This may upset a few people (it's not meant to), but I think it's a valid question, and I'd like to hear some of your thoughts.
Most Republicans seem to consider themselves Christians, but are totally against any sort of social welfare programs. They seem to think that social welfare equates to handouts for the lazy and that it promotes shiftlessness and corruption. When, in reality, countries that offer the most social welfare to their citizens are among the most successful, with the highest standard of living, and generally produce the healthiest, and best educated people in the world, even beating out the good ol' U.S. of A. (Sweden and Switzerland, are good examples).
I'm wondering, how is it that a Christian can be against social welfare, and still consider him/herself a follower of Jesus, who defined himself by his charity, and his help for the poor. After all, wasn't it Jesus who said, "The meek shall inherit the earth"?
2006-12-21
18:19:06
·
12 answers
·
asked by
fax_o_matic
1
in
Law & Ethics