Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Outreach
Outreach
Exploring Christianity
Why are Christians so often politically conservative?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="leftrightleftrightleft" data-source="post: 60064436" data-attributes="member: 246343"><p>This really frustrates me. There's this idea out there that if you're not right wing then your communist or socialist. There's no more moderate, there's no more mixed economy, there's no more centrist and there's no more Third Way.</p><p></p><p>I never advocated communism or the Chinese system of authoritarian capitalism. (China is not longer economically socialist by the way, they are full-fledged capitalist for all intents and purposes. <a href="http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article1519" target="_blank">Link</a>.)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is a good point. So why not put some of the wealth (notice I say "some" and not "all") in the hands of a collective group of people that can more objectively manage it while still being held accountable to the populace?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think this is a false stereotype you have of how government aid can, should or could work. I think lots of people view government aid just as unemployment cheques or something. I have lots of problems with the unemployment cheques because of how its been mishandled and there are too many loop holes.</p><p></p><p>But government-funded services don't have to be just handouts. Governments can build hospitals which provide healing services to those that cannot afford private services. Governments can build more schools and pay teachers better to give kids a better education. Governments can build libraries and hockey arenas. Government can even help fund church-building! Government can use tax dollars to eradicate famines in other parts of the world. Governments can fund affordable housing projects to get homeless people off the streets. Tax dollars can build roads and fund public transit systems. These aren't "handouts" to the unemployed gamer living in his parents basement smoking pot. These are programs and projects that need a large amount of capital that private companies would be wary of investing in but all lead to greater <em>social capital</em>. And they act to enable both the poor and wealthy to access services. A new library doesn't mean only poor people getting the "handout" can go there; it means anyone can go there.</p><p></p><p>I know its idealistic. And ironically, the reason it is idealistic is because of the system you wish to propagate whereby our current governments aren't run by the people and for the people but are rather run by more and more greed. Money talks. And lobby groups from corporations work. And big corporations don't want people spending time in libraries, they want them buying their products.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>See my post to Sketcher as well as the link about inequality. "Inheritance" is not necessarily just the money you receive when your parents die. Its the money they are able to give you, by their own free choice, and by no merit of your own, throughout your childhood. Better schooling, better neighbourhood, better opportunities, less student debt, better employer connections etc.</p><p></p><p>Both Bill Gates and the Kardashians are extreme examples and neither represents the true situation. And what about Bill Gates' kids? Aren't they now just another Kardashian?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Like I've said before, if a society could provide all the government services to everyone by donation only, I'm down. That would be wonderful and truly Christian. But the evils or greed and materialism ultimately outweigh the evil of forced taxation in my books. I think forced taxation is a restriction on your freedom but it is a necessary restriction that leads to greater overall good. And forced taxation is better than greed. Jesus talks about giving your money away and the evils of money more than any other topic during his ministry. So, as a Christian, you should be thrilled to give your money away to the government to let them do more good with it. You should be thrilled to get rid of your material possessions for the sake of the greater good. As a Christian, taxation shouldn't be perceived as "forced" at all, but rather something you <em>want</em> to do.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Indeed. I'm all for marriage remaining between man and woman. But my thirst for social justice trumps that. I would love to see a more Moderate or Centrist party develop in both Canada and the US that calls for both social justice as well as social traditionalism.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>What happened to Give Unto Caesar what is Caesar's and give unto God what is God's?</p><p></p><p>Also, the church is a great mode for getting social justice accomplished. Again, if social justice could be achieved by voluntary donation, great! I think churches do much, much, much good in this department and I encourage them to continue doing more. If a church could ever reach the point where it could adequately provide or subsidize services at a school or a hospital, I would be thrilled. This is also hopelessly idealistic too because there's so much negativity towards "religion" that people would be up in arms about the fact that its church-related, regardless of what good is being done by the church.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yea I understand where you're coming from. I've thought a lot about this too. Conception is the most clear cut definition when two non-related cells join together to form a new type of entity. I personally think that if abortion clinics do exist in a free society, then they should at least not be government funded. And I don't think they should be free and anonymous. I think there has to be some level of responsibility in the people receiving them. It sickens me that some people now use abortion as a form of birth control, they think: "oh well, if I get pregnant, I'll just get an abortion!" They walk in, its free, its anonymous and the procedure is done in a few minutes. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite3" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":(" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="leftrightleftrightleft, post: 60064436, member: 246343"] This really frustrates me. There's this idea out there that if you're not right wing then your communist or socialist. There's no more moderate, there's no more mixed economy, there's no more centrist and there's no more Third Way. I never advocated communism or the Chinese system of authoritarian capitalism. (China is not longer economically socialist by the way, they are full-fledged capitalist for all intents and purposes. [URL="http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article1519"]Link[/URL].) This is a good point. So why not put some of the wealth (notice I say "some" and not "all") in the hands of a collective group of people that can more objectively manage it while still being held accountable to the populace? I think this is a false stereotype you have of how government aid can, should or could work. I think lots of people view government aid just as unemployment cheques or something. I have lots of problems with the unemployment cheques because of how its been mishandled and there are too many loop holes. But government-funded services don't have to be just handouts. Governments can build hospitals which provide healing services to those that cannot afford private services. Governments can build more schools and pay teachers better to give kids a better education. Governments can build libraries and hockey arenas. Government can even help fund church-building! Government can use tax dollars to eradicate famines in other parts of the world. Governments can fund affordable housing projects to get homeless people off the streets. Tax dollars can build roads and fund public transit systems. These aren't "handouts" to the unemployed gamer living in his parents basement smoking pot. These are programs and projects that need a large amount of capital that private companies would be wary of investing in but all lead to greater [I]social capital[/I]. And they act to enable both the poor and wealthy to access services. A new library doesn't mean only poor people getting the "handout" can go there; it means anyone can go there. I know its idealistic. And ironically, the reason it is idealistic is because of the system you wish to propagate whereby our current governments aren't run by the people and for the people but are rather run by more and more greed. Money talks. And lobby groups from corporations work. And big corporations don't want people spending time in libraries, they want them buying their products. See my post to Sketcher as well as the link about inequality. "Inheritance" is not necessarily just the money you receive when your parents die. Its the money they are able to give you, by their own free choice, and by no merit of your own, throughout your childhood. Better schooling, better neighbourhood, better opportunities, less student debt, better employer connections etc. Both Bill Gates and the Kardashians are extreme examples and neither represents the true situation. And what about Bill Gates' kids? Aren't they now just another Kardashian? Like I've said before, if a society could provide all the government services to everyone by donation only, I'm down. That would be wonderful and truly Christian. But the evils or greed and materialism ultimately outweigh the evil of forced taxation in my books. I think forced taxation is a restriction on your freedom but it is a necessary restriction that leads to greater overall good. And forced taxation is better than greed. Jesus talks about giving your money away and the evils of money more than any other topic during his ministry. So, as a Christian, you should be thrilled to give your money away to the government to let them do more good with it. You should be thrilled to get rid of your material possessions for the sake of the greater good. As a Christian, taxation shouldn't be perceived as "forced" at all, but rather something you [I]want[/I] to do. Indeed. I'm all for marriage remaining between man and woman. But my thirst for social justice trumps that. I would love to see a more Moderate or Centrist party develop in both Canada and the US that calls for both social justice as well as social traditionalism. What happened to Give Unto Caesar what is Caesar's and give unto God what is God's? Also, the church is a great mode for getting social justice accomplished. Again, if social justice could be achieved by voluntary donation, great! I think churches do much, much, much good in this department and I encourage them to continue doing more. If a church could ever reach the point where it could adequately provide or subsidize services at a school or a hospital, I would be thrilled. This is also hopelessly idealistic too because there's so much negativity towards "religion" that people would be up in arms about the fact that its church-related, regardless of what good is being done by the church. Yea I understand where you're coming from. I've thought a lot about this too. Conception is the most clear cut definition when two non-related cells join together to form a new type of entity. I personally think that if abortion clinics do exist in a free society, then they should at least not be government funded. And I don't think they should be free and anonymous. I think there has to be some level of responsibility in the people receiving them. It sickens me that some people now use abortion as a form of birth control, they think: "oh well, if I get pregnant, I'll just get an abortion!" They walk in, its free, its anonymous and the procedure is done in a few minutes. :( [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Outreach
Outreach
Exploring Christianity
Why are Christians so often politically conservative?
Top
Bottom