Here's an interesting juxtaposition. First Sabra, on lefties and the whole
"Jesus was a socialist" meme:
Nice theologic answer. Next, Eric S. Raymond tackles the same meme
from the secular ethicist perspective:
Compassion is a duty of every individual. Groups of people organizing voluntarily to achieve compassionate ends are deserve admiration and support. Collectivists pervert compassion, speaking the language of caring but committing the actions of criminals.
It is a crime to rob your neighbor. It is a crime to use your neighbor for your own ends without allowing him or her a choice in the matter. It is a crime to deprive your neighbor of his liberty when he or she has committed no aggression against you.
These crimes are no less crimes when a sociopath (or a politician – but, I repeat myself) justifies them by chanting “for the poor” or “for the children” or “for the environment”.
Sadly, this likely won't be enough to shut up the whole "Jesus believed in 68% marginal tax rates for the wealthy" crowd. But these are two great arguments from opposite starting points, saying precisely the same thing.
6 comments:
Maybe Colbert can show us the verse where Jesus tells us to lie about our political opponents' motives.
Bearing false witness to gain power and wealth for yourself and your friends is the very foundation of progressive morality, but there's less justification for it in the Gospels.
Theft is theft, whether you have a majority in Congress or not.
One of many flaws in using compassion as a political baseball bat to smack fiscal conservatives with is that by and large nobody is saying that we shouldn't take care of the needy. What we are saying is that it should not be done by the federal government.
It's encouraging that both Sabra and Eric Raymond see through the BS cloud. When both the folks they're trying to browbeat and the disinterested bystanders see the lie, that implies that it's probably not a winning strategy.
Or you could be cutting your nose off to spite the poor.
Hold up on the hatred of government-sponsored organizations and think about the question logically.
What's the most effective and efficient way to help the poor? Generally, some sort of group will do better than each of us on our own.
The 'as individuals' is as lousy of a bs argument as it gets. Last I checked, Jesus didn't say anything about the government's role in helping the poor, but neither did he say anything against forming a group to help the poor. The response in the image is a simple polemic against skeery big government.
It doesn't have to be done with tax dollars, but generally speaking, this sounds less like concern about the poor than it does 'that dangone gubbermint'.
Actions speak louder than words, and most of America shouts 'forget the poor - they didn't make it, it's not my place to fix their issues'.
Everyone should have some choice as to where their hard-earned money goes.
Perhaps a social guilt-trip is better than coercion by taxation, but hey.
Well Mark, I expect you'll be in the minority here.
I'm afraid that the days of me cutting the Government slack on their programs to "help" people are over. When you peel away the overhead to support not the poor but an ever expanding bureaucracy, and when you peel away the unanticipated consequences of many of these programs, I'm not sure at all that the people who need help are coming out ahead.
Your mileage may vary, void where prohibited, do not remove tag on penalty of law.
@Mark. You really believe that Government and efficiency in the same sentence passes the belly laugh test?
The US public is extremely generous, far beyond any other nation, or the US government. After the Tsunami in 2004 the US public and non governmental Organizations gave almost 2 billion of the 10 billion total, the feds gave just under a billion. The Saudi's gave a whopping 20 million. Probably wouldn't cover the helicopter fuel for the US response.
The local charity that I support most runs a pantry, clothing bank, furniture "shop", dental and medical clinics, will also pay bills and arrange home and auto repairs. If that isn't meeting the NEEDS of the poor I don't know what is. One thing I like is that I can go buy food using coupons (The Grocery Game rocks!) and get an extremely high return on my donation. Also when someone comes in they are asked what needs they have right now, there is no qualification and no disqualification. a lot of working poor and recently unemployed can't qualify for food stamps because they have a high value vehicle they need for work or family. Food Stamps would make them sell their means to get off food stamps to qualify for them in the first place.
In my Adult Bible Fellowship class the hat was passed to help a woman (friend of a class member, unknown to the rest of us) get a new set of tires, she bought a used car with the $5K+
So we have formed groups to help the poor. We call them Churches and Charities.
No coercion required, no guilt trip, no undefined and unlimited "Social Contract", just the love of Christ and a little prosperity.
Post a Comment