A Religious View of Welfare

[PoliticalChic]

16. The current welfare policy is very different from the earlier American view which saw God as backing the mistreated poor, but chastising the indolent poor.

a. Proverbs 6:6 Go to the ant, you sluggard; consider its ways and be wise!

b. Proverbs 13:4 The soul of the sluggard craves and gets nothing, But the soul of the diligent is made fat.

c. Proverbs 19:15 Laziness casts into a deep sleep, And an idle man will suffer hunger.

d. Proverbs 20:13 Do not love sleep, or you will become poor; Open your eyes, and you will be satisfied with food.

e. Proverbs 21:25 The desire of the sluggard puts him to death, For his hands refuse to work;

f. Proverbs 28:19 He who tills his land will have plenty of food, But he who follows empty pursuits will have poverty in plenty.




The above warnings come from one book.....

Liberation Theology, from another: "The Communist Manifesto," the 1848 publication written by the political theorists Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Therein the obligation of the poor is simple: revolution.

 

[Steven_R]

So because some bills got vetoed for constitutional violations meant Congress didn't try to pass those bills in the first place? Or that presidents didn't sign off on other unconstitutional bills?

And let's not forget Cleveland's role in the annexation of Hawaii or getting involved in Venezuela, neither of which are called for in Art. 1, Sec. 8. Even Jefferson, the most anti-Federalist of presidents entered into the Louisiana Purchase even though it wasn't called for in the Constitution because he thought it needed to be done.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So because some bills got vetoed for constitutional violations meant Congress didn't try to pass those bills in the first place? Or that presidents didn't sign off on other unconstitutional bills?

And let's not forget Cleveland's role in the annexation of Hawaii or getting involved in Venezuela, neither of which are called for in Art. 1, Sec. 8. Even Jefferson, the most anti-Federalist of presidents entered into the Louisiana Purchase even though it wasn't called for in the Constitution because he thought it needed to be done.

There is a reason that I posted this in 'Religion,' but for the purposes of your posts, I state unequivocally, the use of the federal fisc for the sort of welfare that we see today is unconstitutional.

"Since James Madison is called the Father of our Constitution, it makes sense that we would look to him for clarification on this point. Madison discussed this very issue in an argument he was making against subsidizing a cod fisherman in 1792.

“If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their Own hands; they may a point teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision for the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress; for every object I have mentioned would admit of the application of money, and might be called, if Congress pleased, provisions for the general welfare.”
James Madison, On the Cod Fishery Bill, granting Bounties 1792 The General Welfare Clause Justification for Obamacare -KrisAnne Hall NCRenegade

 

[Steven_R]

The Supreme Court says otherwise. Take it up with them.

Just don't pretend for a second that presidents and Congress strictly abided by the Constitution until FDR. Every single Congress and every single president has engaged in at least some unconstitutional activities, including those that had Founding Fathers involved.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Supreme Court says otherwise. Take it up with them.

Just don't pretend for a second that presidents and Congress strictly abided by the Constitution until FDR. Every single Congress and every single president has engaged in at least some unconstitutional activities, including those that had Founding Fathers involved.

I believe I've put you in your place.

You're dismissed.

 

[Steven_R]

 

[Muhammed]

All my dogs are profitable, and yet still bite..strangers...

Uglygogs.

 

[danielpalos]

We have a federal doctrine of separation of powers, for a very good reason.

You're not serious......are you???

yes, i am really really serious; why aren't you?

 

[PoliticalChic]

We have a federal doctrine of separation of powers, for a very good reason.

You're not serious......are you???

yes, i am really really serious; why aren't you?

Because of how easily one finds that there are folks like you who can type, yet have not the slightest education nor ability to comprehend the world around them.

From John Marshall on, the executive branch and the judicial have worked tirelessly to increase the power of the federal government at the expense of any of the federalism that the founding documents promised.

So much for any separation of powers, you dolt.

 

[danielpalos]

We have a federal doctrine of separation of powers, for a very good reason.

You're not serious......are you???

yes, i am really really serious; why aren't you?

Because of how easily one finds that there are folks like you who can type, yet have not the slightest education nor ability to comprehend the world around them.

From John Marshall on, the executive branch and the judicial have worked tirelessly to increase the power of the federal government at the expense of any of the federalism that the founding documents promised.

So much for any separation of powers, you dolt.

simply appealing to ignorance and feeling smug about it is no substitute for having a good argument I believe we should repeal the 17th Amendment to solve that problem.