Minimum Wage Is Overpayment

Just as the government shouldn't do something because it fulfills a Buddhist obligation, so should the government not do something solely becaue of the "christianity" of that thing. Especially this government which promises a separation.
 
The point I am trying to make (possibly badly) is that Religion (Christian at least) teaches you to bow to those in authority, and defer to them to handle your problems
 
uscitizen said:
The point I am trying to make (possibly badly) is that Religion (Christian at least) teaches you to bow to those in authority, and defer to them to handle your problems
Click to expand...
It does not teach you to look to the government. It says that God overlooks and cares even about the birds. At least stick to the script.

The point I am really making here, is that a contest to pretend that each party is holier than the other is disgusting. Especially from a group that has preached the separation clause for decades... The hypocrisy it steeps itself in should be enough for y'all to simply avoid the mention of how much holier you are than the Religious Right.
 
uscitizen said:
The point I am trying to make (possibly badly) is that Religion (Christian at least) teaches you to bow to those in authority, and defer to them to handle your problems
Click to expand...

Right. And isn't it so, also, that in relying on churches and the like to handle charitable matters, too many people who don't belong to a church will fall through the cracks and will receive no aid?

Wouldn't it be preferable to place a time limit on aid, and require some sort of community work along with job training for those fit to work in some capacity? Isn't that the real purpose of welfare, anyway, to give a hand up to people who need it until they can become self-reliant? Those who are not and never will be fit to work because of health reasons or other personal shortcomings should be exempted from this, but the present system does nothing to foster individual dignity or initiative, or any kind of work ethic; in fact it discourages these things.
 
Damocles said:
It does not teach you to look to the government. It says that God overlooks and cares even about the birds. At least stick to the script.

The point I am really making here, is that a contest to pretend that each party is holier than the other is disgusting. Especially from a group that has preached the separation clause for decades... The hypocrisy it steeps itself in should be enough for y'all to simply avoid the mention of how much holier you are than the Religious Right.
Click to expand...

BIG LOL
I claim no holiness, I just observe. I don't believe in heaven, hell, satan , eternal life or God.
 
Damocles said:
However, the Government is not a Christian. All good Christians realize that it was a personal responsibility, not that of the government.
Click to expand...

Damo, virtually ALL charity or aid to the poor goes through some organizational tool -- whether it be the State Medicaid office, or through the United Way.

Hardly anybody is cooking meals, and personally delivering them to homes with hungry or sick children.

This is just a reality in the modern world.
 
Thorn said:
Right. And isn't it so, also, that in relying on churches and the like to handle charitable matters, too many people who don't belong to a church will fall through the cracks and will receive no aid?

Wouldn't it be preferable to place a time limit on aid, and require some sort of community work along with job training for those fit to work in some capacity? Isn't that the real purpose of welfare, anyway, to give a hand up to people who need it until they can become self-reliant? Those who are not and never will be fit to work because of health reasons or other personal shortcomings should be exempted from this, but the present system does nothing to foster individual dignity or initiative, or any kind of work ethic; in fact it discourages these things.
Click to expand...

but if the minimum wage is not enough for those of limited talents and IQ to become self-reliant. also this is not a one time fix, it is an ongoing problem.
 
Thorn said:
Right. And isn't it so, also, that in relying on churches and the like to handle charitable matters, too many people who don't belong to a church will fall through the cracks and will receive no aid?

Wouldn't it be preferable to place a time limit on aid, and require some sort of community work along with job training for those fit to work in some capacity? Isn't that the real purpose of welfare, anyway, to give a hand up to people who need it until they can become self-reliant? Those who are not and never will be fit to work because of health reasons or other personal shortcomings should be exempted from this, but the present system does nothing to foster individual dignity or initiative, or any kind of work ethic; in fact it discourages these things.
Click to expand...


Wouldn't it be preferable to place a time limit on aid, and require some sort of community work along with job training for those fit to work in some capacity?


Where've you been? Welfare reform a decade ago, made these requirments.
 
Yet you argue it is more holy to be a Democrat? Come on...

There are logical reasons to have government help people without attempting to resort to such arguments. It is, in fact, very hypocritical from a group who have largely put forward it was wrong for the RR to do so.

IMO, government should not be run by religious reasoning, and I am glad that I was born in a place where it isn't.
 
Cypress said:
Damo, virtually ALL charity or aid to the poor goes through some organizational tool -- whether it be the State Medicaid office, or through the United Way.

Hardly anybody is cooking meals, and personally delivering them to homes with hungry or sick children.

This is just a reality in the modern world.
Click to expand...
There is a difference when one chooses to give money to the United Way as a "Christian" thing and when another forces somebody else to give money because it is a "Christian" thing.

Once again, the hypocrisy in the "We are holier" argument is astounding to me.
 
Damocles said:
There is a difference when one chooses to give money to the United Way as a "Christian" thing and when another forces somebody else to give money because it is a "Christian" thing.

Once again, the hypocrisy in the "We are holier" argument is astounding to me.
Click to expand...


Taxes are a fact of life. If we pay taxes to the Pentagon, we certainly can pay taxes for a modest social safety network. Its consistent with the moral values of all regligions, and even secular morality.
 
Cypress;50595Where've you been? Welfare reform a decade ago said:
That being the case, it appears that there was considerable inadequacy then, in the reformed structure given the push (and funding!) for what the Bush administration called "faith-based initiatives".

In answer to your opening question, mostly in the lab. Remember too, that I'm a foreigner, sort of, and that I'm largely unfamiliar with the nuts and bolts.

I have, however, worked in institutions that were allied with some faith-based organizations (SallyAnn in particular), and the emphasis on attending services in order to receive help was appalling. That's why this should never be left to churches.
Click to expand...
 
I argue it is more holy to be a demoncrat ????

I am not in anyway claiming that the govt should be run by religious reasoning. You have entirely missed my point.
 
Cypress said:
Taxes are a fact of life. If we pay taxes to the Pentagon, we certainly can pay taxes for a modest social safety network. Its consistent with the moral values of all regligions, and even secular morality.
Click to expand...
Once again, "a fact of life" only once covered by Christ, and not because it was "the Christian way to handle one's responsibility toward others"...

Presenting it as "We are more holy so vote for us because we give money to the poor." is simply another way for religion to intrude on government. The hypocrisy of the case even being made by those who just a short period ago told me that one shouldn't make laws based on religion is very evident. Either you support making government decisions for religious purposes or you don't, don't attempt to apply that test to only the "opposition".
 
uscitizen said:
I argue it is more holy to be a demoncrat ????

I am not in anyway claiming that the govt should be run by religious reasoning. You have entirely missed my point.
Click to expand...
As you have mine.

People are in here thinking I'm arguing against government help. That is not what I am saying here. I have stated from when the first time it was made, the "It's more Christian to be Democrat" statement, that being "more christian" is not the reason to provide such help. It does not fulfill a personal responsibility toward others by using the faceless secular entity to get the Christian Will done....

It isn't more holy to do it as a D or an R.
 
Cypress said:
Taxes are a fact of life. If we pay taxes to the Pentagon, we certainly can pay taxes for a modest social safety network. Its consistent with the moral values of all regligions, and even secular morality.
Click to expand...
I haven't argued against secular reasoning, I have stated unequivocally that it is not more holy to work solely through government for this help. That it is clearly not the message that Christ spoke. The one time he mentions taxation it certainly wasn't because government should be the tool of Christians.
 
Damocles said:
Once again, "a fact of life" only once covered by Christ, and not because it was "the Christian way to handle one's responsibility toward others"...

Presenting it as "We are more holy so vote for us because we give money to the poor." is simply another way for religion to intrude on government. The hypocrisy of the case even being made by those who just a short period ago told me that one shouldn't make laws based on religion is very evident. Either you support making government decisions for religious purposes or you don't, don't attempt to apply that test to only the "opposition".
Click to expand...

all I have siad in this thread relating to that Damo, is that is the majority of voters in the USA are Christians , it is logical to assume that in this quasi democratic government we have it is normal for Christian types of values to show up in our laws and leglislation.

just an observation not in any way an endorsement whatsoever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top