[Pontiac]

I would certainly not argue that everyone must take a vow of poverty and contribute everything to the poor. However, in my opinion of this moral question, a person who is well-to-do and spends lavish sums of money on pets instead of contributing to charity – I have recently heard of six-figure vet bills –is acting wrongly.

Perhaps I was not as clear as I could have been when I said:

“The nice thing about living in a free country is not having to justify what we do with our own property.”

But to me that is a moral issue as is taxing me to pay for another’s health or welfare. Although I hold to the axiom that I am my brother’s keeper I also hold that fulfilling that axiom is a totally voluntary matter.

From reading your post 29 I understand that you were not advocating the forced confiscation of funds to fulfill your moral ideals and I apologize for incorrectly lumping you in with the “loyal opposition”.

I will say that morality is (in this case of charity) a personal matter that one can not judge another on. You can not judge another on how much he spends on his pet compared to how much he gives to charity.

I will agree that to spend hundreds of dollars on the health care of a pet is obscene but it not my place to judge that individual. Had I known those individuals I would have wished them and their pet well.

I consider my self a Christian and as a Christian I believe that Christ calls on us to give charitably to those in need. How much and to whom is a personal choice. I can not make these choices for another nor be the judge of whether they chose correctly.

[dsc]

"I also hold that fulfilling that axiom is a totally voluntary matter. "

I agree completely with that.

"From reading your post 29 I understand that you were not advocating the forced confiscation of funds to fulfill your moral ideals and I apologize for incorrectly lumping you in with the “loyal opposition”.

Thank you very much. Apology not required, but appreciated all the same.

"You can not judge another on how much he spends on his pet compared to how much he gives to charity."

Au contraire, mon frere. Such judgements are an absolute, inescapable moral duty imposed on us by God.

"Had I known those individuals I would have wished them and their pet well."

Certainly, but wishing them well does not require that one fail to note the immorality of their choice.

"I believe that Christ calls on us to give charitably to those in need. How much and to whom is a personal choice."

Couldn't agree more.

"I can not make these choices for another"

We cannot, I agree.

"nor be the judge of whether they chose correctly."

There I disagree. It might not be necessary that you do anything about it, or perhaps even say anything about it, but it is your duty to judge the morality or immorality of it insofar as it comes within your awareness. Unless, of course, you don't have enough information, but usually you will.