COI Jack wrote:
Charity is not necessarily only found in religion, but I agree with former president Carter. He is a good man who lives his beliefs. You can't hate the poor and be a Christian. I would rather see my government helping the poor than building bridges over nothing on roads that lead to nowhere.
Problem is, we're not a Christian nation. Hell, our own President said so.
Bazbo
Loc: Lisboa, Portugal
Bangee5 wrote:
HUH..? How many times have we heard the left cry separation of church and state, something that dose not exist in the Constitution. What part of Congress shall make no laws don't you understand? This means... Government, butt out of our personal life... That includes taking the life of an unborn baby, you know, those little humans in a womans body that has not been born yet. The Constitution applies here also.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
HUH..? How many times have we heard the left cry s... (
show quote)
Perhaps you should take a look at the Establishment Clause, which is the basis of our understanding of the relationship between Church and State. Also, there is a very long chain of case law, including SCOTUS rulings that support the basics of this separation.
The very idea that religious organizations are tax exempt is derived from this separation. If you argue that there is no separation, then you need to argue for the taxation of religious organizations as well.
Tax them! They are businesses, like any other businesses.
Helping the poor is not the option....most of the federal government giveaways go to the rich and powerful.....Wall Street, Big Labor, companies like Google and Comcast which routinely support leftists policies in return for tax bennies. Amazing how so many of the rich and super-rich all support the Left.
Bangee5 wrote:
You can not hate the rich and be a Christian either. Which means being a Christian has nothing to do with helping. I am a poor Christian. No body helps me.
You are a Christian so you are never poor you just do not have a lot of money.
I have 5 children so I am a multimillionaire.
Millionaires have things worth a lot of money not just a lot of money.
Budnjax wrote:
Helping the poor is not the option....most of the federal government giveaways go to the rich and powerful.....Wall Street, Big Labor, companies like Google and Comcast which routinely support leftists policies in return for tax bennies. Amazing how so many of the rich and super-rich all support the Left.
But the left says that they are for the people?
manderson wrote:
Sorry, but I disagree. It's not up to the gov't to take from one and give to another. It's up to each individual person to decide how much and to who the help should be given. Long before welfare programs, people used to get help from religious groups or families actually took care of each other. Not real sure, but I don't think the Constitution or Bill of Rights says the gov't can tax for the purpose of supporting others. I think as a Christian or good citizen, we should help those who need it. But not the gov'ts responsibility.
Sorry, but I disagree. It's not up to the gov't to... (
show quote)
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Lmarc
Loc: Ojojona, Honduras
B4b00n5 wrote:
I'm sure someone will have something to say
Christian values indicate that we, as individuals, should help the legitimately needy, but those values DON'T say the government should take money from the people and dole it out haphazardly. If a person really has those values, Christian or not, he/she will find a way to help someone truly in need.
How many people here would give a cent or a minute to help anyone if it wasn't forced upon them by taxation, most of which is wasted or stolen by bureaucracies to buy Democrat votes, with precious little ever getting to anyone actually in need? Not many, I dare say.
Lmarc wrote:
Christian values indicate that we, as individuals, should help the legitimately needy, but those values DON'T say the government should take money from the people and dole it out haphazardly. If a person really has those values, Christian or not, he/she will find a way to help someone truly in need.
How many people here would give a cent or a minute to help anyone if it wasn't forced upon them by taxation, most of which is wasted or stolen by bureaucracies to buy Democrat votes, with precious little ever getting to anyone actually in need? Not many, I dare say.
Christian values indicate that we, as individuals,... (
show quote)
As a Christian I help people all the time. Not just with money but with time, good advice and questions that help them understand how they got to need help.
Very few can not help themselves. Most make bad decisions and they can understand when you take time to talk to them.
A lot of people will say "I do not have enough money when they are spending it on things they want instead of the things they need.
The government gives money to people that do not need it.
Well that seemed to work well before and during the depression!
Learn some history and then come back
manderson wrote:
Sorry, but I disagree. It's not up to the gov't to take from one and give to another. It's up to each individual person to decide how much and to who the help should be given. Long before welfare programs, people used to get help from religious groups or families actually took care of each other. Not real sure, but I don't think the Constitution or Bill of Rights says the gov't can tax for the purpose of supporting others. I think as a Christian or good citizen, we should help those who need it. But not the gov'ts responsibility.
Sorry, but I disagree. It's not up to the gov't to... (
show quote)
ole sarg wrote:
Well that seemed to work well before and during the depression!
Learn some history and then come back
"Well that seemed to work well before and during the depression!"
So what changed? Why will it not work now?
Bazbo wrote:
Perhaps you should take a look at the Establishment Clause, which is the basis of our understanding of the relationship between Church and State. Also, there is a very long chain of case law, including SCOTUS rulings that support the basics of this separation.
The very idea that religious organizations are tax exempt is derived from this separation. If you argue that there is no separation, then you need to argue for the taxation of religious organizations as well.
Take another look at the First Amendment. Where does it say that Congress can make Laws against Religion? It says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Congress can not establish a State Religion - Congress can not make Laws prohibiting the rights of the people to practice their respective Religion. Just because Congress HAS made such Laws, those Laws are Unconstitutional.
The only separation is that the Government can not get involved in the religious rights of the people but that that dose not mean that the people have to give up their religious views and rights where it concerns the government in their lives. Even a President has the right to worship God and to be influenced by his Religion as long as he dose not try to force a theocratic Government upon the People. To do so would be Unconstitutional because Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.
A Churches Income is based on Donations. You can not tax Donations.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Bangee5 wrote:
Take another look at the First Amendment. Where does it say that Congress can make Laws against Religion? It says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Congress can not establish a State Religion - Congress can not make Laws prohibiting the rights of the people to practice their respective Religion. Just because Congress HAS made such Laws, those Laws are Unconstitutional.
The only separation is that the Government can not get involved in the religious rights of the people but that that dose not mean that the people have to give up their religious views and rights where it concerns the government in their lives. Even a President has the right to worship God and to be influenced by his Religion as long as he dose not try to force a theocratic Government upon the People. To do so would be Unconstitutional because Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.
A Churches Income is based on Donations. You can not tax Donations.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Take another look at the First Amendment. Where do... (
show quote)
Every time Obama says "God bless you" he is violating the law.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebF8uoK4nl8
manderson wrote:
I don't think anyone said anything about hating the poor. Where our gov't runs into problems is differentiating between the truly poor and those who are sponging off the gov't. Unfortunately I see the abuse side of the welfare system and it makes me sick. I'm all about helping the elderly and my family members, people should take care of their own. When you call social programs "entitlements" we have an issue. The Constitution never said the fed gov't would be responsible for those too lazy to work or just don't want to work. I am always amazed how many people will say that they are entitled to some program. That's wrong, they are not entitled to anything they haven't worked for or earned themselves. This is why so many people also have a problem with Obama saying things like "redistribution of wealth". Why should I work hard and long just to have the gov't decide to take from me and give to others that don't want to do it for themselves. There is nothing wrong with public servants wanting to help the poor, after all, it gets them reelected. But using public money, tax dollars, is not the answer.
I don't think anyone said anything about hating th... (
show quote)
Where the hell do you think elected officials get the money for programs to help the poor and other assistance? They sure don't take it out of their own wallets. And as far as Social Security is concerned, we all paid into a system that is now being ravaged by people who want benefits but they never contributed, so we're all being ripped off by your so called philanthropic elected officials for the purposes of gaining votes at the ballot box from those who are leaches on a system that has now gone mad.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.