[Finny]

Every American taxpayer has ‘fed the poor’,... and the lazy, the criminal; they have in one way or another fed every looter, moocher and unfortunate in the world.... Whether they wanted to or not. Do ‘alms’ taken at the point of a gun get brownie points at the Pearly Gates?

BRAVO! Well said!

Charity is a moral act. It requires voluntary sacrifice on the part of the giver. The receiver is morally indebted, knowing that someone else chose to go without for his own in order to help the receiver to go with. The giver is exercising mercy and kindness.

When government usurps the duty of charity, it removes "voluntary" and degree of sacrifice, mercy, and kindness, and converts it to an AMORAL act, zero reference to morality. AMORALITY and all its evil results. Givers become slaves, and receivers become entitled dependents supported in sloth and promiscuity without material consequence.

For charity to operate as God intended, it must always be a MORAL act. Government necessarily removes its morality.

Yet "conservatives" such as Huckabee and Santorum, who appeal to the sect of "conservatives" for whom the word can only be called code for "Christian," advocate government roles in charity. I understand why -- they are Christian, as am I, but they seek to use government to advance Christian morality. I wish instead they defined "conservative" as "with restraint," under "use of government." Use it sparingly. Conservatively.

If the Pope says moral roles include "caring for the Earth," heaven help us as to how far code-Christian "conservatives" would use government to carry out that duty.

[BlatherNaut]

When government usurps the duty of charity, it removes "voluntary" and degree of sacrifice, mercy, and kindness, and converts it to an AMORAL act, zero reference to morality. AMORALITY and all its evil results. Givers become slaves, and receivers become entitled dependents supported in sloth and promiscuity without material consequence.

Well said, Finny.