Posted on 04/27/2007 7:32:08 PM PDT by Simi Valley Tom
The government takes so much of our money (at least half when it’s added all up) that we are unable to care for our own families the way we should be able to.
No, it is not right, nor is it constitutional, for our government to take our money and distribute it the way they see fit. That’s not what the Federal government was constitutionally created for.
The government also inserts itself in the place of family, which is also wrong and unbiblical.
It’s great that you have compassion and a will to help the poor and needy, as we all should, but it’s not biblically right for government to take our money and mandate these things, nor is it in line with our Constitution, just as it wouldn’t be right for Government to preach the bible to us. It’s not their place.
God set things up so that we had to give 10% (tithe). We rejected God and wanted man to lead us, and now we’re paying a whole lot more than 10%.
I hope you aren't using this verse to say we as a nation should allow those without jobs starve.
Paul was addressing a specific situation within the church with this passage.
Are you for real? Read the Bible verse again. The word is unwilling. That's somebody who refuses to work, not somebody who is genuinely trying to find a job.
There are Christian charities that help people find jobs. They get them job training, give them nice outfits (donated by Christians) to wear on job interviews, bus tokens to get to the interviews, etc. I believe God would approve of such charity, but not merely handing taxpayer money to people who are "unwilling"to work.
When you depend on the government for your sustenance, the government becomes your “god” , thus displacing God in your life.
With the federal programs come the federal regulations, and guess Who is regulated out of the equation?
I never said otherwise.
Read my post again.
Do you believe that is true? The “poor” that I see in the hospital all have cell phones and nice clothes. I think they can afford to feed their children.
I give up. Who?
Federal money cannot go to any program that has any element of religion involved, like the Gospel Rescue Mission. President Bush tried to have faith based programs, but they never got off the ground.
It’s better that the Feds get out of this business; most of the money is wasted on bureaucracy and never reaches the people it is intended for.
Welfare programs have busted up families. Liberalism is a disaster for our country in so many ways.
I have NO DOUBT that God is the biggest conservative around. You need to look no further than the 10 Commandments as proof.
Funny how the liberal are against most of the 10 Commandments. Heck they do not even like it sitting in a court house. Then they have the audacity to say God is a liberal????
Why not? Federal money goes to programs like these all the time and quite successfully.
President Bush tried to have faith based programs, but they never got off the ground.
Who told you this?
The Faith Based Initiatives programs have been up and running ever since Bush introduced them.
"Competitive Federal grants to faith-based organizations (FBOs) increased for the third straight year in FY2005. More than $2.1 billion in grants were awarded to religious organizations in FY2005 by seven federal agencies. This is up from last year (FY04) when $2.004 billion in grants were awarded to faith-based groups across the same agencies. "
You can read more about these programs at; http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/fbci/2006_accomplishments.html
Its simple obvious fact that many who give generously to help the poor make that same objection.
I should certainly always trust in God. As for collecting the check, I have never objected to anyone forced into the system from collecting the check. I simply object to the system that was forced on us. So yes, I would, after being forced to pay for the program, take advantage of it.
The fact is God often uses Govt's as an agency of His authority.
Yes. A fact which hardly excuses immoral behavior in a government. Being generous with another's money is not generous.
Its simple obvious fact that many who give generously to help the poor make that same objection.
Well it doesn't make sense. It seems so disingenuous.
I should certainly always trust in God. As for collecting the check, I have never objected to anyone forced into the system from collecting the check. I simply object to the system that was forced on us. So yes, I would, after being forced to pay for the program, take advantage of it.
LOL! You are too funny.
No. The government is supposed to be made up of representatives, not each and everyone of us. The representatives are supposed to be entrusted with specific enumerated powers necessary for the benefit of society. Because the representatives are not perfect, their power is supposed to be strictly limited to the enumerated powers. And a system of checks and balances was set up between the branches of government. Charity is not an enumerated power. Thus when representatives start engaging in it, it is no longer us doing it.
So no, the government is not the same as the people. And particularly not the same as "us" in the sense of the body of Christ.
Either support this implied accusation of hypocrisy. Or don't make it.
It certainly does make sense. And it is hardly disingenuous.
Individual Christian families are better at being generous then huge government bureaucracies. We use the money more effectively. We help the needy get on their feet...while the government just tends to build unhealthy dependencies.
The power to tax is granted to government by the Constitution.
No. The government is supposed to be made up of representatives, not each and everyone of us.
Oh please. Let's split hairs why don't we.
It's supposed to be a Govt "FOR THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE".
Don't even argue with me on this.
I think you are my hero.
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.