What a Christian Pastor says about Wealth Redistribution

[xsited1]

Any comments from a Biblical perspective?

...instead of the government taxing us and giving the money away to worthy causes. I'd rather have the government let us keep it and then you'd learn to give it away yourself, because then you get the credit and then you get the character development and then you get the heart of generosity.

If the government takes it from you and gives it away instead of me giving it away myself, I don't get the personal development.

Pastor Rick Warren, author of "The Purpose Driven Life," and the leader of Saddleback Church

Link here

 

[GigiBowman]

I totally agree with the Pastor

 

[PoliticalChic]

Any comments from a Biblical perspective?



Link here

I've taken a liking to Rev. Rick Warren after the Saddleback Forum with McCain and Obama.

I know in both the Christian and Jewish tradition, charity is spoken of as an obligation. It was stressed in my church that charity was to be done quietly and without boasting. It is an appreciation of what you have, how little and to share with those who are less fortunate.

I never thought of it as wealth distribution, just an exercise of character. I wish they would do public announcements on this matter because people are not aware that giving can make a difference, no matter how small. It doesn't have to be monetary. People can even give their time, which I consider to be even more precious.

 

[xsited1]

I've taken a liking to Rev. Rick Warren after the Saddleback Forum with McCain and Obama.

I know in both the Christian and Jewish tradition, charity is spoken of as an obligation. It was stressed in my church that charity was to be done quietly and without boasting. It is an appreciation of what you have, how little and to share with those who are less fortunate.

I never thought of it as wealth distribution, just an exercise of character. I wish they would do public announcements on this matter because people are not aware that giving can make a difference, no matter how small. It doesn't have to be monetary. People can even give their time, which I consider to be even more precious.

Charity is important to some. To others, it is not important at all. Take for instance this guy:

Biden's Average Annual Charitable-Gift Total: $369 - Philanthropy.com

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think people misunderstand the true purpose of charity. I think the true purpose is to make those receiving it want to STOP receiving it as soon as possible, and to make those who give it determined never to need it.

True charity, of the personal, individual, face-to-face, voluntary sort, is damned uncomfortable for everyone involved. Being forced to admit to another person that you can't handle your situation on your own and need help sucks. It requires gratitude, and I don't know anyone who actually ENJOYS having to feel grateful and beholden for things. Remember the last time you had to ask to borrow money from your parents or some other relative? Brrrr!

And being the person asked is no picnic, either. It requires you to feel pity and embarrassment on behalf of the asker, and while it's better to pity than to be pitied, I guess, it's still not pleasant.

Charity under these circumstances accomplishes much more than merely making sure that someone's physical needs are met. It provides an incentive for the recipient to become useful and productive in some manner, in order to earn back the self-esteem lost through the process of asking for charity. And it produces an opportunity for personal and spiritual growth for both parties.

Now replace that with welfare, and charity becomes merely one more bloodless, bureaucratic service provided by the faceless government, like road repair or trash pickup. It has no value or meaning. There is no gratitude involved, because who ever bothers to be grateful to the government? Its services are something you are entitled to. There is no shame involved, because the entire process is fronted by a disinterested, paper-pushing government drone who doesn't personally own the money you're requesting and has seen too many supplicants to care enough to make any judgements.

 

[dilloduck]

I think people misunderstand the true purpose of charity. I think the true purpose is to make those receiving it want to STOP receiving it as soon as possible, and to make those who give it determined never to need it.

True charity, of the personal, individual, face-to-face, voluntary sort, is damned uncomfortable for everyone involved. Being forced to admit to another person that you can't handle your situation on your own and need help sucks. It requires gratitude, and I don't know anyone who actually ENJOYS having to feel grateful and beholden for things. Remember the last time you had to ask to borrow money from your parents or some other relative? Brrrr!

And being the person asked is no picnic, either. It requires you to feel pity and embarrassment on behalf of the asker, and while it's better to pity than to be pitied, I guess, it's still not pleasant.

Charity under these circumstances accomplishes much more than merely making sure that someone's physical needs are met. It provides an incentive for the recipient to become useful and productive in some manner, in order to earn back the self-esteem lost through the process of asking for charity. And it produces an opportunity for personal and spiritual growth for both parties.

Now replace that with welfare, and charity becomes merely one more bloodless, bureaucratic service provided by the faceless government, like road repair or trash pickup. It has no value or meaning. There is no gratitude involved, because who ever bothers to be grateful to the government? Its services are something you are entitled to. There is no shame involved, because the entire process is fronted by a disinterested, paper-pushing government drone who doesn't personally own the money you're requesting and has seen too many supplicants to care enough to make any judgements.

agreed---and lets not forget that America HIRES people to distrubute the charity as opposed to personally and locally administer assistence. The HIRED distributors and their families are as dependent on welfare as the recipients are.

 

[Cecilie1200]

agreed---and lets not forget that America HIRES people to distrubute the charity as opposed to personally and locally administer assistence. The HIRED distributors and their families are as dependent on welfare as the recipients are.

Very true. In addition, people who are giving charity out of their own pockets and efforts are more likely to put requirements on the recipient, which increases the incentive to become productive and independent.

 

[xsited1]

Very true. In addition, people who are giving charity out of their own pockets and efforts are more likely to put requirements on the recipient, which increases the incentive to become productive and independent.

The way a Democrat like Joe Biden gives to charity is to find someone who makes a lot of money, use the power of the government to forcibly take some of their money and give it to people they believe need it. They call that being 'patriotic'.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The way a Democrat like Joe Biden gives to charity is to find someone who makes a lot of money, use the power of the government to forcibly take some of their money and give it to people they believe need it. They call that being 'patriotic'.

Yes, well, Joe Biden says a lot of stupid things. He's made a career out of it.

 

[xsited1]

Yes, well, Joe Biden says a lot of stupid things. He's made a career out of it.

I don't have a problem with Joe Biden saying stupid things, but I do have a problem with him acting on them.

 

[YWN666]

Do you think every individual could be trusted to give away their fair share? I don't.

 

[xsited1]

Do you think every individual could be trusted to give away their fair share? I don't.

Who defines what someone's 'fair share' is? The government? We aren't talking about taxes for Constitutionally valid government programs. We are talking about charity.

 

[editec]

I think the Pastor is confusing social justice with charity.

A common enough mistake.

 

[xsited1]

I think the Pastor is confusing social justice with charity.

A common enough mistake.

You can't have social justice by taking wealth away from the 'haves' and giving it to the 'have-nots'. That's where charity comes in. Forcibly taking wealth away from someone is not social justice.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You can't have social justice by taking wealth away from the 'haves' and giving it to the 'have-nots'. That's where charity comes in. Forcibly taking wealth away from someone is not social justice.

Yes, we don't need a bigger government. We need to educate our children so they grow up thinking that it is their responsibility to take care of the least among us. We can do it more efficiently than the government. We should spend more money so they can have a whole bureaucracy to give away our money? No way.

 

[Silence]

You can't have social justice by taking wealth away from the 'haves' and giving it to the 'have-nots'. That's where charity comes in. Forcibly taking wealth away from someone is not social justice.

define forcibly? paying taxes isn't force. you live in this country, you benefit from the government works such as military, infrastructure, education, etc.

should the wealthy be the only ones allowed to ride on the roads their tax payer dollars help build? should they be the only people treated in the hospitals funded by tax dollars? should their children be the only ones educated through public schools?

This bullshit of paying no taxes is laughable IMO. When did paying for the things our country needs become a bad thing?

 

[xsited1]

define forcibly? paying taxes isn't force. you live in this country, you benefit from the government works such as military, infrastructure, education, etc.

should the wealthy be the only ones allowed to ride on the roads their tax payer dollars help build? should they be the only people treated in the hospitals funded by tax dollars? should their children be the only ones educated through public schools?

This bullshit of paying no taxes is laughable IMO. When did paying for the things our country needs become a bad thing?

Nobody said anything about not paying taxes except for you. Try again.

 

[editec]

You can't have social justice by taking wealth away from the 'haves' and giving it to the 'have-nots'. That's where charity comes in. Forcibly taking wealth away from someone is not social justice.

You can't?

How about if the haves took it away from the have-nots, first?

 

[Silence]

Nobody said anything about not paying taxes except for you. Try again.

then explain to me when the government forcibly "takes" money from the haves and gives it to the have nots cuz I'm a have not and I've missed my check in the mail.

Raising taxes on the top 1% is entire premise of redistribution of wealth as discussed by McCain/Palin.

so you try again.

 

[Silence]

You can't?

How about if the haves took it away from the have-nots, first?

well actually the have-nots took it from the haves and made it their own and then told the new "have nots" so STFU and be happy about it.