Where would you draw that line on a "comfortable life?"

 

Great question. Don't know.

Is $2400 per month on pets equal to $1000 per month on a country club? $500 per month on golf? $200 per month on Bingo? $1000 per month at restaurants?

 

I was told that Chad Johnson goes to the same store every Tuesday during the season and spends $500 on CDs/DVDs. Should we take extra money from him because of this?

 

Great questions.

 

It is hard to make the argument that we are a caring country when people are starving and doing without insurance while the above is going on.

Is $2400 per month on pets equal to $1000 per month on a country club? $500 per month on golf? $200 per month on Bingo? $1000 per month at restaurants?

 

I was told that Chad Johnson goes to the same store every Tuesday during the season and spends $500 on CDs/DVDs. Should we take extra money from him because of this?

 

No...

 

This is the only area that I am a conservative... I believe people are responsible for themselves, in all aspects, therefore, if a person wants to spend $500 on DVDs, so be it, let them answer for it...

[/b]

 

If they don't work, don't eat...

 

Is that a Biblical stance?

 

As I have stated on here before, my worldly self wants to agree with you.

Not sure by Christian self can.

Old Testiment, my friend, the other half, alot of my brothers and sisters try to forget...

Old Testiment, my friend, the other half, alot of my brothers and sisters try to forget...

 

 

JK

Old Testiment, my friend, the other half, alot of my brothers and sisters try to forget...

 

But Jesus was pretty clear with the when you gave someone something to eat, you were feeding me mantra as well as the rich guy who wouldn't sell everything example. Can't put your wealth above your salvation.

Redistributing wealth from those who work and earn a good living to those who choose not to work and choose not to take advantage of the opportunities available to them is immoral regardless of the gap in wealth between the two groups.

 

I favor exempting some people from taxation who are unable to earn a reasonable income through no fault of their own, such as the severely mentally or physically disabled.

 

The type of class envy that is exploited by hucksters like John Edwards for power and personal wealth threatens to destroy our society.

Is that a Biblical stance?

 

As I have stated on here before, my worldly self wants to agree with you.

Not sure by Christian self can.

 

I think you can be a caring loving giving Christian without supporting wealth redistribution.

But Jesus was pretty clear with the when you gave someone something to eat, you were feeding me mantra as well as the rich guy who wouldn't sell everything example. Can't put your wealth above your salvation.

 

That is right, but that is a choice that has to be made, by the individual, not by the gov't. If I choose to do that I know the consequences, I do not FORCE my view points on them, and neither should the gov't.

Redistributing wealth from those who work and earn a good living to those who choose not to work and choose not to take advantage of the opportunities available to them is immoral regardless of the gap in wealth between the two groups.

 

I favor exempting some people from taxation who are unable to earn a reasonable income through no fault of their own, such as the severely mentally or physically disabled.

 

The type of class envy that is exploited by hucksters like John Edwards for power and personal wealth threatens to destroy our society.

 

Middle one, I agree and as a society we should do everything in our power to provide them with a comfortable life.

 

On the bolded in the first, on what moral grounds are you determining that redistributing wealth is immoral?

But Jesus was pretty clear with the when you gave someone something to eat, you were feeding me mantra as well as the rich guy who wouldn't sell everything example. Can't put your wealth above your salvation.

 

I noticed that you used the work "gave" in your post. There is a big difference between giving to those in need and being taxed to support those in need.

[/b]

 

That is right, but that is a choice that has to be made, by the individual, not by the gov't. If I choose to do that I know the consequences, I do not FORCE my view points on them, and neither should the gov't.

 

Well, it is pretty clear that this country does not want Christian views getting involved in politics so I wonder if we should remove our support for welfare?:sssh:

I noticed that you used the work "gave" in your post. There is a big difference between giving to those in need and being taxed to support those in need.

 

I don't think that is a big difference at all. It is simply giving to an organization that you would believe has to the capabilities to redistribute.

 

Personally, I think this is better done through the churches and the local churches have gravely neglected their duty across this country.

 

People are not being fed at local churches throughout this coutnry like they should.

Middle one, I agree and as a society we should do everything in our power to provide them with a comfortable life.

 

On the bolded in the first, on what moral grounds are you determining that redistributing wealth is immoral?

Thou shalt not steal. It is wrong when individuals do it and it is wrong when governments do it. You have every right to give as much money to worthy (or unworthy) charities as you want, but you do not have the moral right to compel me to do give to the charities of your choice.

 

Taxes should be collected to pay for legitimate expenses of government and all able-bodied adult citizens should pay their fair share of the cost of a just government.