Christian Conservatives, Social Programs and the Teachings of Christ. (soldier, cost, politician)

[Blueberries]

Oh, and OC Investior2, please learn some manners.

[KevK]

Originally Posted by ovcatto

I am curious as to how "Christian conservatives" reconcile their views about "redistribution of wealth," and the programs designed to alleviate the suffering of the poor with Christ's teachings and the teachings of the Bible?

You know:

"Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy."
-Proverbs 31:8-9

"He who mocks the poor shows contempt for their Maker; whoever gloats over disaster will not go unpunished."
-Proverbs 17:5

"Jesus answered, 'If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.'"
-Matthew 19:21

"Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life."
-1 Timothy 6:17-19

"Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy."
-Ezekiel 16:49

"There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land."
-Deuteronomy 15:11

They don't believe in any of that stuff. That is New Testament stuff. Those folks live mostly in the Old Testament- where everybody but them can die and go to Hell.

[OC Investor2]

Originally Posted by Blueberries

I never took social work in college. And I graduated in 1971. I'm neither liberal nor conservative, mainly because I don't have the common propensity to make snide, unfounded and nonsensical comments about what one or the other believes. I asked for facts, you refer me to a book which may or may not have those facts. I just don't accept unsubstantiated claims based on little or nothing.

As for the salaries and such that bureaucrats receive, again, get involved and do something besides whining and complaining.

And I never said or implied that my "opponents" don't care about the poor. Please don't deliberately misinterpret or misstate what I said.

I was not referring to you or your posts, I meant the OP.

As for the book, Stossels whole story is about a long study done by Brooks on charitable giving by various groups. I'm sure Brook's book has all the relevant footnotes, data, etc. that's what I meant when I siad "look it up" I maent see about the book.

[KevK]

Originally Posted by Chatteress

Where does the Bible state that it's the GOVERNMENT's job to provide for the needy? The Bible essentially calls us, the people, to VOLUNTARILY provide for those in need through charity and other good deeds. Since when is forced taxation VOLUNTARY?

By the way, I do support safety nets for folks who fall on hard times but we really need to reform our current system to ensure that those that are really in need are actually receiving government assistance and get rid of fraud. We don't have an unlimited supply of money and no matter what our politicians state, it will always be the middle class that will bear the burdens of increased taxes with our current tax system.

As a LIBERAL I fully agree! I do not know any liberals that say that people should be allowed to defraud or abuse the safety net or that the money spent to help the poor and down and out is not spent wisely and not wastefully.

[delusianne]

Originally Posted by OC Investor2

I was not referring to you or your posts, I meant the OP.

As for the book, Stossels whole story is about a long study done by Brooks on charitable giving by various groups. I'm sure Brook's book has all the relevant footnotes, data, etc. that's what I meant when I siad "look it up" I maent see about the book.

yes, Stossel's article points out that the poor give more than the rich do because they empathize. They've been there, or are there, or could be there, themselves; they understand and they dont judge. They're not giving for tax reasons.

[Chatteress]

Originally Posted by KevK

[/b]
As a LIBERAL I fully agree! I do not know any liberals that say that people should be allowed to defraud or abuse the safety net or that the money spent to help the poor and down and out is not spent wisely and not wastefully.

As a liberal, how do you feel about governmental bureaucrats who are "serving the poor" having high salaries, lifetime pensions and other lavish benefits that most don't enjoy?

[KevK]

Originally Posted by hawkeye2009

Voluntary donation of money to entities that one chooses is charity. Most conservatives donate much more to charities than liberals. Confiscation of wealth from private citizens by the government to distribute to entities that may be diametrically opposed to Christianity is a different matter.

I doubt that. Conservatives are richer and they tend to give lots of money to religious organizations and colleges. Not to the poor.

[delusianne]

Originally Posted by Chatteress

As a liberal, how do you feel about governmental bureaucrats who are "serving the poor" having high salaries, lifetime pensions and other lavish benefits that most don't enjoy?

Which employees in which agencies are you talking about?

Should some govt agencies' employees receive less, or more, than others depending on the purpose of their agency?

[KevK]

Originally Posted by Chatteress

As a liberal, how do you feel about governmental bureaucrats who are "serving the poor" having high salaries, lifetime pensions and other lavish benefits that most don't enjoy?

I would have to know more- like what they do and what they get paid for it. I can pretty much say that they do not make anywhere near what private sector employees get for the same level of responsibility. My thing is how much, as a percentage, of the money goes to help the poor and how much for administration. I get a pension on my job after 30 years or when age+time=75 whichever comes first and I am just a technical worker. The government pays poorly. That is why they give good retirement and other benefits.

[Chatteress]

Originally Posted by KevK

I doubt that. Conservatives are richer and they tend to give lots of money to religious organizations and colleges. Not to the poor.

This conservative isn't rich and there are tons of rich liberals out there that are just as self-serving as the rich conservatives you clearly distain. Also, what is wrong with giving money to religious organizations? The Salvation Army and lots of non-profits that serve the homeless are Christian-based organizations that do lots of good in our society. I would have no issue with the government using tax dollars to help those in need but why are the governmental bureaucrats paid so much and have lavish benefits in order to provide this service?