Marxism

I am well aware of that. Yet people who express views very similar to those of Reagan are unhesitatingly called RINOs.

Then you haven't paid close enough attention to the differences between them and Reagan.

You have never answered what, to me, is the most glaring question of all: if we stop the government from "stealing" to help the poor, then what exactly do you suggest we do to help them instead -- or do we throw them out on the streets to fend for themselves? I predict that if you answer this post at all, it will be with another claim that you've explained already or that you are desperately misunderstood. You don't have an actual answer because there isn't one. Your complaint about "stealing" has no practical applications in the real world. And yet it's the government that facilitates the redistribution of money from rich to poor. That means it's following the principles of all the Bible passages quoted in Message 399, and forcing people to comply who otherwise would not. Are you saying that people should be free to sin against their fellow humans by leaving the poor to fend for themselves, even though the government has the power to stop them? Wow, the thinking here just gets weirder and weirder. If Christians gave as generously as the Bible tells them to, there would not be any need to tax them would there? Amazingly, despite the myth that everyone on welfare is a lazy scrounger, most people do not want to be on government support either and if given the opportunity would go to work and get back on their own two feet. Curiously, the aim of social programmes is to enable this and prevent a permanent spiral down into destitution. Might I remind you that destitution is what would happen to many people if the "stealing" you're complaining about came to an end.

I agree that there are no clearly good alternative solutions but that doesn't convince me that stealing by the government should be accepted as the only or best. I'm not proposing anything so much as I'm simply making a point. Stealing is stealing, I don't know how you or anyone can justify it. And yes destitution would be the result of ending the stealing and I'm NOT advocating that, I'm simply trying to get you to notice that it IS stealing and stealing is stealing is stealing, it's an unjust taking of property and when the government does it, it's a serious threat to the freedom of the nation, it's a precedent that just allows more and more power and tyrannical imposition of the views of a minority against the citizens.Why haven't you noticed that I've said that I'm not blaming the recipients? Why do you persist in your mischaracterizations of what I'm saying?When I talk to Christians, I do argue that it is Chrsitians who should be taking care of the needy, that's our job not the government's. I wish I were in a position to do that, and in fact I do what I can even in the position I'm in. There's a sdripture that says we should earn money for the very purpose fo helping others. Unfortunately too many Christians think according to the views of the world we live in instead of according to scripture.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Any idea how many times he raised your taxes? I thought not.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Well this at least explains the fundamental problem here. Your core beliefs are logically inconsistent. It must give you a headache. Thank you for clarifying that you do not want people to be destitute, that helps. Maybe you can now try to explain how the only way of ensuring that they won't be, is still immoral in your eyes. Maybe you can't explain it to yourself. What I believe you should not be doing is telling people that taxing the rich is "stealing" when it is actually the basis for a large degree of social justice, and when you yourself have no alternative to offer. Saying "I wish Christians would give enough so that we don't need taxes" is pie in the sky. And perhaps many of them are willing and happy to pay taxes as their way of giving. As has been suggested many times, if you disagree with how your tax money is spent, you live in a democracy and there are various routes of change that you can pursue.

It IS stealing. Good grief, what is the matter with your mind?I said WAY back at the very beginning of this topic that conservatives and Chrsitains should be taking care of this situation. I said that's why the left has all the power and the government is able to steal from us. I blamed US. I still blame us.BUT STEALING IS STEALING.Denying it is the illogic.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Oh a hypocrite too. You could be off it today if you weren't such a hypocrite. It is ok for you but not for others?There are something other things I would like to discuss, but it seems you will not answer any hard questions I pose to you.
Can you give ONE example of a country that ran as you wish. Where people pay minimal taxes and the government does not do any of the "stealing" you so abhor? Just one example?Also, I wanted to know what you solution is for people like my adopted son. He is 27 years old and lives in a group home in Duluth, MN. He receives about $400 in SSI payments and subsidized housing. He is mentally impaired and suffers mental health issues from the abuse he suffered from his birth family. He works about 15-20 hours a week pushing carts at Target(a discount retailer for you non-US people). The reason I mention where he lives is because Duluth gets very cold in the winter. He made the paper a few years back when the local paper interviewed people that work in the cold. He pushes carts when it is -30 F. He isnt a lazy bum. He also works about 12 hours a week cleaning offices.
Lets look at how he is stealing. SSI, subsidized housing, job support programs, he uses public transportation(that must be anathema to you too). Because he gets aid he is a contributing member of society. Oh and my ex and I were able to adopt him because there were government social programs available. What should happen to people like him? Should they rot in institutions with the only basic care. Are they required in Faith -world to live on the streets eating scraps until they die of an untreated illness or disease. Do we hope they die at a young age?Come on this is Faith-world, tell us what we should do with the handicapped.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Oh my ...OK, for once I'm speechless. Fortunately, it isn't actually necessary for me to say anything.

I think you've just added substantiation to Dr. Adequate's claim (as if there wasn't enough already) that you are judging the morality of taxes by the uses to which they are put.I'm rich but I'm happy for the government to redistribute my money to the needy=not stealing.I'm rich but I am not happy for the government to redistribute my money to the needy=stealing.I (a hypothetical "I") don't approve of the government having a war in Iraq, so it is stealing my money.I don't approve of the farm subsidy system, so it is stealing my money.I don't approve of my gay congressman, so my tax contribution to his expenses is stealing.I don't like the road that was recently built a quarter of a mile from my house, so the government stole from me for that.But they didn't steal the part of my taxes that paid for the Easter parade. I liked that.Tell you what Faith. Why don't you invent a brand-new social system where everyone only gives as much money as they want, for only the things they want. This still has to be in the real world, so not everyone will be Christian and most of those who are will probably be unwilling to give as much as they have to do in the current tax system. You have to make sure that everyone's human rights are provided for. All the funds go directly to the causes dictated by the individuals, even if there are millions of said individuals, because an elected representative body to oversee fiscal distribution is an invasive government that strips away the rights of the free.Off you go, best of luck. Maybe Hollywood will buy the rights for their next disaster movie.(ABE) Or, come to think of it, their next comedy . . .Edited by Kitsune, : No reason given.

That is very wierd because I just came back to point out that YOU are deciding the meaning of stealing by the use to which the money is put. To your mind if it goes to a good purpose it can't be stealing. That is one of the main insanities on this thread all along. You refuse to consider it stealing as long as somebody needs the money. I've been the one pointing out that it is stealing whether it goes to a good purpose or not. That's what YOU think. That's how DC85 thinks. Her friend NEEDS the money, therefore it CAN'T be stealing.YOU think It keeps people from being destitute, therefore it can't be stealing.THIS IS THE REFRAIN ALL ALONG HERE> BECAUSE IT GOES TO NEEDY PEOPLE YOU WILL NOT CONSIDER THAT ITS STEALING, to your mind it can't be stealing in that case. This is insane. Stealing is taking without giving anything in exchange. The government gives nothing in exchange when it takes your money to give to the needy. It's you you define whether it's stealing or not by what it's used for, not I. How bizarre this list is. It's how YOU think.And why do you keep talking about the rich? I pay ridiculous taxes considering how poor I am. Huh? What a pack of lies. How stupid. YOU all think like this, I've been saying the opposite. I have to get out of this insane asylum.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Again you make statement like this with no backup. You stated you are on assistance. Now you complain about paying taxes. There is a disconnect here. What would you call ridiculous?

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

I wouldn't need as much help if they didn't take so much from me. What's the logic of that?

You're failing to read for comprehension. When Kitune wrote this: She was repeating your views back to you so as to better clarify their inherent contradictory nature.Government taxation under laws passed by our duly elected representatives is not stealing in the legal sense of the word.And you are not saying that it is stealing in a legal sense. You're saying that it's stealing in a moral sense. You can't just say "stealing is stealing" because it depends upon how you're using the word.--Percy

Kitsune's list describes not one thing I've ever said here. It's insane. It is made up out of whole cloth.I have never defined stealing by how the money is used.Over and over people here have refused to consider what I've said about stealing by answering that THEY NEED IT, if you don't give it to them THEY'LL BE DESTITUTE. That's judging the morality of stealing by the use of the money.I have not done that ONCE.Then they'll stick in that if it's legal it's not stealing; that's the next argument. 'So government can make any old law it wants and its laws can never be immoral. Amazing.OK, I'll try to remember to say STEALING IS MORALLY EVIL instead of STEALING IS STEALING.And then everybody goes on and on about why isn't it stealing then to pay for government services like police and military etc?Because you ARE PAYING for something you get in exchange.Money for welfare is paying for nothing; you get nothing in exchange. The money is simply taken from you. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.