Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Charity in Entitlement Era: Speaking Truth to Paupers
The American Thinker ^ | June 21st, 2006 | anonoymous

Posted on 06/21/2006 7:32:11 AM PDT by RightCanuck

I am very proud of my fellow volunteers. It was as much a privilege to serve with them as it was to serve in the armed forces. They were Americans at their best, Christians at their most lovely. They were and continue to be Christ made real. At any given time there are 30 to 75 volunteers staged in just one church, ready to lend back and body to the difficult task or restoring these clobbered homes, a story repeated all over the battered coastlines.

Unfortunately I must report that I am far less impressed by those benefiting from the volunteer largesse. The soon-to-be owner of the new home we build is sweet and charming, but when I compare this individual’s actions to what I or my wife would do in the same situation, I can’t help but be downright put out.

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: aid; charity; help; katrina; lazy; volunteer; work
So much truth. Charity and volunteerism has limited resources and must consider whom they will help.
1 posted on 06/21/2006 7:32:13 AM PDT by RightCanuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RightCanuck
Can government do the work of God (Charity)?

What I have read and understood from the Bible is that God and Jesus wants us to help each other by using our own time, treasure and talent and to give from our hearts ("Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." - 2 Corinthians 9:7). Nowhere have I found anything along the lines of "Go out and institute huge bureaucracies that will take money from some people at the point of a sword and give that money to other people as a politician sees fit."

Our Founding Fathers were Christian and very pious men. They founded this country under strong Judeo-Christian tenets and reflected on their religious beliefs on all their decisions. They wrote nothing into the Constitution of any type of government "aid" to help the poor, children or anyone else on purpose. They wanted a very limited government for good reason. Limited government is the best way to ensure that freedom will be preserved. The Scottish philosopher Alexander Tytler, who lived during the time of the American Revolution and writing of the US Constitution, summed these views:

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure.

From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's great civilizations has been two hundred years.

These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage."

There are many interesting questions if citizens rely on government to do "God's Work."

If a government takes a portion of a man's wages and does good with it, has the man also done good? If a government takes away a portion of a woman's property and does evil with it, has the woman also done evil? When a rich man pays more in taxes than a poor person, is he more Godly? If the government then does evil, is he more to blame? A woman works for the government and uses other people's tax money and does "God Work" with it, is this government woman now a good/Godly woman? If I legally try to avoid paying taxes, does that not make me an "Ungodly" man?

Today, the US government (federal, state and local) takes nearly 50% of a middle-class person's paycheck after all taxes are factored in (income taxes, Social Security, sales tax, real estate taxes, gas tax, death taxes, phone taxes, highway tolls, sad etc.). Uncle Sam will spend more money in just this year (2004) than it spent combined between 1787 and 1900 - even after adjusting for inflation. I cringe at those numbers. The Founding Fathers wanted nothing like the tax-consuming monster that we have as a government today. I also think of all the good work that could have be done if people were allowed to keep more of their own money and give it to organizations/people that they believe in their heart are doing God's work. Maybe it comes down to trust. Will people do the right thing with their own money or must a government take a huge chunk of it to do the "right things?"

Except government rarely does anything right except for those tasks that were explicitly outlined in the Constitution as the Founding Father intended. I could cite many examples (such as where would you rather put $10,000 in retirement money - in Social Security or in your own 401k plan?) but the plight of black America illustrates this failure beyond comparison.

In 1965, the US government was going to wipe out poverty by the "Great Society" programs, in which to date over 3.5 trillion dollars has been spent. These federal programs were designed to "help families and children" or "buy votes" depending on your political viewpoint.

At the beginning of the 1960's, the black out of wedlock birth rate was 22%. In the late 1975 it reached 49% and shot up to 65% in 1989. In some of the largest urban centers of the nation the rate of illegitimacy among blacks today exceeds 80% and averages 69% nationwide. As late as the 1970's there was still a social stigma attached to a woman who was pregnant outside marriage. Now, government programs have substituted for the father and for black moral leadership. The black family and culture has collapsed (and white families are not that far behind).

Illegitimacy leads directly to poverty, crime and social problems. Out of wedlock children are four times more likely to be poor. They are much more likely to live in high crime areas with no hope of escape. In turn, they are forced to attend dangerous and poor-performing government schools, which directly leads to another generation of poverty.

Traditional black areas of Harlem, Englewood and West Philadelphia in the 1950s were safe working class neighborhoods (even though "poor" by material measures). Women were unafraid to walk at night and children played unmolested in the streets and parks. Today, these are some of the worst crime plagued areas of our nation. Work that was once dignified is now shunned. Welfare does not require recipients to do anything in exchange for their benefits. Many rules actually discourage work or provide benefits that reduce the incentive to find work.

The black abortion rate today is nearly 40%. Pregnancies among black women are twice as likely to end in abortion as pregnancies among white and Hispanic women.

The "Great Society" programs all had good intentions. Unfortunately, their real world results are that they have replaced the traditional/Christian models of family/work with that of what a government bureaucrat thinks it should be.

I could make an excellent argument that if the US government had hired former grand wizards of the KKK to run the "Great Society" programs, and if they had worked every day from 1965 to today without rest, they could have hardly have done better in destroying black America than the "Works of God" that the government has done or is trying to do.

I have visited many countries in which the government "guarantees" that everyone has a job, a place to live, education, health care and cradle to grave "government help" for all children and families. It all sounds great except that the people in these countries are/were miserable. They wanted to escape but were forced by their governments, at the end of a gun, to stay. The "worker's paradises" of socialist and communist counties are chilling reminders of letting governments do "God's Work."

The Bible clearly states that we are to help those in need. The question is "Who should help those in need?" I firmly believe that scripture and the historical evidence strongly support that individuals, private organizations and churches should be the ones doing the heavy lifting. Government help should be the last resort. "Charity," enforced by the government, is not charity, it is extortion. "Charity," delivered by the government, is not charity, it is a bribe which corrupts both the giver and the receiver.

Very Sincerely,

2banana

2 posted on 06/21/2006 7:37:53 AM PDT by 2banana (My common ground with terrorists - They want to die for Islam, and we want to kill them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightCanuck
I have no idea how to nudge those trapped in the entitlement mentality to regain their dignity.

I do...but too many politically powerful people would consider it "cruel".

Interesting article describing what happens when traditional Christian charity bumps headfirst into the recent, malicious formulation: "Whitey owes me."

3 posted on 06/21/2006 7:37:53 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ("When the government is invasive, the people are wanting." -- Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightCanuck
The noble poor have been supplanted by folk who are poor because they lack the skills to be self-sufficient, and most vexing, expectant that others will fill in the gaps between what they need and what they have.

So, in meeting and fufilling this (erroneous)expectation; is charity helping them; or actually hurting them ?

4 posted on 06/21/2006 7:50:41 AM PDT by Red Boots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

Thanks for the thoughful, thorough post. You have summed up what I have felt and thought for many years and do not have the eloquence to express.

As a Roman Catholic, I am constantly dumbfounded by the lack of vision and character displayed by the increasing numbers of our bishops and members of the "social justice" movements that display all of the characteristics of what you so accurately describe. Without regard to the biblical exhortations regarding stealing they embrace this philosophy of Marxist/socialist statism and never do the deep thinking that is required to see further than the petty cries to feed the hungry and clothe the poor. They have allowed themselves to be co-opted by the Marxist definitions of class and politics and in doing so, lead the faithful who depend upon their teachings into grievous error.

It is my hope that you, me, and others of like mind can begin to educate the mass of people for whom the socialist mores have become the fallback position of unthinking obedience to a hierarchy that has, in many ways, lost its way.


5 posted on 06/21/2006 9:45:13 AM PDT by LurkLongley (Ad Majoram Dei Gloriam-For the Greater Glory of God)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson