I'm tired of so called "christians" not wanting tax money to go to health care, and yet not having a problem supporting corporate welfare and no-bid defense contractors run by Dick's buddies.
2007-11-17 05:06:29 · 17 answers · asked by Jim T 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
As I have read responses to this question...no conservative actually answered my question or defended their position,,,just tried to insult me...hahahhaa...figures
2007-11-17 05:17:24 · update #1
and yes I Was against the no bid contracts Clinton extended to them.
2007-11-17 05:19:06 · update #2
Would it matter KNOWING that he would vote against abortion?
Why do you guys always involve Christ into politics?
2007-11-17 05:12:39 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes, Jesus would have voted against universal healthcare. Consider the following:
"Consider this: whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. Each must do as already determined, without sadness or compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." 2 Corinthians 9:6-7. If the government compels you to give X to the poor, you are not being charitable; you are discharging an obligation under pain of the civil and criminal penalties in the tax code.
Also, Christians are required in the New Testament to exercise judgment in their execution of charity. "Neither did we eat any man’s bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies." 2 Thessalonians 3:8-11. It may sound harsh, but God has no intention of funding freeloaders in the name of charity. But, we have no control over our charitable giving, if even it can be called that, when we see the money go out as part of the Income Tax line of our pay stub and are forever detached from the money or its control from that second forward.
Now, I'm a Libertarian, and a Catholic. So to me, welfare is welfare whether it's private or corporate. If I want to support you with food or healthcare I'll give to the church or other private charities, if I want to support your business I'll support it by buying your product. I have no problem reconciling that with the teachings of Jesus Christ. Jesus said to GIVE, not to take from others by force. And that's exactly what taxation is. Maybe if I were being taxed less I'd have more to give of my own free will. What a concept.
2007-11-17 13:54:21 · answer #2 · answered by Bigsky_52 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Were you against the no-bid contracts Haliburton got from the Clinton administration?
You didn't mention which corporations in the welfare program are funded by which Christians.
There is a line on every tax return form where you can volunteer to pay extra. There's even a convenient blank to fill in the amount so it can be as much as you'd like.
That option has been on the tax form for 30 years and virtually NOBODY has EVER entered anything on that line!
You stand accused of hypocrisy!
2007-11-17 13:14:34 · answer #3 · answered by Ed Harley 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, I don't know if Jesus would have voted against SCHIP... just as I don't know that Jesus would have approved of SCHIP being funded by a "sin" tax. I do agree about the 'corporate welfare', but my pet peeve on this issue is the non-smokers who want health care for children... but only if it doesn't come out of their pockets and is instead funded by a tobacco tax. A tax that disproportionately burdens the poor. Then they get all upset when I suggest that cigarette makers should be allowed to advertise again and to pass out free samples at school yards. After all, we need to get started on the next generation of smokers now to perpetuate the funding because we all know this generation of smokers will be dying off sooner.
2007-11-17 13:42:01 · answer #4 · answered by sagacious_ness 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No one has ever voted against universial health care.
The democratic party prevented universial health care from being voted on in Congress the three times universial health care bills have been before congress.
In 1973, 1978 and 1993,
All three times we had a democratic majority congress and all three times, the bills were tabled in committee.
But if you want to talk aboyt universial health care,
Tell us all:
What will it cost ?
How will it be funded?
Who will make the decisions about whats covered?
I have yet to see any universial health care supporter, who can answer any of those questions.
And don't you think, we should have those answer's, before we debate the merits of doing so ?
2007-11-17 13:52:11 · answer #5 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
True enough. Repukes want corporate welfare for Blackwater and Halliburton but don't want to cover the uninsured.
To Ed: Yes I was against Clinton on issues like NAFTA. And there was nearly the scale of corporate welfare. And it's not about the average citizens paying more, it is about the corporations setting up shop in Cayman Islands to avoid paying taxes. Discuss the issues don't make it personal like a typical Repuke.
2007-11-17 13:13:57 · answer #6 · answered by nicewknd 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Well, consider that Jesus spent a couple years traveling around the countryside and healing people. POOR people!
He also got really angry at the hypocrisy of powerful religious leaders of his day, because they sold out to politics.
He also interrupted and prevented an execution, but Christians believe he was in favor of capital punishment.
2007-11-17 13:12:30 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
With all the drug recalls out there and the FDA sitting on it's thumbs, do you really want the government running your healthcare too?
If everyone stopped paying into health insurance companies watch their prices go down.
Nothing in this world is free. You get what you pay for.
2007-11-17 13:22:23 · answer #8 · answered by dovesong44 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
First, I assume you were ok when it was Clinton and no-bid contractors.
Second, "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's"
I think Jesus was more into the church helping with children, not government. Jesus wasn't really into politics.
Third, I do know he would be VERY against abortion.
2007-11-17 13:15:12 · answer #9 · answered by time_wounds_all_heelz 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think not. He was not just out for himself
No Y
I believe In reference to what Jesus said mentions something like 20 times in the Bible we should take care of our poor and our widows , I could be wrong it may have been more.
Dove
no I want them to quit letting the insurance companies tie my doctors hands so she can give me better care.
2007-11-17 13:13:04 · answer #10 · answered by RELAX 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
jesus would put a doctor hat on and make some money, cash cash cash cash money, HANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN, he would get his heal on and make bank and take the gulfstream up to vegas and get crunk be telling all the girls to get low while smoking the maddest amount of newports and sippin on that hennesey and when he got back he would put the jesus hat on and have forgive a thon then the doctor hat on and repeat, ya feeling me, maybe he could heal dick cheneys hart too but charge a lot of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for him
2007-11-17 13:18:52 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋