You must take the whole of scripture.If you are a christian it is "A command" to take care of those who are less fortunate and sick.It is also an overwhelming moral virtue for our common Good to establish a just health care system "public option" would help in this process.It is social Darwinism vs real christianity.
HELL awaits those that only think about their pocketbooks and refuse through the mind to contribute to society through taxation. Those that don't want to pay taxes are filthy dirty people who think that roads and education should pay for itself and that it's OK in the worlds richest nation to leave people on the streets and let the sick get denied care. These Christians as they call themselves are nothing but frauds, greedy and evil and clearly working for Satan, even if they don't know it.
Letting the weak die off because they can't afford to take care of themselves sounds pretty fascist to me. Just because the gubmint don't gas the poor suckers, but they're just left to starve and die on their own, don't make a difference if you let it happen. So as a Christian wouldn't it be proper for you to find an uninsured American and take him'her to a doctor at your own expense? Being your brother's keeper. . . .
@TheAzov That's what I say! Still, I wonder why 0bama, who claims to be a Christian and who has a brother living in a grass hut in Africa doesn't take care of his brother. Perhaps he is the typical Christian who can't understand what Jesus said and is waiting for the government to step in and do something.
@TheAzov And yes...yes, it would be the Christian thing to do....to take a needy person to the doc and pay for their medical bills or buy them some food or medicine or pay their heating bills. But if you aren't a Christian, should the government force you to adhere to Christian teachings? Ultimately, this is your personal choice about how you treat the needy. If you pay taxes into a system that takes care of the poor, are you guaranteed a place in heaven?
@TheFascistHunter No, it's not your personal choice, as a Christian. You're *commanded* to do these things, so as to be "like your Father in Heaven." You're as compelled to do righteously unto others as if the government was standing over your shoulder ordering you to distribute your time, service, and goods to the needy. Think of those angels watching and recording as god's commissars.
@TheFascistHunter No, it's not your personal choice, as a Christian. You're *commanded* to do these things, so as to be "like your Father in Heaven." You're as compelled to do righteously unto others as if the government was standing over your shoulder ordering you to distribute your time, service, and goods to the needy. Think of those angels watching and recording as god's commissars.
@TheAzov I have no argument with this. According to the Bible, Christians are indeed supposed to behave in this manner. However, not everyone is a Christian and they should not be forced to behave as Christians if they do not wish to do so. We most certainly do not need to use the government to enforce Christian or any other religious dogma. We have a separation of church & state.
@TheFascistHunter OK. . . that means you're for same-sex marriage and abortion. If you can accept this, then out of consistency I can accept the honesty of your position.
@TheAzov I'm not for, nor against them. I'm for following the Constitution. The document doesn't mention either of them, so it's a 10th Amendment issue. If states want gay marriage or abortion, let them have it. If states do not want either, let them not have it that way.
One important factor in the idea of wealth redistribution:
If the concept of wealth redistribution is acceptable, why is it wrong for the rich to take from the poor? This too is wealth redistribution, only it is in the other direction. Why is one bad and one good if redistribution is OK?
He'd heal the sick himself and not advocate that other people's money be taken from them in order to help the poor. Jesus advocated that individuals help the poor. He never claimed this was a responsibility of the government. If you believe government should be used to do as Jesus said, to help the poor, you are in favor of violating the separation of church and state.
What would Jesus do? Here's what he didnt do: He didnt overeat (diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure). He didnt do drugs (overdose,liver and kidney disease). He didnt engage in promiscuous sex (disease, aids). He didnt take medicines for stress or depression (leading to side effects requiring treatment) How about we first get folks to take some responsibility for themselves and live the way Jesus did and then with all the extra money we could take care of those who are truly sick?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@bosco604 He didn't have to take drugs, overeat, have sex, self-medicate, etc.... Jesus is GOD. Humans are not GOD and don't have godly powers to heal themselves. That's why God told humans to help each other... Help those that are sick, poor, deformed, etc... Personal responsibility does not stop sickness and death. Alot of disease is genetic. Healthcare is a moral obligation, and it you don't agree, then you don't agree with GOD.
@quicksiliva If health care is a moral obligation, then the government has business being involved. We're constantly told that government should not legislate morality, aren't we?
@TheFascistHunter You can't be hypocritical which is what Jesus is very much against. You can't have government legislate morality some of the time for only the issues you choose. Abortion for example is an issue in which most Christians choose pro-life, and base that stance on Jesus' teachings. However, the exact same people are in favor of the death penalty and against nearly any measure of gun control. Jesus wasn't an economist, but he would always favor morality over the costs.
@quicksiliva I agree, however this is what I've been talking about from the beginning! When it comes to gay marriage and executing guilty people, we're told we shouldn't legislate morality. However, when it comes to socialized medicine, we're told we need to use the government to force people to do the "right" thing! Which is it? I don't think Jesus would be too upset over guns since he advocated buying swords. It's people who do harm with them and not the objects themselves.
@TheFascistHunter You're not getting it. Since when are you being told that morailty is not being legistlated toward gay marriage or death penalty? It is all the time, and that is why you can't tell me that Christians aren't picking and choosing their own issues with regard to the scripture and voting on those beliefs. Healthcare should be no exception. Swords are not guns. The liberal Jesus of the bible would most likely be far more liberal than most liberals today.
@TheFascistHunter I'm not saying you should follow Jesus. The government is not saying it. But when governement legislation matches the commands of Christ, why do you Christians have a problem with it? Can you answer why you are mad at government for telling you to do what Jesus has already asked of you? If you read the bible, redistribution of wealth was Jesus' primary goal. He wanted the sick, the poor, the have-nots to recieve help from those that have. He despised greed.
@quicksiliva Sure, I can tell why I'm mad. Charity is a gift, it is not taken and redistributed. Jesus said to give of your own freewill and never advocated anyone or any entity of government redistribute wealth.
@TheFascistHunter No, that's what you're political, economical belief is telling you, not what Jesus told you. Jesus commands that you help people and do so by any means necessary. Again, you're trying to find a loophole, a way out of it by stating your man-made ideology over that of Jesus. Most conservatives don't actually follow Jesus. Do what you want, but don't expect heaven's doors to be open for you by denying what Jesus commands.
@quicksiliva Actually, yes. Jesus never advocated government take care of the poor. He told people to do that. He told them to sell their belongings. He didn't say the government should take their money and redistribute it, that they should do it themselves. Who better knows who the poor are in their area? Not the federal govt.
@TheFascistHunter Frankly, NO, you're an Idiot. Read the bible and stop supporting man's ideology over that of Jesus. God knows you're wrong, Jesus know's you're wrong, and I know you're wrong, because I know the bible better than you. The Christian thing to do is to help those, and yes we do it through taxes. Who better knows the poor in an area? NOT YOU. You're not out scouting people to help. And you have the audacity to say you shouldn't have to pay taxes to help others?
@quicksiliva These people that claim charity is the way to help others don't seem to understand, and Charity doesn't cut it. Besides, if you understood anything about Jesus you get through your thick skull that he wanted the poor and sick to receive help, not by passer-bys or alone neighbors, but by EVERYONE. He called upon all to help all... And you are still arguing your evil Man ideology over what Jesus made Clear. All help all. And there is no other way than through taxes.
@quicksiliva I've read it and I can find nothing where Jesus advocates people's property be taken to help the poor. He did advocate people do this themselves. And anyone who chooses to not help the poor, won't they be judged by God in the end? Isn't that between God and them and not for anyone else to decide? Didn't Jesus say, "Judge not lest ye be judged?"
@TheFascistHunter NO you haven't read or understood anything. When Jesus speaks, he speaks to all of mankind, not individuals. What are you talking about, your property being taken? You don't own anything. All that you have is because God allows you to have it. It belongs to God, not you And with that kind of thinking, the selfishness and greed of Satan that has entered and taken over your heart, you will never understand God. To avoid taxation is also avoiding help to the poor.
@quicksiliva Oh yes, I do own things, so do you, and so did the people Jesus spoke to. He told them to SELL (Capitalism) their personal property and give the proceedings to the poor. This brings up two questions: If they did not own anything, how could they have sold it and...if no one owns anything, wouldn't that mean the poor already had access to the items in the first place?
@TheFascistHunter I own things because God allows it, and on top of owning things that God allows, he also tells me to give away my things to help others in need. It's a trade off, and it's ultimately a test. The more that I can give, the better I score on the test. The ultimate Christian thing to do, as with other religions is to live as minimalistically as possible. This is what Monks and Nuns attempt to accomplish. Others, like you complain about taxes! Step away from your BMW.
@quicksiliva If that's true, you only own things because God allows it, then aren't the poor poor because it is all part of God's plan? Who are we to mess with what the big man has in store? But thanks for admitting that we do in fact own items. Just don't use the government to enforce religious doctrine. Many people are not Christians and shouldn't be forced to follow along. Besides, isn't it God who will punish them and not man? Isn't that good enough for you?
@quicksiliva Also, if the only reason you own things is because God allows it, it would seem God has something against the poor. Otherwise, he'd provide for them like he did you. The idea of owning things because God allows it flies in the face of the idea that the rich got rich because they stole from the poor. It has to be one or the other, right?
@TheFascistHunter If the poor are poor because God allows it, it doesn't change the fact that we are called upon to help them. If for some reason, God sees that certain people deserve to be poor, we are still held accountable for how we treat them and redistribute our wealth among them. Besides, knowing what the bible says about wealth and greed, is it really better to be rich than poor? In the end, it's the Poor who end up winning. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
@quicksiliva Also, if we do not own anything, does that mean the government should not collect personal property taxes? Since we do not own anything, the govt. should also not collect taxes on land, etc.
@quicksiliva And no, Jesus never COMMANDS anyone to do anything, that is why freewill is involved. In Matt 19:21 Jesus says "IF you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor," Notice the "if" in there? Do you believe individuals will be judged on the last day? If so, then it is the individual's responsibility, and not any group. If a group can get me into Heaven, then I'm already there because my taxes go to help the poor.
@TheFascistHunter "Perfect" in this sense is "accepable to God" You can't live subpar in your ways of giving, and still be considered a good Christian. God knows where your heart stands on every manner. From what you've been saying, you don't want to pay taxes or contribute any of your money to help others. Even if you do pay taxes which go to help others, you complain about it and wish you didn't have to pay taxes. So if the gov didn't force you to give, you wouldn't. Not good!!
@quicksiliva I partially agree, but keep it going. It's "perfect" in the sense of the Christian religion. What if you are not Christian? Should you be bound by the State (or anyone else) to conform to a religion you do not agree with? If so, then the State can aid you in your quest for Heaven. However, this seems to go against the teachings of Jesus & Christianity which claim that we're going to be judged individually.
@TheFascistHunter The heart of the matter is that if you're a Christian, you should be living with minimal wealth and belongings. It doesn't matter if you're a CEO, televangelist, the Pope. To live a full life with riches, when so many people have nothing and are suffering around you, is anti-Christian. It goes against Christian values. The frauds on TV preaching that God wants us to be rich are lying. Capitalism is not Christian... sorry. It never was. So you need to make a choice.
@quicksiliva Well, since I'm not a Christian, I must be doing OK. And at last, I can agree with you! I too am against frauds on TV telling us how a proper Christian must be...all the while they live in opulence. Of course in this case I'm talking about 0bama. He tells us frequently he's a Christian, yet did you see the spread he had for the Super Bowl? Bratwurst, Kielbasa, Cheeseburgers, Deep Dish Pizza, Buffalo Wings, German Potato Salad, Twice Baked Potatoes, Chips, dips, etc. shame
The time of the harvest is soon here...I'd hoped there be more years left. The harvest is ripe for GOD to seperate the wheat from the chaff. The righteous from the wicked. I pray for the least amongst us in those days!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@OgeronimonominoregO Haven't seen that definition before, although there are many, some made up. Another word for communism is communalism, which is what Jesus supported....communal living. Jesus wouldn't support a police state that has a strong history of violence, slavery, genocide, and last but not least doesn't provide free health care... such as the U.S. You can say Jesus wouldn't support communism from a political aspect, but he sure doesn't support the U.S. in any way.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@OgeronimonominoregO I don't want your opinion.. Please support your stance with scripture. Show how Jesus prefered capitalism over communism and only give Scripture.
@quicksiliva Matt. 19:21 "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor,"
Jesus advocated selling private property in a capitalist transaction (exchanging goods or services for money). Jesus never advocated the government take care of the poor, he only advised individuals to do this. After all, if this is what you believe, Jesus is right. Individuals will be judged on how they treated the poor. Governments will not.
@TheFascistHunter If you read it another way, you see Jesus advocating the dispossession of the haves and transferring this wealth to the have-nots. He mandated his followers to do this voluntarily as proof of their sincerity. I don't see Jesus advocating state coercion at any level, although when asked whose image was on a tax shekel he came back with the famous "Render unto Ceasar - " etc.
@TheAzov Yes, but he didn't force people to do so, he told them this is what they should do if they wanted to be part of the kingdom of heaven. People have freewill and Jesus never advocated taking the property of someone else to help the poor. He advocated people take a pro-active stance and help the poor themselves. Caesar didn't have a health care policy, so giving money to him wasn't helping the poor anyway.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@TheFascistHunter Enough with the same ol' same ol'.... You have yet to provide scripture to support you stance. Jesus commanded that you sell your possessions. Voluntary is for those that don't wish to follow Jesus. Do you want to follow Jesus or not? Are you a Christian or not? I suppose reading the bible is voluntary, reading only certain sections of the bible voluntary, praying for convenience.. Voluntary. Voluntary action is for those that don't really want to follow Jesus.
@TheAzov Exactly right! Jesus at no time advocated that the government enact bureaucracies that redistribute wealth. He told people to sell their privately held possessions to help the poor. This is Capitalism in a nutshell. Jesus was not a Socialist. Under Socialism, there is a central planning agency of the government that dictates how resources are allocated. Jesus never spoke about this.
@TheFascistHunter Capitalism is about maximizing profit - getting cheap, selling high. The parable totally contradicts the spirit of capitalism by advocating wealth distribution from those who have to those who don't. Whether it's done voluntarily or by state coercion is secondary to the process itself: undermining the profit motive.
@TheAzov But without the profit from the sale of goods, where would the money to help the poor come from? Capitalism is a key component in how to help the needy, according to Jesus. True, the story advocates wealth redistribution, but coercion is not a factor. At no time is anyone forced to sell their goods to help the poor, Jesus encouraged them to do it voluntarily.
@TheFascistHunter The value of goods is not determined by their sale value, but their use. Give the poor the food from the ground, instead of seeking a profit in selling it to them. As the story went, Jesus encouraged them to do this of their own will while knowing full well that the rich man he of the parable would NOT do it, as proof of man's corrupt nature to do the right thing.
@TheAzov Exactly! But keep the story going! Yes, Jesus did all those things. In addition, what did he not do? He never said to take anything from anyone to help the poor. He said it should be GIVEN.
@TheFascistHunter Yes, he insisted that good be done voluntarily, from the heart. "By their deeds shall ye know them," etc. So let's judge the behavior of the private US health care industry - underline the term, industry - by this standard. It's as Christian as an orgy at Sodom. No Christian, if true to the values s/he espouses, can support the American health care system in good conscience.
@TheAzov Once again, Jesus never called for any organizations to aid the poor. He never said it was the responsibility of the government or an insurance agency. Jesus put the responsibility on the individuals in the community and no one else. You say the health care industry doesn't help the poor, maybe so. But that is going according to Jesus' teaching who never challenged anyone but the individual human being to help the poor. Being forced to help anyone is not an action from the heart.
@TheFascistHunter Then fine, we don't need the church either. It seems where you're going with this is that the state and taxes, etc., aren't necessary. But don't forget one particular verse where they tried to trip Jesus up with this same issue:
"And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."
@TheAzov No, I never said government wasn't necessary. I just advocate the use of it for what it was designed. To protect the individual's rights. To protect the minority from the majority. This is what democracy gets you. Democracy killed Jesus and under it people can vote themselves other people's money. Is that a just system? BTW, Caesar didn't use taxes to help the poor either. At least he had that part right.
@TheFascistHunter What Ceasar really used the taxes for was beside the point, but we know he did use them to fight limitless wars of conquest, as in Palestine. Apparently he got that part right, too. Since you despise democracy, he obviously got his politics correct also. As an advocate of imperial autocracy your nic as "fascist hunter" seems a complete non-sequitur.
@TheAzov Fine, leave Caesar out. I didn't bring him up, but if you want to take him off the table, that's OK. Then again, since Jesus advocated giving Caesar what was rightfully his, I suppose Jesus supported the imperialism Rome practiced as you mention. (The same expansionism the Progressives did in America in the late 1800's - 1920ish). I'm totally non-fascist. That includes the government using the health care system to get its message out, ala 0bama.
@TheFascistHunter Being forced to help the poor and enter Heaven at the end of one's life is better than what you have chosen, which is to enter Hell when you die. Jesus told us to help the poor.... At a whole people, not individually. Never once did he single individuals out as the only means of helping the poor. He called everyone to help the poor, the sick, etc.... You keep working your way around that and you're disobeying Jesus in doing so. You're looking for a loophole.
@quicksiliva Interesting. So you believe government has a role in whether or not people make it to heaven? This idea seems opposed to what Jesus believed. Do you have any scriptural evidence to back this philosophy up? Jesus called on individuals to help the poor, not organizations. If you have scriptural evidence to the contrary, that Jesus said it is the responsibility of government to help the poor, please provide it.
@quicksiliva Your point has some logic, however. Since we are taxed to take care of the poor, that means our responsibility has ended and it is now on the government. Except for one thing. Why do we still have the poor? That must mean government programs do not work. Jesus seemed to know what worked and what didn't because he never said for the government to provide aid to anyone.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@TheFascistHunter I asked you proved concrete scripture to prove your stance and you have failed to do so. If Jesus advocated living without possessions, that is not Capitalism. For capitalism to work, people have to buy goods and services. Jesus suggested quite the opposite. He suggested that people share all goods and services. Again, he was much more of a socialist than a capitalist. Jesus wouldn't approve of the USA as it stands today, a corporatist fascist society concerned with greed.
@quicksiliva Except for swords, Jesus advocated buying one or two. Jesus told people to sell their possessions (use capitalism) to help the poor by telling them to give the money to the poor. He didn't advocate taking anyone's property to help the poor. Ultimately, Jesus recognized it was a personal decision.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@TheFascistHunter Enough with the same ol' same ol'.... You have yet to provide scripture to support you stance. Jesus commanded that you sell your possessions. Voluntary is for those that don't wish to follow Jesus. Do you want to follow Jesus or not? Are you a Christian or not? I suppose reading the bible is voluntary, reading only certain sections of the bible voluntary, praying for convenience.. Voluntary. Voluntary action is for those that don't really want to follow Jesus.
@OgeronimonominoregO Very good point! We see how many people died under communism in the world. 60 mil dead in China, 20 mil in the USSR, a couple mil each in Cambodia & N. Korea, over a mil in Africa. Somehow, I don't think Jesus would approve of Communism at all. Also, don't forget...communism is anti-religion so you can kiss Jesus goodbye under that form of government. Jesus told people to SELL their belongings and help the poor. That is a Capitalist transaction.
@TheFascistHunter These figures are bogus. Just doing the demographics based on the population at the time disproves them. In fact, anti-Communism has been as responsible for as many if not more deaths.
@TheAzov If you have proof that at least this many people didn't die due to Communist policies, please point me in the direct of a scholarly source that would support that claim. Deaths from Communism may make Baby Jesus cry.
@TheFascistHunter But deaths from anti-Communism apparently won't, even if they're 6 million of his co-religionists. Scholarly sources requested would include Alexander Werth and Sheila Fitzpatrick on Russia or Michael Vickery's "Cambodia." Your figures are likely culled from one book, without examining its sources or seeking others.
@TheAzov Fine! Once again, we have an example of people dying from government policy and a blind eye is turned, but at the same time they sure get upset because people are dying because someone else isn't forced to pay for their doctor visits.
@TheAzov Well, I guess it depends on the source one uses. In Peter Maguire's "Facing Death in Cambodia,' he claims a higher number of deaths contributed to the Communist government (over 2 million) than I do.
@TheFascistHunter Re: KR deaths. It depends on how the sources are interpreted. It's a grisly and morally dubious undertaking to quibble over how many - one can say one is one too many - but the interests of accuracy seperate truth from propaganda. Start with the known population of the 1970 census - 8 million - extrapolate the deaths known from the war, the normal death rate (high in Cambodia), with the projected increase by 1980, and you arrive at a figure less than 1 million.
@OgeronimonominoregO No one in the US has even suggested this regarding health care renovation. Totally inappropriate and dishonest remark on this topic, but propaganda is that way.
@OgeronimonominoregO Communism has nothing to do with Jesus other than he encouraged everyone to live together in communes and share everything. Jesus wasn't referring to government in this sense. He would never order anyone to see a doctor, except that a Doctor should not be able to refuse treatment without payment. Letting conservative rhetoric cloud your view of Jesus is wrong, and you know it. Placing a $ price on morality is an evil that you accept in place of what Jesus taught.
@quicksiliva I agree! Jesus never advocated Communism. Under that system, there are govt. agencies in place to redistribute the wealth among the masses. Jesus told people to do that themselves and never advocated helping the poor through government means.
Those that complain about the Government forcing morality, the exact same morality that Jesus taught, envoked by the same people that claim to be Christian, should not have any problem with morality placed first and foremost over costs to tax payers. It should not be a loophole to be allowed to criticize government for telling you to do what Jesus already commands of you. To do so is to reject Jesus as well. Any self-proclaimed Christians that reject Jesus in favor of greed is a fraud.
@quicksiliva One more question....are you saying we shouldn't be critical of the government? Isn't this a basic First Amendment issue? As I understand, that is one of the main reasons for the 1st, so the citizens always have a right to speak out against the government policies they disagree with. Hillary Clinton said it was patriotic to question those in power over us. Can't we agree we shouldn't use government to prop up religious teachings? Everyone isn't the same religion.
@quicksiliva No! Jesus said to sell your possessions and give the money to the poor. Under communism, there is no private property! You cannot sell and give to the poor under communism because (a) there are no personal property and (b) everyone is poor except for the leaders.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@TheFascistHunter During Jesus' time, Communism didn't exist. He told everyone to share everything they own, help the poor, help the sick, help those less fortunate, and give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's. He endorsed living in communes and sharing crops, eatting together.... Again, Communism didn't exist. But if you had to pick which system he would choose, it would probably be none, since all systems are corrupted by man. But one thing is for sure, He's wasn't a capitalist.
@quicksiliva I agree that the term Communism didn't exist, but the concept surely did. Jesus however advocated capitalism to help the poor. As I've said, he told people to sell their on goods and take the money to help them. He told them to make a private transaction that involved the exchange of a good or service for money. He did not say the money should be under the control of a government agency who would decide who needed it.
Universal Heathcare for all is a right not a privilege. These so called GOP / Teaparty, (The wicked amongst us) are walking upon this world today fullfilling the Prophecies of many Prophets. Especially in the book of Isaiah and the book of John. They can't help but to be cold and heartless because like many before them in the past GOD has hardened their hearts and sealed their eyes, and closed their ears from the cries of the poor and suffering, to test those who do what he commands.
@TheFascistHunter You should ask Jesus why others have the right to something at another's expense. But truely the good and faithful that follow Jesus would never ask that question. To serve man and help those in need is a no-brainer to a true Christian. They don't raise hell when the governement takes their money and redistributes it into social programs. True Christians don't look for ways to avoid following Jesus, or use the government as a scapegoat.
I do believe we the people need a 2nd bill of rights, I suggest the one President Franklin Roosevelt tried to get done but died a year before he could. I do believe that had he lived to get the bill passed we would be living in a much better, more equal society today. FDR couldn't, but President Obama can. Its whats right.
The PREACHERS in this segment were lightweight on this issue and aquiesce to the GOVERNMENT LINE..........ITS ASHAMED THAT THEY DIDNT HAVE PREACHERS WHO DIDNT KNOW EACH OTHER.......INTERESTING APPROACH....I WONDER WHAT REVEREND JEREMIAH WRIGHT, REVEREND W.L. MCAFEE, AND MINISTER FARRAKHAN HAVE TO SAY ABOUT WHAT JESUS WOULD SAY ABOUT UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE FOR ALL
@mikejackson4ever I feel that you are confused. You quote biblical passages in support of your views and then state that you oppose Christianity. Obama is no less pandering to Christians than his predecessors.. with the exception of Reagan who seemed to have a thing for the occult.
@mikejackson4ever Jesus would perhaps consider us all sinners in need of redemption, especially Christians who have been following a "Paulist" doctrine and ignoring his real message.
Medical dictatorships... Jesus H. Christ.. Current basic economics dictates that only the wealthy will receive adequate healthcare, whereas the rest of us get screwed by insurance companies. The high price of healthcare (the highest in the world.. incidentally) is the result of the system we have now..
Jesus emphasized compassion, so one might assume that he would have supported a system that did not allow the wealthy to get even richer off of the suffering of the sick and the poor.
Jesus was not a proponent of leaving people alone... would have lived longer. I'm not sure how you equate the attempt by our elected leaders to stem a growing health-care disaster into institutional violence - do you propose a solution?
@MillionthUsername But this is the one place (health care) where you lose your head about? This has been happening for decades (Since old mother Reagan).. and it takes the issue of health-care for you to be upset about cartels and monopolies?
I don't know about you, but the tea-baggers who came into the streets after the inauguration of Obama are hypocrites at best and racists at worst.
@MillionthUsername I can't disagree with you there. Abolish corporate monopolies, establish public entities that provide critical services (owned by the aggregate society)...
@MillionthUsername Let me see... libraries, firestations, policestations, water treatment plants, public colleges, public universities, public k-12, transportation maintenance, true public utilities, research facilities, public health maintenance, defense, a large portion of the Internet that you are now using... and where any of these things have gone to crap it is where we have sold these to corporate entities...
@MillionthUsername So by monopolizing a service, you are referring to the poor and sick monopolizing health-care - odd accusation - maybe I misunderstand you.
We currently have fat government contracts feeding into defense, agriculture, and infrastructure... health-care, again, is a very small portion of that. Why don't you start with the big stuff?
@MillionthUsername So you are against all corporate entities ( ie. monopolies and cartels) that get contracted by the government to provide services to citizens? I'm almost with you there... it's called privatization, which has been going on for about three decades, and is perhaps the cause of most of the waste in our government.
@MillionthUsername Now you're talking about real politic... where I'm as cynical as you are... really. Unfortunately, I see it as how things really are - as opposed to the libertarian dream world of "freedom" that in reality would evolve into some form of ludicrous tyranny resembling Mogadishu. We are fortunate that our government has that cynicism built in, for now, at least - I'm sure the anti-health crowd will do their darnest to "throw the bums out"...
@MillionthUsername Freedom (is) good is just a bromide... is not necessarily the case. None of us are free to do what we want. As citizens we legislate the limits and scope of individual freedom as it balances out the common good.
@MillionthUsername True enough. Both used by our founders. If you mean those "liberties", I don't see anything prohibiting universal healthcare in the constitution.
Their interpretation of "the common good" is one of the main reason that the United States exists.
@zenadun Complete and utter bullshit! The 9th and 10th amendments would be meaningless if that was the case. What the hell are "powers not delegated" then?
You and others like you make the words of the constitution or any other law meaningless. The system makes them meaningless since they can "interpret"
anything to mean anything.
I am absolutely right in referring to people like you as immoral. You never
disappoint. You think you are some kind of petty god entitled to use people.
@MillionthUsername I don't know.. there are plenty of liberties that have been legislated against within constitutional process. We have the largest prison population on the planet to prove it.
We have the most expensive and inefficient health-care system in the developing world. We also have the most profitable health-care insurance industry in the world (even in recession). How could we really do any worse with public health care?
@MillionthUsername I'm not going to argue that the industry was overly involved in the writing of the laws.. but this is not unusual in what the government has been doing... especially in the previous 8 years where any regulation of corporate control (over individual rights) were given over to corporate overseers You aren't seeing the real enemy clearly.
@MillionthUsername I believe in a component of what your saying. The war in Iraq poured billions of dollars into the pockets of Republican corporate supporters at all of our expense and with little benefit. The health-care issue is a drop in the bucket.
He wouldn't write 1500 page laws which steal money from some in order to give it to others.
He certainly wouldn't engage in violence and threats and fines and imprisonment to make people do anything. Instead, He would tell the snakes who exercise tyranny over others to repent.
It's funny how corrupt society has become when they worship the institutionalized violence of the state and claim that it's godly.
You think you have the right to steal from people and create a fascist
medical dictatorship because Jesus worked for free?
First of all, that's not exactly true. Nothing is ever free. People supported Jesus by donations. "The workman is worth his wage." People in ministry are always supported by VOLUNTARY contributions. You do not FORCE people to "contribute". That makes you IMMORAL.
You are all about THEFT and VIOLENCE, NOT healing.
@MillionthUsername I hear a lot about fascism and about theft and violence, but not a lot about the terrible status quo and about solutions. What have you got for us? The same old system which is a joke to the rest of the world? You are defending a system that doesn't work - and opposing a system that is relatively fair to most of us, and not a big change for the rest of us.... and will solve some of the problem.
@VisibleEnigma LOL ... yeah.. I'm sure that the radical right consider adequite health care the laying on of hands (donations accepted) and little else.
@VisibleEnigma Well.. one reading of it is that you had to believe in Him. Blind could see, deaf could hear, lepers lost their spots (no pun intended)... if you believe in what they believed...
@MillionthUsername Institutional violence of the state? I find it interesting how the far right is stealing the rhetoric of the far left (fascism, institutionalized violence, all the buzzwords from the crazy talk shows) ... to attack, of all things, universal health-care. Governments all over the world, socialist to neo-conservative have it. Deal with it.
both democrate & republicans conservatives are hipocrites & liers. i can also prove it. "HE WHO GIVE TO THE POOR WILL NOT WANT,BUT HE WHO HIDE HIS EYES [ FROM THEIR WANT ] WILL HAVE MANY A CURSE. "PROVERBS 28:27.IF U WANT GOD TO BE INVOLVED IN YOUR FINANCES & PROSPER U,U MUST HONOR THESE BASIC PRINCIPLES.U CANNOT BE GREEDY & TRULY PROSPER. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH WANTING TO HAVE ABOUNDANCE FOR YOURSELF & YOUR FAMILY,BUT GIVING TO GOD & BEING GENEROUS TO OTHERS IS PART OF THE SPIRITUAL LAW.
@futurerapture It's about avoiding a serious bump in health-care expenditures now that the largest group of health-care users, the boomers, are approaching retirement age. If we don't do something quickly we will be literally screwed by health-care costs... I'm sure there a lot of side agendas, specifically in corporate which will lose money they've been sucking out of us for years and their far-right lackies who feel that a good health-care system will bring about the apocalypse.
Finally, using Christianity and Jesus to support a good cause: not discrimination of other religions or screaming about fires of hell, but promoting helping those in need.
And once again, the unemployment rate of the nation is 14 million and the uninsured is 33 million.
God didn't make other animals the dominant species for a reason. And life is a natural right, and I don't think you can live without healthiness.
If you think a "natural right" is something given by "God" and not other humans, than natural rights are myths. There is absolutely no right we have that is not given by ourselves.
And wow, comparing well-being to owning a car or... the space program. That's very relevant.
Btw, doesn't the Bible say animals have no souls? I disagree, but that has reason behind it. Animals are not the dominant species for a reason. Our ability to govern and help each other have allowed us to rule the world.
Doesn't it seem stupid to encourage abolishing society and become animals? Thank you for admitting that's what conservatism is for, still!
Most Christian leaders understand that this Health Care Bill will fund abortions. This is why most churches don't support the bill...plain and simple! Ms. Standberry, Dir. of International Prolife Federation
You are an ignoramus. I hate how the Senate appeases people like you... Even though Federal dollars couldn't be used for abortions in the first place, the right-wingers cried about how they would until the Stupak Amendment was passed, which entirely prevented giving Federal subsidies to companies that covered abortions.
@ERNIE6274 So most Christians and most congregations are not supporting the Health Care Bill because of a fallacy? This does outline how ignorant most of them are.. I would have given them more credit.
1: Liberals are for Jesus, not the retarded corrupt church
2: Love thy neighbor? That doesn't have anything to do with abortions. Fetuses are not neighbors. Even so, I am against abortions, most likely for different reasons than you, but that at least makes me consistent. I am for the life of all people, you're only for the unborn.
3: Jesus himself would not care about gay marriage. The Bible was written after him, and he never mentioned gay marriage. He was for love of all type.
And I find it really fun a Republicunt is telling me that "whoever does not work shall not eat" when they constantly screamed against those dirty "death panels" which they think will "ration your life away" and kill old people.
The old don't work... they're retired... So, does that mean they shall not eat? Good job being consistent! I'm sure Hitler used that excuse to massacre those people he considered degenerate.
"The disabled obviously can't do any work, so let's just kill them, Fuhrer!"
@KernelSandersCheckin Good point, if we took more responsibility for our own governance to have effective institutions insteadof ranting in support of the McCountry we have now, we would have effective education, health-care and other neglected public institutions, the lack of ignorance and suffering would reduce the ranks of wacky churchgoers?
Notice at 1:04 what he says about BHO. How can he even be called a CHRISTIAN when he supports partial birth abortions. Not to mention he sat 20 plus years in Rev Wright's church. GEEEZ
@momadog01 Throwing stones... if you are a Mormon, Catholic, Seventh Day Adventist, the wrong kind of Methodist or Lutheran or Baptist, often not considered Christian either. Jesus says absolutely nothing regarding abortion, or infanticide (which was very common at the time) by the way.
Jesus isn't a politician. He doesn't care who provides health as long as it's provided. He believes EVERYONE has a moral obligation to provide care for others, which would most certainly include the government which is an organized representative body of officials that serve the nation and its people.
About that "those who don't work don't eat" thing... The population of unemployed in America is 14 million. Population of uninsured is 47 million. What about those 33 million? Do they starve?
@MaverickCentricity I would assume from his words, in regards to government Jesus was in favor of a monarchy... so he would hardly be in support of the foundation of republican democracy.
@MaverickCentricity In regards to health insurance, however, if we believe in him we're healed is about the extent that scripture covers. We must generalize that his parables on responsibility and respect for others could be interpreted as providing the sick with support as a function of good governance in the absence of a society of just people.
Socialist, huh... you mean a dirty lazy idiot who wants to spread wealth around and hates the rich? I hate those socialists. Here's a socialist quote I really despise.
"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a pin than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God."
Typical...Mr Ed does not want to discuss the "details" he just want a 'support' or no support answer. Hmmm, is there EVER anything black/white in this country, no, its always lets discuss it. Cause if it was just black/white, then child molesters would be imprisioned forever after one offense!
You must take the whole of scripture.If you are a christian it is "A command" to take care of those who are less fortunate and sick.It is also an overwhelming moral virtue for our common Good to establish a just health care system "public option" would help in this process.It is social Darwinism vs real christianity.
777bal 10 months ago
HELL awaits those that only think about their pocketbooks and refuse through the mind to contribute to society through taxation. Those that don't want to pay taxes are filthy dirty people who think that roads and education should pay for itself and that it's OK in the worlds richest nation to leave people on the streets and let the sick get denied care. These Christians as they call themselves are nothing but frauds, greedy and evil and clearly working for Satan, even if they don't know it.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
Letting the weak die off because they can't afford to take care of themselves sounds pretty fascist to me. Just because the gubmint don't gas the poor suckers, but they're just left to starve and die on their own, don't make a difference if you let it happen. So as a Christian wouldn't it be proper for you to find an uninsured American and take him'her to a doctor at your own expense? Being your brother's keeper. . . .
TheAzov 1 year ago
@TheAzov That's what I say! Still, I wonder why 0bama, who claims to be a Christian and who has a brother living in a grass hut in Africa doesn't take care of his brother. Perhaps he is the typical Christian who can't understand what Jesus said and is waiting for the government to step in and do something.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheAzov And yes...yes, it would be the Christian thing to do....to take a needy person to the doc and pay for their medical bills or buy them some food or medicine or pay their heating bills. But if you aren't a Christian, should the government force you to adhere to Christian teachings? Ultimately, this is your personal choice about how you treat the needy. If you pay taxes into a system that takes care of the poor, are you guaranteed a place in heaven?
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter No, it's not your personal choice, as a Christian. You're *commanded* to do these things, so as to be "like your Father in Heaven." You're as compelled to do righteously unto others as if the government was standing over your shoulder ordering you to distribute your time, service, and goods to the needy. Think of those angels watching and recording as god's commissars.
TheAzov 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheAzov Who said I was a Christian?
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter No, it's not your personal choice, as a Christian. You're *commanded* to do these things, so as to be "like your Father in Heaven." You're as compelled to do righteously unto others as if the government was standing over your shoulder ordering you to distribute your time, service, and goods to the needy. Think of those angels watching and recording as god's commissars.
TheAzov 1 year ago
@TheAzov I have no argument with this. According to the Bible, Christians are indeed supposed to behave in this manner. However, not everyone is a Christian and they should not be forced to behave as Christians if they do not wish to do so. We most certainly do not need to use the government to enforce Christian or any other religious dogma. We have a separation of church & state.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter OK. . . that means you're for same-sex marriage and abortion. If you can accept this, then out of consistency I can accept the honesty of your position.
TheAzov 1 year ago
@TheAzov I'm not for, nor against them. I'm for following the Constitution. The document doesn't mention either of them, so it's a 10th Amendment issue. If states want gay marriage or abortion, let them have it. If states do not want either, let them not have it that way.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
One important factor in the idea of wealth redistribution:
If the concept of wealth redistribution is acceptable, why is it wrong for the rich to take from the poor? This too is wealth redistribution, only it is in the other direction. Why is one bad and one good if redistribution is OK?
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter A complete non-sequitur. One causes pain and suffering. Show me how the rich man suffers from his redistrubution upward.
TheAzov 1 year ago
What would Jesus do about health care?
He'd heal the sick himself and not advocate that other people's money be taken from them in order to help the poor. Jesus advocated that individuals help the poor. He never claimed this was a responsibility of the government. If you believe government should be used to do as Jesus said, to help the poor, you are in favor of violating the separation of church and state.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
What would Jesus do? Here's what he didnt do: He didnt overeat (diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure). He didnt do drugs (overdose,liver and kidney disease). He didnt engage in promiscuous sex (disease, aids). He didnt take medicines for stress or depression (leading to side effects requiring treatment) How about we first get folks to take some responsibility for themselves and live the way Jesus did and then with all the extra money we could take care of those who are truly sick?
bosco604 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@bosco604 He didn't have to take drugs, overeat, have sex, self-medicate, etc.... Jesus is GOD. Humans are not GOD and don't have godly powers to heal themselves. That's why God told humans to help each other... Help those that are sick, poor, deformed, etc... Personal responsibility does not stop sickness and death. Alot of disease is genetic. Healthcare is a moral obligation, and it you don't agree, then you don't agree with GOD.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva If health care is a moral obligation, then the government has business being involved. We're constantly told that government should not legislate morality, aren't we?
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter Sorry, that should say: If health care is a moral obligation, then the government has no business being involved.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter You can't be hypocritical which is what Jesus is very much against. You can't have government legislate morality some of the time for only the issues you choose. Abortion for example is an issue in which most Christians choose pro-life, and base that stance on Jesus' teachings. However, the exact same people are in favor of the death penalty and against nearly any measure of gun control. Jesus wasn't an economist, but he would always favor morality over the costs.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva I agree, however this is what I've been talking about from the beginning! When it comes to gay marriage and executing guilty people, we're told we shouldn't legislate morality. However, when it comes to socialized medicine, we're told we need to use the government to force people to do the "right" thing! Which is it? I don't think Jesus would be too upset over guns since he advocated buying swords. It's people who do harm with them and not the objects themselves.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter You're not getting it. Since when are you being told that morailty is not being legistlated toward gay marriage or death penalty? It is all the time, and that is why you can't tell me that Christians aren't picking and choosing their own issues with regard to the scripture and voting on those beliefs. Healthcare should be no exception. Swords are not guns. The liberal Jesus of the bible would most likely be far more liberal than most liberals today.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva So you're saying the US should use the government to force people to follow the teachings of Jesus?
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter I'm not saying you should follow Jesus. The government is not saying it. But when governement legislation matches the commands of Christ, why do you Christians have a problem with it? Can you answer why you are mad at government for telling you to do what Jesus has already asked of you? If you read the bible, redistribution of wealth was Jesus' primary goal. He wanted the sick, the poor, the have-nots to recieve help from those that have. He despised greed.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva Sure, I can tell why I'm mad. Charity is a gift, it is not taken and redistributed. Jesus said to give of your own freewill and never advocated anyone or any entity of government redistribute wealth.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter No, that's what you're political, economical belief is telling you, not what Jesus told you. Jesus commands that you help people and do so by any means necessary. Again, you're trying to find a loophole, a way out of it by stating your man-made ideology over that of Jesus. Most conservatives don't actually follow Jesus. Do what you want, but don't expect heaven's doors to be open for you by denying what Jesus commands.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva Actually, yes. Jesus never advocated government take care of the poor. He told people to do that. He told them to sell their belongings. He didn't say the government should take their money and redistribute it, that they should do it themselves. Who better knows who the poor are in their area? Not the federal govt.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter Frankly, NO, you're an Idiot. Read the bible and stop supporting man's ideology over that of Jesus. God knows you're wrong, Jesus know's you're wrong, and I know you're wrong, because I know the bible better than you. The Christian thing to do is to help those, and yes we do it through taxes. Who better knows the poor in an area? NOT YOU. You're not out scouting people to help. And you have the audacity to say you shouldn't have to pay taxes to help others?
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva These people that claim charity is the way to help others don't seem to understand, and Charity doesn't cut it. Besides, if you understood anything about Jesus you get through your thick skull that he wanted the poor and sick to receive help, not by passer-bys or alone neighbors, but by EVERYONE. He called upon all to help all... And you are still arguing your evil Man ideology over what Jesus made Clear. All help all. And there is no other way than through taxes.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva I've read it and I can find nothing where Jesus advocates people's property be taken to help the poor. He did advocate people do this themselves. And anyone who chooses to not help the poor, won't they be judged by God in the end? Isn't that between God and them and not for anyone else to decide? Didn't Jesus say, "Judge not lest ye be judged?"
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter NO you haven't read or understood anything. When Jesus speaks, he speaks to all of mankind, not individuals. What are you talking about, your property being taken? You don't own anything. All that you have is because God allows you to have it. It belongs to God, not you And with that kind of thinking, the selfishness and greed of Satan that has entered and taken over your heart, you will never understand God. To avoid taxation is also avoiding help to the poor.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva Oh yes, I do own things, so do you, and so did the people Jesus spoke to. He told them to SELL (Capitalism) their personal property and give the proceedings to the poor. This brings up two questions: If they did not own anything, how could they have sold it and...if no one owns anything, wouldn't that mean the poor already had access to the items in the first place?
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter I own things because God allows it, and on top of owning things that God allows, he also tells me to give away my things to help others in need. It's a trade off, and it's ultimately a test. The more that I can give, the better I score on the test. The ultimate Christian thing to do, as with other religions is to live as minimalistically as possible. This is what Monks and Nuns attempt to accomplish. Others, like you complain about taxes! Step away from your BMW.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva If that's true, you only own things because God allows it, then aren't the poor poor because it is all part of God's plan? Who are we to mess with what the big man has in store? But thanks for admitting that we do in fact own items. Just don't use the government to enforce religious doctrine. Many people are not Christians and shouldn't be forced to follow along. Besides, isn't it God who will punish them and not man? Isn't that good enough for you?
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@quicksiliva Also, if the only reason you own things is because God allows it, it would seem God has something against the poor. Otherwise, he'd provide for them like he did you. The idea of owning things because God allows it flies in the face of the idea that the rich got rich because they stole from the poor. It has to be one or the other, right?
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter If the poor are poor because God allows it, it doesn't change the fact that we are called upon to help them. If for some reason, God sees that certain people deserve to be poor, we are still held accountable for how we treat them and redistribute our wealth among them. Besides, knowing what the bible says about wealth and greed, is it really better to be rich than poor? In the end, it's the Poor who end up winning. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva LOVE ;YOU
THE MEEK SHALL INHERIT THE EARTH!
renaissanceknight 1 year ago
@quicksiliva Also, if we do not own anything, does that mean the government should not collect personal property taxes? Since we do not own anything, the govt. should also not collect taxes on land, etc.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@quicksiliva And no, Jesus never COMMANDS anyone to do anything, that is why freewill is involved. In Matt 19:21 Jesus says "IF you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor," Notice the "if" in there? Do you believe individuals will be judged on the last day? If so, then it is the individual's responsibility, and not any group. If a group can get me into Heaven, then I'm already there because my taxes go to help the poor.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter "Perfect" in this sense is "accepable to God" You can't live subpar in your ways of giving, and still be considered a good Christian. God knows where your heart stands on every manner. From what you've been saying, you don't want to pay taxes or contribute any of your money to help others. Even if you do pay taxes which go to help others, you complain about it and wish you didn't have to pay taxes. So if the gov didn't force you to give, you wouldn't. Not good!!
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva I partially agree, but keep it going. It's "perfect" in the sense of the Christian religion. What if you are not Christian? Should you be bound by the State (or anyone else) to conform to a religion you do not agree with? If so, then the State can aid you in your quest for Heaven. However, this seems to go against the teachings of Jesus & Christianity which claim that we're going to be judged individually.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter The heart of the matter is that if you're a Christian, you should be living with minimal wealth and belongings. It doesn't matter if you're a CEO, televangelist, the Pope. To live a full life with riches, when so many people have nothing and are suffering around you, is anti-Christian. It goes against Christian values. The frauds on TV preaching that God wants us to be rich are lying. Capitalism is not Christian... sorry. It never was. So you need to make a choice.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva Well, since I'm not a Christian, I must be doing OK. And at last, I can agree with you! I too am against frauds on TV telling us how a proper Christian must be...all the while they live in opulence. Of course in this case I'm talking about 0bama. He tells us frequently he's a Christian, yet did you see the spread he had for the Super Bowl? Bratwurst, Kielbasa, Cheeseburgers, Deep Dish Pizza, Buffalo Wings, German Potato Salad, Twice Baked Potatoes, Chips, dips, etc. shame
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
The time of the harvest is soon here...I'd hoped there be more years left. The harvest is ripe for GOD to seperate the wheat from the chaff. The righteous from the wicked. I pray for the least amongst us in those days!
nyhero2012 1 year ago
Remember, If Jesus walked upon the earth today he would be neither democrat or republican! He will be king of kings and lord of lords.
nyhero2012 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@nyhero2012 He'd be a communist. Time for you to read the bible.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva Communism, and politics in general, is using
violence and the threat of violence to control the lives and
property of others by force. That is the antithesis of the
Golden Rule and "love your neighbor as yourself."
Jesus didn't use violence to steal property from people.
He didn't use thugs to imprison people who resisted.
He didn't give orders about which doctor you could see.
He didn't set up monopoly services.
Those are acts of tyranny.
OgeronimonominoregO 1 year ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@OgeronimonominoregO Haven't seen that definition before, although there are many, some made up. Another word for communism is communalism, which is what Jesus supported....communal living. Jesus wouldn't support a police state that has a strong history of violence, slavery, genocide, and last but not least doesn't provide free health care... such as the U.S. You can say Jesus wouldn't support communism from a political aspect, but he sure doesn't support the U.S. in any way.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@OgeronimonominoregO I don't want your opinion.. Please support your stance with scripture. Show how Jesus prefered capitalism over communism and only give Scripture.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva Matt. 19:21 "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor,"
Jesus advocated selling private property in a capitalist transaction (exchanging goods or services for money). Jesus never advocated the government take care of the poor, he only advised individuals to do this. After all, if this is what you believe, Jesus is right. Individuals will be judged on how they treated the poor. Governments will not.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter If you read it another way, you see Jesus advocating the dispossession of the haves and transferring this wealth to the have-nots. He mandated his followers to do this voluntarily as proof of their sincerity. I don't see Jesus advocating state coercion at any level, although when asked whose image was on a tax shekel he came back with the famous "Render unto Ceasar - " etc.
TheAzov 1 year ago
@TheAzov Yes, but he didn't force people to do so, he told them this is what they should do if they wanted to be part of the kingdom of heaven. People have freewill and Jesus never advocated taking the property of someone else to help the poor. He advocated people take a pro-active stance and help the poor themselves. Caesar didn't have a health care policy, so giving money to him wasn't helping the poor anyway.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@TheFascistHunter Enough with the same ol' same ol'.... You have yet to provide scripture to support you stance. Jesus commanded that you sell your possessions. Voluntary is for those that don't wish to follow Jesus. Do you want to follow Jesus or not? Are you a Christian or not? I suppose reading the bible is voluntary, reading only certain sections of the bible voluntary, praying for convenience.. Voluntary. Voluntary action is for those that don't really want to follow Jesus.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@TheFascistHunter Nice trying to hide my comment because I ask for biblical proof and not your opinion.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@TheAzov Exactly right! Jesus at no time advocated that the government enact bureaucracies that redistribute wealth. He told people to sell their privately held possessions to help the poor. This is Capitalism in a nutshell. Jesus was not a Socialist. Under Socialism, there is a central planning agency of the government that dictates how resources are allocated. Jesus never spoke about this.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter Capitalism is about maximizing profit - getting cheap, selling high. The parable totally contradicts the spirit of capitalism by advocating wealth distribution from those who have to those who don't. Whether it's done voluntarily or by state coercion is secondary to the process itself: undermining the profit motive.
TheAzov 1 year ago
@TheAzov But without the profit from the sale of goods, where would the money to help the poor come from? Capitalism is a key component in how to help the needy, according to Jesus. True, the story advocates wealth redistribution, but coercion is not a factor. At no time is anyone forced to sell their goods to help the poor, Jesus encouraged them to do it voluntarily.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter The value of goods is not determined by their sale value, but their use. Give the poor the food from the ground, instead of seeking a profit in selling it to them. As the story went, Jesus encouraged them to do this of their own will while knowing full well that the rich man he of the parable would NOT do it, as proof of man's corrupt nature to do the right thing.
TheAzov 1 year ago
@TheAzov Exactly! But keep the story going! Yes, Jesus did all those things. In addition, what did he not do? He never said to take anything from anyone to help the poor. He said it should be GIVEN.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter Yes, he insisted that good be done voluntarily, from the heart. "By their deeds shall ye know them," etc. So let's judge the behavior of the private US health care industry - underline the term, industry - by this standard. It's as Christian as an orgy at Sodom. No Christian, if true to the values s/he espouses, can support the American health care system in good conscience.
TheAzov 1 year ago
@TheAzov Once again, Jesus never called for any organizations to aid the poor. He never said it was the responsibility of the government or an insurance agency. Jesus put the responsibility on the individuals in the community and no one else. You say the health care industry doesn't help the poor, maybe so. But that is going according to Jesus' teaching who never challenged anyone but the individual human being to help the poor. Being forced to help anyone is not an action from the heart.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter Then fine, we don't need the church either. It seems where you're going with this is that the state and taxes, etc., aren't necessary. But don't forget one particular verse where they tried to trip Jesus up with this same issue:
"And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."
TheAzov 1 year ago
@TheAzov No, I never said government wasn't necessary. I just advocate the use of it for what it was designed. To protect the individual's rights. To protect the minority from the majority. This is what democracy gets you. Democracy killed Jesus and under it people can vote themselves other people's money. Is that a just system? BTW, Caesar didn't use taxes to help the poor either. At least he had that part right.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter What Ceasar really used the taxes for was beside the point, but we know he did use them to fight limitless wars of conquest, as in Palestine. Apparently he got that part right, too. Since you despise democracy, he obviously got his politics correct also. As an advocate of imperial autocracy your nic as "fascist hunter" seems a complete non-sequitur.
TheAzov 1 year ago
@TheAzov Fine, leave Caesar out. I didn't bring him up, but if you want to take him off the table, that's OK. Then again, since Jesus advocated giving Caesar what was rightfully his, I suppose Jesus supported the imperialism Rome practiced as you mention. (The same expansionism the Progressives did in America in the late 1800's - 1920ish). I'm totally non-fascist. That includes the government using the health care system to get its message out, ala 0bama.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter Being forced to help the poor and enter Heaven at the end of one's life is better than what you have chosen, which is to enter Hell when you die. Jesus told us to help the poor.... At a whole people, not individually. Never once did he single individuals out as the only means of helping the poor. He called everyone to help the poor, the sick, etc.... You keep working your way around that and you're disobeying Jesus in doing so. You're looking for a loophole.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva Interesting. So you believe government has a role in whether or not people make it to heaven? This idea seems opposed to what Jesus believed. Do you have any scriptural evidence to back this philosophy up? Jesus called on individuals to help the poor, not organizations. If you have scriptural evidence to the contrary, that Jesus said it is the responsibility of government to help the poor, please provide it.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@quicksiliva Your point has some logic, however. Since we are taxed to take care of the poor, that means our responsibility has ended and it is now on the government. Except for one thing. Why do we still have the poor? That must mean government programs do not work. Jesus seemed to know what worked and what didn't because he never said for the government to provide aid to anyone.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@TheFascistHunter I asked you proved concrete scripture to prove your stance and you have failed to do so. If Jesus advocated living without possessions, that is not Capitalism. For capitalism to work, people have to buy goods and services. Jesus suggested quite the opposite. He suggested that people share all goods and services. Again, he was much more of a socialist than a capitalist. Jesus wouldn't approve of the USA as it stands today, a corporatist fascist society concerned with greed.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva Except for swords, Jesus advocated buying one or two. Jesus told people to sell their possessions (use capitalism) to help the poor by telling them to give the money to the poor. He didn't advocate taking anyone's property to help the poor. Ultimately, Jesus recognized it was a personal decision.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@TheFascistHunter Enough with the same ol' same ol'.... You have yet to provide scripture to support you stance. Jesus commanded that you sell your possessions. Voluntary is for those that don't wish to follow Jesus. Do you want to follow Jesus or not? Are you a Christian or not? I suppose reading the bible is voluntary, reading only certain sections of the bible voluntary, praying for convenience.. Voluntary. Voluntary action is for those that don't really want to follow Jesus.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@quicksiliva Nice trying to hide my comment because I ask for biblical proof and not your opinion.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@OgeronimonominoregO Very good point! We see how many people died under communism in the world. 60 mil dead in China, 20 mil in the USSR, a couple mil each in Cambodia & N. Korea, over a mil in Africa. Somehow, I don't think Jesus would approve of Communism at all. Also, don't forget...communism is anti-religion so you can kiss Jesus goodbye under that form of government. Jesus told people to SELL their belongings and help the poor. That is a Capitalist transaction.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter These figures are bogus. Just doing the demographics based on the population at the time disproves them. In fact, anti-Communism has been as responsible for as many if not more deaths.
TheAzov 1 year ago
@TheAzov If you have proof that at least this many people didn't die due to Communist policies, please point me in the direct of a scholarly source that would support that claim. Deaths from Communism may make Baby Jesus cry.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter But deaths from anti-Communism apparently won't, even if they're 6 million of his co-religionists. Scholarly sources requested would include Alexander Werth and Sheila Fitzpatrick on Russia or Michael Vickery's "Cambodia." Your figures are likely culled from one book, without examining its sources or seeking others.
TheAzov 1 year ago
@TheAzov Fine! Once again, we have an example of people dying from government policy and a blind eye is turned, but at the same time they sure get upset because people are dying because someone else isn't forced to pay for their doctor visits.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheAzov Well, I guess it depends on the source one uses. In Peter Maguire's "Facing Death in Cambodia,' he claims a higher number of deaths contributed to the Communist government (over 2 million) than I do.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@TheFascistHunter Re: KR deaths. It depends on how the sources are interpreted. It's a grisly and morally dubious undertaking to quibble over how many - one can say one is one too many - but the interests of accuracy seperate truth from propaganda. Start with the known population of the 1970 census - 8 million - extrapolate the deaths known from the war, the normal death rate (high in Cambodia), with the projected increase by 1980, and you arrive at a figure less than 1 million.
TheAzov 1 year ago
@TheAzov OK, no prob. I guess less than a mil dead isn't too bad.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@OgeronimonominoregO No one in the US has even suggested this regarding health care renovation. Totally inappropriate and dishonest remark on this topic, but propaganda is that way.
TheAzov 1 year ago
@OgeronimonominoregO Communism has nothing to do with Jesus other than he encouraged everyone to live together in communes and share everything. Jesus wasn't referring to government in this sense. He would never order anyone to see a doctor, except that a Doctor should not be able to refuse treatment without payment. Letting conservative rhetoric cloud your view of Jesus is wrong, and you know it. Placing a $ price on morality is an evil that you accept in place of what Jesus taught.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva I agree! Jesus never advocated Communism. Under that system, there are govt. agencies in place to redistribute the wealth among the masses. Jesus told people to do that themselves and never advocated helping the poor through government means.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
Those that complain about the Government forcing morality, the exact same morality that Jesus taught, envoked by the same people that claim to be Christian, should not have any problem with morality placed first and foremost over costs to tax payers. It should not be a loophole to be allowed to criticize government for telling you to do what Jesus already commands of you. To do so is to reject Jesus as well. Any self-proclaimed Christians that reject Jesus in favor of greed is a fraud.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva One more question....are you saying we shouldn't be critical of the government? Isn't this a basic First Amendment issue? As I understand, that is one of the main reasons for the 1st, so the citizens always have a right to speak out against the government policies they disagree with. Hillary Clinton said it was patriotic to question those in power over us. Can't we agree we shouldn't use government to prop up religious teachings? Everyone isn't the same religion.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
@quicksiliva No! Jesus said to sell your possessions and give the money to the poor. Under communism, there is no private property! You cannot sell and give to the poor under communism because (a) there are no personal property and (b) everyone is poor except for the leaders.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@TheFascistHunter During Jesus' time, Communism didn't exist. He told everyone to share everything they own, help the poor, help the sick, help those less fortunate, and give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's. He endorsed living in communes and sharing crops, eatting together.... Again, Communism didn't exist. But if you had to pick which system he would choose, it would probably be none, since all systems are corrupted by man. But one thing is for sure, He's wasn't a capitalist.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@quicksiliva I agree that the term Communism didn't exist, but the concept surely did. Jesus however advocated capitalism to help the poor. As I've said, he told people to sell their on goods and take the money to help them. He told them to make a private transaction that involved the exchange of a good or service for money. He did not say the money should be under the control of a government agency who would decide who needed it.
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Universal Heathcare for all is a right not a privilege. These so called GOP / Teaparty, (The wicked amongst us) are walking upon this world today fullfilling the Prophecies of many Prophets. Especially in the book of Isaiah and the book of John. They can't help but to be cold and heartless because like many before them in the past GOD has hardened their hearts and sealed their eyes, and closed their ears from the cries of the poor and suffering, to test those who do what he commands.
nyhero2012 1 year ago
@nyhero2012 Why do people have a right to something at another person's expense?
TheFascistHunter 1 year ago 2
@TheFascistHunter You should ask Jesus why others have the right to something at another's expense. But truely the good and faithful that follow Jesus would never ask that question. To serve man and help those in need is a no-brainer to a true Christian. They don't raise hell when the governement takes their money and redistributes it into social programs. True Christians don't look for ways to avoid following Jesus, or use the government as a scapegoat.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I do believe we the people need a 2nd bill of rights, I suggest the one President Franklin Roosevelt tried to get done but died a year before he could. I do believe that had he lived to get the bill passed we would be living in a much better, more equal society today. FDR couldn't, but President Obama can. Its whats right.
nyhero2012 1 year ago
I like his show...Ed does his thing.
nyhero2012 1 year ago
The PREACHERS in this segment were lightweight on this issue and aquiesce to the GOVERNMENT LINE..........ITS ASHAMED THAT THEY DIDNT HAVE PREACHERS WHO DIDNT KNOW EACH OTHER.......INTERESTING APPROACH....I WONDER WHAT REVEREND JEREMIAH WRIGHT, REVEREND W.L. MCAFEE, AND MINISTER FARRAKHAN HAVE TO SAY ABOUT WHAT JESUS WOULD SAY ABOUT UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE FOR ALL
VisibleEnigma 1 year ago
@mikejackson4ever I feel that you are confused. You quote biblical passages in support of your views and then state that you oppose Christianity. Obama is no less pandering to Christians than his predecessors.. with the exception of Reagan who seemed to have a thing for the occult.
zenadun 1 year ago
@mikejackson4ever Jesus would perhaps consider us all sinners in need of redemption, especially Christians who have been following a "Paulist" doctrine and ignoring his real message.
zenadun 1 year ago
Medical dictatorships... Jesus H. Christ.. Current basic economics dictates that only the wealthy will receive adequate healthcare, whereas the rest of us get screwed by insurance companies. The high price of healthcare (the highest in the world.. incidentally) is the result of the system we have now..
zenadun 1 year ago
unfortunately this so called reform is just more govt takeover of our lives and we can't afford it!! brother ed is blowin' smoke once again!
dlkrat 1 year ago
@dlkrat Yet we can't afford to do nothing... what do you suggest?
zenadun 1 year ago
Jesus emphasized compassion, so one might assume that he would have supported a system that did not allow the wealthy to get even richer off of the suffering of the sick and the poor.
Jesus was not a proponent of leaving people alone... would have lived longer. I'm not sure how you equate the attempt by our elected leaders to stem a growing health-care disaster into institutional violence - do you propose a solution?
zenadun 2 years ago
@zenadun "Jesus was not a proponent of leaving people alone"
Oh really? Did He go around setting up medical dictatorships where
the politically connected get to write laws which force working people
to have to pay artificially high prices for medical care?
Do you understand basic economics? As long as you have freedom,
no person or group can monopolize a service. It is only the gov't which
can FORCE cartels and monopolies onto us by manipulating the law
to exclude competition.
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername But this is the one place (health care) where you lose your head about? This has been happening for decades (Since old mother Reagan).. and it takes the issue of health-care for you to be upset about cartels and monopolies?
I don't know about you, but the tea-baggers who came into the streets after the inauguration of Obama are hypocrites at best and racists at worst.
zenadun 1 year ago
@zenadun "and it takes the issue of health-care for you to be upset about cartels and monopolies?"
No. I've always been against such things. Anyone who knows anything about
economics is against them because they rob people.
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername I can't disagree with you there. Abolish corporate monopolies, establish public entities that provide critical services (owned by the aggregate society)...
zenadun 1 year ago
@zenadun Hell no. What the hell is a "public entity"? You mean a bunch of
people with guns?
It is those "public entities" which create the corporate monopolies and
cartels. That's the purpose of the "public entity".
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername Let me see... libraries, firestations, policestations, water treatment plants, public colleges, public universities, public k-12, transportation maintenance, true public utilities, research facilities, public health maintenance, defense, a large portion of the Internet that you are now using... and where any of these things have gone to crap it is where we have sold these to corporate entities...
zenadun 1 year ago
@zenadun Amtrak loses billions, post office loses billions, pentagon war machine wastes trillions, lost 2.3 trillion announced 9/10/01, WMD lies,TARP= $787+ billion to corrupt banksters, AIG bailout= 137 billion & more, S&L bailout, TSA naked body scanners, DEA, BTF, IRS, raids, SWAT teams, police brutality, CIA assassinations, coups, drug smuggling, cronyism, revolving door, regulatory
capture, the Fed printing trillions for insolvent system, CPS child abuse,
SS & Medicare broke, etc., etc.
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@MillionthUsername We already have a collective monopoly... The insurance companies screwing everyone.
quicksiliva 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername So by monopolizing a service, you are referring to the poor and sick monopolizing health-care - odd accusation - maybe I misunderstand you.
We currently have fat government contracts feeding into defense, agriculture, and infrastructure... health-care, again, is a very small portion of that. Why don't you start with the big stuff?
zenadun 1 year ago
@zenadun "So by monopolizing a service, you are referring to the poor and sick monopolizing health-care"
No. The words cartel and monopoly refer to producers, not consumers.
Gov't creates cartels and monopolies.
Cartels and monopolies bad.
Freedom good.
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername So you are against all corporate entities ( ie. monopolies and cartels) that get contracted by the government to provide services to citizens? I'm almost with you there... it's called privatization, which has been going on for about three decades, and is perhaps the cause of most of the waste in our government.
zenadun 1 year ago
@zenadun You're talking about something else there. I'm talking about
liberty, not "privatization". The gov't is always and everywhere privatized.
When Hitler runs it, it's privatized by his crowd. When Mao runs it, it's
privatized by him. Whoever can use the state for power and advantage
will do so because they cannot help but do so. You cannot avoid that.
All state power will be used by someone to their advantage because
that's what state power is - the ability to rule over others by force.
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername Now you're talking about real politic... where I'm as cynical as you are... really. Unfortunately, I see it as how things really are - as opposed to the libertarian dream world of "freedom" that in reality would evolve into some form of ludicrous tyranny resembling Mogadishu. We are fortunate that our government has that cynicism built in, for now, at least - I'm sure the anti-health crowd will do their darnest to "throw the bums out"...
zenadun 1 year ago
@zenadun "Anti-health crowd"??? WTF???
Freedom is tyranny? If we were free we would be Mogadishu?
And you solution to the horrors of liberty is tyranny even though you
say that liberty is tyranny? So, what the hell are you saying? You're
going to approve and worship tyranny because it keeps you "free"
from the "tyranny" of freedom, which is tyranny?
Maybe the reason you sound like a nut is that you are one. You
cannot even distinguish between liberty and tyranny, so why
even argue?
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername Freedom (is) good is just a bromide... is not necessarily the case. None of us are free to do what we want. As citizens we legislate the limits and scope of individual freedom as it balances out the common good.
zenadun 1 year ago
@zenadun "The common good" is a bromide.
I don't legislate anything and neither do you, citizen.
Liberty is not a crime to be "legislated" against. And it does not
mean the license to do whatever you want.
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername True enough. Both used by our founders. If you mean those "liberties", I don't see anything prohibiting universal healthcare in the constitution.
Their interpretation of "the common good" is one of the main reason that the United States exists.
zenadun 1 year ago
@zenadun Complete and utter bullshit! The 9th and 10th amendments would be meaningless if that was the case. What the hell are "powers not delegated" then?
You and others like you make the words of the constitution or any other law meaningless. The system makes them meaningless since they can "interpret"
anything to mean anything.
I am absolutely right in referring to people like you as immoral. You never
disappoint. You think you are some kind of petty god entitled to use people.
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername I don't know.. there are plenty of liberties that have been legislated against within constitutional process. We have the largest prison population on the planet to prove it.
zenadun 1 year ago
We have the most expensive and inefficient health-care system in the developing world. We also have the most profitable health-care insurance industry in the world (even in recession). How could we really do any worse with public health care?
zenadun 2 years ago
@zenadun This fascist system was created by the gov't. They use force
to enrich their friends. Just look at the history of it. They interfere in free
markets because they want to make their contributors rich off the
backs of regular people. So they write special privileges into law which
drive up the costs. They FORBID competition by every conceivable way
in order to create a class of people who can loot the rest of us at will.
Then they cry "crisis" and repeat the process.
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername I'm not going to argue that the industry was overly involved in the writing of the laws.. but this is not unusual in what the government has been doing... especially in the previous 8 years where any regulation of corporate control (over individual rights) were given over to corporate overseers You aren't seeing the real enemy clearly.
zenadun 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername I believe in a component of what your saying. The war in Iraq poured billions of dollars into the pockets of Republican corporate supporters at all of our expense and with little benefit. The health-care issue is a drop in the bucket.
zenadun 1 year ago
Jesus would leave people alone.
He wouldn't write 1500 page laws which steal money from some in order to give it to others.
He certainly wouldn't engage in violence and threats and fines and imprisonment to make people do anything. Instead, He would tell the snakes who exercise tyranny over others to repent.
It's funny how corrupt society has become when they worship the institutionalized violence of the state and claim that it's godly.
There is no right to steal and no reason to.
MillionthUsername 2 years ago
I dont know what mickey mouse bible that you read from, but, in MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE, and JOHN of the KJV version records JESUS HEALING FOR FREE
VisibleEnigma 1 year ago
@VisibleEnigma What kind of idiotic reply is that?
You think you have the right to steal from people and create a fascist
medical dictatorship because Jesus worked for free?
First of all, that's not exactly true. Nothing is ever free. People supported Jesus by donations. "The workman is worth his wage." People in ministry are always supported by VOLUNTARY contributions. You do not FORCE people to "contribute". That makes you IMMORAL.
You are all about THEFT and VIOLENCE, NOT healing.
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername I hear a lot about fascism and about theft and violence, but not a lot about the terrible status quo and about solutions. What have you got for us? The same old system which is a joke to the rest of the world? You are defending a system that doesn't work - and opposing a system that is relatively fair to most of us, and not a big change for the rest of us.... and will solve some of the problem.
zenadun 1 year ago
@zenadun "What have you got for us?"
Liberty.
Leave people alone. Let people provide goods and services to each
other without interference, without introducing force and fraud into
voluntary exchanges.
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
@VisibleEnigma LOL ... yeah.. I'm sure that the radical right consider adequite health care the laying on of hands (donations accepted) and little else.
zenadun 1 year ago
@VisibleEnigma Well.. one reading of it is that you had to believe in Him. Blind could see, deaf could hear, lepers lost their spots (no pun intended)... if you believe in what they believed...
zenadun 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername Institutional violence of the state? I find it interesting how the far right is stealing the rhetoric of the far left (fascism, institutionalized violence, all the buzzwords from the crazy talk shows) ... to attack, of all things, universal health-care. Governments all over the world, socialist to neo-conservative have it. Deal with it.
zenadun 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername You have a pretty warped view of things. I would be interested in seeing where you get your information.
zenadun 1 year ago
both democrate & republicans conservatives are hipocrites & liers. i can also prove it. "HE WHO GIVE TO THE POOR WILL NOT WANT,BUT HE WHO HIDE HIS EYES [ FROM THEIR WANT ] WILL HAVE MANY A CURSE. "PROVERBS 28:27.IF U WANT GOD TO BE INVOLVED IN YOUR FINANCES & PROSPER U,U MUST HONOR THESE BASIC PRINCIPLES.U CANNOT BE GREEDY & TRULY PROSPER. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH WANTING TO HAVE ABOUNDANCE FOR YOURSELF & YOUR FAMILY,BUT GIVING TO GOD & BEING GENEROUS TO OTHERS IS PART OF THE SPIRITUAL LAW.
unelmitchell 2 years ago
Is it really about health care or is the government up to something else?
futurerapture 2 years ago 2
@futurerapture It's about avoiding a serious bump in health-care expenditures now that the largest group of health-care users, the boomers, are approaching retirement age. If we don't do something quickly we will be literally screwed by health-care costs... I'm sure there a lot of side agendas, specifically in corporate which will lose money they've been sucking out of us for years and their far-right lackies who feel that a good health-care system will bring about the apocalypse.
zenadun 1 year ago
Comment removed
futurerapture 2 years ago
Finally, using Christianity and Jesus to support a good cause: not discrimination of other religions or screaming about fires of hell, but promoting helping those in need.
CreatureOfLegend 2 years ago
@CreatureOfLegend Amen.
zenadun 1 year ago
Christianity supports free health care. Plain and simple if you do not then you and Jesus Christ do not have the same values.
NewRevolutionLeader 2 years ago
And once again, the unemployment rate of the nation is 14 million and the uninsured is 33 million.
God didn't make other animals the dominant species for a reason. And life is a natural right, and I don't think you can live without healthiness.
If you think a "natural right" is something given by "God" and not other humans, than natural rights are myths. There is absolutely no right we have that is not given by ourselves.
nafaidni 2 years ago
Sorry, I should replace "starve" with "die".
And wow, comparing well-being to owning a car or... the space program. That's very relevant.
Btw, doesn't the Bible say animals have no souls? I disagree, but that has reason behind it. Animals are not the dominant species for a reason. Our ability to govern and help each other have allowed us to rule the world.
Doesn't it seem stupid to encourage abolishing society and become animals? Thank you for admitting that's what conservatism is for, still!
nafaidni 2 years ago
Most Christian leaders understand that this Health Care Bill will fund abortions. This is why most churches don't support the bill...plain and simple! Ms. Standberry, Dir. of International Prolife Federation
ERNIE6274 2 years ago
You are an ignoramus. I hate how the Senate appeases people like you... Even though Federal dollars couldn't be used for abortions in the first place, the right-wingers cried about how they would until the Stupak Amendment was passed, which entirely prevented giving Federal subsidies to companies that covered abortions.
nafaidni 2 years ago
@ERNIE6274 So most Christians and most congregations are not supporting the Health Care Bill because of a fallacy? This does outline how ignorant most of them are.. I would have given them more credit.
zenadun 1 year ago
1: Liberals are for Jesus, not the retarded corrupt church
2: Love thy neighbor? That doesn't have anything to do with abortions. Fetuses are not neighbors. Even so, I am against abortions, most likely for different reasons than you, but that at least makes me consistent. I am for the life of all people, you're only for the unborn.
3: Jesus himself would not care about gay marriage. The Bible was written after him, and he never mentioned gay marriage. He was for love of all type.
nafaidni 2 years ago
And I find it really fun a Republicunt is telling me that "whoever does not work shall not eat" when they constantly screamed against those dirty "death panels" which they think will "ration your life away" and kill old people.
The old don't work... they're retired... So, does that mean they shall not eat? Good job being consistent! I'm sure Hitler used that excuse to massacre those people he considered degenerate.
"The disabled obviously can't do any work, so let's just kill them, Fuhrer!"
nafaidni 2 years ago
Jesus said give non-freely through taxes. Then let government control more of your life so you don't need Me anymore.
KernelSandersCheckin 2 years ago
@KernelSandersCheckin Good point, if we took more responsibility for our own governance to have effective institutions insteadof ranting in support of the McCountry we have now, we would have effective education, health-care and other neglected public institutions, the lack of ignorance and suffering would reduce the ranks of wacky churchgoers?
zenadun 1 year ago
Obama is not a Christian
JavierCA2008 2 years ago
@JavierCA2008 Then neither are you...
zenadun 1 year ago
Notice at 1:04 what he says about BHO. How can he even be called a CHRISTIAN when he supports partial birth abortions. Not to mention he sat 20 plus years in Rev Wright's church. GEEEZ
momadog01 2 years ago
Okay Hannity.
bittyrock 2 years ago
@momadog01 Throwing stones... if you are a Mormon, Catholic, Seventh Day Adventist, the wrong kind of Methodist or Lutheran or Baptist, often not considered Christian either. Jesus says absolutely nothing regarding abortion, or infanticide (which was very common at the time) by the way.
zenadun 1 year ago
Really? Jesus says the government has a moral obligation to provide health insurance? I missed that passage.
MaverickCentricity 2 years ago
Jesus isn't a politician. He doesn't care who provides health as long as it's provided. He believes EVERYONE has a moral obligation to provide care for others, which would most certainly include the government which is an organized representative body of officials that serve the nation and its people.
About that "those who don't work don't eat" thing... The population of unemployed in America is 14 million. Population of uninsured is 47 million. What about those 33 million? Do they starve?
nafaidni 2 years ago
@MaverickCentricity I would assume from his words, in regards to government Jesus was in favor of a monarchy... so he would hardly be in support of the foundation of republican democracy.
zenadun 1 year ago
@MaverickCentricity In regards to health insurance, however, if we believe in him we're healed is about the extent that scripture covers. We must generalize that his parables on responsibility and respect for others could be interpreted as providing the sick with support as a function of good governance in the absence of a society of just people.
zenadun 1 year ago
Socialist
snapperco 2 years ago
Socialist, huh... you mean a dirty lazy idiot who wants to spread wealth around and hates the rich? I hate those socialists. Here's a socialist quote I really despise.
"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a pin than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God."
Luke 18:25
He must be a Russian Leninist... It's probably an excerpt from one of his communist speeches. God damn him and his evil ways...
nafaidni 2 years ago
Typical...Mr Ed does not want to discuss the "details" he just want a 'support' or no support answer. Hmmm, is there EVER anything black/white in this country, no, its always lets discuss it. Cause if it was just black/white, then child molesters would be imprisioned forever after one offense!
sdflipper743 2 years ago