Exactly. If we're a "Christian" nation as so many of you and as so many of our Republican leaders claim, why do you fight so hard to get rid of programs that give relief to millions from poverty, illness and ignorance? You argue that you don't want these programs funded with your tax money--so you want to (I won't say greedily) line your own pocket instead of taking care of those weaker and lower than yourself. Seems pretty selfish and un-Jesus-like to me. But what do I know? I'm not in the military.
No, what's selfish is forcing other people to do it for me. If I feel like being generous, there's hundreds of charities that will take my money and give it to people who need it. What government programs do is allow politicians to call themselves generous because they have a very innefficient system of taking other people's money
by force and giving it to leeches who know how to work the system.
And, let me once again express my downright outrage at the idea of what the Bible refers to as a 'heathen' daring to berate me for acting against my faith. You know nothing of the nature of God or of the teachings of Jesus, and for the sake of your soul, I hope you wise up. I know what Jesus wants, because I talk to him on a regular basis. Its people like you who twist the words of my Lord and Saviour to try to manipulate people to your own, twisted ends, and I find that to be the highest form of blasphemy. Utter no more of it here.
admit "prohibits" was the wrong word. I think it does imply though that an all-time, standing, federal army is not something the founders forsaw. The Constitution mentions state militias several times, but never a standing, federal army. I think they saw this as something that would have been raised if the Union were under attack from a foriegn or homegrown power.
My point was that we do have a standing army. And we also have social programs. Times have changed since the writing of the Constitution. If we didn't both of those things, our society would be extemely different--and I think worse-off.
There has been a standing army since the formation of the Republic. The system was put in the Constitution as a balance against the President's supreme command of the armed forces. It was to keep monarchist powers out of the hands of the President so that while he is always Commander in Chief, he may only engage in a prolonged conflict with the consent of the Congress.
Social programs, however, have no basis in the Constitution, and were never seen in this country until the New Deal, and even then, they were supposed to be a temporary measure to relieve the downtrodden economy. Truth is that while they may have softened the blow, many economists believe they may have actually prolonged the Depression. It's a waste of MY money and puts an undue burden on the taxpayers that accomplishes nothing besides buying votes for apathetic politicians and creating leeches to suck the lifeblood out of this great nation. If I want to give to charity, I'll go look up the United Way or the Salvation Army, not the IRS.
:wank: :bj2:
