Jesus was a liberal

[Mertex]

So Esmeralda negs me, as if that's going to stop me from stating my views. Not surprising, liberals will always try to silence their opposition when they are proven wrong. The funny thing is that I wasn't disagreeing with her that people should help each other, only that it should not be forced.
That is the difference between a Christian and a Marxist, but when you expose them for trying to use Jesus to promote their communist views, they react with hostility and slander (like Mertex assigning positions you have never taken). But that's the way they operate.

You are full of beans. You don't even know the Bible, claiming that Jesus created the fish at the time.....both times that he fed people with fish, the fish were already there. So, don't try to act so knowledgeable about the Bible and then post some idiotic thing that isn't true.
And yes, God created everything, and Jesus is God, so don't try to come back and claim that is what you meant. You said He didn't take fish from someone to give to others, but that is what He did.

S.J. No one is arguing that Jesus wants us to share, and in that respect, Esmeralda was right. But she was wrong about the lesson in Jesus feeding the masses. It was not about sharing the fish (there were not fish to share). He CREATED the fish, and the lesson was about faith in HIM to provide for their needs. Then she quoted Karl Marx to make her case, as if Jesus would have agreed with Karl Marx and his communist philosophy. Marx preached "forced redistribution", Jesus did not.

Mathew 14: 13-21
13 When Jesus heard what had happened, he withdrew by boat privately to a solitary place. Hearing of this, the crowds followed him on foot from the towns. 14 When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them and healed their sick.

15 As evening approached, the disciples came to him and said, “This is a remote place, and it’s already getting late. Send the crowds away, so they can go to the villages and buy themselves some food.”

16 Jesus replied, “They do not need to go away. You give them something to eat.”

17 “We have here only five loaves of bread and two fish,” they answered.

18 “Bring them here to me,” he said. 19 And he directed the people to sit down on the grass. Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the people. Afterward he did the same with the fish. And they all ate as much as they wanted.



John

5 Jesus soon saw a huge crowd of people coming to look for him. Turning to Philip, he asked, "Where can we buy bread to feed all these people?" 6 He was testing Philip, for he already knew what he was going to do.
7 Philip replied, "Even if we worked for months, we wouldn't have enough money to feed them!"
8 Then Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, spoke up. 9 "There's a young boy here with five barley loaves and two fish. But what good is that with this huge crowd?"
10 "Tell everyone to sit down," Jesus said. So they all sat down on the grassy slopes. (The men alone numbered about 5,000.) 11 Then Jesus took the loaves, gave thanks to God, and distributed them to the people.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Remember when Jesus chided the Romans for not providing free healthcare?

Jesus provided free healthcare, and his is our role model. So what is your point?

He's your role model?

That's so sweet and honest

Because you believe in government the way his followers believed in him and his Father, right?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Jesus may have already returned, and been swiftly locked up in a mental ward for claiming to be Jesus Christ.

 

[S.J.]

So Esmeralda negs me, as if that's going to stop me from stating my views. Not surprising, liberals will always try to silence their opposition when they are proven wrong. The funny thing is that I wasn't disagreeing with her that people should help each other, only that it should not be forced.
That is the difference between a Christian and a Marxist, but when you expose them for trying to use Jesus to promote their communist views, they react with hostility and slander (like Mertex assigning positions you have never taken). But that's the way they operate.

I negged you for this statement "Your ignorance is astounding. No wonder you're a liberal." Not for your point of view on the fishes and loaves story. You really are not very sharp are you? You're so busy defending Jesus from being called a Communist (which no one has actually done) that you can't see straight.

That was your excuse. The reason is because I outed you for implying that Jesus subscribed to your Marxist philosophy.

 

[S.J.]

So Esmeralda negs me, as if that's going to stop me from stating my views. Not surprising, liberals will always try to silence their opposition when they are proven wrong. The funny thing is that I wasn't disagreeing with her that people should help each other, only that it should not be forced.
That is the difference between a Christian and a Marxist, but when you expose them for trying to use Jesus to promote their communist views, they react with hostility and slander (like Mertex assigning positions you have never taken). But that's the way they operate.

You are full of beans. You don't even know the Bible, claiming that Jesus created the fish at the time.....both times that he fed people with fish, the fish were already there. So, don't try to act so knowledgeable about the Bible and then post some idiotic thing that isn't true.
And yes, God created everything, and Jesus is God, so don't try to come back and claim that is what you meant. You said He didn't take fish from someone to give to others, but that is what He did.

S.J. No one is arguing that Jesus wants us to share, and in that respect, Esmeralda was right. But she was wrong about the lesson in Jesus feeding the masses. It was not about sharing the fish (there were not fish to share). He CREATED the fish, and the lesson was about faith in HIM to provide for their needs. Then she quoted Karl Marx to make her case, as if Jesus would have agreed with Karl Marx and his communist philosophy. Marx preached "forced redistribution", Jesus did not.

Mathew 14: 13-21
13 When Jesus heard what had happened, he withdrew by boat privately to a solitary place. Hearing of this, the crowds followed him on foot from the towns. 14 When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them and healed their sick.

15 As evening approached, the disciples came to him and said, “This is a remote place, and it’s already getting late. Send the crowds away, so they can go to the villages and buy themselves some food.”

16 Jesus replied, “They do not need to go away. You give them something to eat.”

17 “We have here only five loaves of bread and two fish,” they answered.

18 “Bring them here to me,” he said. 19 And he directed the people to sit down on the grass. Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the people. Afterward he did the same with the fish. And they all ate as much as they wanted.



John

5 Jesus soon saw a huge crowd of people coming to look for him. Turning to Philip, he asked, "Where can we buy bread to feed all these people?" 6 He was testing Philip, for he already knew what he was going to do.
7 Philip replied, "Even if we worked for months, we wouldn't have enough money to feed them!"
8 Then Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, spoke up. 9 "There's a young boy here with five barley loaves and two fish. But what good is that with this huge crowd?"
10 "Tell everyone to sit down," Jesus said. So they all sat down on the grassy slopes. (The men alone numbered about 5,000.) 11 Then Jesus took the loaves, gave thanks to God, and distributed them to the people.

You're the one who doesn't know the Bible. Read what you just quoted. "A huge crowd" should be your clue. Five barley loaves and two fish does not feed a huge crowd. He created barrels of fish from the two that were there, plus many more loaves of bread. The lesson being that FAITH is what fed them. FAITH that God would provide. They didn't feed a multitude of people by making them share two fish, you idiot.
You were able to copy and paste the passage but you failed to understand what it said, confirming that your ignorance is indeed astounding.

 

[S.J.]

Jesus may have already returned, and been swiftly locked up in a mental ward for claiming to be Jesus Christ.

No. When he comes the next time, no one will be locking him up or anything else. They'll be on their knees.

 

[Mertex]

How can a Liberal quote Jesus when it's a know fact their fingers burn when touching a Bible?

Is that what they teach you at Westboro Baptist Church?

 

[Mertex]

Remember when Jesus chided the Romans for not providing free healthcare?

Jesus provided free healthcare, and his is our role model. So what is your point?

He's your role model?

That's so sweet and honest

Because you believe in government the way his followers believed in him and his Father, right?

Jesus never taught people to fight and dishonor the government. That must be a Republican addition to the scriptures. He told his disciples to give to Ceasar what was Ceasar's and to God what is Gods. Obviously you go by your own rules. You need to read Revelation and find out what happens to people who change God's words.

Mark 12
13 Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words. 14 They came to him and said, “Teacher, we know that you are a man of integrity. You aren’t swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not? 15 Should we pay or shouldn’t we?”

But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. “Why are you trying to trap me?” he asked. “Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.” 16 They brought the coin, and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?”

“Caesar’s,” they replied.

17 Then Jesus said to them, “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.”

Also, Jesus never told anyone to rebel against the government like most psuedo Christians are doing. Whoever is in charge is there because God put him/her there.

Romans 13:
13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

 

[Mertex]

No shit, Sherlock. That was my point. And it wasn't a lesson about sharing, it was a lesson in having faith in God.

It was a lesson about having faith in God, which many conservatives, like you, don't have, you seem to rely much on your own abilities....like carrying a gun everywhere you go, because you live in the spirit of fear. And you have to fight for every penny you make, because you are afraid that if you give a few cents out of your earnings so the poor can have food, you won't be able to afford more luxuries, like extra guns, to protect you, because obviously you don't have faith in God to protect you

Your ignorance is astounding. No wonder you're a liberal.

It is obvious you have reached the peak of your debating abilities when you have to start insulting and making it personal...no wonder you are a member of the loser party.

 

[Bush92]

Today I posted Jesus wasa libertarian and it got moved after about 5 very thought provoking post.Fuck your thread.

 

[Mertex]

So Esmeralda negs me, as if that's going to stop me from stating my views. Not surprising, liberals will always try to silence their opposition when they are proven wrong. The funny thing is that I wasn't disagreeing with her that people should help each other, only that it should not be forced.
That is the difference between a Christian and a Marxist, but when you expose them for trying to use Jesus to promote their communist views, they react with hostility and slander (like Mertex assigning positions you have never taken). But that's the way they operate.

You are full of beans. You don't even know the Bible, claiming that Jesus created the fish at the time.....both times that he fed people with fish, the fish were already there. So, don't try to act so knowledgeable about the Bible and then post some idiotic thing that isn't true.
And yes, God created everything, and Jesus is God, so don't try to come back and claim that is what you meant. You said He didn't take fish from someone to give to others, but that is what He did.

S.J. No one is arguing that Jesus wants us to share, and in that respect, Esmeralda was right. But she was wrong about the lesson in Jesus feeding the masses. It was not about sharing the fish (there were not fish to share). He CREATED the fish, and the lesson was about faith in HIM to provide for their needs. Then she quoted Karl Marx to make her case, as if Jesus would have agreed with Karl Marx and his communist philosophy. Marx preached "forced redistribution", Jesus did not.

Mathew 14: 13-21
13 When Jesus heard what had happened, he withdrew by boat privately to a solitary place. Hearing of this, the crowds followed him on foot from the towns. 14 When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them and healed their sick.

15 As evening approached, the disciples came to him and said, “This is a remote place, and it’s already getting late. Send the crowds away, so they can go to the villages and buy themselves some food.”

16 Jesus replied, “They do not need to go away. You give them something to eat.”

17 “We have here only five loaves of bread and two fish,” they answered.

18 “Bring them here to me,” he said. 19 And he directed the people to sit down on the grass. Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the people. Afterward he did the same with the fish. And they all ate as much as they wanted.



John

5 Jesus soon saw a huge crowd of people coming to look for him. Turning to Philip, he asked, "Where can we buy bread to feed all these people?" 6 He was testing Philip, for he already knew what he was going to do.
7 Philip replied, "Even if we worked for months, we wouldn't have enough money to feed them!"
8 Then Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, spoke up. 9 "There's a young boy here with five barley loaves and two fish. But what good is that with this huge crowd?"
10 "Tell everyone to sit down," Jesus said. So they all sat down on the grassy slopes. (The men alone numbered about 5,000.) 11 Then Jesus took the loaves, gave thanks to God, and distributed them to the people.

You're the one who doesn't know the Bible. Read what you just quoted. "A huge crowd" should be your clue. Five barley loaves and two fish does not feed a huge crowd. He created barrels of fish from the two that were there, plus many more loaves of bread. The lesson being that FAITH is what fed them. FAITH that God would provide. They didn't feed a multitude of people by making them share two fish, you idiot.
You were able to copy and paste the passage but you failed to understand what it said, confirming that your ignorance is indeed astounding.

He extended the number of fish that were there, so that everyone would be fed. If He thought along your conservative lines he would have told the people to go and fend for themselves.
You implied that there were no fish to begin with and that he created them, which is not true, there were fish provided by someone, and He by his ability to perform miracles magnified the number to feed everyone. Why didn't He tell the people what you conservatives would have told them - "Don't be lazy and expect to given something for nothing - you all like free stuff, but I'm not going to give it to you, because whoever doesn't work doesn't eat."

I hope you're very proud of your way of thinking. No, I'm sure you're very proud of your way of thinking.

 

[yidnar]

Liberals are not business men? Really? You think all business men are conservatives? How narrow is your world?

the majority of business men and small business owners are conservative .

 

[S.J.]

It was a lesson about having faith in God, which many conservatives, like you, don't have, you seem to rely much on your own abilities....like carrying a gun everywhere you go, because you live in the spirit of fear. And you have to fight for every penny you make, because you are afraid that if you give a few cents out of your earnings so the poor can have food, you won't be able to afford more luxuries, like extra guns, to protect you, because obviously you don't have faith in God to protect you

Your ignorance is astounding. No wonder you're a liberal.

It is obvious you have reached the peak of your debating abilities when you have to start insulting and making it personal...no wonder you are a member of the loser party.

YOU made it personal with the post I was responding to. Try reading it.

 

[Mertex]

Liberals are not business men? Really? You think all business men are conservatives? How narrow is your world?

the majority of business men and small business owners are conservative .

Do you have some stats to back your statement? Because what I read, it's probably evenly divided.




Beyond the obvious corporate affiliations, the politics of the company can often be determined by the politics of the current CEO. The retail leaders of some of the biggest U.S. retail organizations cast their vote in the 2008 presidential election long before the polls were open by providing financial support to candidate campaigns.




According to NNDB.com, which claims to be “an intelligence aggregator that tracks the activities of people… determined to be noteworthy, both living and dead,” both the Republican and Democratic parties have their share of high-profile retail executive support. The website lists the political alliances of hundreds of famous people, including some of the most well-known personalities in the retail industry.

Retail CEOs Who Supported Barack Obama in the 2008 Presidential Election:

Michael L. Ainslie, CEO of Sotheby’s 1984-94
Arthur Blank, Co-founder of Home Depot
Maxine Clark, CEO of Build-a-Bear Workshop
Michael Eisner, CEO of Disney, 1984-2005
Alan Feldman, CEO of Midas
Bill Gates, Co-founder of Microsoft
Stephen F. Gates, Former EVP Conoco-Phillips
Jack M. Greenberg, CEO of McDonald’s 1998-2002
Lawrence V. Jackson, Wal-Mart Executive
Sidney Kimmel, CEO of Jones Apparel Group, 1975-2002
James Kimsey, AOL’s founding CEO
Philip Marineau, CEO of Levi Strauss, 1999-2006
Norman S. Matthews, President and COO of Federated, 1987-88
Thomas J. Meredith, CFO of Dell, 1992-2000
George MrKonic, Jr., Former President of Borders
Craig Newmark, Founder Craigslist
Paul Orfalea, founder of Kinko’s
Dan Rosensweig, COO of Yahoo, 2002-2007
Howard Schultz, founder of Starbucks
Terry Semel, CEO of Yahoo, 2001-2007
James Sinegal, CEO of Costco
Tom Stemberg, Founder and CEO of Staples, Inc.
Marvin Traub, CEO of Bloomingdale’s, 1978-1992
George Zimmer, founder and CEO of Men’s Wearhouse
The list of Republican retail leaders is just as long and equally prestigious.


U.S. Retail Industry Political Affiliations

 

[S.J.]

You are full of beans. You don't even know the Bible, claiming that Jesus created the fish at the time.....both times that he fed people with fish, the fish were already there. So, don't try to act so knowledgeable about the Bible and then post some idiotic thing that isn't true.
And yes, God created everything, and Jesus is God, so don't try to come back and claim that is what you meant. You said He didn't take fish from someone to give to others, but that is what He did.




Mathew 14: 13-21
13 When Jesus heard what had happened, he withdrew by boat privately to a solitary place. Hearing of this, the crowds followed him on foot from the towns. 14 When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them and healed their sick.

15 As evening approached, the disciples came to him and said, “This is a remote place, and it’s already getting late. Send the crowds away, so they can go to the villages and buy themselves some food.”

16 Jesus replied, “They do not need to go away. You give them something to eat.”

17 “We have here only five loaves of bread and two fish,” they answered.

18 “Bring them here to me,” he said. 19 And he directed the people to sit down on the grass. Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the people. Afterward he did the same with the fish. And they all ate as much as they wanted.



John

5 Jesus soon saw a huge crowd of people coming to look for him. Turning to Philip, he asked, "Where can we buy bread to feed all these people?" 6 He was testing Philip, for he already knew what he was going to do.
7 Philip replied, "Even if we worked for months, we wouldn't have enough money to feed them!"
8 Then Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, spoke up. 9 "There's a young boy here with five barley loaves and two fish. But what good is that with this huge crowd?"
10 "Tell everyone to sit down," Jesus said. So they all sat down on the grassy slopes. (The men alone numbered about 5,000.) 11 Then Jesus took the loaves, gave thanks to God, and distributed them to the people.

You're the one who doesn't know the Bible. Read what you just quoted. "A huge crowd" should be your clue. Five barley loaves and two fish does not feed a huge crowd. He created barrels of fish from the two that were there, plus many more loaves of bread. The lesson being that FAITH is what fed them. FAITH that God would provide. They didn't feed a multitude of people by making them share two fish, you idiot.
You were able to copy and paste the passage but you failed to understand what it said, confirming that your ignorance is indeed astounding.

He extended the number of fish that were there, so that everyone would be fed. If He thought along your conservative lines he would have told the people to go and fend for themselves.
You implied that there were no fish to begin with and that he created them, which is not true, there were fish provided by someone, and He by his ability to perform miracles magnified the number to feed everyone. Why didn't He tell the people what you conservatives would have told them - "Don't be lazy and expect to given something for nothing - you all like free stuff, but I'm not going to give it to you, because whoever doesn't work doesn't eat."

I hope you're very proud of your way of thinking. No, I'm sure you're very proud of your way of thinking.

Tell ya what, when you can debate a subject without putting words in the other person's mouth, let me know. I won't hold my breath though.

 

[Mertex]

You're the one who doesn't know the Bible. Read what you just quoted. "A huge crowd" should be your clue. Five barley loaves and two fish does not feed a huge crowd. He created barrels of fish from the two that were there, plus many more loaves of bread. The lesson being that FAITH is what fed them. FAITH that God would provide. They didn't feed a multitude of people by making them share two fish, you idiot.
You were able to copy and paste the passage but you failed to understand what it said, confirming that your ignorance is indeed astounding.

He extended the number of fish that were there, so that everyone would be fed. If He thought along your conservative lines he would have told the people to go and fend for themselves.
You implied that there were no fish to begin with and that he created them, which is not true, there were fish provided by someone, and He by his ability to perform miracles magnified the number to feed everyone. Why didn't He tell the people what you conservatives would have told them - "Don't be lazy and expect to given something for nothing - you all like free stuff, but I'm not going to give it to you, because whoever doesn't work doesn't eat."

I hope you're very proud of your way of thinking. No, I'm sure you're very proud of your way of thinking.

Tell ya what, when you can debate a subject without putting words in the other person's mouth, let me know. I won't hold my breath though.

I'm not putting words in your mouth.....you've been pushing the reactionary conservative beliefs, and that is what comes through loud and clear....so why would you be any different?

 

[S.J.]

He extended the number of fish that were there, so that everyone would be fed. If He thought along your conservative lines he would have told the people to go and fend for themselves.
You implied that there were no fish to begin with and that he created them, which is not true, there were fish provided by someone, and He by his ability to perform miracles magnified the number to feed everyone. Why didn't He tell the people what you conservatives would have told them - "Don't be lazy and expect to given something for nothing - you all like free stuff, but I'm not going to give it to you, because whoever doesn't work doesn't eat."

I hope you're very proud of your way of thinking. No, I'm sure you're very proud of your way of thinking.

Tell ya what, when you can debate a subject without putting words in the other person's mouth, let me know. I won't hold my breath though.

I'm not putting words in your mouth.....you've been pushing the reactionary conservative beliefs, and that is what comes through loud and clear....so why would you be any different?

Show me where I said they should fend for themselves. You can't debate, you slander.

 

[Mertex]

They didn't feed a multitude of people by making them share two fish, you idiot.
You were able to copy and paste the passage but you failed to understand what it said, confirming that your ignorance is indeed astounding.

Tell ya what, when you can debate a subject without putting words in the other person's mouth, let me know. I won't hold my breath though.

I'm not putting words in your mouth.....you've been pushing the reactionary conservative beliefs, and that is what comes through loud and clear....so why would you be any different?

Show me where I said they should fend for themselves. You can't debate, you slander.

And you are a hypocrite, to boot. You insult and slander and then accuse me of the same. Typical moron.

 

[S.J.]

They didn't feed a multitude of people by making them share two fish, you idiot.
You were able to copy and paste the passage but you failed to understand what it said, confirming that your ignorance is indeed astounding.

I'm not putting words in your mouth.....you've been pushing the reactionary conservative beliefs, and that is what comes through loud and clear....so why would you be any different?

Show me where I said they should fend for themselves. You can't debate, you slander.

And you are a hypocrite, to boot. You insult and slander and then accuse me of the same. Typical moron.

I said your ignorance was astounding. That's not slander. You tried to say Jesus fed thousands of people with 2 fish and the lesson was about sharing. I corrected you and said that he turned the 2 fish into many barrels of fish and fed them, and that the lesson was not about sharing but about faith.
You then proceeded to claim that I believed they should fend for themselves (and all the other bullshit stereotypes you could think of to throw at me). You could have acknowledged I was right, but you're too proud and embarrassed to admit it. Still, you continue to assign statements and positions I have never espoused, which makes you not only a hypocrite but a liar as well. You could be adult about it but you instead are opting to double down on your slanderous tactics. This is why you are not worth debating.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Yes, but conservatives don't want to feed the poor....they think they are lazy and just need to get a job. I guess Jesus was lying about the poor....cause he didn't say they were lazy.

Washington Post:

Are Republicans stingy but principled while Democrats are generous but racist?

"I wouldn't put it quite so starkly," said Stanford University professor Shanto Iyengar. He would prefer to call Democrats "less principled" rather than bigoted, based on his analysis of data collected in a recent online experiment that he conducted with The Washington Post and washingtonpost.com.

As reported in this column a few weeks ago, the study found that people were less likely to give extended aid to black Hurricane Katrina victims than to white ones. The race penalty, on average, totaled about $1,000 per black victim.

As Iyengar and his colleagues subsequently dug deeper into these data, another finding emerged: Republicans consistently gave less aid, and gave over a shorter period of time, to victims regardless of race.

Democrats and independents were far more generous; on average, they gave Katrina victims on average more than $1,500 a month, compared with $1,200 for Republicans, and for 13 months instead of nine.

But for Democrats, race mattered -- and in a disturbing way. Overall, Democrats were willing to give whites about $1,500 more than they chose to give to a black or other minority. (Even with this race penalty, Democrats still were willing to give more to blacks than those principled Republicans.) "Republicans are likely to be more stringent, both in terms of money and time, Iyengar said. "However, their position is 'principled' in the sense that it stems from a strong belief in individualism (as opposed to handouts). Thus their responses to the assistance questions are relatively invariant across the different media conditions. Independents and Democrats, on the other hand, are more likely to be affected by racial cues."

To test the effects of race, participants in the study were asked to read a news article about Katrina victims. Some read a story featuring a white person. Some read identical stories -- except the victim was black, Asian or Hispanic. Then they were asked how much assistance they think the government should give to help hurricane victims. Approximately 2,300 people participated in the study.

Iyengar said he's not surprised by the latest findings: "This pattern of results matches perfectly an earlier study I did on race and crime" with Franklin D. Gilliam Jr. of UCLA. "Republicans supported tough treatment of criminals no matter what they encountered in the news. Others were more elastic in their position, coming to support more harsh measures when the criminal suspect they encountered was non-white."​

What are we seeing here? Republicans are stingy with the public purse while Democrats are very generous with spending other people's money. What happens when it comes to spending one's own money on charity?

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.

-- Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.

-- Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.

-- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.

-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition. ​