25 Mar 10
Originally posted by epiphinehasWell the federal government has a problem epi. Currently, we cannot purchase health insurance across state lines. Buying health insurance is a state by state issue, yet, they are now saying that federal law mandates we buy insurance within these states. So is insurance a state issue or a federal one? I don't see how you can have it both ways. Now if they had elected to allow people to buy insurance across state lines, this problem would not exist, but they didn't. Currently a good number of states have passed legislation challenging the notion that the federal government can force its citizenery to buy health insurance. No doubt, their attempts will fail as they are crushed by "the Machine", but it should be entertaining nonetheless.
It is not a fact that the new health care bill violates the constitution, that is an opinion. Even if mandated healthcare impinges one's personal freedom, that doesn't necessarily make it unconstitutional. Consider the draft, for instance.[/b]
25 Mar 10
Originally posted by duecerWould it surprise you if I agreed. I agree.
The real problem with republicans is that the leaders of the party use religion as a tool to rally a very small part of the conservative base. They whip their followers into a frenzy with smoke and mirror techniques and flat out rhetorical lies. They motivate large blocks of faith based voters to get to the polls to support them, when in truth they couldn't c ...[text shortened]... ity.
The sad part is that millions of Christians don't even realize they are being had...😞
25 Mar 10
5 edits
Originally posted by duecerWrong. Wealth is not always equated with righteousness nor is poverty always equated with wickedness. What is wicked, however, are those who covet what you have and who plot to steal it from you. Clearly scripture commands us to help the poor, but there is a deafening silence when it comes to state mandated redistribution of wealth to acheive this end. Why?
that is actually on the mark. they believe that righteousness and personal wealth are intertwined. If you work hard and make money and are successful then God must be favoring you, and anything that stands in the way of ammasing a fortune must be from satan. They forget that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike.
In the example of Jesus witnessing the widow casting her very small tithe, he indicated that she had given more than everyone else who was present even though she had given monitarily the least amount of money. As a result, God smiled on her tithe more than everyone else who gave because she had given everything she had. Compare this with the progressive way of redistributing wealth. More than likely they would scorn the widow for tithing her money and demand that those of wealth give her their tithes. In fact, when we pay taxes is it charity? It seems to me that redistributing money to help the poor in this way deprives us of our charity as does it deprive the receiving party of the gratitude of the gift. It then becomes an entitlement rather than a charitable gift. Of course, this is not to mention the middle man, who is the government, who soaks up a great deal of our wealth in the process. In fact, I once heard that only 9 cents on the dollar allocated to welfare actually goes to those in need, the rest is government overhead. In terms of helath care reform, one of the driving costs of welfare is welfare fraud, yet, they are only preoccupied with universal coverage.
So how far should the redistribution of wealth go? Do you think we should give up all our worldly possessions and divide it equally amongst ourselves?
25 Mar 10
Originally posted by whodeyread the book of Acts
Wrong. Wealth is not always equated with righteousness nor is poverty always equated with wickedness. What is wicked, however, are those who covet what you have and who plot to steal it from you. Clearly scripture commands us to help the poor, but there is a deafening silence when it comes to state mandated redistribution of wealth to acheive this end. Wh ...[text shortened]... you think we should give up all our worldly possessions and divide it equally amongst ourselves?
26 Mar 10
Originally posted by karoly aczel"How does the idea of a leader like the dalai lama strike the readers of this forum?"
How does the idea of a leader like the dalai lama strike the readers of this forum?
To have spiritual and governmental powers rolled into one seems to simplify things on the one hand...
Are there any other societies where the governmental leader is also the spiritual leader?
In my opinion he's a flake. A weak, ineffective, charlatan leaching off his followers.
Pretty mean eh!
26 Mar 10
Originally posted by josephwIs that your opinion of all the dalai lamas of the past as well?
[b]"How does the idea of a leader like the dalai lama strike the readers of this forum?"
In my opinion he's a flake. A weak, ineffective, charlatan leaching off his followers.
Pretty mean eh![/b]
Apparently leaders of perfectly prosperous,peaceful societies.
26 Mar 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobWhat's the matter? Can't you come up with an alternative? Like all good liberals, as soon as your world view is exposed to the light of truth you resort to making accusations.
What a paranoid world you must live in.
Is it paranoid to object to the charade the democrats are foisting on us? Is it paranoid to point out the lies and deceit?
Is it paranoid to point out the obvious?
Paranoia is the fear of an illusion. It's no illusion that after the forty years of liberalism that I've observed, that we are now witnessing the attempt by the democrat party, with the aide of some rhinos, the implementation of socialism and the destruction of the constitution.
26 Mar 10
Originally posted by whodeyI've seen Wallace(I think it's actully Wallis?) talk and thought a lot of him. He was intelligent and radical for Christ.
Who is Jim Wallace? He is Barak Obama's new spiritual advisor.
He was raised in a devout Plymouth Brethren household, but broke with the Church at 14 over its failure to commit to political causes. Wallis went on to join and then lead the militant Sutdents for a Democratic Society, at Michigan State University. After colllege, he went on to attent Trini ...[text shortened]... ribute wealth at any oppurtunity to the poor? If so, is there anything wrong with this?
What's the problem here? Could you make your objection to him more specific and clear. I actually liked him.
26 Mar 10
Originally posted by josephwIf thats what you call 'liberalism' ,I'd hate to see your conservative take😛
What's the matter? Can't you come up with an alternative? Like all good liberals, as soon as your world view is exposed to the light of truth you resort to making accusations.
Is it paranoid to object to the charade the democrats are foisting on us? Is it paranoid to point out the lies and deceit?
Is it paranoid to point out the obvious?
Paranoia is ...[text shortened]... ide of some rhinos, the implementation of socialism and the destruction of the constitution.
26 Mar 10
Originally posted by karoly aczel"Apparently leaders of perfectly prosperous,peaceful societies."
Is that your opinion of all the dalai lamas of the past as well?
Apparently leaders of perfectly prosperous,peaceful societies.
Peaceful? Prosperous? Take another look.
Look karoly, I don't want you to think I'm really that mean. The Dali Lama is probably a really nice guy, but so what? And maybe he has a just cause. I just don't like his personality.
It's all in the mind. Relatively speaking, the Dali Lama will come and go like so many others. What concerns me are those things that will last forever. Things like Jesus, who lives!
26 Mar 10
Originally posted by josephwAre you telling me that Tibet was not a peaceful,prosperous and harmonious country before China came along? Please fix up my knowledge of history please.
[b]"Apparently leaders of perfectly prosperous,peaceful societies."
Peaceful? Prosperous? Take another look.
Look karoly, I don't want you to think I'm really that mean. The Dali Lama is probably a really nice guy, but so what? And maybe he has a just cause. I just don't like his personality.
It's all in the mind. Relatively speaking, the Dali ...[text shortened]... s. What concerns me are those things that will last forever. Things like Jesus, who lives![/b]
26 Mar 10
Originally posted by josephwGeorge Bush was a conservative. I know that much😛
You know I'm a conservative. Do you even know what conservatism is?
Its funny because here in Australia the 'Liberal' party is actually the conservative party. Its all pretty bad and if you were a true follower of Jesus' teachings you would take a page from rwingetts book and fight the a-holes that pretend to do a good job at leading our nations.
The Dalai Lama is head and shoulders above western political leaders.