Republican Debate?

[chickened]

Do take the time to read the responses to the "Others" link they are more in line with the actual meanings of the verses quoted than the blog that the author wrote.
Quote:
Jesus isn't a socialist. Saying Jesus is socialist is like saying MLK was racist!

Others apparently disagree with you, and the linked sites provide biblical references.

http://www.lcurve.org/writings/BiblicalLiberal.htm

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/is-jesus-christ-a-socialist/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_socialism


It just goes along with what I say -- if you look hard enough for something in that book, you can find it.

 

[punk-a-doodle]

I am not sure there are poor people anymore in the U.S.

Visit some areas in West Virginia, some native American reservations, some intercity areas, etc. I consider not having access to clean, running water, electricity, and a steady supply of food to be poor. I also consider having these things but not having the tools needed for mobility offered to be areas of poverty within the culture of this country. I would not consider the same to be true in some cultures, but those and their languages are rapidly dying off due to assimilation, land encroachment, etc.​

 

[chickened]

Try visiting some other countries their poverty is not limited to small isolated areas in fact the wealth is in small isolated areas and there they have no government supplied opportunities, really no comparison to being poor in America. What you are describing in the latter part of your statement is also known as evolving or adapting to a changing environment, look to the creatures of the world they manage to adapt, the ones that are diverse. Are not people superior in intellect than the animals?
Quote:
Visit some areas in West Virginia, some native American reservations, some intercity areas, etc. I consider not having access to clean, running water, electricity, and a steady supply of food to be poor. I also consider having these things but not having the tools needed for mobility offered to be areas of poverty within the culture of this country. I would not consider the same to be true in some cultures, but those and their languages are rapidly dying off due to assimilation, land encroachment, etc.

 

[chickened]

Well for once we agree, you look hard enough in the Bible you can find anything... including salvation.

Quote:
Jesus isn't a socialist. Saying Jesus is socialist is like saying MLK was racist!

Others apparently disagree with you, and the linked sites provide biblical references.

http://www.lcurve.org/writings/BiblicalLiberal.htm

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/is-jesus-christ-a-socialist/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_socialism


It just goes along with what I say -- if you look hard enough for something in that book, you can find it.

 

[FourPawz]

Quote:
Remember, this country is a representative republic, as opposed to a pure democracy. With a system of pure popular vote, smaller states' citizenery would be steamrolled by the large metropolitan populations forevermore. I'm assuming you have chickens, so do you have an interest in animals and in farming? Do you really want the citizens of NYC, Los Angeles and Chicago having all of the power to elect the executive branch of our government from now on out?

Speaking of the electoral college debate, here's an article on the subject, published today:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/electoral_college_reform_to_preserve_states_rights.html

 

[punk-a-doodle]

I have.

. Still strike me as being poor, especially given statistics on how likely people from these areas are to experience mobility. Not sure why I would not consider them to be living in poverty, ie. "poor people"?

Nope, that is not what I am speaking of. I am speaking of the loss of diversity and a rise in globalization, which has yet to be seen how well adapted it is.

 

[Duramaxgirl]

On health care. I've no problem with going on Medicaid... but my husband insists that he pays for what's his! I just want the security of being able to take care of my kids easily. He insists that once in the sistem one will begine to rely on it and when its gone we won't be able to live with out it. We made $14777 the first year we where married and do not really make a bunch more now. We more then qualify for all the government handouts with 4 kids. I'm proud of him and how hard he works and his belief of being free from handouts (just don't tell him I said so

we do it his way... but with our kids things are always tight! If more people had the pride to work hard for their familys maybe we wouldn't need such a huge obamacare.

 

[chickened]

Then we can agree that being poor is relative to our culture and environment then right?

People in America that are poor with some exceptions are poor because they have not taken opportunity of the resources that are available. Third world countries are poor because they have no opportunities they have no real government only dictatorships or monarchies. Did it occur to you that the 2 places you described as poor areas (intercity and Indian reservations) are areas that receive the larger shares of welfare?

That therein is the problem with evolution in a society we do not yet know where something new in our environment will take us. I took big steps outside my own comfort zone and by the grace of God I am surviving and others have done the same. I do actually believe in helping the poor but not in the way the government does it, I think it should be more at the personal level as the government has amply shown its' inability at running the show. If we stay at our present course as a country we will resemble the countries I speak of, that is not something I as an American am not ready to do.

 

[AquaEyes]

...or the motives behind the Inquisition...yep, anything.

Quote:

 

[punk-a-doodle]

Then we can agree that being poor is relative to our culture and environment then right?

In a simplified way, yes. However, this does not include important factors such as things like social contract theory. In another thread, you had discussed how high school was a case of 'survival' in relation to bullies, and that you 'survived'. If I am honestly fighting to survive, then I should be doing that in a tribal society or by choosing to live on my own entirely. Not in a society where the idea is that citizens give something (ie. tax dollars, military service, what have you) with the return of provided security.

People in America that are poor with some exceptions are poor because they have not taken opportunity of the resources that are available.

Disagree, especially as these same resources are seen as "entitlements" to many, leaving them open to the chopping block.

Third world countries are poor because they have no opportunities they have no real government only dictatorships or monarchies.

Disagree. In many cases, people have taken a society that has functioned for, in some cases, thousands of years, and attempted to alter it's structure, often without paying heed to the geographic and political neccesities of the area.

Did it occur to you that the 2 places you described as poor areas (intercity and Indian reservations) are areas that receive the larger shares of welfare?

Why would I be surprised that more people would be on financial aid programs in areas where job growth, economic mobility, and other factors of class are poor? However, all the places I listed do not have the largest percentage of welfare even were it relevant. http://www.ppinys.org/reports/jtf/welfarespending.htm

I have found that helping to poor in a society with a large population on a person-to-person basis to be inadequate. For instance, according to your initial statement, you are not sure there are any poor people within the States to help, so I am not sure how much your belief in helping the poor would count within the US. The remarks those around me made about those who are not well-off, and the statistics for things such as private charity versus governement dollars, do not seem to support the idea that the poor would be looked after. Nor does our ongoing and changing rate of wealth distribution.​