sounds like you have totally rationalized away the meaning of jesus message. i think the author, a former preacher, had people like you pegged: "It Comes Down To Greed⦠Based on my observations, a vast majority of the opposition to socialized medicine comes down to paying for it, and the religious right cherry-pick their bibles to come up with reasons why they shouldnât have to fork over any of their holy cash to benefit their fellow human being. This, of course, is bullshit, because there are millions and millions and millions of holy dollars being funneled into programs, initiatives and legislative lobbies for the single purpose of putting god back into government, schools and science. The scripture should read, âRender unto Caesar what is Caesarâs, and to God what is Godâs â unless what Caesar wants goes against what Christians think God wants and according to how much money they will have to part with.â I find myself shaking my head when I look at the most glaring inconsistency of them all; that Charity should not be forced. The concept behind the argument is still greed, and I will tell you, and as well why the problem at hand is systemic within most of Christianity as it is practiced in the United States."
Jesus said to give to the poor. Jesus did not say give to the rich. Can we agree on that? Ok...so who/what is the richest entity on earth? Oh...the United States government. So socialized medicine is giving your money to the rich and hoping they will take care of the poor. You dont like that one? Ok got another one for ya. Thou shall not steal. Not everyone believes in the bible, but as Christians we do. So its wrong for us to vote so that we steal money out of other peoples pockets (like you atheists or others who may not want to give money to the sick & poor) and give to the government so they can give it to others for reasons they see fit (this is also known as redistribution of wealth. Taking money from one person to give to another)
Do you even read what I write? Where have I said anywhere that one shouldn't give to the needy? You have absolutely no idea of who I am, but let me assure you I give regularly, both time and money to my local church, over seas missions, local free health care clinics as well as pro-life centers..... Our debate was about the right to spend other peoples money, and repeat not the command to give of ourselves. The last foreign mission trip I went on was to Honduras with "Feed the Children" about 20 from our church paid our own ways, plus supplies and went down to help rebuild a boys home... we paid the whole bill, while we were down there we worked with some the local churches as well, didn't care what denomination just wanted to help spread the Gospel..........we came back exhausted, with only the clothes on our back, and smiles and memories forever,,, had a great time and looking forward to doing it again...... You want to vilify all Christianity, but there's real Christians all over the world doing good every-day for no other reason that they love doing God's work helping people........ I'd say that dollar for dollar their efforts are exponential compared to the normal government red-tape and bureaucracy.
Most of the Christian Right today are in it for personal salvation only. They are selfish Christians. They look past the fact that altruism is central to Christianity. It might cost them money. They believe that the freedom to be selfish is more important than caring for their fellow man. They just want to feel good. To be saved. They want to call the US a Christian nation but don't think the government should act that way. I have no doubt Jesus would be horrified to see how his teachings have been "modified" to suit the conservative right's ignorance, selfishness, racism, militarism and intolerance. The one's arguing against the OP are prime examples of this.
sorry i dont give much value to what churches call charity. for most it is more about indoctrination and preaching. i was familiar with church finances at my last church. it was a very well off church. they paid the pastor over 100k. from what i saw 90% of the offerings went for salaries and to pay and maintain fancy new buildings. 10% was designated for missions work. the problem is most of that was spent either building churches or preaching. very little was actually helping people.
Amazing, the logical contortions employed here... breathtaking. So what entity is most able to help the unfortunate regardless of what religion they are or where they live or what race they are? The US Government. The current social safety net works.
I know several pastors, none of which make anywhere close to 6 figures, but I'm sure there are some that make more than that. I know a few missionaries that are totally dependent upon funding, they have near zero salaries, just to cover personal items if they are in areas where they can be purchased. But to categorize "all" is wrong. Church organizations are much better at immediately handling aid and relief compared to our government. Obviously the government has the bigger pool of resources, but the local level churches can quickly step in during emergencies. It's not a perfect world I will confess, "to whom much is given much is required."
One of the largest NGOs in the world... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Relief_Services almost a billion in revenue in 2010. a 2008 audit revealed ... 3% for admin... 4% for fund raising. Over 100 million people helped.