Catholic Church And Gov. Welfare Programs

[Winchester]

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=297445#ixzz1MSJdqzD8

The government has the right to force us to buy wheat. But absolute authority is not where government enforced charity leads. No. Of course not. You're paranoid and selfish.

[thessalonian]

And Jesus said "Thou shalt force upon the rich taxes which shall provide for the needy, turn them upside down and shake from their pockets all checkbooks, wallets, cash, and coins because after all isn't the amount of money what charity is all about. Where did that story about the widow with the pennies come from anyway".

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Maggie' timestamp='1305475234' post='2241859']
It's fine to believe this way but it's pretty much the opposite of what the Church believes. You can read what our Catechism says about "the universal destination of goods" [url="http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/seventh.html"]here[/url].

There are so many great documents and so much magisterial teaching is freely available on this issue. Studying with an open-heart can go far to help Christians choose Jesus over "conservative" or "liberal" secular ideologies every time!
[/quote]

I didn't realize that your church was for a radical form of socialism that would have the government confinscate money or services from individuals that earned it and give it to those who didn't. I will remember this as another reason why I'm not affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church, thanks. As for Jesus, he didn't advocate for this.

[Winchester]

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1305508804' post='2242071']
I didn't realize that your church was for a radical form of socialism that would have the government confinscate money or services from individuals that earned it and give it to those who didn't. I will remember this as another reason why I'm not affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church, thanks. As for Jesus, he didn't advocate for this.
[/quote]
WJFN, aka Super Country, is a Classic Country radio station in Brandon, Mississippi.

WJFN began as WRKN in the late 1960's as a country station. Longtime owners were Roy and June Harris. For a short time the station had a 1950's based oldies format and also had a country gospel format for while. In later years it simulcast its sister station WRJH 97.7 FM with a Southern Gospel format. After WRJH was sold, WRKN AM contunued to operate with a Southern Gospel format. After the retirement of the owner the station emerged as an affiliate of the "Real Country" network with classic country with call letters WZQK.

On May 19, 2008, WZQK (Real Country 970) switched from classic country to all-sports. And the station's call letters became WJFN.

On December 26, 2010 WJFN returned to classic country.

WJFN also operates a 99 watt low power translator at 99.1 FM in Jackson that is licensed to Ridgeland, MS

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Era Might' timestamp='1305475417' post='2241860']
What you are essentially arguing for is a radical individualism which, if taken to its logical conclusion, would not entitle anyone to anything. The US Constitution allows the government to raise taxes. That means taking money from people unwillingly.[/quote] No I'm saying that people should individually for their own moral reasons give to the less fortunate but not through compulsion through government entities. I'm not arguing against raising taxes, so thanks.

[quote]But let's apply your argument to other things. Did you fight in the Civil War? No. Therefore you are not entitled to be a part of the Union. Did you pay taxes to build the streets around your house? No. Therefore you are not entitled to use them.
[/quote]

Sorry but you seriously failed in this example. Not only does the Civil War argument not make a bit of sense but paying taxes to build streets is different and I addressed this already. There is a huge difference between building streets, having a police department, for everyone to persue their business, and taking money from the rich and giving it to those who did not earn it. I pay taxes so did I earn the roads that I use? Yes I did. Trying to put entitlements like "free universal healthcare" right there with taxes for the roads is apples and oranges.

[quote]Society cannot exist unless people are entitled to benefit from what others have earned.
[/quote] This is false under the context for which you put it. Society can exist without Free universal healthcare, social security and unemployment entitlements, medicaid and medicare, etc. As a matter of fact, it's this country's level of competition and individualism that made this country great.

[quote]The very existence of government assumes that we ARE entitled to things from society. If we are not entitled to anything, then we are all just ravenous dogs in a kill or be killed world. Why was the US Constitution written? Here's its explanation:
[/quote]

The problem is that you're taking it from simple roads being built to a welfare state. Building roads so that businesses can thrive is different then taking money from those productive members of society and giving it to people that are not productive.

[quote]There's those words "Justice" and "Welfare." I am entitled to those things, not because you want to give them, but because I have a right to them. Even St. Thomas Aquinas says in the Summa:
[/quote]

First, I don't care what your religion says. Second, justice and welfare in the constitution, you are taking out of context. They never meant entitlements as you are saying.

[Winchester]

I agree with Gorbachev's wife.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1305478334' post='2241881']
The animosity is toward the use of force to allocate resources to help the groups the government has deemed less fortunate.
[/quote]

Yes, the animosity is not about people being less fortunate and needing help.

[quote name='Maggie' timestamp='1305484855' post='2241900']
A lot of it comes from the attitude that "good" people don't become poor, that the poor must be lazy, drunks, addicts, etc. These attitudes can only flourish among Christians when they don't spend enough time ministering to poor people, which puts them at risk spiritually.[/quote]

Umm, no. I have been homeless with a wife and daughter and before that I'd spent alot of time amongst the poor helping feed them, as well as donated time at local assisted living and nursing homes. It's not about "good people don't become poor", sorry.

[quote]When you minister to someone and try to be Jesus to them, you start to see them as a human being worthy of the community's investment, and not as a "drain" or a statistic. For a lot of folks the poor are an abstraction. They exist only as a category in ideological arguments or a line item on a budget. When you are face to face with them, poverty suddenly becomes a concrete reality. In this way, practicing charity often leads to a desire to practice social justice.[/quote] It's not about seeing them as a drain, rather it's about holding people accountable and responsible for their own actions. The truth be told, entitlements do not make people productive in our society. I'm part Native American and have spent some time living on Reservations [with relatives and friends]. The truth be told is that with all the entitlements that Native Americans get, it has turned many of them into third world countries. Just go to Red Lake Minnesota. It's high on crime, jobs are scarce, the "free healthcare" is primative, and young adults only go to college until they get their government check, then they stop going.

The more that people rely upon entitlements, the less likely they are going to stand on their own two feet. Enabling them is only going to postpone what they could and should become. When I was homeless, what did I do? I drove my car [with my whole family] to Target and got a job [instantly]. Target and Walmart are two corporations that give people that are homeless or on government substities employment within no time at all. What was my wage? It was 8$ an hr unloading trucks at 4AM in the morning until approx. 2PM in the afternoon. Was it "ideal"? No...was it alot of hard work unloading trucks for little pay? Yes. However this is what starting opportunities capitalism gives. Did my life get better after that? Slowly.

The reality is that the rich in this country pay the most taxes, give the most to charity [outside of the government] and create most of the jobs.

[quote]God has a preferential love both for those who are poor spiritually and those who are poor physically. At the end of the day we will be judged by love. I suspect Heaven will be surprising for a lot of folks - I think the homeless addicts, the prostitutes on Medicaid and the working people on food stamps will win more crowns than the "good" people who griped about a mandatory percentage of their money going to help the least of these obtain basic human rights - a percentage that in most cases in no significant way affects their own lifestyle. Who really knows if that will be the case. But we do know that God hears the cry of the poor.
[/quote]

That is true but saying that we should cut off government entitlements is not the same as not loving the poor. Rather it's about loving the poor more, because socialism does not create vaccines to illnesses, it doesn't create job growth, etc.

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1305493473' post='2241939']
I just love it when people assume that those who oppose such things have ever been poor,or are not poor currently. You know nothng about Winchesters life,you know nothing about my life, you know nothing about the live's of anyone else on here who objects to government cohersion. I assure you, many of us have been truely poor.[/quote] Amen

[quote]I was so poor when I was young that my parents were threatened with tax evasion charges by the IRS. Why?Becuase in the words of the Auditor " it is not possible to live on the amount of money you claim.[/quote] Wow, thou I had been poor most of my life [hence my foster relatives], I don't remember any IRS problems.

[quote]My parents were not hiding any income.
[/quote]

I have been audited before [3 years ago] for this reason but it was simple to get off the hook for us. We lived [and still do] quite humble.

[quote]Don't act so self rightous, you know nothing about those of whom you are speaking.
[/quote]

Yes, for me - someone who is not rich but knows many rich people - it's about not allowing the country to slip into bankruptcy and get so far in debt that it can't come out of it. It's about loving this country and the freedoms that we have to create jobs and be productive members of society.

[Jesus_lol]

How many of you guys donated money to help people live and rebuild in alabama and the other southern states that were hit by the tornado?

i would be surprised if more than a couple of you sent anything more than prayers. this is a recent and horrible event where people are in need of a lot of help, within the borders of your country. most of that is probably going to come out of your taxes. if that small percentage of your taxes was removed, and their fate left up to private run charities, how do you think everyone would be faring? do you think that you would start donating a significant amount more of your money to the charities involved in rebuilding? honestly?

i would hope so, but honestly most people would continue to think "oh thats horrible, maybe i should donate a few dollars... where is my credit card... oh nevermind whats happening with American Idol tonight?"

When things like this happen, survivors need to be able to reply on continuing aid from a system set up for that purpose. they cant rely on a sporadic and small amount of donations within the first few days, only to have that mostly dry up as soon as the next celebrity scandal or political gaffe starts getting airtime.

Im not saying that government systems as they are are the only solution, reform is almost certainly needed, but casting them out entirely would not help.

[Winchester]

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1305511404' post='2242098']
[size="5"][Lots of really cool stuff][/size]
[/quote]
Okay, I take back the comment and the picture, officially and apologize for antagonizing you over one [s](horribly written, just seared my eyes and actually made me forget the content of three Borges stories)[/s] post.

Edited May 16, 2011 by Winchester

[havok579257]

so the question i have is, if the government stopped using tax money from one group of people to help another group of people. thus stopping what people call charity. so no government charity. so its all private. what happens when private charity is not enough? how do we make up the difference to help those who require help? not talking about the ones who abuse the system but the ones who actually need help? the man who is paralyzed from a hit and run and has no family. the child who can not live without a respirator and has no family willing to support them. if government charity were to stop and private charity was not enough, how do we fill the gap? do we just tell people, so sorry but you can just die now? so what's the answer?

[Era Might]

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1305510395' post='2242088']There is a huge difference between building streets, having a police department, for everyone to persue their business, and taking money from the rich and giving it to those who did not earn it. I pay taxes so did I earn the roads that I use? Yes I did. Trying to put entitlements like "free universal healthcare" right there with taxes for the roads is apples and oranges.[/quote]
They are not apples and oranges. They are the exact same thing: they involve the government taking money from people to provide certain things to everyone.

Roads are not built "for everyone to pursue their business." Not everyone has a car. Roads are built for people who can afford a car to pursue their business. It involves the government taking everyone's money (including the taxes of the poor) to give to the rich (a car is a luxury).

The existence of government assumes that the government is there to act for the justice and welfare of its people (as the US Constitution says). Of its very nature, this involves taking money from individuals and using it for the general welfare. You confuse justice and charity, and you arbitrarily limit the general welfare to certain things that you don't want to do without.

Your radical individualism cannot be consistent unless you deny the right to taxation, and ultimately, deny the the right of any kind of government.

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1305510395' post='2242088']First, I don't care what your religion says. Second, justice and welfare in the constitution, you are taking out of context. They never meant entitlements as you are saying.
[/quote]
Of course not. They only meant entitlements as you are saying. As I said, you arbitrarily limit the general welfare to certain things that you don't want to do without. Trying to establish social justice through private charities is like trying to provide for the common defense through private militias, or trying to provide for taxation through voluntary giving. It can't be done in a nation like ours. It can only be done in imaginary scenarios that have no basis in the actual situation we live in.

Edited May 16, 2011 by Era Might

[Winchester]

[quote name='Era Might' timestamp='1305512451' post='2242107']
They are not apples and oranges. They are the exact same thing: they involve the government taking money from people to provide certain things to everyone.

Roads are not built "for everyone to pursue their business." Not everyone has a car. Roads are built for people who can afford a car to pursue their business. It involves the government taking everyone's money (including the taxes of the poor) to give to the rich (a car is a luxury).

[/quote]
http://www.bing.com/maps/?FORM=Z9LH4#JnE9LmxpbmNvbG4lMmJwYXJrJTJiYXBhcnRtZW50cyUyYmhvdXN0b24lMmJ0eCU3ZXNzdC4wJTdlcGcuMSZiYj00Ni41MzM0MjM3Njc0OTE1JTdlLTU0LjU0MTQ0Mjg3MSU3ZTkuNjcyNjAwNzUyNTM0NjglN2UtMTM2LjI3OTcyNDEyMQ==


Not sure how it will show up, but that complex is entirely Section 8. It's packed with cars.

Look for 790 West Little York. Cars are not a luxury for rich people.

Edited May 16, 2011 by Winchester

[thessalonian]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1305512658' post='2242111']
http://www.bing.com/maps/?FORM=Z9LH4#JnE9LmxpbmNvbG4lMmJwYXJrJTJiYXBhcnRtZW50cyUyYmhvdXN0b24lMmJ0eCU3ZXNzdC4wJTdlcGcuMSZiYj00Ni41MzM0MjM3Njc0OTE1JTdlLTU0LjU0MTQ0Mjg3MSU3ZTkuNjcyNjAwNzUyNTM0NjglN2UtMTM2LjI3OTcyNDEyMQ==


Not sure how it will show up, but that complex is entirely Section 8. It's packed with cars.

Look for 790 West Little York. Cars are not a luxury for rich people.
[/quote]

Cars are not the only means of transportation either. Bikes, busses, light rail come to mind. The poor can use these to travel on roads.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1305511622' post='2242100']
How many of you guys donated money to help people live and rebuild in alabama and the other southern states that were hit by the tornado?

i would be surprised if more than a couple of you sent anything more than prayers. this is a recent and horrible event where people are in need of a lot of help, within the borders of your country. most of that is probably going to come out of your taxes. if that small percentage of your taxes was removed, and their fate left up to private run charities, how do you think everyone would be faring? do you think that you would start donating a significant amount more of your money to the charities involved in rebuilding? honestly?[/quote]

The majority of it will come from the state and local taxes, not national/federal taxes. However, as for saying "I would be surprised", that is not your business, but more importantly, you have already judged people without knowing. However I will say this, I didn't give to that disaster because I [along with most people] cannot afford to give to every local, national or international disaster that takes place. If I asked you, "how many of you gave to help poor people in Morocco without running waters, build wells last summer", I could almost guarentee that almost all of you would answer "no", but that doesn't mean that you didn't give to other charities to the best of your abilities. Therefore this is a strawman argument.

[quote]i would hope so, but honestly most people would continue to think "oh thats horrible, maybe i should donate a few dollars... where is my credit card... oh nevermind whats happening with American Idol tonight?"
[/quote]

Sorry but I don't watch American Idol, rather I'm busy trying to create jobs, father my children, take care of my wife, etc. [basically more important stuff].

[quote]When things like this happen, survivors need to be able to reply on continuing aid from a system set up for that purpose. they cant rely on a sporadic and small amount of donations within the first few days, only to have that mostly dry up as soon as the next celebrity scandal or political gaffe starts getting airtime[/quote]. Your opinion, sorry but the only thing that you should be able to rely upon is G-d and yourself. When people are starving to death in Africa, should they be able to say, "gosh, we should atleast be able to rely upon America and Europe"? Look at Japan. They once were a primative nation in debt but through allowing the people to create jobs in a capitalist way, they created jobs and became an economic powerhouse. Just look at China, during the Great Leap Forward, people were starving to death, now they are where people around the world go for loans.

Charity doesn't create job and economic growth. Rather creating jobs is the best anti-poverty program in the world. Jobs are not created through entitlements, rather it crushes job growth.

[quote]Im not saying that government systems as they are are the only solution, reform is almost certainly needed, but casting them out entirely would not help.
[/quote] Not true, it would lesson taxes, which creates job growth [also known as the best anti-poverty program ever].

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1305511732' post='2242102']
so the question i have is, if the government stopped using tax money from one group of people to help another group of people. thus stopping what people call charity. so no government charity. so its all private. what happens when private charity is not enough? how do we make up the difference to help those who require help? not talking about the ones who abuse the system but the ones who actually need help? the man who is paralyzed from a hit and run and has no family. the child who can not live without a respirator and has no family willing to support them. if government charity were to stop and private charity was not enough, how do we fill the gap? do we just tell people, so sorry but you can just die now? so what's the answer?
[/quote]

When the rich man came to Jesus and said, "how do I get into heaven", Jesus responded with "give all your money to the poor and come follow me", did he not? When the man chose not to do so, did Jesus suggest that it be taken from him by force? No, that was the man's choice and Jesus gave him that choice. If the country is going through major economic problems and people are poor in the streets, the call for those with to give more will increase but it's still their money and their choice. When people in India were starving to death, mother Theresa did not tell rich people that their money should be taken from them by force, rather she asked them to donate and many of them did.

Bottomline is that people should work hard and save hard, and they shall prosper. Read Proverbs, it's all about working hard, not getting caught up in distractions and propering.

[Era Might]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1305512658' post='2242111']
http://www.bing.com/maps/?FORM=Z9LH4#JnE9LmxpbmNvbG4lMmJwYXJrJTJiYXBhcnRtZW50cyUyYmhvdXN0b24lMmJ0eCU3ZXNzdC4wJTdlcGcuMSZiYj00Ni41MzM0MjM3Njc0OTE1JTdlLTU0LjU0MTQ0Mjg3MSU3ZTkuNjcyNjAwNzUyNTM0NjglN2UtMTM2LjI3OTcyNDEyMQ==


Not sure how it will show up, but that complex is entirely Section 8. It's packed with cars.

Look for 790 West Little York. Cars are not a luxury for rich people.
[/quote]
Cars are a luxury for everyone, including the poor. Cars are not a human necessity. We have two legs for a reason. In other countries people get around fine on bikes and horses. But our society decided to cater to the rich by designing streets for cars rather than for people. This had certain advantages to a society that caters to the rich. But it also means that the poor are required to adjust themselves to meet this standard of living (which, conveniently, allows the car industry to boom...once society makes cars a necessity, then car manufacturers gain control over this so-called "necessity"). In other words, and quite ironically, our society of cars has immobilized us. Roads are no longer for people, but for cars...people have to adjust their lives to give precedence to expensive machines.

Edited May 16, 2011 by Era Might