Originally Posted By: whomod
But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed,
because they cannot repay you. You will be repaid at the resurrection of the just. [Luke 14:13 &14.]

"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least among you, you did not do for me.'"
-Matthew 25:41-45


You know, we could argue about the context of these passages all day, but it wouldn't get us far. Suffice it to say that I am still convinced from all my studies that the primary focus of Christ's teachings regarding compassion still lies in the choices we make as individual human beings concerning other individual human beings. The only even quasi-political entities Jesus ever addressed with commands or condemnation were the Pharisees with their stifling 'supplementary' codes of morality and the Sadducees with their stagnant Temple-centric religious and social heirarchy.

Again, making looking after those who can't look after themselves the government's job, rather than yours and mine and every other individual's moral responsibility, only accomplishes locking the disadvantaged into an inescapable and fatalistic cycle of dependency on the hand that feeds them. I've seen it. It may be well and good for some to sit back and cut a check and feel confident that the powers that be will spend said check providing medical care for underprivileged children rather than Bridges to Nowhere™. But I don't like the idea of faceless bureaucrats determining what's best for the well-being of citizens they'd never go out of their way to meet off the campaign trail. And I ESPECIALLY don't like the precedent set by making anyone dependent on the government for any facet of their existence.

I have no doubt that you genuinely care about the underprivileged, dude. But so do I. And I think there are vastly superior ways to take care of those who can't take care of themselves than "empowering" them into dependency on government cheese. I hope now we understand each other at least a little better.

go.

ᴚ ᴀ ᴐ ᴋ ᴊ ᴌ ᴧ
ಠ_ಠ