Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So you say, if you are for welfare, then why oppose government welfare? Isn't the government just the people? Is there really a fundamental difference between faith-based or private welfare and public welfare?
Well, disregard the threat of force issue. While I'm not a big fan of government using force, I don't believe that there is a fundamental argument by any political philosophy which doesn't tolerate on some level the use of force by the government(other than maybe anarchy).
The real issue in my mind when it comes to socialism, is not the intentions, but rather the results. And the problem with public welfare is simply that it always fails.
The primary problem is that it disincentivizes people to contribute to society, and moreover, it incentivizes them to just take whatever they can get from society.... And while so does private charity to some degree, it is nowhere near the same level as public charity.
In the case of a church-based charity. Generally, people see themselves as a single group, and tend to be more hesitant to take from the church unless they really need it. Because they believe they are taking from someone else who does need it. With government charity, the mindset is more that you want to get "your fair share" or to "get what you deserve" from the government. Basically, public charity creates almost a competition for handouts by competing groups. Who send Congressman to Washington D.C. whose primary job is to try to get as much money as they can get from the federal government for their group.
The truth is, there are a huge number of young, able-bodied men, who choose not to work because the government is basically supporting them, and they just don't care. It is becoming a sort of epidemic in this country. They took the work-requirement away from the food stamp program, and the number of young people on the program has exploded. Imagine if they brought back the old unlimited cash welfare payments, and some of the more generous housing programs. The number of people on welfare would absolutely explode.
What you're saying sounds reasonable, but it's not the truth.
Welfare assistance of all kinds in both public and private sectors has been cut to the bone over the past 12 years. Federal welfare had been chopped away at every year until it is now less that half of what it was in the 80's, and state welfare has been cut even more in many states.
Those young able-bodied young men you mention are true enough, but they are not living on welfare. They are living off their parents and/or girlfriends.
If, as you said, the number of young on welfare is exploding, the budget numbers certainly aren't keeping pace. There is less welfare money to go around this year than last, and less last year than the year before, on and on.
Show me the facts and I'll agree with you.
Government and private welfare are massively different.
Government welfare began much more as a public health and crime issue than from Christian charity. If the poor were not starving, there would not be as much crime or typhus in the streets. That was true, and it worked.
It's still true. When the welfare goes down, the crime and health costs go up. We end up paying the bills either way.
All this discussion of welfare ignores the government payments to the owners of the military suppliers, the agricultural industry and the drug companies. These profits paid for by the taxpayers and far exceed the total take by the indigent welfare recipients. In this country it is legitimate for businesses to steal from the government but a sin for an unwed mother to use government money to house and feed herself and her baby. Everyone knows while the owner’s party and play the poor should be working for as little as possible.
Back to the OP. I am amused by how similar the most radical of the protestant religions has the same policy toward having children as the Catholic Church, the oldest of the Christian faiths. Both are patriarchal systems with women relegated to being slaves of the men. The other thing they have in common is they are pure bull**** created by men for men and captured by the greedy to justify their mass thievery.
That verse is the foundation of an entire movement: QuiverFull .com :: Psalm 127:3-5 You are right, he didn't say anything specific regarding women, but using this verse in the context of a speech encouraging early marriage and many children, sends a message. He inserts a homily about wife Ann proclaiming to Harvard MBAs that her profession as a mother was the toughest career choice she could have made and then launches into a discussion of career choices for the sitting grads. He's tacitly circumscribed what he thinks should be the career choice for the female grads sitting in the audience: marry, have lots of babies, and stay home to mother them.
Sweet, heavenly Jesus. I am SO GLAD this man did not get elected. Quiverfull ~ just no. No. That is NOT the advice you give to graduating college seniors.
Again - we see Mitt's true colors. Barefoot and in the kitchen you binders full of women!!!
More like we have taken a bullet to the frontal lobe in the re-election of Barack H. Obama to a thus far disasterous second term (it is proving to be as much a failure as the first term).
The OP's bigotry is painfully obvious here. Not only does he execrate what God has deemed good, the family and the bringing forth of children, without which the Human Race would vanish, he also attacks Mormonism, and by extension, Christianity.
This isn't surprising coming from one of the votaries of a President that asked God's blessing on an organization that admits to the killing of almost 334,000 babies in 2011. This is also a President that, voted to withold life saving measures to the surviors of abortion in Illinois, and has not condemned the killing of babies born alive at Kermit Gosnell's killing center in Philadelphia, whose practice Planned Parenthood admits they were aware of, but did nothing.
Children are simply chattel apparently, and when convenient, their dead bodies are used to advance a political agenda, as in Barack Obama's exploitation of the innocent victims of Sandy Hook to advance an agenda of a disarmed citizenry.
Perhaps in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings, the OP should focus on criticism of our Dear Leader's policies as they regard to Islam and immigration policies that allow terrorists to take advantage of our colleges and universites, often at the expense of taxpayers. I don't know of any Christians or Mormons (or Jews) who have built bombs in their basements to use against Ameircan citizens.
Sweet, heavenly Jesus. I am SO GLAD this man did not get elected. Quiverfull ~ just no. No. That is NOT the advice you give to graduating college seniors.
Again - we see Mitt's true colors. Barefoot and in the kitchen you binders full of women!!!
Your attitude make no sense to me. Please explain what you think is wrong with encouraging educated young people to start families.
The same college kids we're burdening with insane amounts of student loan debt these days? I'm sorry, but Mormons are their cult religions are insane.
actually, college is relatively affordable for Mormon students, because of how they set up BYU.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
