Universal Health Care

[Diamantina]

Why do you take offense? Seriously, based on everything you’re saying, why would you take offense at my comments regarding the welfare state?
I am asking that question in all sincerity, and really hope you respond.

Because I am a beneficiary of the welfare state: I have benefited from it, thanks be to God. I don’t think that charities would give me a BA, or $870 a month, or (very important to me) free medical care and prescriptions that I do not have to pay for. Yes, there is bureaucracy in government, but to go to several different charities with their bureaucracies in order to get help would be even more exhausting for me. I am grateful to taxpayers for giving me their money. I hope they aren’t doing it involuntarily. Really, children in school should be trained to see paying taxes as more than a burden or a duty: taxes pay for things that help them or their families.

If you believe that, you must also believe that the government exists to take from one group and give to another.

If you believe that, then you must also believe that the government must somehow deal with those people who don’t want to give away the products of their labor.

If you believe that, then you must advocate the use of government force against anyone who doesn’t agree with your values.

If you believe that, you believe in violence.

Jesus did not teach violence.

Sir! I am a pacifist! (Remember that I contribute to the Fellowship of Reconciliation and the War Resisters League – both are pacifist organizations.) I believe that the use of government force is immoral. I believe that people should be persuaded and taught to voluntarily accept the welfare state, I do not think that it is as pernicious as you think it is. I am not a pure socialist, after all: I would allow some free enterprise. If people do not like my ideal of government, then c’est la vie. If I were a president or prime minister, I would resign. (Thank goodness I am not a politician!)

Yes, people should work hard and pursue their dreams at the same time. That would be nice. But if circumstances don’t line up that way, then people need to take responsibility for themselves and their own lives.

You may have a legitimate disability, and I don’t fault you for that- my father accepted disability for years before he died. He hated every minute of it, but it proved to be a valuable lesson in humility for him- without that experience he would have died a very different person.

However, you need to consider that God made life challenging for very good reasons- both to inspire us to compassion and charity toward others, but also to force us to strive to be our best.

The nanny state you propose is simply poisonous to the human spirit.

Well, we have different philosophies of life, probably due to our upbringings and life experiences. (My father was a unionized sheet metal worker – grateful to the union – and voted straight Democratic.) We will probably never agree on this matter, so let us agree to disagree, OK? :sad_yes:

 

[Oscarthecat]

Well, we have different philosophies of life, probably due to our upbringings and life experiences. (My father was a unionized sheet metal worker – grateful to the union – and voted straight Democratic.) We will probably never agree on this matter, so let us agree to disagree, OK? :sad_yes:

No, not different philosophies of life- we have different philosophies of the role of government and taxes vs. the role of the church and charity.

I believe the roles you attribute to the government and taxes rightfully belong to the Church and charity.

You cannot separate the government from violence, especially when it comes to taxation.

Any time you use your vote to increase the government’s power of taxation and redistribution, for whatever reason whatsoever, you must accept that you are contributing to the violence that comes with that power.

The Church doesn’t put people in jail, take their homes, or issue fines for refusing to tithe.
Instead the Church encourages people to better understand the reasons they should tithe, and to give freely of themselves and the products of their labor. Does that sound like anything you have said?

I would agree with you on many points if it were not for the fact that you consistently advocate the force of government, however indirectly, as the foundation of your ideal society.

You cannot have two masters. Either you put your trust in the force of government, or you put your trust in the Charity of your fellow man.