The End Of Christian America

[CFM]

Explain how it was overbearing. Southern apologists always fail to do this.

Nullification Crisis surrounding tariffs in the early 1830s. What you likely don't know is during the War of 1812, New England states met in Hartford, CT and considered seceding because the war was messing with their trade with the enemy, Britain, and their concerns about the ever increasing power of the federal government. Sad thing is when tariffs that led to the nullification crisis benefited those northern manufacturing states, they had no problem with it negatively effecting the southern states.

I can sum up the overbearing in two words: States' rights. The federal government, much like today, has taken on things for which it has no delegated authority. If you deny, you lie.

I don't apologize for the South. They did what they needed to do.

 

[Minister of Truth]

Nullification Crisis surrounding tariffs in the early 1830s. What you likely don't know is during the War of 1812, New England states met in Hartford, CT and considered seceding because the war was messing with their trade with the enemy, Britain, and their concerns about the ever increasing power of the federal government. Sad thing is when tariffs that led to the nullification crisis benefited those northern manufacturing states, they had no problem with it negatively effecting the southern states.

I can sum up the overbearing in two words: States' rights. The federal government, much like today, has taken on things for which it has no delegated authority. If you deny, you lie.

I don't apologize for the South. They did what they needed to do.

1) Secession was never a position on the floor of the Hartford Convention. NE banks did ultimately refuse to give war loans to the government, which ultimately is what caused Madison to change his position on the National Bank. Secession was brought up in a committee and was opposed.

2) Nullification is unconstitutional. Secession is at least debatable, but as long as you are living under the Constitution, you do have to follow the law. South Carolina was the entity being overbearing (and Jackson was a southerner, BTW).

3) I don't apologize for the North taking away your slaves. They did what was right.

 

[Stelakh]

Dear Stelakh:



I love it when people roll with the punches and come up laughing! Well done!

IMT

You will be invited to the barbecues.

Oh, and brisket dinners on Shabbat.

 

[The Dude]

You go to Hell, you filthy, cultural Marxist history revisionist. You proved nothing wrong except proof of your cultural Marxism and your desire for people to put their faith in secular government Gods.

White trash are often very funny without trying

 

[evince]

Dear Eno L. Camino:



I'm not sure whether you're addressing me; but in my perspective, the issue is not property per se. It is property used to arrange social relations by dictating who can work where, when, doing what, and on what terms.

It is this subjugation of the working class to the ownership/investment/banking class which is so iniquitous. We don't need to eliminate private property. Capitalism all but eliminates it now, which allows the bourgeoisie to dictate the terms on which the rest of us are allowed to subsist.

IMT

because its not properly fettered



the right keeps unfettering it when they get power

 

[Stelakh]

Leaving because of an overbearing federal government. You don't have to agree as that is not a requirement for the truth to be the truth.

I'd suggest you have a look at what high-ups had to say about why they decided to wander off into their own government.

I can't believe I have to go over this again.

Alexander H. Stephens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America, had this to say about the cause of the war:

The new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions—African slavery as it exists among us—the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution.

And...

Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition.

Mississippi's Declaration of Secession stated:

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery — the greatest material interest of the world … a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization.

South Carolina actually argued AGAINST States' rights, at least when it came to New York...

In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals.

Stan Deaton, senior historian at the Georgia Historical Society went on record saying:

People think that somehow it demonizes their ancestors [to have fought for slavery]. But the people fighting at the time were very much aware of what was at stake.

Then there's the Compromise of 1850, which included a provision that slavery would not be permitted in the territories newly-acquired from the Mexican War. The south went nuts trying to stop that from happening. They didn't give a fig about state's rights then, either. They wanted to be sure to expand the ability to trade in slaves - because it brought them more money. (Which led to the whole "Bloody Kansas" thing.)

The Civil War was about the South wanting to keep slaves, not states' rights.

You don't have to agree as that is not a requirement for the truth to be the truth.

But I'm digressing.

Hey, Philly Rarebit. Where are you? I'm calling you out, mate.

 

[evince]

lies are all the right have left

 

[IMT]

Dear Eno L. Camino:

What are these dictates which determine where/when/how we can work? Are you referring to employers requiring college degrees, and professional organizations (BAR, AMA, etc.) requiring certification/testing/advanced degrees?

The examples you cite concern academic qualification, to which we could add experience and other criteria. I on the other hand am thinking [for example] in terms of remuneration.

I will develop two examples to illustrate what is at issue:

Suppose that a multi-national corporation ‘owns’ [the ‘property’ thing] a plant in the US, Canada, Mexico, Brasilia, Japan and Germany. The potential exists to divide and pit the working class against itself. It can [for example] tell workers that unless cuts to wages, health benefits and pensions are cut, this plant [wherever it is located] will be closed and whatever would those workers would have produced will be allotted to other workers in whatever country that produce the same goods. Of course, if that reduced package is accepted, this is then used to leverage pressure on other workers in yet another plant. And so the process continues. This process can also be enlarged to include other corporations producing comparable goods, so that pressure is brought to bear on workers from that direction also. Longer hours, less pay, speed up, higher quotas, fewer/no health care benefits, less safety, less vacation and so on – a firm’s ability to maximize profit at worker expense is limited only by the corporate imagination.

This nightmare can be avoided while the economy is expanding. Under those conditions, a few things concessions can be thrown to working people. But in times of economic contraction, no matter how well-intended firms may otherwise be – they have no choice but to exact such measures. Such measures are necessitated by market conditions and the profit imperative.

Another scenario: Suppose that a province or canton is a ‘rump’ region in a nation. It is not particularly well developed, and it is generally poor. The region does however have a natural deposit of some value. But development is costly, and the regional government refuses to develop this resource citing the need of budgetary restraint. Nothing happens for generations. Then a foreign firm enters negotiations with the regional government for access to these natural deposits. Although this corporation has remarkable assets, it offers only a portion of the funds needed to develop this resource, and it does this on the proviso that the regional government matches them. This becomes a gift from the cash-short regional government to the wealthy corporation. As discussion continues, the public learns of these talks. Concerns are raised. 1] These deposits reside on protected, native lands. 2] Depending on how this resource is developed, there is potential for significant environmental damage which militates against the quality of human life. 3] The regional government can fulfill its financial commitment to development if and only if significant budgetary cuts are made to other social spending [say education, seniors, etc.]. 4] The corporation in question is a foreign-based operation, and profit developed from this project would be carried not only outside the region but outside the country.

Here, progress occurs only if all parties agree to the arrangements. Even if leadership comes forward and develops other arrangements, such as local people determining how [by what method] or at what rate the resource is developed, the corporation refuses these terms declaring this plan ‘unprofitable.’ The project ends. Meanwhile, this valuable resource in a needy region goes undeveloped because the regional government under any administration refuses to take action to develop this resource. The premise is, that unless there is a powerful, Capitalist partner and potential supporter of the regional government, no action will be taken and one generation must wait until it is replaced by another which may then be given an ‘opportunity’ to ‘get it right’ [meaning that there some jobs in construction, development and transport become available while the resource lasts, and the operation remains ‘profitable’ to foreign owners. Here, the regional government exists not an asset, but an obstacle to economic development based on the unstated premise that resources exist not for the need of all, but for the greed of a few. This, after all, is a ‘Capitalist’ system.

IMT

 

[evince]

you forget


they are sociopaths and think its fine for children to carry buckets of hot melted glass for 10 hours a day

 

[Minister of Truth]

Dear Eno L. Camino:



The examples you cite concern academic qualification, to which we could add experience and other criteria. I on the other hand am thinking [for example] in terms of remuneration.

I will develop two examples to illustrate what is at issue:

Suppose that a multi-national corporation ‘owns’ [the ‘property’ thing] a plant in the US, Canada, Mexico, Brasilia, Japan and Germany. The potential exists to divide and pit the working class against itself. It can [for example] tell workers that unless cuts to wages, health benefits and pensions are cut, this plant [wherever it is located] will be closed and whatever would those workers would have produced will be allotted to other workers in whatever country that produce the same goods. Of course, if that reduced package is accepted, this is then used to leverage pressure on other workers in yet another plant. And so the process continues. This process can also be enlarged to include other corporations producing comparable goods, so that pressure is brought to bear on workers from that direction also. Longer hours, less pay, speed up, higher quotas, fewer/no health care benefits, less safety, less vacation and so on – a firm’s ability to maximize profit at worker expense is limited only by the corporate imagination.

This nightmare can be avoided while the economy is expanding. Under those conditions, a few things concessions can be thrown to working people. But in times of economic contraction, no matter how well-intended firms may otherwise be – they have no choice but to exact such measures. Such measures are necessitated by market conditions and the profit imperative.

Another scenario: Suppose that a province or canton is a ‘rump’ region in a nation. It is not particularly well developed, and it is generally poor. The region does however have a natural deposit of some value. But development is costly, and the regional government refuses to develop this resource citing the need of budgetary restraint. Nothing happens for generations. Then a foreign firm enters negotiations with the regional government for access to these natural deposits. Although this corporation has remarkable assets, it offers only a portion of the funds needed to develop this resource, and it does this on the proviso that the regional government matches them. This becomes a gift from the cash-short regional government to the wealthy corporation. As discussion continues, the public learns of these talks. Concerns are raised. 1] These deposits reside on protected, native lands. 2] Depending on how this resource is developed, there is potential for significant environmental damage which militates against the quality of human life. 3] The regional government can fulfill its financial commitment to development if and only if significant budgetary cuts are made to other social spending [say education, seniors, etc.]. 4] The corporation in question is a foreign-based operation, and profit developed from this project would be carried not only outside the region but outside the country.

Here, progress occurs only if all parties agree to the arrangements. Even if leadership comes forward and develops other arrangements, such as local people determining how [by what method] or at what rate the resource is developed, the corporation refuses these terms declaring this plan ‘unprofitable.’ The project ends. Meanwhile, this valuable resource in a needy region goes undeveloped because the regional government under any administration refuses to take action to develop this resource. The premise is, that unless there is a powerful, Capitalist partner and potential supporter of the regional government, no action will be taken and one generation must wait until it is replaced by another which may then be given an ‘opportunity’ to ‘get it right’ [meaning that there some jobs in construction, development and transport become available while the resource lasts, and the operation remains ‘profitable’ to foreign owners. Here, the regional government exists not an asset, but an obstacle to economic development based on the unstated premise that resources exist not for the need of all, but for the greed of a few. This, after all, is a ‘Capitalist’ system.

IMT

These are working conditions. They are not the same thing as the ability to seek and gain employment.

 

[Minister of Truth]

I'd suggest you have a look at what high-ups had to say about why they decided to wander off into their own government.

I can't believe I have to go over this again.

Oh, not to worry. We have rehashed this debate ad nauseum, quoting from the secession documents and CSA leaders, yet you will still find southern apologists re-setting the debate, starting over with 1) overbearing federal government 2) states's rights 3) economic conditions.

 

[IMT]

Dear evince:

lies are all the right have left

Dear evince:

Yes, yes, the right-wing lies and slings mud.

But is it true that President Obama is pressuring Illinois to adopt a bipartisan plan for austerity?

And is it also true that Governor Snyder found state Democrats [also right-wingers] and plenty more Democrats in the Detroit Federation of Teachers/American Federation of Teachers and the Coalition for the Future of Detroit Schoolchildren and Democrat union officials with whom to negotiate the ‘restructuring’ of Detroit Schools [whatever THAT means]?

So long as we’re discussing ‘truth,’ evince, isn’t it true that ‘from Reagan to the Obama administration, Democrats and Republicans alike have overseen a corporate-government assault on the jobs, wages, pensions and health benefits of working people?’

‘The ruling elite has dismantled the bulk of the country’s industrial infrastructure, destroying decent-paying jobs by the millions, and turned to the most parasitic and criminal forms of financial speculation as the main source of its profit and private wealth. Untold trillions have been squandered to finance perpetual war and the maniacal self-enrichment of the top 1 percent and 0.1 percent. The basic infrastructure of the country has been starved of funds and left to rot, to the point where uncounted millions of people are being poisoned with lead and other toxins from corroded water systems. Flint, Michigan is just the tip of the iceberg.’

Isn’t it true, evince, that…

‘Under Obama, this social counterrevolution has been intensified. The financial meltdown of 2008 has been utilized by the same forces that precipitated the crash to carry through a reordering of social relations aimed at reversing every social gain won by the working class in the course of a century of struggle?’

Isn’t it true that ‘a central target of the attack is health care for working people?’

Isn’t it true that ‘Obamacare is the spearhead of a worked-out strategy to reduce the quantity and quality of health care available to workers and reorganize the health care system directly on a class basis?’

And evince--isn’t it true that ‘corporate and government costs are to be slashed by gutting employer-paid health care, forcing workers individually to buy expensive, bare-bones plans from the insurance monopolies, and rationing drugs, tests and medical procedures to make them inaccessible to workers?’

Isn’t it time, evince, that you come clean and tell us that the Democratic Party fully supports the American Imperial agenda, and that you fully support the Democratic Party in its ruthless attack on working class people of the US?

IMT

 

[Stelakh]

I go by how Jesus actually did things. He never once went to the government and had them mandate what you would have the government mandate. Jesus didn't have to say not to, His ACTIONS are all that's needed to know he didn't support it.

What's sad is the Liberals who constantly talk about a separation of religion and government don't mind mixing religion and government when it comes to supporting certain things like social welfare. Typical hypocrites. Actually had one tell me that my religious beliefs shouldn't play a role in my decision concerning abortion or same sex marriage because there was a separation of church and state. However, when asked why he supported government mandated social welfare programs, he said "it was the Christian thing to do". In other words, the typical Liberal hypocrite.

Hmmmmmm. Interesting.

The bible is FULL of examples where Jesus mandated that his disciples help the poor, I mean directly told them to. In fact, the Bible is FULL of that kind of thing.

To wit:

Hebrews 13:16
Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God.

Philippians 2:4
Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.

Luke 6:38
Give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you.”

1 John 3:17
But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?

Matthew 25:35-40
For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ ...

James 2:14-17
What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

Galatians 6:2
Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.

John 15:12
This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.

Matthew 5:16
In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.

Proverbs 19:17
Whoever is generous to the poor lends to the Lord, and he will repay him for his deed.

Proverbs 22:9
Whoever has a bountiful eye will be blessed, for he shares his bread with the poor.

Matthew 5:42
Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.

Romans 15:1
We who are strong have an obligation to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves.

John 15:13
Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.

Matthew 10:8
Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, cast out demons. You received without paying; give without pay.

Acts 20:35
In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’

Romans 12:13
Contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality.

Luke 10:27
And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.”

Mark 10:21
And Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, “You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”

Luke 3:10-11
And the crowds asked him, “What then shall we do?” And he answered them, “Whoever has two tunics is to share with him who has none, and whoever has food is to do likewise.”

Acts 4:32-35
Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common. And with great power the apostles were giving their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.

1 Timothy 5:8
But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

Matthew 25:44-45
Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’

Psalm 41:1-3
To the choirmaster. A Psalm of David. Blessed is the one who considers the poor! In the day of trouble the Lord delivers him; the Lord protects him and keeps him alive; he is called blessed in the land; you do not give him up to the will of his enemies. The Lord sustains him on his sickbed; in his illness you restore him to full health.

Matthew 25:31-46
When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me

1 Timothy 6:17-19
As for the rich in this present age, charge them not to be haughty, nor to set their hopes on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly provides us with everything to enjoy. They are to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share, thus storing up treasure for themselves as a good foundation for the future, so that they may take hold of that which is truly life.

Matthew 6:24
No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money.

Acts 4:34-37
There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need. Thus Joseph, who was also called by the apostles Barnabas, a Levite, a native of Cyprus, sold a field that belonged to him and brought the money and laid it at the apostles' feet.

Galatians 6:9
And let us not grow weary of doing good, for in due season we will reap, if we do not give up.

Romans 12:10
Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor.

Ephesians 2:10
For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

James 2:1-26
My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, “You sit here in a good place,” while you say to the poor man, “You stand over there,” or, “Sit down at my feet,” have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? Listen, my beloved brothers, has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom, which he has promised to those who love him?

Acts 20:35-38
In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’” And when he had said these things, he knelt down and prayed with them all. And there was much weeping on the part of all; they embraced Paul and kissed him, being sorrowful most of all because of the word he had spoken, that they would not see his face again. And they accompanied him to the ship.

Matthew 5:41
And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.

James 4:17
So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.

James 2:1-5:20
My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, “You sit here in a good place,” while you say to the poor man, “You stand over there,” or, “Sit down at my feet,” have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? Listen, my beloved brothers, has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom, which he has promised to those who love him? ...

Deuteronomy 15:11
For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.’

Matthew 14:13-21
Now when Jesus heard this, he withdrew from there in a boat to a desolate place by himself. But when the crowds heard it, they followed him on foot from the towns. When he went ashore he saw a great crowd, and he had compassion on them and healed their sick. Now when it was evening, the disciples came to him and said, “This is a desolate place, and the day is now over; send the crowds away to go into the villages and buy food for themselves.” But Jesus said, “They need not go away; you give them something to eat.” They said to him, “We have only five loaves here and two fish.”

So forget governmental mandate. If you are a Christian (as it seems you may be from your quoted comment), you have a mandate from Jesus and God to help those who are poor.

And you don't need a biblical mandate for being a decent person and helping those less fortunate as you can. You just need to be a decent person, full stop.

If I have to dig up more quotes, I can.

 

[philly rabbit]

Hmmmmmm. Interesting.

The bible is FULL of examples where Jesus mandated that his disciples help the poor, I mean directly told them to. In fact, the Bible is FULL of that kind of thing.

To wit:



So forget governmental mandate. If you are a Christian (as it seems you may be from your quoted comment), you have a mandate from Jesus and God to help those who are poor.

And you don't need a biblical mandate for being a decent person and helping those less fortunate as you can. You just need to be a decent person, full stop.

If I have to dig up more quotes, I can.

If he's a Christian (or a decent moral person, you Marxist disgrace) how do you know he doesn't help the poor or the down and out? The disciples of Christ were not government bureaucrats, they were ordinary common people from the community. The message of Christ was community charity, not governmental wealth redistribution to further empower the government.

You have some nerve quoting scripture that you wish to eradicate and replace with your cultural Marxism and your anti first amendment socialism. Everything with you begins and ends with government. This is why leftists like you never open your wallets to help out your fellow man because for you everytrhing has to be done collectively from a central governmental power.

 

[Stelakh]

If he's a Christian (or a decent moral person, you Marxist disgrace) how do you know he doesn't help the poor or the down and out? The disciples of Christ were not government bureaucrats, they were ordinary common people from the community. The message of Christ was community charity, not governmental wealth redistribution to further empower the government.

You have some nerve quoting scripture that you wish to eradicate and replace with your cultural Marxism and your anti first amendment socialism. Everything with you begins and ends with government. This is why leftists like you never open your wallets to help out your fellow man because for you everytrhing has to be done collectively from a central governmental power.

Oh, you're back, are you?

And apparently you're still incapable of reading more than a line or two, or you'd know I put my money, time and effort where my mouth is.

Why do I have some nerve quoting scripture, pray tell? Since I actually follow the tenets laid out above and I'm not even a Christian? Because I used the Bible to say, "Oh, yes, Jesus DID mandate to his disciples that they go out and help the poor" and I'm correct about it?

You're going to have to do a lot better than your pathetic attempts here, I'm afraid. Your rank ignorance isn't just showing, it's kicking its legs up and singing show tunes.

Go back and read what I've said through this entire thread, you obtuse piece of flotsam, then come apologize like a good little puppet.

And hey, would you mind finding something to call me besides, "Marxist"? I'm bored with that, now. I rather liked the Woodstock one. Want to start referring to me with that? That'd be great. I always enjoy a good laugh.

And that's all you're good for, isn't it? A laugh.

Run along now.

You're done.

 

[Minister of Truth]

 

[Darth Omar]

Hmmmmmm. Interesting.

The bible is FULL of examples where Jesus mandated that his disciples help the poor, I mean directly told them to. In fact, the Bible is FULL of that kind of thing.

To wit:



So forget governmental mandate. If you are a Christian (as it seems you may be from your quoted comment), you have a mandate from Jesus and God to help those who are poor.

And you don't need a biblical mandate for being a decent person and helping those less fortunate as you can. You just need to be a decent person, full stop.

If I have to dig up more quotes, I can.

Jesus' ethical or moral teachings were almost exclusively directed at the individual. The Pharisees were the only exception I can think of. Liberals who try to use Jesus' moral instruction to justify wealth distribution are guilty of hijacking scripture.

Regarding the OP: America IS becoming less Christian and increasingly secular. But as long as the majority claim to be Christian we are still a Christian nation based on that metric. America was never a Christian nation in theocratic terms; was never intended to be and never will be, because 'Christian theocracy' is an oxymoron.

The founders knew this better than our modern secular liberal friends who bristle instinctively at the phrase 'Christian nation'.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Hmmmmmm. Interesting.

The bible is FULL of examples where Jesus mandated that his disciples help the poor, I mean directly told them to. In fact, the Bible is FULL of that kind of thing.

To wit:



So forget governmental mandate. If you are a Christian (as it seems you may be from your quoted comment), you have a mandate from Jesus and God to help those who are poor.

And you don't need a biblical mandate for being a decent person and helping those less fortunate as you can. You just need to be a decent person, full stop.

If I have to dig up more quotes, I can.

Let's not forget these:

Proverbs 13:4
The soul of the sluggard craves and gets nothing, while the soul of the diligent is richly supplied.

Colossians 3:23
Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men,

2 Thessalonians 3:10
For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.


Proverbs 10:4
A slack hand causes poverty, but the hand of the diligent makes rich.

Proverbs 18:9
Whoever is slack in his work is a brother to him who destroys.

Proverbs 21:25
The desire of the sluggard kills him, for his hands refuse to labor.

Proverbs 20:4
The sluggard does not plow in the autumn; he will seek at harvest and have nothing.

Proverbs 19:15
Slothfulness casts into a deep sleep, and an idle person will suffer hunger.

Proverbs 12:24
The hand of the diligent will rule, while the slothful will be put to forced labor.


Proverbs 6:6
Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise.

James 1:22
But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.

2 Thessalonians 3:11-12
For we hear that some among you walk in idleness, not busy at work, but busybodies. Now such persons we command and encourage in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work quietly and to earn their own living.

Proverbs 14:23
In all toil there is profit, but mere talk tends only to poverty.

Proverbs 10:5
He who gathers in summer is a prudent son, but he who sleeps in harvest is a son who brings shame.

Ephesians 4:28
Let the thief no longer steal, but rather let him labor, doing honest work with his own hands, so that he may have something to share with anyone in need.

Proverbs 10:26
Like vinegar to the teeth and smoke to the eyes, so is the sluggard to those who send him.

Proverbs 22:29
Do you see a man skillful in his work? He will stand before kings; he will not stand before obscure men.

Ecclesiastes 10:18
Through sloth the roof sinks in, and through indolence the house leaks.

Proverbs 12:11
Whoever works his land will have plenty of bread, but he who follows worthless pursuits lacks sense

2 Corinthians 9:6
The point is this: whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully.

2 Thessalonians 3:8
Nor did we eat anyone's bread without paying for it, but with toil and labor we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you.

 

[IMT]

Dear Eno L. Camino:

I had to serious hunting to locate your post. If I don't get back to you, it doesn't mean I'm ignoring you; likely, it means I'm going blind.

These are working conditions. They are not the same thing as the ability to seek and gain employment.

I can work with 'conditions.' So long as the ownership/investment/banking class together with the political class remain sole determiners of the 'conditions,' working people will never be 'free' to work. Unless perhaps it is to 'work for free,' which will never feed anyone.

IMT

 

[IMT]

Dear evince:

because its not properly fettered

the right keeps unfettering it when they get power

Rather than 'fettering' the bourgeoisie, why not free the proletariat?

Come to the Dark Side, evince!

IMT