If Ron Paul did get elected congress would not back him sadly. He would try to do things they would not agree with and if congress doesn't like it that means you leave.
Republican Debate?
- Thread starter E.M. Silkies
- Start date
- Status
- Dec 18, 2010
- 54
- 0
- 28
All we have to do is elect a more true Tea Party congress. Just be sure they are TRUE Tea Partiers. So many fakers have jumped on the bandwagon just so the voters would believe their lies & elect them to carry on the washington as usual scams.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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.
Epic context fail.
The example in Acts particularly is abused - notice that NO OTHER TIME do the disciples ever behave in such a way. Why did they do this? They knew that Jerusalem was in trouble, so they had no reason to hold property. (The Roman invasion in 70 AD). In addition, it was voluntary, unlike socialism, which relies on government power. Plus, they were "filled with the Holy Spirit," according to the Bible, and socialism doesn't rely on the influence of God, which is what it would take for socialism to work. Something tells me that they were a rather unique case among human beings.
Like I said, you can find ANYTHING in the Bible, but only if you're willing to ditch the context.
As for the "rich man" example, it's pretty clear that he's not warning about wealth per se, but against wealth becoming your god. Money is not the root of all evil, according to the Bible, but the LOVE of money. Totally different.
Context, context, context. Never, EVER read a Bible verse - always read at least a chapter, but preferably the whole book.
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.
Epic context fail.
As for the "rich man" example, it's pretty clear that he's not warning about wealth per se, but against wealth becoming your god. Money is not the root of all evil, according to the Bible, but the LOVE of money. Totally different.
Context, context, context. Never, EVER read a Bible verse - always read at least a chapter, but preferably the whole book.
Quote:
Epic context fail.
The example in Acts particularly is abused - notice that NO OTHER TIME do the disciples ever behave in such a way. Why did they do this? They knew that Jerusalem was in trouble, so they had no reason to hold property. (The Roman invasion in 70 AD). In addition, it was voluntary, unlike socialism, which relies on government power. Plus, they were "filled with the Holy Spirit," according to the Bible, and socialism doesn't rely on the influence of God, which is what it would take for socialism to work. Something tells me that they were a rather unique case among human beings.
Like I said, you can find ANYTHING in the Bible, but only if you're willing to ditch the context.
As for the "rich man" example, it's pretty clear that he's not warning about wealth per se, but against wealth becoming your god. Money is not the root of all evil, according to the Bible, but the LOVE of money. Totally different.
Context, context, context. Never, EVER read a Bible verse - always read at least a chapter, but preferably the whole book.
X2 I think Q9 should run for president, when he's older of course. Over 36.
Epic context fail.
As for the "rich man" example, it's pretty clear that he's not warning about wealth per se, but against wealth becoming your god. Money is not the root of all evil, according to the Bible, but the LOVE of money. Totally different.
Context, context, context. Never, EVER read a Bible verse - always read at least a chapter, but preferably the whole book.
X2 I think Q9 should run for president, when he's older of course. Over 36.
Last edited:
President of the chess club.
Quote:
No, of the USA!
No, of the USA!
You assume that the poor in other countries are ready to give up their personal freedoms, did not work in Korea, Vietnam or really in any culture I am aware of. Social contract theory is just that a theory and has no reality where the rubber meets the road. Another argument to consider is Phillip Pettits'. Tribal survival is the route the American Indians took and look what that got them. One can become to dependant on the government/society and loose all sense of sustainability and reason and operate out of a learned condition that may be flawed or as Mr. Spock would say illogical but we are illogical or we as a race would not always be seeking what we think is logical. It is not in our nature. Read the Chinese parable of the scorpion and the fox sometime.
How long does one dangle the carrot of entitlement/opportunity? they never really go away they always replace them. It takes ambition to act on something that is free and in this country there is no excuse to not get an education for anyone really wanting one but there are plenty of excuses. Why do you suppose the foreigners from eastern block countries do so well here ? they recognize a golden opportunity,our education system teaches us to all be nice to each other and compassionate and all but leaves the skills to survive in the real world out of the classroom.
The idea of giving the poor some money and presto they are no longer poor does not work. I could give you a home worth 10 million and you could not afford to keep it. Again what you say has all been tried through out history and failed but alas each new generation with its' new found knowledge will try and cure the ilks of society and the sad part is the answer is right in their face. The poor are simply not poor because they lack money there are too many other factors involved.
Quote:
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.
How long does one dangle the carrot of entitlement/opportunity? they never really go away they always replace them. It takes ambition to act on something that is free and in this country there is no excuse to not get an education for anyone really wanting one but there are plenty of excuses. Why do you suppose the foreigners from eastern block countries do so well here ? they recognize a golden opportunity,our education system teaches us to all be nice to each other and compassionate and all but leaves the skills to survive in the real world out of the classroom.
The idea of giving the poor some money and presto they are no longer poor does not work. I could give you a home worth 10 million and you could not afford to keep it. Again what you say has all been tried through out history and failed but alas each new generation with its' new found knowledge will try and cure the ilks of society and the sad part is the answer is right in their face. The poor are simply not poor because they lack money there are too many other factors involved.
Quote:
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.
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.
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.
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.
Last edited:
Actually, the poor in America are not as poor as people may think.
For example, 99% of people who live below the "poverty line" in America have refrigerators, and 94% have a TV set. Also, in other countrys, the poor are starving, but here, most of the people who live under the "poverty line" are obese.
For example, 99% of people who live below the "poverty line" in America have refrigerators, and 94% have a TV set. Also, in other countrys, the poor are starving, but here, most of the people who live under the "poverty line" are obese.
Quote:
Playing devil's advocate, most rental places come equipped with at least a stove and a refrigerator. And TV's are cheap, if you stay away from the plasmas and the other big screens.
Lastly, it's been proven that many indigent people can be obese, yet they can still be malnourished. A diet of cheap carbohydrates can make you fat, but you might still be unable to afford green vegetables, fruit and meat.
Playing devil's advocate, most rental places come equipped with at least a stove and a refrigerator. And TV's are cheap, if you stay away from the plasmas and the other big screens.
Lastly, it's been proven that many indigent people can be obese, yet they can still be malnourished. A diet of cheap carbohydrates can make you fat, but you might still be unable to afford green vegetables, fruit and meat.
- Status
Similar threads
New posts New threads Active threads
-
Latest threads
-
Turkey Poult having trouble seeing?
- Started by amarsano
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
-
-
Threads with more replies in the last 15 days
-
-
-
-
Prettiest chicken breeds and plumage color- Started by Beau plus penny
- Replies: 46
-
Question of the Day - Thursday, August 21st, 2025- Started by casportpony
- Replies: 46
-
