I post this question knowing full-well that it is going to get quite heated but I genuinely want to know the answer.
Now this may be my hippy liberal beliefs talking but why is there such irony in the beliefs of many conservatives?
Now hear me out, for this is a multi-faceted question:
1. Do you see a trend in many conservative Christians being Christian but not Christ-like? (Exemplifying Capitalist teaching over religious doctrine of charity and giving to the poor)
2. Is there legitimacy in various modes of Chistianity to choose to ignore certain parts of the bible but take others as the word of god? (Say ignoring incest, rape, slavery, and charity but taking a single line about men not lying with other men as one of the centerpieces of their religious doctrine)
3. This is the question that really started my wanting to ask all of this here. Why is a child getting free lunch (which costs $4 a pop) and the elderly getting social security considered socialist or that they are all a bunch of welfare queens but if a small business owner uses tax breaks from the federal government or gets a tax refund they are just business savvy?
I do not ask these questions to purposely antagonize anyone but to open up a discussion about why these things occur. If you have any suggestions on things you find ironic about liberals then make it known and I will post a thread about that.
Because capitalists not socialists own and control the media.
Yes, I've definitely noticed that the term "Christian" has been coopted by a subculture of narrow thinking, extremely non-Christlike people.
As to the disparity in who gets government funding, here's my best guess:
Because those poor people and old people are sponging off the government and the business owner is creating jobs?
1. Because since the inception of organized religion, there have been groups of people who use religion as a means to garner goods and services from others. It's not exclusively a Christian practice; anywhere there is organized religion there is abuse of the belief system.
2. Splicing text from the Good Book is not a legitimate practice in the moral sense of the word. Again, this is not a strictly Christian practice. Essentially, the answer is no.
3. Small business owners need tax breaks and incentives to operate. The owners are not 'individuals' getting the breaks; the business as an entity operates under a specific tax code separate from personal taxation.
Welfare programs are based on socialist ideals; to share the wealth of the nation is an underlying tenet of such concepts. However, welfare departs from the socialist concept because the wealth is distributed only to those who qualify or are able to game the system to qualify. Taxpayers pay for such programs, and they are very, very expensive. It isn't one child getting one free lunch. It's hundreds of thousands of children getting hundreds of thousands of free lunches.
Furthermore, those who have paid taxes for years and years and years, and suddenly find themselves out of work, do not get welfare benefits or food stamps or any of the other freebies. They get a finite amount of unemployment. So yes, people are resentful not of the child who is in need of a hot meal, but of those who are able to make welfare a lifestyle. Such people are living off the sweat of the taxpayers.
Social security, by the way, is not a welfare program. People who work pay into social security; it's not a free lunch. Taxpayers don't resent retirees getting social security; they resent welfare queens and freeloaders.
Thanks for the comments. I'm not stating that these are my beliefs or that I'm lumping everyone together on this that has right leaning tendencies. Sadly, I did fall into the trap of generalizing above but what I am trying to strike at is the overall image that is both being presented about and by those on the extreme right. The image that government should never be involved in citizens' lives ever. I am not drawing an equals sign between social security and lunches and welfare but I have observed some that have and that is what I am criticizing.
I think the whole situation was summed up wonderfully early in the nomination run for the GOP when Pat Robertson said that the nominees were taking things too far. You know that's gotta be waaaaaayyyy out there then.
The problem is more that the right wing is becoming more irrational, greedy and self entitled by the day, not that anything they say makes sense or is even true.
They enable themselves to make any claim or to tell any lie. The point is to keep posting in forums like this to let them know that the majority of us are sick and tired of their nonsense.
Otherwise, I refuse to engage with them. Why not give a time out to ill behaved brats, no matter how old they are?
I like that thought, bring timeouts into the workplace. You have encapsulated my sentiments about this very nicely. We are just tired of hearing the next steaming pile of crap that comes out of conservative pundit and politician's mouths. This excludes the liberals in no way but the right is moving so far over in the spectrum that they are almost no longer on it.
You see there is a double standard in operation here. Many conservatives insist that if a child receives free lunch, their parents are somewhat negligent parents because they cannot even afford to adequately support their children. I do not think that people begrudge older citizens receiving social security benefits becaise the reasoning is after all, the old once were employed and contributed into the system. Many conservatives maintain that corporations are not so called leeches for not paying taxes because they are creating jobs hat are subsequently beneficial to the overall economy. In other words, the wealthy and powerful can but the poorer and less powerful had better not!
I just want to correct one thought here. A welfare queen is a woman who gets pregnant multiple times while collecting welfare, section 8, wic, and medicaid while never being able to get a job because she's too busy spitting out yet another child. Most conservatives are not against free lunch programs (maybe free breakfast and dinner as this takes parent responsibilities away) and social security.
by GA Anderson23 months ago
this is the discussion I have wanted for a long time. Greetings, Old Poolman and when I am done I hope to get the frog out of the prince's throat. _______________________________________________--Excerpt from the link...
by Doug Hughes5 years ago
George Will - "Steady 5 percent growth probably won't happen. Also, his pledge to get federal spending down to 18 percent of GDP is very hard to do with an aging population and a welfare state that exists to...
by Credence23 years ago
I quote from a news source“Former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney jumped into the debate over the GOP's future Tuesday night, warning congressional Republicans against forcing a government shutdown in...
by rhamson4 years ago
In the senseless budget debates and spending arguments it is funny that we don't look at the real cost factors and waste this country continuesIn the unending push towards imperial domination of the world. We are...
by My Esoteric3 months ago
The N.Y. Times revealed Trump lost almost $1B and therefore allegedly legally avoided taxes for an astounding number of years. (He has since avoided paying taxes after that as well.)The presumption is that Trump's...
by Ralph Deeds3 years ago
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/opini … ef=opinionSocial Security, Present and FutureBy THE EDITORIAL BOARDPublished: March 30, 2013 6 Comments"In the fight over the federal budget deficit, Social Security...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.