Not Yours To Give

[Kevin_Kennedy]

One day in the House of Representatives, a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose:

“Mr. Speaker–I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him.

Not Yours To Give | Foundation for Economic Education

 

[midcan5]

Does a soldier's wife have no rights as a citizen of the nation? Are rights only rights when they support the wealthy and the corporations? Plenty of proof of those rights, but human care rights, hm, what BS you guys live in.

The thread starter should have followed the advice given by the inhuman a-hole who gave that small bit of stupid - he should have kept his insensitive horse manure to himself. We exist for a mere second and yet some occupy that second as fools.

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." John Kenneth Galbraith

 

[daveman]

Does a soldier's wife have no rights as a citizen of the nation? Are rights only rights when they support the wealthy and the corporations? Plenty of proof of those rights, but human care rights, hm, what BS you guys live in.

The thread starter should have followed the advice given by the inhuman a-hole who gave that small bit of stupid - he should have kept his insensitive horse manure to himself. We exist for a mere second and yet some occupy that second as fools.

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." John Kenneth Galbraith

What's stopping you from giving your money to the causes you support?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Does a soldier's wife have no rights as a citizen of the nation? Are rights only rights when they support the wealthy and the corporations? Plenty of proof of those rights, but human care rights, hm, what BS you guys live in.

The thread starter should have followed the advice given by the inhuman a-hole who gave that small bit of stupid - he should have kept his insensitive horse manure to himself. We exist for a mere second and yet some occupy that second as fools.

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." John Kenneth Galbraith

Of course she has rights, but in what way does she have the right to other people's money? Apparently you missed the part where he asked the Congress to donate the money themselves if they thought the cause was so worthy, and none of them did.

Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.”

He took his seat. Nobody replied.

 

[Toome]

IT appears that this thread is predicated upon the belief that military widows are compensated by some fund set aside by Congress.

Uh, bullshit.

Military widows are compensated by any insurance benefits the service member may have paid into. That's it. Now, if you want to get picky about certain benefits such as funeral services and financial assistance programs, these are benefits that have been established by law. They are not automatic, and family member survivors have to apply to determine whether or not they qualify. There's a controversy that programs such as the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation actually are subtracted from the Survivor Benefit Plan, which is paid into by the service member. In other words, the funds aren't an additional benefit but are merely a transfer from funds already paid into. I'm no lawyer. I just know that if I don't have a good life insurance program set up, then my wife and kids aren't taken care of. The Army doesn't do it for me. The SBP is not enough, so I opted out of it and went with my own private insurance.

I'm all for those programs that ease the expenses families have to endure for those killed in action, and I think it's good that the Government has these programs. However, these are not automatic, and they are not the "bennies" that some folks seem to believe them to be. Military families are basically on their own.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

IT appears that this thread is predicated upon the belief that military widows are compensated by some fund set aside by Congress.

Uh, bullshit.

Military widows are compensated by any insurance benefits the service member may have paid into. That's it. Now, if you want to get picky about certain benefits such as funeral services and financial assistance programs, these are benefits that have been established by law. They are not automatic, and family member survivors have to apply to determine whether or not they qualify. There's a controversy that programs such as the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation actually are subtracted from the Survivor Benefit Plan, which is paid into by the service member. In other words, the funds aren't an additional benefit but are merely a transfer from funds already paid into. I'm no lawyer. I just know that if I don't have a good life insurance program set up, then my wife and kids aren't taken care of. The Army doesn't do it for me. The SBP is not enough, so I opted out of it and went with my own private insurance.

I'm all for those programs that ease the expenses families have to endure for those killed in action, and I think it's good that the Government has these programs. However, these are not automatic, and they are not the "bennies" that some folks seem to believe them to be. Military families are basically on their own.

This thread isn't predicated on that belief at all. I'd suggest reading the link in the OP.