So many replies, not enough time to respond to them all.....
You so called christians are still living within the time period Jesus did. You fail to take into account the way life was in that time period. You assume society today is a exact representation of what life was like 2000 years ago. Are all christians retarded? Or just the ones defending on this board?
You Christians might want to investigate the dicotomy of the (socialist) realm of Rome and thier control/allowance/coexistence with the Isrealites....esp when it came to health care.
Then you can research the dicotomy of the Isrealites within Roman rule, very much a socialist society IMO.
Fast forward to the 21 century and neither exist, yet christians still hold on to one society and have totally rejected the other aspect of society in the realm in which Jesus lived.
So if you want to pick and choose which aspects of allowance you choose to follow, then why not allow fathers to sell their daughters to other rich men, own slaves, stone children to death, etc. Jesus was a Isrealite, yet he never spoke out against these things, but somewhere he spoke against giving unto Ceasar what is Ceasars; somewhere where jesus taught the poor amongst you must die so the rich among you may become richer, and lastly where Jesus taught those who are incapable of contributing financialy to society must be done away with so the well to do are not burdend by these lazy people?
According to you the Christians who object to their government spending fourty percent more than it receives in taxes and pays $16 a piece for muffins for the Justice department are just heartless people who are against feeding hungry people.
Yet you have no problem paying a 200% mark-up on retail products when all the profits do is go directly into someone's pocket.
Jesus had two dads, and he turned out alright.~ Andy Gussert
“Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law.
If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”
So many replies, not enough time to respond to them all.....
You so called christians are still living within the time period Jesus did. You fail to take into account the way life was in that time period. You assume society today is a exact representation of what life was like 2000 years ago. Are all christians retarded? Or just the ones defending on this board?
You Christians might want to investigate the dicotomy of the (socialist) realm of Rome and thier control/allowance/coexistence with the Isrealites....esp when it came to health care.
Then you can research the dicotomy of the Isrealites within Roman rule, very much a socialist society IMO.
Fast forward to the 21 century and neither exist, yet christians still hold on to one society and have totally rejected the other aspect of society in the realm in which Jesus lived.
So if you want to pick and choose which aspects of allowance you choose to follow, then why not allow fathers to sell their daughters to other rich men, own slaves, stone children to death, etc. Jesus was a Isrealite, yet he never spoke out against these things, but somewhere he spoke against giving unto Ceasar what is Ceasars; somewhere where jesus taught the poor amongst you must die so the rich among you may become richer, and lastly where Jesus taught those who are incapable of contributing financialy to society must be done away with so the well to do are not burdend by these lazy people?
According to you the Christians who object to their government spending fourty percent more than it receives in taxes and pays $16 a piece for muffins for the Justice department are just heartless people who are against feeding hungry people.
Yet you have no problem paying a 200% mark-up on retail products when all the profits do is go directly into someone's pocket.
And you have no problem with paying $16 for a muffin, if the government is doing it with someone else's money. In your example someone making a profit is not bad and I have a choice in buying or not buying the product and in a capitalist society, I have the choice of producing the product myself, selling it for 100% markup and putting the profit in my pocket. In my example I have no choice but pay the taxes and watch them squander it and when I object you accuse me of being against feeding hungry people.
What's scarey is what some of these idiot socialists here are proposing.....no matter that a socialist government has ever succeeded, they always believe THEY can make it work if THEY just get the chance........
I don't know if I would go that far. I just think they haven't examined the ramifications of their actions. They see the immediate problem, and see that politicians are offering a solution for it. I don't understand why people keep believing the politicians.
all
Yesterday, in America, 100 million gun owners did nothing.
>>>All: Everything we get from them means that they take something from us. I do not trust them, I never have. This issue baffles me.
I have to say I agree with all of All's posts too.
Based upon all's comment that the 'issue baffles him', why does it?...one simply needs to look at the reality that a varying portion of US citizens, anywhere from 42 to 47 percent in any given year, Do Not Pay Income Taxes. This being the case, is it any wonder that Obama still has about a 45-47% base and he only needs to tilt the middle for a 5-6% approval to give him a winning margin. That's Exactly the agenda of the Democrats and Socialists (actually that's redundant)..... the more people they can get completely dependent on government handouts, pretty soon there won't be any need for a presidential election....
That's what's scarey.
It baffles me that people keep expecting the government to solve all their problems, then complaining about them when they do, yet still persist in expecting government to solve all their problems. It reminds me of Einsteins quote regarding insanity.
all
Yesterday, in America, 100 million gun owners did nothing.
Whatever the merits of anarchism, it is still a separate conversation in that if we are trying to determine how to insure widely-accessible healthcare for all citizens of a nation state, it presupposes a state.
So, like I have asked multiple times on this thread, is this the governments job? So far the only person that has attempted to answer me is Cap. There has been a lot of talk about what Jesus would approve. News flash guys, in Jesus's time, or any time except for the last 150 years, taking care of people with chronic illnesses meant giving them food, water, and cleaning their waste so they don't have to lay in a pile of their own filth for the remaining days of their lives. There was no cancer surgery, there were no hospitals, no doctors, no nurses, nothing. Asking what Jesus would do and looking at the bible to check makes almost as much sense as examining cave paintings for advice on how to build a rocket ship.
An anarchist society might have positive features, but I doubt that it would work well for the chronically ill, the handicapped, or people of modest means that need extensive medical intervention. When a given society is fairly large, the numbers of such people are commensurate.
take care,
TFV
I beg to differ. In fact, I don't see as government as necessary to provide for them in the first place. People today are just so used to the pervasiveness of government in their lives that they cannot even think of other alternatives.
all
Yesterday, in America, 100 million gun owners did nothing.
Do you seriously want to suggest the doctrinal foundations of the early Christian communities and the Soviet Union are comparable?
Are early Christian communities and the US comparable? The US loves to spread the happy fairy tale of the poor beleaguered rich white guys getting out from under the Man, but let's face it: they didn't want to pay their bills. Nowadays, we return to calling that what it is: tax evasion with guns.
Although I do not think Jesus would approve, I think there does come a time when one should refuse to pay the taxes as we did in the American Revolution. I am very unhappy about any taxes I pay to a government that spends $16 for each muffin for the conferences at the Justice Department.
Or the whiskey rebellion.
Yesterday, in America, 100 million gun owners did nothing.
So, like I have asked multiple times on this thread, is this the governments job?
I really feel I've tried to answer this query by positing that in a modern society, things are either government responsibilities or they are left to the market which the state facilitates.
Some things are the governments job. I believe public health is one of those things. If we don't want the government to do anything with respect to this, then it is handled by 'the market'. It is also a fairly undeniable truth that functioning, modern markets require a state (i.e. a government). If anyone wants to posit that the only thing a government should do is to facilitate the enforceability of contract in a market, then I would like them to point to one real life example that shows this produces good results with respect to healthcare policy. It is my opinion that it is a fantasy. Here in the real world, there are examples of functioning healthcare systems that facilitate a social good; access to affordable, quality healthcare.
If one thinks that abolishing government will lead to better general health for a given population, I would again posit that this doesn't play out well in real life. However, if one's aesthetic is some 'state of nature' as opposed to modern society well...