1. You should probably be banned for your behavior of late. Let this be a firm warning. 2. Did you make this 650,000 number up? Is this inclusive of every single Iraqi that has died over the last 4-5 years, including natural causes, al Qaeda bombings, etc? Typical glynch...
Im not sure what you mean by "forcibly taking". Our tax dollars are spent in many different ways. Would Jesus advocate "forcibly" taking money for a war on Iraq? There are universal rights and wrongs. If left up to the "Religious Right" and Republicans, there would be no "government handouts". And if voluntary donations are insufficient, they'd rather see innocent children starve. Yes, that's a true Christian and those people will go to heavan.
Give me a break. It's meant to prove the moral superiority of glynch and everyone like him by proving that Christians really don't care about people and glynch is really a better person than all Christians. Wow. What a completely ignorant thing to say. You admit that you are not a part of the community but then go on to pretend that you are by saying what you think the answer is as though you have any insight whatsoever.
I think some of y'all might be confusing the chest-thumping evangilists and other blow hards as real christians.
Jesus never said that people should be forced to give money to anyone. Jesus said that people SHOULD give money to the poor and needy. Jesus even said that there was no way to solve poverty saying there will always be poor among us. Does that mean we shouldn't help them? No. However, I think Jesus would rather have willing donations to the poor as that's the most Christian thing to do.
That is a more eloquent way to say what I was trying to say. When I was in college, I saw a graph showing that as government programs increased and thus taxes increased, the level of charitable contributions decreased at a proportionate rate. Government does the things that private charities used to do...they just do it a lot less efficiently and through higher taxes rather than voluntary contributions. But there are those that think rendering up more money to government is the answer for everything. I do not believe that is what Jesus had in mind.
Do you have the admin power to ban people? Who gives you the right to issue warnings? You should probably not be warning anybody on here about their behavior.
Religious Right, by definition, are conservative. Conservatives don't believe (in general), that the government should be trying to solve personal problems. That has nothing to do with religion. People choose their politics for a myriad of reasons. Conservatives aren't better Christians than Liberals (although they are typically smarter ), and Liberals aren't better Christians than Conservatives. Christians in general, regardless of politics, are the most generous group in the country (unless you want to count millionaires as a group). Trying to paint Christians who happen to be conservative politically as hypocrites is disingenuous.
You're attributing a proportional increase in welfare benefits to raising taxes. If the government was more efficient and eliminated waste, they could accomplish this without hurting most families. How much did we spend on the useless highway construction in Alaska? How many mouths could that have fed? How much have we spent on the Iraq war. Even if we assume that it's a "war on terror" (dubious), how much have we wasted? What if the "Religious Right" redirected the resources opposing gay marriage to feeding the hungry, how much more would we accomplish from a humanitarian stand point? I work with high net worth clients everyday. I can tell an .1% increase in taxes on their wealth would not affect their lifestyle whatsover vs what it would accomplish. I certainly am not exempt from this critique as I myself could always do more. It amazes me why the "Religious Right" does not focus more of their attention to these issues.
Right. Now work with the middle class everyday and tell me how it affects them, because the middle class really pays most of the freight.
The fact Republicans want to eliminate the estate tax for the top 1% of the wealthy demonstrates it's not middle class taxpayers the Republicans want to benefit. Tax cuts for the wealthy - thats what Republicanism is all about.
Good point! But i understand what he's getting at. Different churches have different levels of prayer. I can say a quick five minute prayer to cover anything and everything. Some believe in specific prayer. I personally think its unfair to leave out all those who are suffering beyond their control.
No apology. As an ex Catholic, I realize that my priests, who were often politically liberal during the Vietnam War ,asked us to pray for the N. Vietnamese, the S. Vietnamese. etc. I was wondering about some of the other religions, that to this day are big supporters of President Bush and, I assume, his war.
Actually you can learn a lot about marketting a business by occasionally watching part of his broadcasts. The seamless interaction between his speeches, call for purchases of his products, the website url constantly in the background of his broadcast etc. is masterful. Not to mention that he owns Channel 55. etc. He may well be a Christian who cares about something besides money. I'll leave that for God, assuming he/she/it exists to determine. However, you have to admit that he is a brilliant marketer and businessman as well. Is this arrogance or condescension on my part toward Ol Joel? It is just the way I think and or feel and maybe I'm wrong and he is right about everything.
Jorge, I would think that the moderators might get mad at you demanding once again that they do your will. As far as the 650,000, I have been advising you for a long time to not just rely on your upbringing, apparently narrow education at Rice U, genral GOP talking points and the editorial page of the WSJ. Re the 650,000. I'll guide you a bit. We have had whole threads discussing the matter. However, 30 seconds on googe dot com. Try it. It will help you find information. I typed "lancet 650,000" in the google search box. Granted I did have an unfair advantage over you as I was aware of the "Lancet". "Iraq dead 650,000"might work just as well. Try a few searches yourself. I suppose if nothing else you have heard of Google as a stock. Or do you just purely do internal number crunching. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1469636.ece
Nice link glynch. It does a good job of listing the reasons why the door-to-door survey is flawed. The same survey used to concoct the wildly inaccurate 650,000 figure. Why would you be incented to exaggerate this figure? Hmm.... Whose side are you on in the War on Terror?
