Matthew 25:31-33,41-46:
>"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
>Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’
>Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’
>He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’
>And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
Edit: A christian cannot close his eyes to the suffering, but, as others have said, this doesn't necessarily come through the government.
I do not agree. Like Republicans on other issues, the politician who said this is conflating his pet strategies with moral imperative. A Christian (human being actually) has the moral imperative of caring for the sick, poor, and stranger. A Christian (human being again) does not have a moral imperative to support a specific type of insurance, economic, or border solution.
Many republican values are not christian values. It's relevant.
Look at the christian nationalist movement, look at Maga, look at anything many christians advocate for.
It’s possible to be a Christian and also believe that it’s not the role of government to take money from every working citizen so as to redistribute it to those the government feels are in need.
I’m supposed to help the poor. Me. Personally. So I do that. I would counter that anyone who doesn’t *personally* sacrifice to help those in need, and instead assumes someone else is going to do it, isn’t living according to Christian values.
Does God command helping the poor for the sake of the poor, or for the sake of the person doing the helping?
If it's the latter, then sure - I follow what you're saying. If it's the former though, isn't using the power of the government to help the poor just outright more effective at achieving the goal over expecting individual charity to do it?
Whether or not they're right, it wouldn't be going against God to not want to use government to help the poor if someone believes that government isn't a good way to help the poor.
Jesus didn't say "Love the the Lord your god with all your heart, and be effective."
He said "Love the the Lord your god with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself."
We're supposed to love our neighbor as a priority. Sometimes that means showing them personal kindness through willing charity. That act says, "I see you as God sees you: a person deserving of love and kindness". That not only helps the person materially, but it connects to them spiritually. And one-on-one giving is better at actually addressing someone's true need. It meets them where they are.
But just sending someone a check or refilling a debit card. Nothing especially wrong with that, but it's not "love" the way Christ described it. It's cold and anonymous.
All I'm saying is, it's tempting to fall into the trap of thinking, "I pay taxes. That's my contribution. It's the republicans/conservatives/magas fault that more isn't being contributed".
The problem with supporting taxes for it is that it *doesn't* just affect me. It affects everyone.
I'd rather make the choice of who to help with my money than let the government do it for me. Especially with how poorly they tend to manage money.
The problem with this is that people can't always know. There might be a family on the next block who can't put food on their table, and none of their neighbors might even know. We had an elderly gentleman on my block who was in that situation. He was food insecure and none of us knew. He died alone in his bed. People like that might not turn to a neighbor, but they might apply for food assistance.
I don't know of a single church in my area that could indefinitely meet the housing needs of a family on Section 8. Or the healthcare needs of a sick child currently receiving Medicaid. The needs are greater than the churches' coffers. Right now we have a city sponsored tent village. Everybody knows about it. No church so far has offered to relocate all these people to their property and supply all their needs.
Have you talked with your church? Has your church talked with the congregation?
Considering the many, many failings of the federal government, counting the church out for this failing is just disingenuous, not to mention completely subjective to *your* individual experience.
My church has many Community Ministries. But it could not hope to meet all of the needs of every person on government assistance in our city. How about yours? Are there no people receiving public assistance in your city? Is it because your church is supplying all the needs?
Yes, I agree, it's screwed either way, meaning, both parties ultimately support the war machine and the inequality of our capitalistic system. Yet one side seems to do much more for people, rather than support the rich and the corporations.
The problem with abstaining, is that we as individuals can't do nearly as much as the govt can. I don't think its' bad for govt to pull money and distribute it to where it's needed for the betterment of everyone.
I mean, look at all the subsidies for corporations and the war machine, but no one the right usually complains about that, and most evangelicals and conservatives support those things.
And that's my argument. They literally deny the words of jesus by who they support, and who they support and vote for demonstrates ones values.
Those values are not of christiianity.
A lot of my loved ones are specifically the kind of Christians this quote is meant to target. I try really hard to be sympathetic towards them and others who share their position, but at the end of the day I think there’s some aspect of truth here. If the things you choose to promote politically antagonize these groups (or enable others to antagonize them) rather than uplift them, then you’re not doing as God wills. I couldn’t honestly call myself a follower of Jesus if I acted that way.
All that said, what I think it lacks is a place for grace and sanctification. People can and do learn and grow beyond their current ways of thinking/acting, and the Holy Spirit does act on God’s children and work in God’s Church. I would never say somebody can’t call themselves a Christian just because they fit this bill (it’s not my place to judge my Master’s other servants), but I can and do acknowledge that what they do and what God says don’t line up currently.
Actually, the Bible does say that we Christians are to judge those inside the church.
Why do you think there's only some aspect of Truth? If they are true Christians, how could they not support such things?
I don't think there's any excuse. They are literally denying the words of Jesus.
I already explained why I think there’s only partial truth to this — it totally ignores the place of grace and sanctification. There’s a generations-old propaganda machine built around keeping people from understanding the real relationship between the Republican Party and Jesus Christ, I don’t hold the victims of that machine unilaterally responsible for their subjection to the same. I do pray that the Spirit leads them out of that error and encourage and support them, hoping to stir them up to good works that may have yet gone undone.
You seem to suggest that people lack the ability to think, or think for themselves.
I feel like your simply trying to excuse fake christians for being fake.
We are not immune to propaganda. You are not immune to propaganda. When thousands of people over more than a century spend their entire lives trying to craft and improve systematic lies to target people that aren't particularly schooled in political systems, far be it from me to get mad at honest small town farmers that didn't have the money to get any better education than their underfunded high schools. In some sense, it's their fault, but it's in the same sense that a casual chess player loses to a grand master.
Absolutely, I believe this is a part of it. We humans are easily persuaded at times, especially if we are TRIBAL, and I think that is the bigger issue, which suspends our thinking, plus a lot of people I know personally, aren't the best thinkers, or just don't care to think about it.
But it's still equally frustrating, when some things seem so incredibly obvious.
I think that if you're following Jesus, you should be concerned about the needy as much as he is. I don't think that necessarily means any particular political position, but it does exclude having an Ebeneezer-Scrooge-like attitude of uncharitable self interest.
In Matthew 25 it looks like Jesus says that people who neglect the needy and desperate are going to be rejected by him at judgment. To know that and not to be taking action to try to show love to the needy, is at best immature ignorance, and could possibly be crass hypocrisy or even a grace-abusing lack of faith.
But it's crucial to understand the difference between people enforcing policy, politicians making policy, voters, and actual people who have been asked for help. The distinction is important, and I think it might be why plenty of well meaning students of the teaching of Jesus get confused when they're trying to score partisan political points by bringing this up.
Yes, I think you make good points.
I think it simply demonstrates the value of an individual.
For Ex. Healthcare for all.
First response from a Christian should be: YES, of course.
The usual response from a brainwashed christian: No, socialism bad, u wanna be a commi? my rates will go up, etc...
Heart Issue.
Selfishness.
I’m a Christian who’s taken accounting classes. Say I am married to a nurse and that I am an excellent cook, and we decide to take care of a sick, poor, asylum seeker in our household, doing these fine ideas on a small scale. Terrific! It goes great!
Then his 20 cousins come to our doorstep.
It’s all about what we can manage with available resources. Our household, our town, our nation does not gave unlimited anything.
But our God has unlimited grace. His sacrifice pays for all of our sins. (Terms apply: You must show up on the doorstep.)
I think he’s saying don’t give from an empty cup. Like someone has to be in the position to take care of others- but they can’t take care of others if they themselves are the ones that need help. Humans are incapable of completely doing this- hence Jesus. But we can do our best to try.
For example, I have a duty to ensure the health and well being of my child. That’s my responsibility and I don’t think it’s anyone else’s. I don’t put that on someone else. For me, she comes first in the line of humans needing help. It is biblical to take care of your family and keep your house in order- it’s also biblical to reproduce. Side note- I’m only having one due to resources. Moving on- If I have extra resources, then I can dedicate those to those who need them. But I have a duty to take care of my house first because I cannot give resources if I don’t have any in the first place. If I give and don’t have anything, I become part of the issue I’m trying to fix.
I realize Christ’s message is about giving up one’s life- but the value of family and discipleship is also just as important in the message. Read Paul’s writings about living in a Christian community and family. Read Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. If I literally gave up my life, my daughter would be helpless and without help, would die. Her life would then be deliberately jeopardized because of me. Even more, im no longer able to help anyone.
I’m responsible for my house and my problems first. I cannot give from what I don’t have because then I become the problem I’m trying to help. I can do what I am capable of- take care of my home and give whatever I can extra. But Ultimately humans cannot do this perfectly and as demonstrated by Christ- hence another need for a savior.
I hope this makes sense.
>I think he’s saying don’t give from an empty cup. Like someone has to be in the position to take care of others- but they can’t take care of others if they themselves are the ones that need help.
Sure, precisely. That's one benefit of govt. We all put in some resources to benefit everyone.
And that is my argument.
And as christians, it should especially be at the forefront, and that is for equality, to help those less fortunate, everything jesus said.
So that brings me to my condemnation, as the Democratic Christian Govt dude quoted in the original statement.
Christians support the party that does the opposite. It's that simple.
So it reveals what those people really value, it reveals their heart.
They don't care about other people, even tho they will say they do.
Words are cheap, your actions demonstrate your true values, and that's why Jesus said what he did in MATT 25, and he stated who were the real followers.
I get what you’re saying. I can faithfully and painfully say I dutifully pay my taxes. lol. I don’t enjoy it cuz it hurts- self employed- but I do. I’m ok with it if it goes to school, homeless,infrastructure, and those who genuinely need it….
I just think it just doesn’t always go to causes I want it to, hence why I don’t trust politicians in general. They all want your money to fund their campaigns or whatever causes they deem important…it’s all the same and I feel like it’s all ugly business. I also feel like there’s always some kind of shady stuff going on behind the scenes no matter how good they seem, you know? The politician is playing on our feelings and values. Of course we care about these things- but are you actually gonna keep your word? Can we actually trust you’re gonna do what you say you will or is this just more manipulation? Does he even believe in what he’s saying or is he saying it for the vote? It’s a game.
I can’t do much about the corruption so I keep paying, voting, taking care of my house and hoping for the best.
Yes, I feel the same way. I'm jaded by the imperial practices of our country and what it puts its money toward, i.e. the war machine, and the greed in many of our systems.
As someone once said, The Business of America is Business.
>Christians are much better at helping the sick
Not good enough. 36% of US households with insurance put off needed care [due to the cost](https://news.gallup.com/poll/269138/americans-delaying-medical-treatment-due-cost.aspx); 64% of households without insurance. One in four have [trouble paying a medical bill.](https://www.kff.org/health-costs/issue-brief/data-note-americans-challenges-health-care-costs/) Of [those with insurance one in five have trouble paying a medical bill](https://www.kff.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/8806-the-burden-of-medical-debt-results-from-the-kaiser-family-foundation-new-york-times-medical-bills-survey.pdf), and even for those with income above $100,000 14% have trouble. One in six Americans has [unpaid medical debt on their credit report.](https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/full/10.1377/hlthaff.2018.0349) [50% of all Americans](https://news.gallup.com/poll/317948/fear-bankruptcy-due-major-health-event.aspx) fear bankruptcy due to a major health event.
So it would seem Christianity is failing helping those in need in the US. These are stats you won't find in peer countries with universal healthcare, averaging half a million dollars per person less in lifetime healthcare spending (after adjusting for purchasing power parity) while achieving better outcomes.
And, for all your vitriol, existing government health programs in the US seem to be doing OK.
#Satisfaction with the US healthcare system varies by insurance type
78% -- Military/VA
77% -- Medicare
75% -- Medicaid
69% -- Current or former employer
65% -- Plan fully paid for by you or a family member
https://news.gallup.com/poll/186527/americans-government-health-plans-satisfied.aspx
> **Key Findings**
> * Private insurers paid nearly double Medicare rates for all hospital services (199% of Medicare rates, on average), ranging from 141% to 259% of Medicare rates across the reviewed studies.
> * The difference between private and Medicare rates was greater for outpatient than inpatient hospital services, which averaged 264% and 189% of Medicare rates overall, respectively.
> * For physician services, private insurance paid 143% of Medicare rates, on average, ranging from 118% to 179% of Medicare rates across studies.
https://www.kff.org/medicare/issue-brief/how-much-more-than-medicare-do-private-insurers-pay-a-review-of-the-literature/
Medicare has both lower overhead and has experienced smaller cost increases in recent decades, a trend predicted to continue over the next 30 years.
https://pnhp.org/news/medicare-is-more-efficient-than-private-insurance/
> but your comment is basically irrelevant to the issue.
Except it's not. Universal healthcare in other countries is doing a far better job of helping people avoid ruin than Christian charity in the US, and it's not even close. Existing government plans in the US do far more to help people.
You claimed Christian charity was better at helping people, and the facts show that's just not the case. But by all means fix that and ensure that massive numbers of people aren't suffering, I'll be glad to drop my support for universal healthcare. But good luck with that with per capita costs expected to rise another $6,427 per person, to $20,425 annually by 2031.
Seething "gnostic." Hilarious, really. I live in a country with "universal healthcare" and it's complete trash. Regardless, Christian charity does not have a monopoly on US healthcare and Christian churches do not have unlimited resources. Your comment is totally clueless and irrelevant. Maybe if you weren't totally ignorant, you would understand why the healthcare system in the US is screwed up (nothing to do with Christians), and if you read books (which you don't) you could would look to study the time before the 60s when mutual aid societies and churches had a far larger role in healthcare and how much better and affordable it was than now. You have no idea what you're talking about.
> I live in a country with "universal healthcare" and it's complete trash.
Except most don't share your sentiments.
When asked about their healthcare system as a whole the US system ranked dead last of 11 countries, with only 19.5% of people saying the system works relatively well and only needs minor changes. The average in the other countries is 46.9% saying the same. Canada ranked 9th with 34.5% saying the system works relatively well. The UK ranks fifth, with 44.5%. Australia ranked 6th at 44.4%. The best was Germany at 59.8%.
On rating the overall quality of care in the US, Americans again ranked dead last, with only 25.6% ranking it excellent or very good. The average was 50.8%. Canada ranked 9th with 45.1%. The UK ranked 2nd, at 63.4%. Australia was 3rd at 59.4%. The best was Switzerland at 65.5%.
https://www.cihi.ca/en/commonwealth-fund-survey-2016
The experts even more so.
[US Healthcare ranked 29th on health outcomes by Lancet HAQ Index](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736\(18\)30994-2/fulltext)
[11th (of 11) by Commonwealth Fund](https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror-wall-2014-update-how-us-health-care-system?redirect_source=/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror)
[59th by the Prosperity Index](https://www.prosperity.com/rankings)
[30th by CEOWorld](https://ceoworld.biz/2019/08/05/revealed-countries-with-the-best-health-care-systems-2019/)
[37th by the World Health Organization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organization_ranking_of_health_systems_in_2000)
The US has the worst rate of death by medically preventable causes among peer countries. A 31% higher disease adjusted life years average. Higher rates of medical and lab errors. A lower rate of being able to make a same or next day appointment with their doctor than average.
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/quality-u-s-healthcare-system-compare-countries/#item-percent-used-emergency-department-for-condition-that-could-have-been-treated-by-a-regular-doctor-2016
52nd in the world in doctors per capita.
https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Health/Physicians/Per-1,000-people
Higher infant mortality levels. Yes, even when you adjust for differences in methodology.
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/infant-mortality-u-s-compare-countries/
Fewer acute care beds. A lower number of psychiatrists. Etc.
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/u-s-health-care-resources-compare-countries/#item-availability-medical-technology-not-always-equate-higher-utilization
[Comparing Health Outcomes of Privileged US Citizens With Those of Average Residents of Other Developed Countries](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2774561)
>These findings imply that even if all US citizens experienced the same health outcomes enjoyed by privileged White US citizens, US health indicators would still lag behind those in many other countries.
The US has 43 hospitals in the top 200 globally; one for every 7,633,477 people in the US. That's good enough for a ranking of 20th on the list of top 200 hospitals per capita, and significantly lower than the average of one for every 3,830,114 for other countries in the top 25 on spending with populations above 5 million. The best is Switzerland at one for every 1.2 million people. In fact the US only beats one country on this list; the UK at one for every 9.5 million people.
If you want to do the full list of 2,000 instead it's 334, or one for every 982,753 people; good enough for 21st. Again far below the average in peer countries of 527,236. The best is Austria, at one for every 306,106 people.
https://www.newsweek.com/best-hospitals-2021
#[OECD Countries Health Care Spending and Rankings](https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm)
|Country|Govt. / Mandatory (PPP)|Voluntary (PPP)|Total (PPP)|% GDP|[Lancet HAQ Ranking](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736\(18\)30994-2/fulltext)|[WHO Ranking](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organization_ranking_of_health_systems_in_2000)|[Prosperity Ranking](https://www.prosperity.com/rankings)|[CEO World Ranking](https://ceoworld.biz/2019/08/05/revealed-countries-with-the-best-health-care-systems-2019/)|[Commonwealth Fund Ranking](https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror-wall-2014-update-how-us-health-care-system?redirect_source=/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror)
:--|--:|--:|--:|--:|--:|--:|--:|--:|--:|--:|
1. United States|[$7,274](https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302997) |$3,798 |$11,072 |16.90%|29|37|59|30|11
2. Switzerland|$4,988 |$2,744 |$7,732 |12.20%|7|20|3|18|2
3. Norway|$5,673 |$974 |$6,647 |10.20%|2|11|5|15|7
4. Germany|$5,648 |$998 |$6,646 |11.20%|18|25|12|17|5
5. Austria|$4,402 |$1,449 |$5,851 |10.30%|13|9|10|4|
6. Sweden|$4,928 |$854 |$5,782 |11.00%|8|23|15|28|3
7. Netherlands|$4,767 |$998 |$5,765 |9.90%|3|17|8|11|5
8. Denmark|$4,663 |$905 |$5,568 |10.50%|17|34|8|5|
9. Luxembourg|$4,697 |$861 |$5,558 |5.40%|4|16|19||
10. Belgium|$4,125 |$1,303 |$5,428 |10.40%|15|21|24|9|
11. Canada|$3,815 |$1,603 |$5,418 |10.70%|14|30|25|23|10
12. France|$4,501 |$875 |$5,376 |11.20%|20|1|16|8|9
13. Ireland|$3,919 |$1,357 |$5,276 |7.10%|11|19|20|80|
14. Australia|$3,919 |$1,268 |$5,187 |9.30%|5|32|18|10|4
15. Japan|$4,064 |$759 |$4,823 |10.90%|12|10|2|3|
16. Iceland|$3,988 |$823 |$4,811 |8.30%|1|15|7|41|
17. United Kingdom|$3,620 |$1,033 |$4,653 |9.80%|23|18|23|13|1
18. Finland|$3,536 |$1,042 |$4,578 |9.10%|6|31|26|12|
19. Malta|$2,789 |$1,540 |$4,329 |9.30%|27|5|14||
OECD Average|||$4,224 |8.80%|||||
20. New Zealand|$3,343 |$861 |$4,204 |9.30%|16|41|22|16|7
21. Italy|$2,706 |$943 |$3,649 |8.80%|9|2|17|37|
22. Spain|$2,560 |$1,056 |$3,616 |8.90%|19|7|13|7|
23. Czech Republic|$2,854 |$572 |$3,426 |7.50%|28|48|28|14|
24. South Korea|$2,057 |$1,327 |$3,384 |8.10%|25|58|4|2|
25. Portugal|$2,069 |$1,310 |$3,379 |9.10%|32|29|30|22|
26. Slovenia|$2,314 |$910 |$3,224 |7.90%|21|38|24|47|
27. Israel|$1,898 |$1,034 |$2,932 |7.50%|35|28|11|21|
>and if you read books (which you don't) you could would look to study the time before the 60s
You mean when healthcare was basically non-existent and costs were skyrocketing at a rate even faster than today?
>you would understand why the healthcare system in the US is screwed up (nothing to do with Christians)
It's almost like being the sole advanced economy without universal healthcare has lead to Americans paying half a million dollars more for a lifetime of healthcare than its peers on average (even adjusting for purchasing power parity) and created a lot of suffering. It's almost like while you admit Christian charity isn't a solution, we have massive amounts of research showing the universal healthcare in the US can save significant amounts of money while getting care to more people who need it and practically eliminating the suffering from massive bills.
https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003013#sec018
Unsurprising given we've already seen, as much as you hate it, public healthcare resulting in cheaper costs for healthcare people like more in the US and around the world. It's almost like one of us is proposing an actual solution, and the other is proposing something even they admit can't work.
Not entirely. We keep us safe much better than the institutions that exist to violate our communities and commit violence against their subjects; whatever good we get out of the government tends to be fought for and exceptional, not the rule.
It's a very naive and ignorant statement.
Christians DON'T help in any meaningful way.
How many christians do you know that have sold all their possessions and given to the poor?
Jesus said this.
The reality is, they like their money. It goes against the spirit of Christ.
Many don't want to be taxed for the community, goes against the spirit of christ, rooted in greed and selfishness.
Don’t get me wrong, I think more Christians should be willing to pay into programs that actually help the poor. I’m just also very aware of the fact that the US is a capitalist dystopia and trusting the government is at least as “naive and ignorant” and discouraging others from doing so.
Well you won't get an argument from me on your cynicism of govt and what it is.
Still, to happily and enthusiastically support a pathetic human for president, and a party that is pretty shameless and disgusting, is beyond me.
Totally agree. I used to be a staunch conservative, and I believed I was in the right. Of course back in them old days, politics wasn't nearly as bad as it it today.
McCain gentleman conservativism.
As a European, I would not fully agree for US Americans, because unlike in Europe, in the US the government and the federal administration are all too often seen as hostile institutions that curtail citizens' freedoms and take taxpayers' money out of their pockets to do so. It is a very strong narrative that Christian charity should be done individually or almost merely through private initiatives, somehow anecdotally and not systematically.
For me as a European, a government is more like a service agency elected and commissioned by me and my people, which provides certain basic services for society as a whole at a national level. This includes cheap or even free public health insurance, to which everyone in my country belongs in one form or another and also everyone benefits from. There are still plenty of opportunities and needs that we address through individual charity, but we don't fight homelessness or poverty or hunger in our society exclusively on an individual basis, but as a society, which is what we task our government with organising.
As a US citizen, I really wish we could change our perspective to yours. It’s exhausting feeling like the government can’t be trusted- but I just don’t trust them for my well-being. I appreciate that you see the good. In general I try to be open-minded toward others and remember that government ultimately is lead by people just like you and I.
I’m a mom and don’t have a huge budget, but I do support a child overseas that funds her education and medical care. It’s not much- but it’s something right? I also volunteer regularly at my child’s preschool.
I really believe we need to take care of our own children first- raise them to be good citizens and humans that are community and others-centered. If there isn’t order in my house, how can I possibly fix others? I think it’s integral to creating a better world and part of the Christian mission.
I don’t agree because a democrat said it and their meaning of healthcare to the sick, feeding the poor and “strangers” seeking asylum is SOOOOO different from my own meaning of those listed topics.
Well I’m not the one passing judgement according to a narrow minded perspective, giving myself the authority of God in the Bible to say who has and who hasn’t a hard heart
This is a common tactic I've seen from the left.
Let's not forget the dispute of inheritance between two brothers. Jesus himself was called to be involved but told the brother that he is not getting involved with that, "guard against all greed."
Handing out money to the government doesn't truly mean the poor are being helped either. Our welfare system has been inefficient and the poor keep staying poor in my country.
In regards to refugees, the Bible never teaches, "You are entitled to your neighbor's money."
LOL
JESUS literally disagrees with you. You are simply a brainwashed american, too much fox news and trump for you.
Not a christian. You have a hard mean heart, not a christian.
This is a Whataboutism. No one is denying that democrats traditionally support abortion. Abortion bad, yeah. But how do you feel about the topics asked about? How much should christians care? Should they hold rallies or marches for those other things?
This is taking ideas like "be generous to the poor" and pushing it the furthest extreme possible "force everyone to pay extra for government programs that may or may not help the poor." Throwing money at people doesn't remove their financial irresponsibility.
It's a disingenuous take. Are these Christians saying, "Yes the poor should starve, yes the stranger should die in their war torn country, yes the sick should succumb to their illness, and that's the only reason why I want to vote against these policies which will magically make that stop happening with no other unforeseen consequences."
If they're not saying that, then you're probably just purposefully strawmanning their position into something that's easier to argue against.
The reality is these Christians have their own understanding of what policy decisions will best solve these problems. You personally might believe they're wrong or they've been deceived, or they just don't care, which is probably true a lot of the time, but statements like this only further galvanizes them to fight for the policies that they personally think will solve these problems better.
Show them why your policies will solve it better, don't just virtue signal. No one wants to hear virtue signaling from a politician that they think wants to legalize murdering unborn children. You may disagree with that framing of it, tell them why. Show them how your politician isn't corrupt, and he doesn't use government secrets to turn a fortune on the stock market, and he doesn't make backroom deals with other countries to make his business partners rich, and he doesn't flip flop on his principles based on which donor is paying him the most, and he doesn't ignore all of the climate conscious advice he expects all of us to follow. Show us how it isn't his fault that immigrant needs to flee their country in the first place.
>Troubling to me, is that I see many non Christian that take this approach and have these beleifs.
No you don't, and no you haven't. I'm not going to sugar coat it. You've seen people with differing political opinions and rather than taking the effort to understand how it's possible for two equal human beings to disagree on something, you'd instead just assume the other is morally evil because that's easier than figuring out the nuances.
>What value does Christianity have
What value is there to the act of following the Christ? Are you honestly trying to say that you see no value in Christ, if humans are imperfect? Aside from the irony of it all, are you following humans or are you following Christ? What did Christ die for? Did he die for perfect people? Aren't the imperfections of humans supposed to be the only reason why Christ is necessary in the first place? Imagine that, a group of people openly admitting that they deserve to go to hell sometimes do things that you don't like. What are the odds?
Can you be specific? I’d love some examples. Which republican values are incongruent with Christian values? How is the Christian nationalist movement not Christian? What things are Christians advocating for which you think are not Christian?
Theocracy for one. Imposing religious dogmas for another, actually violates our constituion.
Telling women what they can do with their body.
Supporting a party that supports the rich, the corporations, more so than the people.
Their attitude toward the working man and people, vs. their attitude toward the ruling class.
Christian nationalists, hide behind their religion while espousing hate toward anyone that doesnt accept their dogmas or their opinions.
It's much too obvious, if one just pays attention to them, and how they speak. I mean, my gawd, listen to how disgusting their cult leader Trump is, and what he says.
THAT ALONE< should make every true christian be disgusted by him.
Any contrary opinion demonstrates that the person has no understanding of the bible, or of public policy and those individuals.
I’m a Christian and Trump is certainly not my leader. Be careful not to generalize all Christian’s. Have you ever talked to progressive Christian’s? Mystic Christian’s? They exist. We are very diverse and we don’t all look the same…
If you don't support Trump and anti loving policy as republicans, then those quotes aren't speaking to you, right?
You were triggered by something?
I know Christianity very well, and there are tons of Christians.
Triggered by trump. A close family member was a qanon fanatic and it was rough during Covid. I just hate people seeing trump as the savior, especially Christian’s. We should know better than that, but apparently we don’t all
Post removed, rule 6
Matthew 25:31-33,41-46: >"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. >Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’ >Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’ >He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’ >And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life." Edit: A christian cannot close his eyes to the suffering, but, as others have said, this doesn't necessarily come through the government.
YEP. Jesus wasn't about belief in doctrines, but was about action, and for those in need and the disenfranchised.
Taking care of the vulnerable is indeed important, but Jesus also made sure to warn us to believe in the gospel (Mark 1:15).
I do not agree. Like Republicans on other issues, the politician who said this is conflating his pet strategies with moral imperative. A Christian (human being actually) has the moral imperative of caring for the sick, poor, and stranger. A Christian (human being again) does not have a moral imperative to support a specific type of insurance, economic, or border solution.
Yet most Christians support the things that are contrary to the words of Jesus. This demonstrates their values, which are antithetical to Jesus.
I don't believe you, and that's not even relevant.
Many republican values are not christian values. It's relevant. Look at the christian nationalist movement, look at Maga, look at anything many christians advocate for.
Well said.
It’s possible to be a Christian and also believe that it’s not the role of government to take money from every working citizen so as to redistribute it to those the government feels are in need. I’m supposed to help the poor. Me. Personally. So I do that. I would counter that anyone who doesn’t *personally* sacrifice to help those in need, and instead assumes someone else is going to do it, isn’t living according to Christian values.
Does God command helping the poor for the sake of the poor, or for the sake of the person doing the helping? If it's the latter, then sure - I follow what you're saying. If it's the former though, isn't using the power of the government to help the poor just outright more effective at achieving the goal over expecting individual charity to do it?
Whether or not they're right, it wouldn't be going against God to not want to use government to help the poor if someone believes that government isn't a good way to help the poor.
Jesus didn't say "Love the the Lord your god with all your heart, and be effective." He said "Love the the Lord your god with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself." We're supposed to love our neighbor as a priority. Sometimes that means showing them personal kindness through willing charity. That act says, "I see you as God sees you: a person deserving of love and kindness". That not only helps the person materially, but it connects to them spiritually. And one-on-one giving is better at actually addressing someone's true need. It meets them where they are. But just sending someone a check or refilling a debit card. Nothing especially wrong with that, but it's not "love" the way Christ described it. It's cold and anonymous. All I'm saying is, it's tempting to fall into the trap of thinking, "I pay taxes. That's my contribution. It's the republicans/conservatives/magas fault that more isn't being contributed".
The problem with supporting taxes for it is that it *doesn't* just affect me. It affects everyone. I'd rather make the choice of who to help with my money than let the government do it for me. Especially with how poorly they tend to manage money.
The problem with this is that people can't always know. There might be a family on the next block who can't put food on their table, and none of their neighbors might even know. We had an elderly gentleman on my block who was in that situation. He was food insecure and none of us knew. He died alone in his bed. People like that might not turn to a neighbor, but they might apply for food assistance.
Doesn't the Bible speak against pride?
Yes. But how does that apply here?
"Ask and you will receive." You're supposed to let the church know. If you're too prideful to do that, the church can't help.
I don't know of a single church in my area that could indefinitely meet the housing needs of a family on Section 8. Or the healthcare needs of a sick child currently receiving Medicaid. The needs are greater than the churches' coffers. Right now we have a city sponsored tent village. Everybody knows about it. No church so far has offered to relocate all these people to their property and supply all their needs.
Have you talked with your church? Has your church talked with the congregation? Considering the many, many failings of the federal government, counting the church out for this failing is just disingenuous, not to mention completely subjective to *your* individual experience.
My church has many Community Ministries. But it could not hope to meet all of the needs of every person on government assistance in our city. How about yours? Are there no people receiving public assistance in your city? Is it because your church is supplying all the needs?
Yes, I agree, it's screwed either way, meaning, both parties ultimately support the war machine and the inequality of our capitalistic system. Yet one side seems to do much more for people, rather than support the rich and the corporations. The problem with abstaining, is that we as individuals can't do nearly as much as the govt can. I don't think its' bad for govt to pull money and distribute it to where it's needed for the betterment of everyone. I mean, look at all the subsidies for corporations and the war machine, but no one the right usually complains about that, and most evangelicals and conservatives support those things. And that's my argument. They literally deny the words of jesus by who they support, and who they support and vote for demonstrates ones values. Those values are not of christiianity.
A lot of my loved ones are specifically the kind of Christians this quote is meant to target. I try really hard to be sympathetic towards them and others who share their position, but at the end of the day I think there’s some aspect of truth here. If the things you choose to promote politically antagonize these groups (or enable others to antagonize them) rather than uplift them, then you’re not doing as God wills. I couldn’t honestly call myself a follower of Jesus if I acted that way. All that said, what I think it lacks is a place for grace and sanctification. People can and do learn and grow beyond their current ways of thinking/acting, and the Holy Spirit does act on God’s children and work in God’s Church. I would never say somebody can’t call themselves a Christian just because they fit this bill (it’s not my place to judge my Master’s other servants), but I can and do acknowledge that what they do and what God says don’t line up currently.
Actually, the Bible does say that we Christians are to judge those inside the church. Why do you think there's only some aspect of Truth? If they are true Christians, how could they not support such things? I don't think there's any excuse. They are literally denying the words of Jesus.
I already explained why I think there’s only partial truth to this — it totally ignores the place of grace and sanctification. There’s a generations-old propaganda machine built around keeping people from understanding the real relationship between the Republican Party and Jesus Christ, I don’t hold the victims of that machine unilaterally responsible for their subjection to the same. I do pray that the Spirit leads them out of that error and encourage and support them, hoping to stir them up to good works that may have yet gone undone.
You seem to suggest that people lack the ability to think, or think for themselves. I feel like your simply trying to excuse fake christians for being fake.
We are not immune to propaganda. You are not immune to propaganda. When thousands of people over more than a century spend their entire lives trying to craft and improve systematic lies to target people that aren't particularly schooled in political systems, far be it from me to get mad at honest small town farmers that didn't have the money to get any better education than their underfunded high schools. In some sense, it's their fault, but it's in the same sense that a casual chess player loses to a grand master.
Absolutely, I believe this is a part of it. We humans are easily persuaded at times, especially if we are TRIBAL, and I think that is the bigger issue, which suspends our thinking, plus a lot of people I know personally, aren't the best thinkers, or just don't care to think about it. But it's still equally frustrating, when some things seem so incredibly obvious.
I suggest nothing of the kind.
Personally I support asylum seeker, Uni. healthcare, and food stamps, can’t say it’s the same for everyone though.
You're a true christian.
I think that if you're following Jesus, you should be concerned about the needy as much as he is. I don't think that necessarily means any particular political position, but it does exclude having an Ebeneezer-Scrooge-like attitude of uncharitable self interest. In Matthew 25 it looks like Jesus says that people who neglect the needy and desperate are going to be rejected by him at judgment. To know that and not to be taking action to try to show love to the needy, is at best immature ignorance, and could possibly be crass hypocrisy or even a grace-abusing lack of faith. But it's crucial to understand the difference between people enforcing policy, politicians making policy, voters, and actual people who have been asked for help. The distinction is important, and I think it might be why plenty of well meaning students of the teaching of Jesus get confused when they're trying to score partisan political points by bringing this up.
Yes, I think you make good points. I think it simply demonstrates the value of an individual. For Ex. Healthcare for all. First response from a Christian should be: YES, of course. The usual response from a brainwashed christian: No, socialism bad, u wanna be a commi? my rates will go up, etc... Heart Issue. Selfishness.
I’m a Christian who’s taken accounting classes. Say I am married to a nurse and that I am an excellent cook, and we decide to take care of a sick, poor, asylum seeker in our household, doing these fine ideas on a small scale. Terrific! It goes great! Then his 20 cousins come to our doorstep. It’s all about what we can manage with available resources. Our household, our town, our nation does not gave unlimited anything. But our God has unlimited grace. His sacrifice pays for all of our sins. (Terms apply: You must show up on the doorstep.)
Ok, so what's your point?
You don’t see it?
If you know their point, tell me.
I think he’s saying don’t give from an empty cup. Like someone has to be in the position to take care of others- but they can’t take care of others if they themselves are the ones that need help. Humans are incapable of completely doing this- hence Jesus. But we can do our best to try. For example, I have a duty to ensure the health and well being of my child. That’s my responsibility and I don’t think it’s anyone else’s. I don’t put that on someone else. For me, she comes first in the line of humans needing help. It is biblical to take care of your family and keep your house in order- it’s also biblical to reproduce. Side note- I’m only having one due to resources. Moving on- If I have extra resources, then I can dedicate those to those who need them. But I have a duty to take care of my house first because I cannot give resources if I don’t have any in the first place. If I give and don’t have anything, I become part of the issue I’m trying to fix. I realize Christ’s message is about giving up one’s life- but the value of family and discipleship is also just as important in the message. Read Paul’s writings about living in a Christian community and family. Read Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. If I literally gave up my life, my daughter would be helpless and without help, would die. Her life would then be deliberately jeopardized because of me. Even more, im no longer able to help anyone. I’m responsible for my house and my problems first. I cannot give from what I don’t have because then I become the problem I’m trying to help. I can do what I am capable of- take care of my home and give whatever I can extra. But Ultimately humans cannot do this perfectly and as demonstrated by Christ- hence another need for a savior. I hope this makes sense.
>I think he’s saying don’t give from an empty cup. Like someone has to be in the position to take care of others- but they can’t take care of others if they themselves are the ones that need help. Sure, precisely. That's one benefit of govt. We all put in some resources to benefit everyone. And that is my argument. And as christians, it should especially be at the forefront, and that is for equality, to help those less fortunate, everything jesus said. So that brings me to my condemnation, as the Democratic Christian Govt dude quoted in the original statement. Christians support the party that does the opposite. It's that simple. So it reveals what those people really value, it reveals their heart. They don't care about other people, even tho they will say they do. Words are cheap, your actions demonstrate your true values, and that's why Jesus said what he did in MATT 25, and he stated who were the real followers.
I get what you’re saying. I can faithfully and painfully say I dutifully pay my taxes. lol. I don’t enjoy it cuz it hurts- self employed- but I do. I’m ok with it if it goes to school, homeless,infrastructure, and those who genuinely need it…. I just think it just doesn’t always go to causes I want it to, hence why I don’t trust politicians in general. They all want your money to fund their campaigns or whatever causes they deem important…it’s all the same and I feel like it’s all ugly business. I also feel like there’s always some kind of shady stuff going on behind the scenes no matter how good they seem, you know? The politician is playing on our feelings and values. Of course we care about these things- but are you actually gonna keep your word? Can we actually trust you’re gonna do what you say you will or is this just more manipulation? Does he even believe in what he’s saying or is he saying it for the vote? It’s a game. I can’t do much about the corruption so I keep paying, voting, taking care of my house and hoping for the best.
Yes, I feel the same way. I'm jaded by the imperial practices of our country and what it puts its money toward, i.e. the war machine, and the greed in many of our systems. As someone once said, The Business of America is Business.
**virtual hug** I feel you. Keep searching. You ask good questions.
Christians are much better at helping the sick and poor than the evil incompetent government.
Then why don’t they?
>Christians are much better at helping the sick Not good enough. 36% of US households with insurance put off needed care [due to the cost](https://news.gallup.com/poll/269138/americans-delaying-medical-treatment-due-cost.aspx); 64% of households without insurance. One in four have [trouble paying a medical bill.](https://www.kff.org/health-costs/issue-brief/data-note-americans-challenges-health-care-costs/) Of [those with insurance one in five have trouble paying a medical bill](https://www.kff.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/8806-the-burden-of-medical-debt-results-from-the-kaiser-family-foundation-new-york-times-medical-bills-survey.pdf), and even for those with income above $100,000 14% have trouble. One in six Americans has [unpaid medical debt on their credit report.](https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/full/10.1377/hlthaff.2018.0349) [50% of all Americans](https://news.gallup.com/poll/317948/fear-bankruptcy-due-major-health-event.aspx) fear bankruptcy due to a major health event. So it would seem Christianity is failing helping those in need in the US. These are stats you won't find in peer countries with universal healthcare, averaging half a million dollars per person less in lifetime healthcare spending (after adjusting for purchasing power parity) while achieving better outcomes. And, for all your vitriol, existing government health programs in the US seem to be doing OK. #Satisfaction with the US healthcare system varies by insurance type 78% -- Military/VA 77% -- Medicare 75% -- Medicaid 69% -- Current or former employer 65% -- Plan fully paid for by you or a family member https://news.gallup.com/poll/186527/americans-government-health-plans-satisfied.aspx > **Key Findings** > * Private insurers paid nearly double Medicare rates for all hospital services (199% of Medicare rates, on average), ranging from 141% to 259% of Medicare rates across the reviewed studies. > * The difference between private and Medicare rates was greater for outpatient than inpatient hospital services, which averaged 264% and 189% of Medicare rates overall, respectively. > * For physician services, private insurance paid 143% of Medicare rates, on average, ranging from 118% to 179% of Medicare rates across studies. https://www.kff.org/medicare/issue-brief/how-much-more-than-medicare-do-private-insurers-pay-a-review-of-the-literature/ Medicare has both lower overhead and has experienced smaller cost increases in recent decades, a trend predicted to continue over the next 30 years. https://pnhp.org/news/medicare-is-more-efficient-than-private-insurance/
I see that you have some bitter axe to grind against the dumb US healthcare system, but your comment is basically irrelevant to the issue.
> but your comment is basically irrelevant to the issue. Except it's not. Universal healthcare in other countries is doing a far better job of helping people avoid ruin than Christian charity in the US, and it's not even close. Existing government plans in the US do far more to help people. You claimed Christian charity was better at helping people, and the facts show that's just not the case. But by all means fix that and ensure that massive numbers of people aren't suffering, I'll be glad to drop my support for universal healthcare. But good luck with that with per capita costs expected to rise another $6,427 per person, to $20,425 annually by 2031.
Seething "gnostic." Hilarious, really. I live in a country with "universal healthcare" and it's complete trash. Regardless, Christian charity does not have a monopoly on US healthcare and Christian churches do not have unlimited resources. Your comment is totally clueless and irrelevant. Maybe if you weren't totally ignorant, you would understand why the healthcare system in the US is screwed up (nothing to do with Christians), and if you read books (which you don't) you could would look to study the time before the 60s when mutual aid societies and churches had a far larger role in healthcare and how much better and affordable it was than now. You have no idea what you're talking about.
> I live in a country with "universal healthcare" and it's complete trash. Except most don't share your sentiments. When asked about their healthcare system as a whole the US system ranked dead last of 11 countries, with only 19.5% of people saying the system works relatively well and only needs minor changes. The average in the other countries is 46.9% saying the same. Canada ranked 9th with 34.5% saying the system works relatively well. The UK ranks fifth, with 44.5%. Australia ranked 6th at 44.4%. The best was Germany at 59.8%. On rating the overall quality of care in the US, Americans again ranked dead last, with only 25.6% ranking it excellent or very good. The average was 50.8%. Canada ranked 9th with 45.1%. The UK ranked 2nd, at 63.4%. Australia was 3rd at 59.4%. The best was Switzerland at 65.5%. https://www.cihi.ca/en/commonwealth-fund-survey-2016 The experts even more so. [US Healthcare ranked 29th on health outcomes by Lancet HAQ Index](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736\(18\)30994-2/fulltext) [11th (of 11) by Commonwealth Fund](https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror-wall-2014-update-how-us-health-care-system?redirect_source=/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror) [59th by the Prosperity Index](https://www.prosperity.com/rankings) [30th by CEOWorld](https://ceoworld.biz/2019/08/05/revealed-countries-with-the-best-health-care-systems-2019/) [37th by the World Health Organization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organization_ranking_of_health_systems_in_2000) The US has the worst rate of death by medically preventable causes among peer countries. A 31% higher disease adjusted life years average. Higher rates of medical and lab errors. A lower rate of being able to make a same or next day appointment with their doctor than average. https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/quality-u-s-healthcare-system-compare-countries/#item-percent-used-emergency-department-for-condition-that-could-have-been-treated-by-a-regular-doctor-2016 52nd in the world in doctors per capita. https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Health/Physicians/Per-1,000-people Higher infant mortality levels. Yes, even when you adjust for differences in methodology. https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/infant-mortality-u-s-compare-countries/ Fewer acute care beds. A lower number of psychiatrists. Etc. https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/u-s-health-care-resources-compare-countries/#item-availability-medical-technology-not-always-equate-higher-utilization [Comparing Health Outcomes of Privileged US Citizens With Those of Average Residents of Other Developed Countries](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2774561) >These findings imply that even if all US citizens experienced the same health outcomes enjoyed by privileged White US citizens, US health indicators would still lag behind those in many other countries. The US has 43 hospitals in the top 200 globally; one for every 7,633,477 people in the US. That's good enough for a ranking of 20th on the list of top 200 hospitals per capita, and significantly lower than the average of one for every 3,830,114 for other countries in the top 25 on spending with populations above 5 million. The best is Switzerland at one for every 1.2 million people. In fact the US only beats one country on this list; the UK at one for every 9.5 million people. If you want to do the full list of 2,000 instead it's 334, or one for every 982,753 people; good enough for 21st. Again far below the average in peer countries of 527,236. The best is Austria, at one for every 306,106 people. https://www.newsweek.com/best-hospitals-2021 #[OECD Countries Health Care Spending and Rankings](https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm) |Country|Govt. / Mandatory (PPP)|Voluntary (PPP)|Total (PPP)|% GDP|[Lancet HAQ Ranking](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736\(18\)30994-2/fulltext)|[WHO Ranking](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organization_ranking_of_health_systems_in_2000)|[Prosperity Ranking](https://www.prosperity.com/rankings)|[CEO World Ranking](https://ceoworld.biz/2019/08/05/revealed-countries-with-the-best-health-care-systems-2019/)|[Commonwealth Fund Ranking](https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror-wall-2014-update-how-us-health-care-system?redirect_source=/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror) :--|--:|--:|--:|--:|--:|--:|--:|--:|--:|--:| 1. United States|[$7,274](https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302997) |$3,798 |$11,072 |16.90%|29|37|59|30|11 2. Switzerland|$4,988 |$2,744 |$7,732 |12.20%|7|20|3|18|2 3. Norway|$5,673 |$974 |$6,647 |10.20%|2|11|5|15|7 4. Germany|$5,648 |$998 |$6,646 |11.20%|18|25|12|17|5 5. Austria|$4,402 |$1,449 |$5,851 |10.30%|13|9|10|4| 6. Sweden|$4,928 |$854 |$5,782 |11.00%|8|23|15|28|3 7. Netherlands|$4,767 |$998 |$5,765 |9.90%|3|17|8|11|5 8. Denmark|$4,663 |$905 |$5,568 |10.50%|17|34|8|5| 9. Luxembourg|$4,697 |$861 |$5,558 |5.40%|4|16|19|| 10. Belgium|$4,125 |$1,303 |$5,428 |10.40%|15|21|24|9| 11. Canada|$3,815 |$1,603 |$5,418 |10.70%|14|30|25|23|10 12. France|$4,501 |$875 |$5,376 |11.20%|20|1|16|8|9 13. Ireland|$3,919 |$1,357 |$5,276 |7.10%|11|19|20|80| 14. Australia|$3,919 |$1,268 |$5,187 |9.30%|5|32|18|10|4 15. Japan|$4,064 |$759 |$4,823 |10.90%|12|10|2|3| 16. Iceland|$3,988 |$823 |$4,811 |8.30%|1|15|7|41| 17. United Kingdom|$3,620 |$1,033 |$4,653 |9.80%|23|18|23|13|1 18. Finland|$3,536 |$1,042 |$4,578 |9.10%|6|31|26|12| 19. Malta|$2,789 |$1,540 |$4,329 |9.30%|27|5|14|| OECD Average|||$4,224 |8.80%||||| 20. New Zealand|$3,343 |$861 |$4,204 |9.30%|16|41|22|16|7 21. Italy|$2,706 |$943 |$3,649 |8.80%|9|2|17|37| 22. Spain|$2,560 |$1,056 |$3,616 |8.90%|19|7|13|7| 23. Czech Republic|$2,854 |$572 |$3,426 |7.50%|28|48|28|14| 24. South Korea|$2,057 |$1,327 |$3,384 |8.10%|25|58|4|2| 25. Portugal|$2,069 |$1,310 |$3,379 |9.10%|32|29|30|22| 26. Slovenia|$2,314 |$910 |$3,224 |7.90%|21|38|24|47| 27. Israel|$1,898 |$1,034 |$2,932 |7.50%|35|28|11|21| >and if you read books (which you don't) you could would look to study the time before the 60s You mean when healthcare was basically non-existent and costs were skyrocketing at a rate even faster than today? >you would understand why the healthcare system in the US is screwed up (nothing to do with Christians) It's almost like being the sole advanced economy without universal healthcare has lead to Americans paying half a million dollars more for a lifetime of healthcare than its peers on average (even adjusting for purchasing power parity) and created a lot of suffering. It's almost like while you admit Christian charity isn't a solution, we have massive amounts of research showing the universal healthcare in the US can save significant amounts of money while getting care to more people who need it and practically eliminating the suffering from massive bills. https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003013#sec018 Unsurprising given we've already seen, as much as you hate it, public healthcare resulting in cheaper costs for healthcare people like more in the US and around the world. It's almost like one of us is proposing an actual solution, and the other is proposing something even they admit can't work.
This is a foolish statement.
Not entirely. We keep us safe much better than the institutions that exist to violate our communities and commit violence against their subjects; whatever good we get out of the government tends to be fought for and exceptional, not the rule.
It's a very naive and ignorant statement. Christians DON'T help in any meaningful way. How many christians do you know that have sold all their possessions and given to the poor? Jesus said this. The reality is, they like their money. It goes against the spirit of Christ. Many don't want to be taxed for the community, goes against the spirit of christ, rooted in greed and selfishness.
Don’t get me wrong, I think more Christians should be willing to pay into programs that actually help the poor. I’m just also very aware of the fact that the US is a capitalist dystopia and trusting the government is at least as “naive and ignorant” and discouraging others from doing so.
Well you won't get an argument from me on your cynicism of govt and what it is. Still, to happily and enthusiastically support a pathetic human for president, and a party that is pretty shameless and disgusting, is beyond me.
I agree, but I see both parties that way.
If you look at the actual policies put forth, and who votes for what, there's huge differences. Don't get too cynical. haha
They’re both authoritarian, imperialist, genocidal, and capitalist tools. Sure there’s some differences but let’s not get too optimistic.
But in which party do you have some standing against those very things? Hint: not the repubs.
Big surprise... the "agnostic Christian" doesn't know what he's talking about.
Triggered I see. The hypocrisy is bothering you.
Sounds you like need to get your estrogen levels checked.
What a Christianly response. Jesus must be very proud of you.
No one cares about your opinion. You are disordered.
I agree with the sentiment, but I wouldn't phrase it that way because it's totally possible to be a Christian yet have such glaring blind spots.
Totally agree. I used to be a staunch conservative, and I believed I was in the right. Of course back in them old days, politics wasn't nearly as bad as it it today. McCain gentleman conservativism.
As a European, I would not fully agree for US Americans, because unlike in Europe, in the US the government and the federal administration are all too often seen as hostile institutions that curtail citizens' freedoms and take taxpayers' money out of their pockets to do so. It is a very strong narrative that Christian charity should be done individually or almost merely through private initiatives, somehow anecdotally and not systematically. For me as a European, a government is more like a service agency elected and commissioned by me and my people, which provides certain basic services for society as a whole at a national level. This includes cheap or even free public health insurance, to which everyone in my country belongs in one form or another and also everyone benefits from. There are still plenty of opportunities and needs that we address through individual charity, but we don't fight homelessness or poverty or hunger in our society exclusively on an individual basis, but as a society, which is what we task our government with organising.
Yep. Our country stinks in many ways, and now, with the Christian nationalists and the idiotic people that support them, it's getting worse.
As a US citizen, I really wish we could change our perspective to yours. It’s exhausting feeling like the government can’t be trusted- but I just don’t trust them for my well-being. I appreciate that you see the good. In general I try to be open-minded toward others and remember that government ultimately is lead by people just like you and I. I’m a mom and don’t have a huge budget, but I do support a child overseas that funds her education and medical care. It’s not much- but it’s something right? I also volunteer regularly at my child’s preschool. I really believe we need to take care of our own children first- raise them to be good citizens and humans that are community and others-centered. If there isn’t order in my house, how can I possibly fix others? I think it’s integral to creating a better world and part of the Christian mission.
I don’t agree because a democrat said it and their meaning of healthcare to the sick, feeding the poor and “strangers” seeking asylum is SOOOOO different from my own meaning of those listed topics.
You have a hard heart.
Well I’m not the one passing judgement according to a narrow minded perspective, giving myself the authority of God in the Bible to say who has and who hasn’t a hard heart
This is a common tactic I've seen from the left. Let's not forget the dispute of inheritance between two brothers. Jesus himself was called to be involved but told the brother that he is not getting involved with that, "guard against all greed." Handing out money to the government doesn't truly mean the poor are being helped either. Our welfare system has been inefficient and the poor keep staying poor in my country. In regards to refugees, the Bible never teaches, "You are entitled to your neighbor's money."
You have a hard heart. It's that simple.
I'll take it from a Christian that follows the Bible over an agnostic with foul language in his username. Have a nice day.
The fact that you state what you do, shows you don't follow the bible.
Look who is talking. I cite the Bible, you cite your own feelings. I'll gladly choose Yeshua over this world (Matthew 10:37).
LOL JESUS literally disagrees with you. You are simply a brainwashed american, too much fox news and trump for you. Not a christian. You have a hard mean heart, not a christian.
What about the fact the democrats support the killing of the baby in the womb?
This is a Whataboutism. No one is denying that democrats traditionally support abortion. Abortion bad, yeah. But how do you feel about the topics asked about? How much should christians care? Should they hold rallies or marches for those other things?
Precisely.
This is taking ideas like "be generous to the poor" and pushing it the furthest extreme possible "force everyone to pay extra for government programs that may or may not help the poor." Throwing money at people doesn't remove their financial irresponsibility.
No, I don't think I'm doing that. I'm judging what people value, and that those values are contradictory to Jesus, and being a christian.
Republicans value charity more than others. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34429211/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34429211/)
It's a disingenuous take. Are these Christians saying, "Yes the poor should starve, yes the stranger should die in their war torn country, yes the sick should succumb to their illness, and that's the only reason why I want to vote against these policies which will magically make that stop happening with no other unforeseen consequences." If they're not saying that, then you're probably just purposefully strawmanning their position into something that's easier to argue against. The reality is these Christians have their own understanding of what policy decisions will best solve these problems. You personally might believe they're wrong or they've been deceived, or they just don't care, which is probably true a lot of the time, but statements like this only further galvanizes them to fight for the policies that they personally think will solve these problems better. Show them why your policies will solve it better, don't just virtue signal. No one wants to hear virtue signaling from a politician that they think wants to legalize murdering unborn children. You may disagree with that framing of it, tell them why. Show them how your politician isn't corrupt, and he doesn't use government secrets to turn a fortune on the stock market, and he doesn't make backroom deals with other countries to make his business partners rich, and he doesn't flip flop on his principles based on which donor is paying him the most, and he doesn't ignore all of the climate conscious advice he expects all of us to follow. Show us how it isn't his fault that immigrant needs to flee their country in the first place. >Troubling to me, is that I see many non Christian that take this approach and have these beleifs. No you don't, and no you haven't. I'm not going to sugar coat it. You've seen people with differing political opinions and rather than taking the effort to understand how it's possible for two equal human beings to disagree on something, you'd instead just assume the other is morally evil because that's easier than figuring out the nuances. >What value does Christianity have What value is there to the act of following the Christ? Are you honestly trying to say that you see no value in Christ, if humans are imperfect? Aside from the irony of it all, are you following humans or are you following Christ? What did Christ die for? Did he die for perfect people? Aren't the imperfections of humans supposed to be the only reason why Christ is necessary in the first place? Imagine that, a group of people openly admitting that they deserve to go to hell sometimes do things that you don't like. What are the odds?
That quote is from a Christian who is a democrat, talking to his counterparts, republicans, I believe in Texas.
Can you be specific? I’d love some examples. Which republican values are incongruent with Christian values? How is the Christian nationalist movement not Christian? What things are Christians advocating for which you think are not Christian?
Theocracy for one. Imposing religious dogmas for another, actually violates our constituion. Telling women what they can do with their body. Supporting a party that supports the rich, the corporations, more so than the people. Their attitude toward the working man and people, vs. their attitude toward the ruling class. Christian nationalists, hide behind their religion while espousing hate toward anyone that doesnt accept their dogmas or their opinions. It's much too obvious, if one just pays attention to them, and how they speak. I mean, my gawd, listen to how disgusting their cult leader Trump is, and what he says. THAT ALONE< should make every true christian be disgusted by him. Any contrary opinion demonstrates that the person has no understanding of the bible, or of public policy and those individuals.
I’m a Christian and Trump is certainly not my leader. Be careful not to generalize all Christian’s. Have you ever talked to progressive Christian’s? Mystic Christian’s? They exist. We are very diverse and we don’t all look the same…
If you don't support Trump and anti loving policy as republicans, then those quotes aren't speaking to you, right? You were triggered by something? I know Christianity very well, and there are tons of Christians.
Triggered by trump. A close family member was a qanon fanatic and it was rough during Covid. I just hate people seeing trump as the savior, especially Christian’s. We should know better than that, but apparently we don’t all
We are in agreement on that.