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

To: KittenClaws
But it is not constitutional to feed the poor, house, medicate and school the illegal.

Precisely.

Fine. We have social security ingrained. Social security is unconstitutional as well, but I can live with it. For citizens only.

Agreed, and it should be phased out.

Cut the spending on illegals. Period.

The money spent on them should be spent primarily on repatriation.

Cut spending on benevolent programs in other countries.

More often than not, those funds only establish and maintain the instruments of subjugation of foreign populaces, and do not go to feed the poor there. If it isn't Constitutional to feed our own poor, how can it be said to be Constitutional to feed the poor elsewhere?

It isn't charity if the Government forcefully takes our funds and redistributes them. There's no option to give.

Charity should be in the hands of civic organizations (Churches and others) to which people can freely donate of their goods, services and money. Those organizations don't have an incentive to keep people on the dole, but rather to give them a hand to get out of poverty and become self-sufficient. They also know who is in need and who isn't in a local community, and can better allocate limited resources.

It isn't "cold hearted" to place expectations on those capable of meeting them, to expect those capable of taking care of themselves to do so. It is far more demeaning and damaging to them to instead insist on their protracted dependency.

20 posted on 03/04/2013 9:13:56 PM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: Smokin' Joe

Thanks for saying what was on my mind.

It bothers me especially, about government interference in religious charity work.

Why shouldn’t the poor, for a meal, hear the name and message, the reason, that their benefactors were compelled to give?

The government, along with some individuals call it “demeaning” I call it “under conviction”. Conviction can certainly be uncomfortable, but, if left to stew, can bring some might flavorful concoctions.

Although nearing the age for SS I agree it should be phased out. I think anyone who has paid in, should be refunded that exact amount, with minimal interest, yes, I think that would be fair.

I don’t think anything should be spent on the illegals as far as repatriation is concerned. Of are you talking about repatriation to their home countries? I could go for that.

I don’t think any illegal entrant should ever be given citizenship. Ever. I also think all immigrants should be tested for disease . Should have a skill we need, should be able to provide for themselves or a responsible mentor.

Further, I think voting should be disallowed to ALL new entrants according to presidential election cycles. IOW, one full cycle must pass before voting is allowed. A FULL cycle. So, you arrive in 2014? The middle of a cycle? Too bad, 2016 is not your year. Try 2020.


21 posted on 03/04/2013 9:38:53 PM PST by KittenClaws (You may have to fight a battle more than once in order to win it." - Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

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