I don't know what church you go to. I am aware of no “scriptural mandate” for the “government” to “help the poor”. It is counterproductive for the government to help the poor. People are the ones who should help those less fortunate than themselves. When the government “helps the poor” they merely make people feel like they no longer have a responsibility to help their fellow man. They dis-empower those who would otherwise be inclined to do good. That is wrong both scripturally and morally.
Then the “poor” end up feeling like they are entitled to every “itty bitty benefit” that they desire. And who do they thank for all of these “itty bitty” multiple billion dollar benefits... the taxpayers or God? No, they thank Obama.
“I have no problem with the government spending $120 a year for poor people to have a basic necessity like a phone.”
You are seriously deluded my young liberal friend. Food, shelter, and clothing are “basic necessities.” When did a cell phone become a “basic necessity”? They are a convenience and in many cases a nuisance. I know a lot of people who don't own a cell phone and do not feel deprived in any way.
By your standards the approximately half the population who don't pay any federal income tax must be “poor”... After all If they don't have enough money to pay any income tax surely they can't afford a cell phone. So I have a little math problem for you... if you multiply $120 + $50 to administer the program times half the population which is 150 million times 10 years what do you get? You can probably do it on your iPhone... $170 x 150,000,000 x 10 = 255,000,000,000. Math may not be your strongest subject that is an "itty bitty" 255 Billion dollars for that “itty bitty benefit” over just ten years not counting for inflation or the interest the half that do pay taxes are going to have to pay for the increased debt.
"I like to think I cut down both candidates equally."
How sweet of you. You must be very compassionate. It would be hurtful and wrong if you cut down Obama more than Romney wouldn't it? You really are a good boy aren't you. I hear that Obama is quite sensitive to criticism. If you could just sit down and talk with Obama I am sure that you could win him to your way of thinking. Oh I forgot... on the issue of "free cell phones" for the "poor" you are already in agreement. Let's see what do you disagree with him about again?
Jer 22:15 Shalt thou reign, because thou closest [thyself] in cedar? did not thy father eat and drink, and do judgment and justice, [and] then [it was] well with him?Jer 22:16 He judged the cause of the poor and needy; then [it was] well [with him: was] not this to know me? saith the LORD.
If "We the people" want to reign, we can't forsake the poor.
And I'm Christian and Southern Baptist. "It is counterproductive for the government to help the poor." Really? I don't buy it. Government has been helping the poor, did people quit helping? You could make the same argument for churches. If churches help the poor will individuals quit? I think that's just an excuse by people who want to shirk their responsibilities.
"Food, shelter, and clothing are “basic necessities.” When did a cell phone become a “basic necessity”?"
1990's? Cell phones are now cheaper and make more sense than a land line. If you want to get a job, it's a necessity. If you have an emergency, it's a necessity. People went without some necessities in the past.
"By your standards the approximately half the population who don't pay any federal income tax must be “poor”"
When did I say that? That's a complete straw man. There's 11 million on the lifeline phone program that's <3% of our population.
"on the issue of "free cell phones" for the "poor" you are already in agreement."
Reagan started the program. But you do smug attitude with the best of the best.