Equality: What's the Difference? Equality means each individual or group of people is given the same resources or opportunities. ... Equity recognizes that each person has different circumstances and allocates the exact resources and opportunities needed to reach an equal outcome.
In plain English, that's just confirmation that the government has nothing. And that it has nothing because it does not produce anything. And that the only way it gets anything is to steal it from actual producers at the barrel of a government gun and then redistribute it to those whom it is biased toward.
In that regard, government is the most biased entity on the planet.
So you think our government, and the constitution we use as a rule book for that government is a bad thing? You hate the USA because it requires it's citizens to contribute to it's cost?
So you think our government, and the constitution we use as a rule book for that government is a bad thing? You hate the USA because it requires it's citizens to contribute to it's cost?
Equality: What's the Difference? Equality means each individual or group of people is given the same resources or opportunities. ... Equity recognizes that each person has different circumstances and allocates the exact resources and opportunities needed to reach an equal outcome. View attachment 502680
So you think our government, and the constitution we use as a rule book for that government is a bad thing? You hate the USA because it requires it's citizens to contribute to it's cost?
Ok, but you didn't answer the question. Do you believe we should have a government that by necessity has to depend on taxing it's citizens to exist? Is our government, which includes the IRS a bad thing? Do you like having an infrastructure?
Equality: What's the Difference? Equality means each individual or group of people is given the same resources or opportunities. ... Equity recognizes that each person has different circumstances and allocates the exact resources and opportunities needed to reach an equal outcome. View attachment 502680
It's Alinskyite crap where the left tries to use religion to justify their putting half of humanity in chains.
I don't even know what that poster said exactly, I've had the clown on ignore for so long.
But the strategy never changes. Make the enemy live up to his own value system.
And that includes disingenuously using Jesus when it suits their purposes.
It's actually not a bad strategy when the left has no values per se except to gain power by any means
necessary.
It's Alinskyite crap where the left tries to use religion to justify their putting half of humanity in chains.
I don't even know what that poster said exactly, I've had the clown on ignore for so long.
But the strategy never changes. Make the enemy live up to his own value system.
And that includes disingenuously using Jesus when it suits their purposes.
It's actually not a bad strategy when the left has no values per se except to gain power by any means
necessary.
So you think it's unfair to ask someone who claims to base their decisions on guidance from the bible a few questions about what is actually in the bible? Really?
No, it is not. They never put government forcing folks to do things against their will in the bible. They had voluntarily come to that accord. You take that passage out of context. Further up, Acts 4: 32.
"And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common."
Most Christians have no problem with Mutual Societies. In fact, you will hear them advertised as an alternative to Health Insurance on conservative radio stations. Making a profit off of health care is pretty evil to a lot of conservative Christians.
There is nothing at all wrong with socialism, as long as it is not forced. Voluntary Socialism is the very root of Christian charity.
Christians have nothing against Energy Co-ops, Food Co-ops, Credit Unions, Mutual aid societies, etc.
It is when there is coercion, which is a form of violence? THAT is what is anti-Christian.
A lot of folks don't know this about the history of Socialism, but it was, actually, invented in America, (the idea from Robert Owen in England though,) NOT Europe. Marx stole the idea from the Native Americans and Owenism.
At one time, the left and the right got along well. Lysander Spooner and Josiah Warren were friends, and I believe acquainted with Owen, who for whatever reason, established his social experiments in the New World.
Marx would have been. . . what? Seven years old when this occurred? What a neophyte, Statist, Marx always was.
Only in America, do Americans know how to balance the rights of the individual, with the community. We have for a long time, and we learned it from the natives. Those silly, silly Eurotrash commies don't have a clue.
Owenism and New Harmony
"In 1825, Warren became aware of the "social system" of Robert Owen and began to talk with others in Cincinnati about founding a communist colony.[8] When this group failed to come to agreement about the form and goals of their proposed community, Warren "sold his factory after only two years of operation, packed up his young family, and took his place as one of 900 or so Owenites who had decided to become part of the founding population of New Harmony, Indiana."[2] The Cincinnati colony was attempted without Warren's involvement, but failed.[9] Warren traveled by flat-boat from Cincinnati, arriving in New Harmony in early May, 1825. By 1827, he had returned to Cincinnati, convinced that the complete individualization of interests was necessary to cooperation. He considered Owen's experiment "communism," which he rejected in no uncertain terms, but he developed a warm and lasting respect for Robert Owen and his sons. One of his earliest writings, published in The March of Mind in 1827, attests to this, as do later writings.[10]"
It's Alinskyite crap where the left tries to use religion to justify their putting half of humanity in chains.
I don't even know what that poster said exactly, I've had the clown on ignore for so long.
But the strategy never changes. Make the enemy live up to his own value system.
And that includes disingenuously using Jesus when it suits their purposes.
It's actually not a bad strategy when the left has no values per se except to gain power by any means
necessary.
No, it is not. They never put government forcing folks to do things against their will in the bible. They had voluntarily come to that accord. You take that passage out of context. Further up, Acts 4: 32.
"And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common."
Most Christians have no problem with Mutual Societies. In fact, you will hear them advertised as an alternative to Health Insurance on conservative radio stations. Making a profit off of health care is pretty evil to a lot of conservative Christians.
There is nothing at all wrong with socialism, as long as it is not forced. Voluntary Socialism is the very root of Christian charity.
Christians have nothing against Energy Co-ops, Food Co-ops, Credit Unions, Mutual aid societies, etc.
It is when there is coercion, which is a form of violence? THAT is what is anti-Christian.
A lot of folks don't know this about the history of Socialism, but it was, actually, invented in America, (the idea from Robert Owen in England though,) NOT Europe. Marx stole the idea from the Native Americans and Owenism.
At one time, the left and the right got along well. Lysander Spooner and Josiah Warren were friends, and I believe acquainted with Owen, who for whatever reason, established his social experiments in the New World.
Marx would have been. . . what? Seven years old when this occurred? What a neophyte, Statist, Marx always was.
Only in America, do Americans know how to balance the rights of the individual, with the community. We have for a long time, and we learned it from the natives. Those silly, silly Eurotrash commies don't have a clue.
Owenism and New Harmony
"In 1825, Warren became aware of the "social system" of Robert Owen and began to talk with others in Cincinnati about founding a communist colony.[8] When this group failed to come to agreement about the form and goals of their proposed community, Warren "sold his factory after only two years of operation, packed up his young family, and took his place as one of 900 or so Owenites who had decided to become part of the founding population of New Harmony, Indiana."[2] The Cincinnati colony was attempted without Warren's involvement, but failed.[9] Warren traveled by flat-boat from Cincinnati, arriving in New Harmony in early May, 1825. By 1827, he had returned to Cincinnati, convinced that the complete individualization of interests was necessary to cooperation. He considered Owen's experiment "communism," which he rejected in no uncertain terms, but he developed a warm and lasting respect for Robert Owen and his sons. One of his earliest writings, published in The March of Mind in 1827, attests to this, as do later writings.[10]"
No, it is not. They never put government forcing folks to do things against their will in the bible. They had voluntarily come to that accord. You take that passage out of context. Further up, Acts 4: 32.
"And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common."
Most Christians have no problem with Mutual Societies. In fact, you will hear them advertised as an alternative to Health Insurance on conservative radio stations. Making a profit off of health care is pretty evil to a lot of conservative Christians.
There is nothing at all wrong with socialism, as long as it is not forced. Voluntary Socialism is the very root of Christian charity.
Christians have nothing against Energy Co-ops, Food Co-ops, Credit Unions, Mutual aid societies, etc.
It is when there is coercion, which is a form of violence? THAT is what is anti-Christian.
A lot of folks don't know this about the history of Socialism, but it was, actually, invented in America, (the idea from Robert Owen in England though,) NOT Europe. Marx stole the idea from the Native Americans and Owenism.
At one time, the left and the right got along well. Lysander Spooner and Josiah Warren were friends, and I believe acquainted with Owen, who for whatever reason, established his social experiments in the New World.
Marx would have been. . . what? Seven years old when this occurred? What a neophyte, Statist, Marx always was.
Only in America, do Americans know how to balance the rights of the individual, with the community. We have for a long time, and we learned it from the natives. Those silly, silly Eurotrash commies don't have a clue.
Owenism and New Harmony
"In 1825, Warren became aware of the "social system" of Robert Owen and began to talk with others in Cincinnati about founding a communist colony.[8] When this group failed to come to agreement about the form and goals of their proposed community, Warren "sold his factory after only two years of operation, packed up his young family, and took his place as one of 900 or so Owenites who had decided to become part of the founding population of New Harmony, Indiana."[2] The Cincinnati colony was attempted without Warren's involvement, but failed.[9] Warren traveled by flat-boat from Cincinnati, arriving in New Harmony in early May, 1825. By 1827, he had returned to Cincinnati, convinced that the complete individualization of interests was necessary to cooperation. He considered Owen's experiment "communism," which he rejected in no uncertain terms, but he developed a warm and lasting respect for Robert Owen and his sons. One of his earliest writings, published in The March of Mind in 1827, attests to this, as do later writings.[10]"