• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

GOP Spending Priorities Begin to Come to Light: cuts to supplemental nutrition for women, infants and children (WIC)

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
44,903
47,837
Los Angeles Area
✟1,066,322.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)

Food aid for low-income mothers, babies becomes spending flashpoint

Advocates and state administrators fear they may have to begin putting people on waitlists to receive WIC benefits if Congress doesn’t increase funding in January.

Unlike other federal nutrition programs, WIC funding has traditionally enjoyed bipartisan support, with Republicans and Democrats committed to ensuring every eligible mother and baby who applies for the program can receive benefits. That consensus is now fraying, with House Republicans pushing to pare back WIC spending this year, arguing tough cuts are needed across the government amid the nation’s mounting debt.
 
Upvote 0

A2SG

Gumby
Jun 17, 2008
10,273
4,096
Massachusetts
✟186,699.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat

Food aid for low-income mothers, babies becomes spending flashpoint

Advocates and state administrators fear they may have to begin putting people on waitlists to receive WIC benefits if Congress doesn’t increase funding in January.

Unlike other federal nutrition programs, WIC funding has traditionally enjoyed bipartisan support, with Republicans and Democrats committed to ensuring every eligible mother and baby who applies for the program can receive benefits. That consensus is now fraying, with House Republicans pushing to pare back WIC spending this year, arguing tough cuts are needed across the government amid the nation’s mounting debt.
I suppose one benefit of a republican being elected next year would be that we'll stop hearing about the debt for a while.

-- A2SG, because "deficits don't matter".....
 
Upvote 0

dogs4thewin

dog lover
Christian Forums Staff
Red Team - Moderator
CF Ambassadors
Site Supporter
Apr 19, 2012
33,001
6,459
Georgia U.S. State
✟1,154,560.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
In the first place, weekly church attendance is around 30% of the population, and at least as high a percentage of the population is in the "nones" category.
In the second place, this article says only 13% of evangelicals tithe, and half give away less than 1% of their income.
So I would call your wishes unrealistic rather than just optimistic.
How many Christians would take this "opportunity?"
Especially since at least 50% of regular churchgoers support the party that is trying to take away all the state services in the first place?
Again, many of those people would whether the state stay out of that as they may feel that people/churches/charities are better at handling aid.
 
Upvote 0

dogs4thewin

dog lover
Christian Forums Staff
Red Team - Moderator
CF Ambassadors
Site Supporter
Apr 19, 2012
33,001
6,459
Georgia U.S. State
✟1,154,560.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
I always thought that the government was comprised of people; is this not true?
It is, but I mean people on a smaller scale without the red tape that comes with government.
 
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2012
30,479
30,300
Baltimore
✟848,988.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Again, many of those people would whether the state stay out of that as they may feel that people/churches/charities are better at handling aid.
Those people are clueless.
 
Upvote 0

Desk trauma

[redacted]
Site Supporter
Dec 1, 2011
23,159
19,047
✟1,515,714.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
It is, but I mean people on a smaller scale without the red tape that comes with government.
They are already free to form charitable groups to give aid to those in need. If it's more effective people will likely chose that over the government options.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Innsmuthbride
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
33,778
21,015
Orlando, Florida
✟1,560,394.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
In the first place, weekly church attendance is around 30% of the population, and at least as high a percentage of the population is in the "nones" category.
In the second place, this article says only 13% of evangelicals tithe, and half give away less than 1% of their income.
So I would call your wishes unrealistic rather than just optimistic.
How many Christians would take this "opportunity?"
Especially since at least 50% of regular churchgoers support the party that is trying to take away all the state services in the first place?

Once you exclude giving to religious institutions, Christians in the US aren't really any more charitable than anybody else, perhaps less so.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Innsmuthbride
Upvote 0