waste there money in tax dollars, if they go to church weekly, are putting money in the collection plate. (If they are Protestant, their preachers are probably harping on it - the bi-annual sermon I didn't have to hear when I was Catholic).

[johnsmith]

If my taxes are higher, less of my money goes to the United Way. I give directly to Boysville, and organization on the Northeast side of SA. Once taxes go up, I'll give less.

[Spurminator]

Letting people starve to death is also morally wrong, is it not?

Ignoring the poor when you can help is also morally wrong is it not?


Yes, but as I said...


It's not the government's duty to coerce morality. I favor taxation and welfare, but as a necessary component of any government that imposes legislation that limits the means by which its citizens can acquire food or shelter.


In other words, the government doesn't (or shouldn't) feed the poor or house the homeless because it's the "moral" thing to do. The government should do it because it's their responsibility to.

It's not charity, it's protection.

[sandman]

I meant that the Dems are just as "moral" as the Republicans, but those moral people tend to be a bit less overtly pious, ala Jerry Falwell on the GOP. Moral Dems don't tend to shout their religion from the rooftops.

OVERTLY

–adverb openly; publicly.


PIOUS

–adjective having or showing a dutiful spirit of reverence for God or an earnest wish to fulfill religious obligations.

How is a Christian who holds firm to the tenants of their faith not going to be overt or pious? Is that not a part of being a real Christian? Making one's life a public example of how Christ lived and sharing one's faith with others?

I understand that you probably were going for pompous instead of pious, but this thread is all about being un-Christian, yet you are implying that Christians should tone down how much they act like a Christian. How do I do that? Be against same-sex marriages, abortion and so forth but never speak up about it? Quite frankly, I would be suspect of someone who adhered to a particular faith and was not willing to take a stand against those things that were in direct violation of the tenants of that faith.

As far as Jerry goes, well, he is still getting over the stereotype from the heyday of the Moral Majority. I actually attend Liberty University where I am working on my MBA. If the university is any indication, I can promise you that he is not the constipated, stuffed-shirt legalistic bigot as he has been portrayed.

[SA210]

It's not the government's duty to coerce morality.
This is garbage.

The Republican Party has spent decades trying to co-opt morality, pushing voters to their side by claiming to represent American values. They promote themselves as "Christians" as if Dems aren't. They pretend to have these so-called values of integrity and faithfulness to their wives and being against child molestation, but yet, they cover for their people when a child predator is discovered, they cover for their people when they commit adultery, they lied America into war and on and on.

The hypocricy! :pctoss


They run on "morality" all of the time!

[Extra Stout]

This is garbage.

The hypocricy! :pctoss

They run on "morality" all of the time!
Your thought was prematurely ejaculated here.

Since when does Spurminator follow the GOP line 100%?

[SA210]

Your thought was prematurely ejaculated here.

Since when does Spurminator follow the GOP line 100%?
Maybe he doesn't, but my "hypocricy" line is directed at the Republicans.

[Spurminator]

This is garbage.

The Republican Party has spent decades trying to co-opt morality, pushing voters to their side by claiming to represent American values. They promote themselves as "Christians" as if Dems aren't.

I never took you for a Republican, SA120. Guess I've been wrong all this time.

[SA210]

I never took you for a Republican, SA120. Guess I've been wrong all this time.No, I could never be Republican.

Sorry if I made a mistake about the "garbage" line directed at you :toast , but I stand by what I said about the hypocricy within the Republican party.

[Spurminator]

Understood. But do you believe the government SHOULD coerce morality?

[SA210]

Understood. But do you believe the government SHOULD coerce morality?
Well, I just think that when a party claims to be the "christian" party, that maybe they might not want to go against Christ-like values.

In my personal opinion, I think that we all have a responsibilty to help the poor and hungry, not only with feeding them, but understanding the circumstances and that there are many different kinds of circumstances (it's not always as simple as "they are lazy and don't want to work), get them training and long term career goals, so they can become self-sufficient.

To me it's not about just charity, but enriching their lives, because some people don't have all the breaks that others have or even positive influences around them for them to be confident and educated properly.

And if they have noone, why ignore that?

[SA210]

October 26th, 2006 12:08 pm
War on poverty slips from election agenda
By Matthew Bigg / Reuters (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061025/us_nm/poverty_dc)

NEW ORLEANS - On a boat stranded in a street in New Orleans, two words are scrawled: "No politicians."

It's not clear if the boat is a remnant of Hurricane Katrina, which devastated this city more than a year ago, but the message of the graffiti is unmistakable: politicians failed to deliver for those who lost their homes in the hurricane.

"They sent boys over there (to Iraq) to fight in a war that never ends. Why didn't they keep the money over here when Americans are suffering," said Gwen Brown, 51, whose home in New Orleans was flooded by Katrina.

Hurricane Katrina exposed an underclass of poor Americans to the rest of the world, but poverty has slipped off the agenda in the runup to midterm congressional elections next month.

"After the hurricane it was easier for a time (to interest people in poverty) but it is ... very hard to maintain national attention unless there is national leadership," former Democratic senator John Edwards said in an interview.

Edwards ran for president in 2004 arguing there were two Americas, one for the well-off and another for those who struggle. When that effort failed, he ran for vice president on John Kerry's ticket. He said he has not decided whether to run again in 2008.

Poverty has been a Democratic issue since President Lyndon Johnson declared a "war on poverty" in 1964, but Edwards said Democrats see risks in promoting the issue, fearing they would be painted as big-government spenders.

An illustration of that is Harold Ford, running for the U.S. Senate for Tennessee, who campaigns on reforming health care but also advocates issues attractive to conservative voters such as opposition to gay marriage and cutting taxes.

U.S. civil rights leader Jesse Jackson warned there were dangers for Democrats who abandoned social justice issues to win elections.

"There is a need to have politicians whose positions represent change for the better and not an accommodation with the worst of our status quo," he told Reuters.


DOES POVERTY EXIST?

The U.S. Census Bureau said in August one in eight Americans and one in four black people lived in poverty last year.

In all, some 37 million Americans lived below the poverty line, defined as having an annual income around $10,000 for a single person or $20,000 for a family of four, it said.

Robert Rector of the conservative Heritage Foundation think-tank argued there is little actual poverty in the United States and most poor people had a house, car, television, air conditioning, food and medical care.

Democrats only employed the word to stir emotions and "low income status" would be a better description in most cases, Rector said in an interview.

That case gains traction in the United States, a society with a fiercely competitive ethic and a belief that hard work and self-reliance are a sure route to success, making it risky to promote a national goal of helping the poor.

What makes it still harder is that the religious right has hijacked the agenda for Christian voters promoting opposition to abortion and gay marriage but pushing poverty off the agenda, said Jim Wallis, leader of Sojourners, a Christian ministry that promotes spiritual renewal and social justice.

Wallis cited recent research by the Center for American Values in Public Life which indicated that 85 percent of Americans say poverty and affordable health care are more important issues than abortion and same sex marriage.

"The conventional wisdom is that poverty isn't sexy and that nobody wants to talk about poverty ... You need political leaders with the courage to test the proposition," he said.

For many voters in New Orleans, talk of political courage may come too late to dent their cynicism.

Near the stranded boat, the owner of a newly-rebuilt house near the stranded boat has created a mock Hurricane Katrina cemetery, with colorful headstones bearing epitaphs for local politicians and President Bush. One reads: "Bush rebuilt the city -- Baghdad."

[Guru of Nothing]

"Like every great religion of the past SOME seek to find the divinity within and to express this revelation in a life of glorification and the worship of God. These ancient goals we define in the metaphor of the present — turn on, tune in, drop out."

[RandomGuy]

Maybe not pious, but they certainly have self-righteous indignation down pat.

Yup. PC at it's worst.

[RandomGuy]

Yes.



Yes.

But the lord would also, IMO, look unfavorably at the person who supports higher taxes to feed the starving, pays those taxes to help the poor, but stops there, and doesn't recognize that those taxes, in fact, did not feed that many starving, or help that many poor.

I fight, and vote, for lower taxes, so that, in part, I can keep more of my own, so that I have more to give to organizations that will actually do some good - and help people to not be poor and starving anymore.

Please remember that all of these Christians who you condemn for not wanting to waste there money in tax dollars, if they go to church weekly, are putting money in the collection plate. (If they are Protestant, their preachers are probably harping on it - the bi-annual sermon I didn't have to hear when I was Catholic).


Materiality is an empty vice.

God doesn't care how much money you have or keep or make in your life time. When you die you don't take all of it with you and your money is not God's concern. Your soul is.

"it doesnt' help much anyway, so why do it?" is your response?

[101A]

Materiality is an empty vice.

God doesn't care how much money you have or keep or make in your life time. When you die you don't take all of it with you and your money is not God's concern. Your soul is.

"it doesnt' help much anyway, so why do it?" is your response?



Read my post again:

Taxes don't help as much as charitable giving (in terms of clothing and feeding the poor).

I am disgusted by the fact that the government takes so much money and wastes it, or uses it to bolster its own power. It doesn't help the poor; it hurts the poor, ultimately.

Nowhere in the gospel in Christ's teachings does it praise a man for paying taxes to the government which then went to help a poor or ailing person. There several texts, however, regarding individual men helping their individual neighbors DIRECTLY. This in honored. This is what I want to have more of my own money to do.

God is not neutral on materialism. He warns against it in no uncertain terms. Acquiring wealth isn't forbidden, but it is recognized as a stumbling block to a Christian life.

[xrayzebra]

In my personal opinion, I think that we all have a responsibilty to help the poor and hungry, not only with feeding them, but understanding the circumstances and that there are many different kinds of circumstances (it's not always as simple as "they are lazy and don't want to work), get them training and long term career goals, so they can become self-sufficient.

To me it's not about just charity, but enriching their lives, because some people don't have all the breaks that others have or even positive influences around them for them to be confident and educated properly.

And if they have noone, why ignore that?

You thought process is flawed. Charity is not a responsibility. It is something
that is done freely by the individual. You must always remember something.
Some people do need government help. The sick, disabled and mentally
ill. And maybe on occasion the able bodied for a short period of time.
But remember something about taxes. Honest hard working "poor" people
have to pay, whether they can afford to or not. So is that fair for them
to deny their families the benefit of those dollars while giving to someone
else what they need. Income taxes aren't the only taxes paid by a long
shot. Look at how many taxing agencies there are in Bexar county alone.
And that is a crime. And government is creating more and more everyday.
And using the same arguments as you have for some of those taxes.

I will ask your another question. How many training programs do we need?
My goodness, there must be hump-teen available here in San Antonio
alone.

Enriching some ones life. Sounds good, but you cant do it, nor can I.
Is enrichment making sure they have the "breaks" you and I had. I
don't recall a single "break" in my life. I worked for what I had, it wasn't
given to me. The same opportunities I had, every able bodied person
in the United States has. You get a job, stick with it. Lean what is
expected of you and be dependable and work your butt off. Jobs are
available for those that want to work. They may not pay very well to
begin with, but over time they can and in most cases do. Even
What-a-Burger has management people who started out flipping hamburgers.


It is fine and good that you want to help people. And you doing it,
I have no problem whatsoevery. You and others like you demanding
that everyone do it through our taxes. Yes I have a big problem with
that.