House Passes Trump-Backed Rescissions Package Slashing $9 BILLION in Bloated Spending — FOREIGN AID, NPR, and PBS on the Chopping Block — Two Republic

rjs330 · Sunday at 11:36 PM

Fantine said:
An un-bloated budget, transferring benefits of the have nots to unnecessary, unneeded tax cuts for the people who have everything materially, and often very little spiritually.
Calling oneself a Christian nation while completely ignoring Jesus' preferential option for the poor is the cruelest form of hypocrisy.

But we aren't a Christian Nation. The real question for Christians is what are WE doing to help others? It is not, what is a secular government doing to help?

rjs330 · Sunday at 11:38 PM

Fantine said:
And that is one reason why environmentalist and progressives want solar and wind energy to replace the need for ethanol. But let's face it, with ethanol some corn is diverted away from the food supply but the air is cleaner and our planet is in less peril. With your solution, using fossil fuels, a higher percentage of corn may be diverted for food, but climate change will cause famines and hardships. Droughts and famine will mean that there is less corn for everything. Less corn for food. Less corn for ethanol. Not to mention the other dangers to our planet.

That only works if you believe we caused it and have any control over it. Climate change is here and there is nothing we can do to prevent it.

Fantine · Sunday at 11:55 PM

rjs330 said:
That only works if you believe we caused it and have any control over it. Climate change is here and there is nothing we can do to prevent it.

I think denial is rooted in greed and intransigence. Who cares about responsibility? Future generations? Selfishness is a hollow emotion.

Fantine · 2025-07-21T00:03:16-0500

rjs330 said:
But we aren't a Christian Nation. The real question for Christians is what are WE doing to help others?

I have seen personal charity being used as a cop-out for too long to believe in its sincerity most of the time. We've been through this already. Churches have had 6,000 years to get their act together and they failed. And now we are living in the most prosperous Nation on Earth and we think that throwing some coins in a collection plate every week is doing enough to end the suffering all around us. It's not and you know it. We are capable of ending poverty, of providing Universal Health Care, and giving our children a world class education that will prepare them to live in a more competitive world. Hiding behind the excuse of letting the churches do it is hypocritical. Christians should want to live in a just society, free from the greed and income inequality that increases every year.

Fantine · 2025-07-21T00:05:32-0500

rjs330 said:
I think USAID hosed itself with its leftist politics. If it would have stuck with just giving food to the hungry they wouldnt have been defunded.

Now comes the process where we change how we operate.

We will still help others. It just won't be through the same mechanism. We are going to go through some processes to work it out.

I think everyone knows that programs to help feed people are good. Its not over for ever and ever.

I'm not holding my breath, but thank you for an optimistic albeit unrealistic post.

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN · 2025-07-21T00:50:17-0500

Valletta said:
Indeed, with the tax cuts Americans should be able to choose the organizations to donate to that will best help those in need instead of organizations loyal to the Democrats.

No, they wont.

Valletta · 2025-07-21T00:53:29-0500

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN said:
No, they wont.

I sure will.

7thKeeper · 2025-07-21T02:22:59-0500

Valletta said:
Indeed, with the tax cuts Americans should be able to choose the organizations to donate to that will best help those in need instead of organizations loyal to the Democrats.

If we are talking about the current new tax cuts, the cuts to government programs elsewhere though have made it a net loss for all but, iirc, the top 10% of income earners (may have been top 20%, I would need to check again), so it's not like most people have more money to put into charity, but less.

Larniavc · 2025-07-21T03:18:28-0500

Richard T said:
I guess you never have seen swollen bellies of infants, and primary school kids. It is real in some places. I doubt much of this reached them though. I can say that corn subsidies for making ethanol gas sure is causing many to starve.

Ethanol policy threatens to starve the world

Drought. War. Poverty. These are leading causes of hunger, according to the United Nations. Soon we may add another. Ethanol. Across the globe, people are discovering it's a new contributor to world hunger. Led by the United States, governments are paying companies billions to make ethanol from...

www.heritage.org

How sad that on this a Christian website, obvious sarcasm is taken at face value.

Larniavc · 2025-07-21T03:19:24-0500

BCP1928 said:
I know you'd like to think that, but many of us do. Others are satisfied with having it taken out of our taxes, like an automatic periodic contribution to the United way. What's wrong with that?

It’s the ‘screw you, I got mine’ American Dream.

Ophiolite · 2025-07-21T03:37:12-0500

rjs330 said:
Why would you await that. You said you are a former Christian. The Bible is just a book to you.

Just a book? Until the advent of the cloud, books were where human knowledge and experience and beliefs were preserved. In my worldview they are not dismissed as "just a book".

As a Christian it was the Sermon on the Mount that spoke to me with greatest power and conviction. What I see in the actions and declarations of many Christians in the USA is the antithesis of those words. Many of the posts on this forum reek with same the hypocrisy and disregard for human dignity.

Remove the Sermon of the Mount from the Bible, which is symbolically what those ignoring it are doing, and you take away the heart of it.

Valletta · 2025-07-21T05:46:12-0500

7thKeeper said:
If we are talking about the current new tax cuts, the cuts to government programs elsewhere though have made it a net loss for all but, iirc, the top 10% of income earners (may have been top 20%, I would need to check again), so it's not like most people have more money to put into charity, but less.

I expect more money in the long run.

BCP1928 · 2025-07-21T07:09:18-0500

rjs330 said:
That only works if you believe we caused it and have any control over it. Climate change is here and there is nothing we can do to prevent it.

Is that the Christian view?

JosephZ · 2025-07-21T09:06:01-0500

rjs330 said:
Do we need to be motivated?

Yes, because it's going to require a massive uptick in giving to match the good USAID has been doing around the world.

rjs330 said:
If we REALLY want to help we will.

How will Americans know which local NGOs in far-flung corners of the world need funding for a health clinic, feeding program, or immediate funds for humanitarian assistance or disaster relief?

Pommer · 2025-07-21T09:32:42-0500

Ophiolite said:
Just a book? Until the advent of the cloud, books were where human knowledge and experience and beliefs were preserved. In my worldview they are not dismissed as "just a book".

As a Christian it was the Sermon on the Mount that spoke to me with greatest power and conviction. What I see in the actions and declarations of many Christians in the USA is the antithesis of those words. Many of the posts on this forum reek with same the hypocrisy and disregard for human dignity.

Remove the Sermon of the Mount from the Bible, which is symbolically what those ignoring it are doing, and you take away the heart of it.

One might expect people who say that they believe the Bible to adhere to it more than they appear to do…but there’s no guarantees on that.

Ophiolite · 2025-07-21T09:48:06-0500

Pommer said:
One might expect people who say that they believe the Bible to adhere to it more than they appear to do…but there’s no guarantees on that.

Of course, but that does not alter my optimism that people can and will strive towards more tolerant, inclusive, supportive behaviour. If only a fraction of people do so that is still a cause for celebration, as it demonstrates what humanity is capable of when they look beyound themselves.

Pommer · 2025-07-21T11:08:09-0500

Ophiolite said:
Of course, but that does not alter my optimism that people can and will strive towards more tolerant, inclusive, supportive behaviour. If only a fraction of people do so that is still a cause for celebration, as it demonstrates what humanity is capable of when they look beyound themselves.

Either one believes that we can be better than just what our DNA tells us to be or we are not.

Ophiolite · 2025-07-21T11:50:17-0500

Pommer said:
Either one believes that we can be better than just what our DNA tells us to be or we are not.

False dichotomy, ambiguous parsing and a key factor is omitted. It makes me wonder if you are just trolling. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Parsing: I think you meant to say "Either one believes that we can be better than just what our DNA tells us to be or we cannot be so." The orginal version doesn't make sense.
False Dichotomy: Assuming you meant my proposed version, then you have overlooked the possibilities that a) one may not have any beliefs, or b) one many be undecided as to which of the options is true.
Missing Factor: You propose our potential is controlled exclusively by genetics and ignore the demonstrable impact of environment.

Summary: What you are trying to say is unclear, but the most probable version is, in my opinion, - what's the technical term - incorrect.

Say it aint so · 2025-07-21T11:54:55-0500

rjs330 said:
That only works if you believe we caused it and have any control over it. Climate change is here and there is nothing we can do to prevent it.

That is quite the modus operandi.

Deny the science, fight the science, then concedes it's here, and there is nothing we can do about it because we have been fighting and denying it for decades.

Pommer · 2025-07-21T12:58:04-0500

Ophiolite said:
False dichotomy, ambiguous parsing and a key factor is omitted. It makes me wonder if you are just trolling. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Parsing: I think you meant to say "Either one believes that we can be better than just what our DNA tells us to be or we cannot be so." The orginal version doesn't make sense.
False Dichotomy: Assuming you meant my proposed version, then you have overlooked the possibilities that a) one may not have any beliefs, or b) one many be undecided as to which of the options is true.
Missing Factor: You propose our potential is controlled exclusively by genetics and ignore the demonstrable impact of environment.

Summary: What you are trying to say is unclear, but the most probable version is, in my opinion, - what's the technical term - incorrect.

It’s philosophy, as such, it is not required to “make sense”.

House Passes Trump-Backed Rescissions Package Slashing $9 BILLION in Bloated Spending — FOREIGN AID, NPR, and PBS on the Chopping Block — Two Republic

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Dona Quixote

Dona Quixote

Dona Quixote

My dad died 1/12/2023. I'm still devastated.

Well-Known Member

Venture life, Burn your Dread

"Encourage him to keep talking. He's hilarious."

"Encourage him to keep talking. He's hilarious."

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape

Well-Known Member

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Similar threads