What follows is a quote from yesterday's comments:
"Do you think it is easier to ask the church for help, or the government? Unfortunately I think it is easier to ask the government because the church is full of judgmental people. And I'll be the first to admit I am as guilty as anyone else. We draw lines down the church based on money, marital status, et al. With the government you're just another number to them, no one to judge really. That's not why I think welfare is good (I don't for the most part), but it's why I think Christian as a whole have no room to complain."
Very true. As a matter of fact, I would use those very same words. But let's take this from a different perspective.
I agree that people who turn to the church often feel alienated by a judging eye. But here's my issue; I don't think that eye is always that of the church itself.
You're right, if I can go to the government and get a paycheck, why should I go to someone who makes me feel guilty? I wouldn't, and I don't think anyone really would. But the next question is, just why do I feel guilty? The government asks you to prove that you're looking for work. What church entity does that? The church rarely ever makes you feel guilty for being poor by being judgmental. Maybe the guilt is coming from God. If someone feels guilty for asking a church for money when that is the only time they set foot in it, maybe they should use that as an inspiration to walk through the doors on a Sunday morning. However, I would agree that the instructions laid out in the Bible to feed the masses before you ever try to preach to them is not being practiced.
My next question would be this: Is it fair to make someone who will never live off of welfare pay for those who will? I do agree that it is my responsibility to help my fellow man, Christian or not. But there are plenty of people shirking their responsibilities out there, and are only held accountable by God Himself. When did it become the government's position to force me to adhere to my humanitarian responsibilities? I should want to help, and I do, and I think its wrong if you don't want to help your community. But no matter how wrong it is, who's right is it to force my hand?
Say everybody in my building wants the parking lot paved outside, but I never use it. They say to me, "will you chip in?" Should I? Maybe I should, at least for the sake of community. But if I don't, the punishment should be that I'm considered a pariah by everyone. It should not ultimately end up with me being hancuffed and fingerprinted, right? Same scenario, but with a more powerful entity. If I don't drive on the roads I still have to pay for the roads. If I don't send my children to a public school I still have to pay for the school. And if I don't, I'll be sleeping in a cage soon.
We as a society give up more and more rights for more and more stability and comfort and safety. The problem is we're giving up our freedom. The further we move away from the revolutionary spirit that started this nation, the more we are willing to give up to make sure we have a safety net. That's fine for some, I just with there was a clause to get out of it all. Live in this country without having to support things to which I normally would not lend myself.
I really think its too late, though. After two strong blows to the 10th amendment (The Civil War and The New Deal) I think that there is no turning back. We're not revolutionaries, we're lazy. George Orwell had it all wrong. Big Brother doesn't watch you, and he never will. There is no reason to worry about people's thoughts if you keep them happy enough. The only reason we revolted in the first place was because we were fed up with being told what to do. If we had stayed happy, we'd still have a queen. The fight is gone from us, and there really is no real freedom unless you're constantly fighting someone for it... even your own government.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." -- Thomas Jefferson