Of late I have been writing much about our rights as Americans. A big part of that has been my belief that you do not have the "right" to anything that costs me money. Examples of this include healthcare, food, housing, an automobile, etc...
While I do not believe the government has a place in these issues the church certainly does. As a Christian you are commanded to look after the orphans and widows. You are commanded to look after the poor and disabled. You are to have compassion on those who are ill. That compassion should then translate into action.
If you are not a Christian this does not apply to you. If you are a Christian, this next piece is absolutely directed at you. Do not ask for state programs aiding the elderly, the poor, the orphaned to end unless you are willing to pick up the slack.
That doesn't mean you indiscriminatly throw money at the problem the way the government has in the past, but it does mean that you will be required as a Christian to follow the commands set forth to care for those less fortunate.
I would even be willing to concede that the government has stepped in to these social welfare issues due to the failings of the local church.
My final thought. If you are a Christian, Don't complain about these programs unless your are willing to step in to fill the gap for those truely in need in your community.
14 comments:
I too believe that the government stepped in when the church failed to uphold its Christian duties. However, do we care for all who qualify for these programs, or do we discriminate against those that refuse to stand up for themselves because they know they get help regardless?
Hi Jay, I'm a Christian who believes the church has already failed in these areas. The church's message is much too other-worldly to solve socio-economic problems. So if the church doesn't (won't or can't) help the poor, what's a government to do?
I do not understand why people think taxes are "their" money. Taxes go into the general coffers and should be there to bring the "pursuit of happiness" to all citizens. How do people even expect others to be happy when they do not possess life's necessities? Why are Christians (like you and in general) so selfish? "My money" indeed!
Helen
Well, I hate to use the word discriminate. I would prefer to use the word discern. We as Christians should discern those truely in need and assist others to find a path where they can provide for themselves.
yes, discern..much better term
2 issues here. 1. Has the church failed in these areas? I think to the largest extent yes. Does that mean the attmept should be abandoned? No. We need to get back to that place where the church is meeting that need. The point of this blog entry is to point out that as christians it is our responsibility to meet that need, and we can't complain unless we are willing to do something about it.
2. Sure the money is taken from you and me and placed into the general coffers. I am not complaining about the money that is taken. I live well and want others to do the same. However, I also believe that as citizens we have the duty to ensure those dollars are being spent wisely. I also believe that the federal governments powers are limited to what is outlined in the constitution. Nothing more. Social welfare programs are not a duty spelled out in the constitution, I believe it is a responsibility of the local church to meet those needs. It is truely a shame that we are failing in that calling.
I believe there is a clause, I forget which ammendment, that states specifically all that isn't listed in the Constitution, that additional powers are to be controlled exclusively by the state. Also, we survived as a nation over 100 years with a federal income tax....maybe a reversion might cause some people to try harder taking care of themselves knowing that such "entitlement" programs no longer exist?
Number 10 in the Bill of Rights. Anything not specifically numberated in the constitution is to be left to the state, and to the people.
After rereading my post, I'm honestly surprized at the comments of deadmule. I really thought we'd totally agree on this one.
Jay,
I have to say I agree and disagree on this issue. I agree that we're in this state because the church didn't do what they should have done. But I actually like the idea of universal healthcare.
Because the issue is so broad and now sits in the hands of corporations and government, I think it's unfortunately too late for the church to step in and say, "We screwed up, but give it to us now and we'll take care of it." Unless churches did something truly radical and revolutionary to solve the problem. I just don't think we can step into the existing system and fix it.
Is universal healthcare flawless? No. But I think healthcare is one of those issues that should transcend money or the "bottom line". It shouldn't be as much about making money, as it is about helping people. Honestly, you could make your argument for firefighters or any other program that provides a social service. We may not have the constitutional right to have a team of professionals put out the fire we started, but it's a GOOD thing - it's worth it because it gives us comfort, security, saves lives, and makes our nation a better place to live. I think the same is true of universal healthcare.
I know it's a complicated issue. But I would always rather us err on the side of helping people.
Jeff
In response to Dead Mule's thoughts....I could say "my money" and be in the wrong, but the very fact that people assume that tax money to be spent on THEIR healthcare (in essence their money), they more or less nagate each other. The problem I have currently with healthcare is that the government keeps opting to expand the eligibility slowly and surely to into the realm of those families that can already afford decent coverage on their own. By and far, the options the government gives us, compensates their own workers in wasted expenses on layered bureacracy, leaving less to actually go to the doctors and nurses who actually perform the work itself, as well as to the necessary expenses of the patients in general. Plus, given the way the system wors these days....the regulation on helthcare jumps, conservatively by double (more expenses for oversight and compliance), and there is still the pandora's box of lawsuits. If a government sponsored doctor or healthcare facility screws up, can they sue the government for malpractice? And if so, who pays for the government's defense (who's mainline is to outspend the accuser's ability to prosecute)? Just some thoughts to stir the debate up a bit.
Ditto to Jeff.
Mookie, I don't know what planet you live on, but on earth health care is mighty expensive. Lots of people can;t afford it. And why does anyone need to sue anyone? Doctors make mistakes. Live with it.
Dead Mule,
Just so we're clear, I want you to know, I'm debating the ideas here, not you personally. I come off a little more than brash sometimes, so I wanted you to know I appreciate the differing point of view! That being said-
I promise, I do live here on Earth, really I do. As for suing doctors...trust me, the doctor could accidentally remove my arm when I went in just to have my tonsils removed, and all I would do is request a do-over on the tonsils, and maybe some help locating a new arm. The suing of doctors by others is a (growing)reality, which is one reason malpractice costs go up, driving doctors direct billing costs up, and therefore the hospitals costs to us...which makes insurance more expensive for the rest of us. I work for a small company, so my insurance is a tad expensive, and it isn't great coverage either, so we use my wife's workplace insurance plan to cover her and the kids. (I stubbornly refuse medical help, so to save money, I told her to keep me off. Guess time will tell whether or not I'm an idiot for such a decision. Don't answer that Jay!)
As for helping other people, I'm all for it. Ask my wife, I'll give you my very last dollar if you need it, even if I had plans for it..all you have to do is ask me. I just don't believe in being forced to pay for other people's issues. I just want to be asked for my help. That still leaves room to help, and still be given a choice in the matter.
And I won't debate the expensiveness of healthcare, I'm well aware of it, but when they are talking about expanding "CHILDRENS" healthcare programs to families that make upwards of $70-90k in some states is ridiculous. If I made that kind of money, I could afford an independent insurance that covers just as well and STILL live at my current lifestyle.
I can see how this ended up at healthcare as I have been writing much about it recently. However, healthcare isn't something I would include in the mandate of Christianity. I was reffering more to the current social welfare systems such as foodstamps, help for the homeless, wic, and unemployment.
Well in that case...I think the process seems to have been streamlined too much. There's no shame in taking the help if you need it, and now there seems to be no shame in taking it because you want it. I was on food stamps and had medicaid for the kids when we were going through a hard stretch, but I worked to get off of it. A friend of your mom and Chad's was saying she saw a lady use her foodstamp card to buy $40 worth of King Crab legs, and in the parking lot saw the same lady get into a brand new NICE care, while she was surviving on $20k for their family of 5 and couldn't seem to get assisstance for even a few months while her husband was deployed during Gulf War I. She thought, maybe she was too honest about things. I have no problem with the people who genuinely are trying and need the social services, but those who just don't care and will only work hard enough to have cash for their cigarettes, booze, and still qualify for the assistance...they make me sick to be honest.
Post a Comment