Pope: Gay marriage is 'evil'?

[Texsox]

That is a huge generalization that is absolutely wrong.  The GOP doesn't believe in making people starve.  They also don't believe that people should depend on the government.  The difference being that they believe that the private structure should help to take care of people.  Charities are meant to be run by private people, not the federal government.  The GOP believes the churches should be feeding people, not government cheese.  There obviously needs to be a safety net for people who are unable to take care of themselves, but there are many people who do not fall into that group.

 

The fundamental difference is Democrats believe the Government is WE; Republicans seem to believe the government is THEY, and citizens are somehow not responsible through our government. We manage our affairs as a society. We combine resources via a system of taxes to pay for services like fire, police, military protection, and we pay for services and items for our common good. We elect people to manage those shared resources. In the end what is accomplished is WE.

 

We have freedom of religion is this country and by extension, freedom from religion. I don't think it is good social policy to ask people to head down to the local Mosque for their daily bread.

 

Quarters spent on our social programs are dollars saved in our criminal justice system.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Quarters spent on our social programs are dollars saved in our criminal justice system.

 

More crazy talk. Where do you guys get these wacky ideas?

[southsider2k5]

The fundamental difference is Democrats believe the Government is WE; Republicans seem to believe the government is THEY, and citizens are somehow not responsible through our government. We manage our affairs as a society. We combine resources via a system of taxes to pay for services like fire, police, military protection, and we pay for services and items for our common good. We elect people to manage those shared resources. In the end what is accomplished is WE.

 

We have freedom of religion is this country and by extension, freedom from religion. I don't think it is good social policy to ask people to head down to the local Mosque for their daily bread.

 

Quarters spent on our social programs are dollars saved in our criminal justice system.

 

So why does it have to be a governmental quarter, that started out at 35 cents of tax payers money? Why couldn't it be a private citizen's quarter going to fix a problem right in front of his face, with a result that he can view? I don't get the insistance that the government does stuff.

[sox4lifeinPA]

"I don't think it is good social policy to ask people to head down to the local Mosque for their daily bread."

 

 

I don't think its good social policy for the people to get their daily bread from the government...

[jackie hayes]

So why does it have to be a governmental quarter, that started out at 35 cents of tax payers money?  Why couldn't it be a private citizen's quarter going to fix a problem right in front of his face, with a result that he can view? I don't get the insistance that the government does stuff.

There's no obvious incentive for individuals to provide something for other people. Even if it's valuable to them, individuals will tend to piggyback -- 'It's already being provided, my own contribution won't make a noticeable difference.'

 

Charity happens, so it's not all-or-nothing, but social services (where the advantage isn't realized by one person) are almost certainly underprovided unless government organizes them.

[southsider2k5]

There's no obvious incentive for individuals to provide something for other people.  Even if it's valuable to them, individuals will tend to piggyback -- 'It's already being provided, my own contribution won't make a noticeable difference.'

 

Charity happens, so it's not all-or-nothing, but social services (where the advantage isn't realized by one person) are almost certainly underprovided unless government organizes them.

 

Easy there with your wording. There is no economic incentive for giving. But the US leads the world in aid given. For many people the incentive is the feeling of making someone's life a little better. There is no incentive for me to get up early on a Saturday and referee peewee basketball, as I am a volunteer, but I do it anyway. Some people also believe that it is their religious duty to give to people less fortunate, whether it be from money or time or any other way they are able.

 

Charity is a huge industry in the US, and it isn't because of incentive, because there is none.

[FlaSoxxJim]

There's no obvious incentive for individuals to provide something for other people.  Even if it's valuable to them, individuals will tend to piggyback -- 'It's already being provided, my own contribution won't make a noticeable difference.'

 

'Tragedy of the Commons' on a human dimension.

[Texsox]

"I don't think it is good social policy to ask people to head down to the local Mosque for their daily bread."

I don't think its good social policy for the people to get their daily bread from the government...

 

Name another organization that represents ALL AMERICANS? ALL AMERICANS that are able, contribute through our tax system to social services. Why not have a group of ALL AMERICANS instead of just your Church? The government is you and I and WDJ and Steff and Kip Wells Fan. That's how we take care of our own.

 

Why would you want to form thousands of individual groups offering those services when we already have an organization that EVERY AMERICAN that is able to, contributes to?

 

THE GOVERNMENT IS ALL OF US!! It isn't US and THEM. WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT.

 

And what is really funny, is how few people here actually attend Church. Sounds to me like some of you will dump that responsibility on the people in Church. How will athiests contribute? Will there be meetings somewhere for them to contribute? Will we have Athiest based soup kitchens handing out meals? Will they spring up and rent buildings, buy food?

 

It is a shame that Republicans think that if all Americans get together to do something it is somehow worse than if just a few do.

Edited February 24, 2005 by Texsox

[jackie hayes]

Easy there with your wording.  There is no economic incentive for giving.  But the US leads the world in aid given.  For many people the incentive is the feeling of making someone's life a little better.  There is no incentive for me to get up early on a Saturday and referee peewee basketball, as I am a volunteer, but I do it anyway.  Some people also believe that it is their religious duty to give to people less fortunate, whether it be from money or time or any other way they are able.

 

Charity is a huge industry in the US, and it isn't because of incentive, because there is none.

Like I said, charity happens. But the question is always, How much? I don't doubt for a second that it would be underprovided if government stepped aside. Put up all the soup kitchens you want, that's hardly comparable to SS and Medicaid and early education/decent lunch funding.

 

Safety networks will exist anyway in tight-knit communities & families. But it doesn't accord with our sense of a 'good society' that individuals without a (reliable) family or church community should be allowed to fall through the cracks.

 

I'm not entirely opposed to reforming some entitlement programs. I think entitlements should be fairly limited. But I hope it never gets taken out of government hands.

[southsider2k5]

Name another organization that represents ALL AMERICANS? ALL AMERICANS that are able, contribute through our tax system to social services. Why not have a group of ALL AMERICANS instead of just your Church? The government is you and I and WDJ and Steff and Kip Wells Fan. That's how we take care of our own.

 

Why would you want to form thousands of individual groups offering those services when we already have an organization that EVERY AMERICAN that is able to, contributes to?

 

THE GOVERNMENT IS ALL OF US!! It isn't US and THEM. WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT.

 

And what is really funny, is how few people here actually attend Church. Sounds to me like some of you will dump that responsibility on the people in Church. How will athiests contribute? Will there be meetings somewhere for them to contribute? Will we have Athiest based soup kitchens handing out meals? Will they spring up and rent buildings, buy food?

 

It is a shame that Republicans think that if all Americans get together to do something it is somehow worse than if just a few do.

Ignoring the tons of assumptions and generalizations in there... The reason that I would rather see things done on a local level, is because of the HUGE ineffeciences of government. When you cut out buearucracy, you cut costs. If you cut out costs more money gets to go to the things you are trying to fix. At a local level you are also much better able to identify specific and particular problems that are as easily seen from Washington DC.

 

Besides I am still a big believer in the idea that the framers of the constituion had individualism in mind when the founded this country. How did we survive for 150 years without SSI and welfare? How did we ever make it without medicare and medicade? The federal government was meant to protect us from our enemies. The local governments were meant to provide services that the private sector fails at.

[southsider2k5]

Like I said, charity happens.  But the question is always, How much?  I don't doubt for a second that it would be underprovided if government stepped aside.  Put up all the soup kitchens you want, that's hardly comparable to SS and Medicaid and early education/decent lunch funding.

 

Safety networks will exist anyway in tight-knit communities & families.  But it doesn't accord with our sense of a 'good society' that individuals without a (reliable) family or church community should be allowed to fall through the cracks.

 

I'm not entirely opposed to reforming some entitlement programs.  I think entitlements should be fairly limited.  But I hope it never gets taken out of government hands.

 

There obviously has to be safety nets now. The entire country is such now that they depend on the government when the worst happens. It is engrained in our culture now. But some of it is just ridiculous.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Name another organization that represents ALL AMERICANS? ALL AMERICANS that are able, contribute through our tax system to social services. Why not have a group of ALL AMERICANS instead of just your Church? The government is you and I and WDJ and Steff and Kip Wells Fan. That's how we take care of our own.

 

Um, congratulations on your citizenship, Kip??

 

 

PS Kip: Why'd you go and do a stupid thing like that?

[Texsox]

Ignoring the tons of assumptions and generalizations in there... The reason that I would rather see things done on a local level, is because of the HUGE ineffeciences of government.  When you cut out buearucracy, you cut costs.  If you cut out costs more money gets to go to the things you are trying to fix.  At a local level you are also much better able to identify specific and particular problems that are as easily seen from Washington DC.

 

Besides I am still a big believer in the idea that the framers of the constituion had individualism in mind when the founded this country.  How did we survive for 150 years without SSI and welfare?  How did we ever make it without medicare and medicade?  The federal government was meant to protect us from our enemies.  The local governments were meant to provide services that the private sector fails at.

 

Currently every American able to pay taxes and support these social services, does. With it being privatized, how many Americans will be paying for this stuff? Who will be collecting the money? You don't think there will be huge scams taking in dollars and spending pennies? Who will set the standards? Waste? How about someone who just travels from Church to Church and social group to social group? Without any central record keeping, you don't know if you are getting scammed or not. If you want to eat you must pray to Mecca, you must practice Witchcraft, dumb dumb system.

 

We were an agricultural society. People could grow their own food. Now many neighborhoods have zoning restrictions on livestock? Buy yourself some baby chickens and set them up in the backyard and see what your neighbors say. Plow up part of your front yard and grow some vegetables.

 

I don't care if it's the Federal or local governments. Taxes are Taxes. What I don't want to see is taking this burden from everybody and placing it on a few.

[southsider2k5]

wow. Nevermind.

[Texsox]

wow.  Nevermind.

 

Sorry I am passionate about my country. I believe in the power of the American people and us getting together and solving problems. The only time ALL Americans get together is through our government.

 

You mentioned 150 years. 150 years ago you could barter with the Doctor when he came to your house. The world was too different. We need new solutions.

 

Again, who will be paying for these social services when the government pulls back and how will they be delivered?

[FlaSoxxJim]

If you want to eat you must pray to Mecca, you must practice Witchcraft, dumb dumb system.

 

And don't anybody think that doesn't happen.

 

Most famous is the story of the "Soupers" the Irish potato blight. The Catholic dirt farmers in many parts of the country were reduced to the point of trying to eat grass along the roadsides to survive... or they could go get a handout from the Protestant soup kitchen. The catch, of course, was that you had to renounce your Catholic faith and become a Prod before you got the soup. Of course, faced with the alternatives of emigration or starvation, a great many people converted for the soup and were then reviled by the rest of the Catholic community that didn't buckle.

[Queen Prawn]

"I don't think it is good social policy to ask people to head down to the local Mosque for their daily bread."

I don't think its good social policy for the people to get their daily bread from the government...

 

I am trying to get caught up in this (work has actually made me work, the bastards haha), so I appologize if I am taking the above completely out of context.

 

Speaking as someone who has eaten government food (and as I found out a good few others here have as well), my family also received a food basket from the mother's club of the Catholic grammar school I went to when I was a kid. A helping hand is needed from time to time. After that two year period, we never had to take that to make ends meet again. I also know it killed my parents inside to have to take a hand out, but because it was between that having malnourished kids, they swallowed their pride.

 

There is nothing wrong with the government helping out. There is a problem with people who live on the handout rather than using it as a temporary help.

[Wong & Owens]

There is nothing wrong with the government helping out.  There is a problem with people who live on the handout rather than using it as a temporary help.

 

 

I agree 100%, and I would add that I have a problem with the criterion used for determining who gets this "help." Drive by one of the housing projects one day in Chicago, and count how many windows have satellite dishes attached to them. If you have the money for satellite TV, then you don't need gov't hand-outs.

[Texsox]

I am trying to get caught up in this (work has actually made me work, the bastards haha), so I appologize if I am taking the above completely out of context.

 

Speaking as someone who has eaten government food (and as I found out a good few others here have as well), my family also received a food basket from the mother's club of the Catholic grammar school I went to when I was a kid.  A helping hand is needed from time to time.  After that two year period, we never had to take that to make ends meet again.  I also know it killed my parents inside to have to take a hand out, but because it was between that having malnourished kids, they swallowed their pride.

 

There is nothing wrong with the government helping out.  There is a problem with people who live on the handout rather than using it as a temporary help.

 

For most people it should be a hand up as well as a hand out. IMHO, there should also be a plan in place to end the need for the support and the support in place to work the plan. Job training, child care, transportation, etc. all need to be addressed. To do it right requires a tremendous amount of cooperation, information, and resources. To just have someone stop by a food pantry and pick up some cans of green beans and bags of rice is only addressing one part of the situation.

[Texsox]

I agree 100%, and I would add that I have a problem with the criterion used for determining who gets this "help."  Drive by one of the housing projects one day in Chicago, and count how many windows have satellite dishes attached to them.  If you have the money for satellite TV, then you don't need gov't hand-outs.

 

The money they are paying the satellite company should be used for education or to improve their situation. At the minimum on Sox tickets.

[Queen Prawn]

I agree 100%, and I would add that I have a problem with the criterion used for determining who gets this "help."  Drive by one of the housing projects one day in Chicago, and count how many windows have satellite dishes attached to them.  If you have the money for satellite TV, then you don't need gov't hand-outs.

 

 

I used to work in a grocery store that was on the edge of a rough neighborhood (the one I grew up in - wasn't rough at that time, but when I was between the ages of 12-16 it got ROUGH). I couldn't even tell you the numbers of times I had people come in to cash welfare checks (prior to LINK) or use food stamps that had tons of gold, name brand clothes, cell phones and/or bought lots of lottery tickets.

[sox4lifeinPA]

when I was first born my parents were on food stamps for a little while, and I think that helped them out for a temporary status, but story after story they have of people from their "community" sending annonymous donnations or cooking food for them.

 

"daily bread" sounds like just that, every day the government replaces dependence on God...

[sox4lifeinPA]

 

I used to work in a grocery store that was on the edge of a rough neighborhood (the one I grew up in - wasn't rough at that time, but when I was between the ages of 12-16 it got ROUGH).  I couldn't even tell you the numbers of times I had people come in to cash welfare checks (prior to LINK) or use food stamps that had tons of gold, name brand clothes, cell phones and/or bought lots of lottery tickets.

 

 

working at banks near economically poor areas is very sad. To see parents spend their money on junk and watch them walk away with ratty clothing or neglecting their kids future and health is part of my frustration on this subject.

[Texsox]

when I was first born my parents were on food stamps for a little while, and I think that helped them out for a temporary status, but story after story they have of people from their "community" sending annonymous donnations or cooking food for them.

 

"daily bread" sounds like just that, every day the government replaces dependence on God...

 

Out of work parent #1 "I just picked up some soup and crackers at the Church of Christ"

 

Parent #2 "Man, you have to convert. The Mormons have the best dinners, and they offer to research your genealogy"

 

Parent #3 "Nope Muslim is the way to go. They throw in free health care which I wasn't getting when I was a Jehovah Witness"

 

Parent #4 "You are all wrong. I just denounced Christ and started attending Temple. I like getting it out of the way on Saturday so I can watch the Bears on Sunday. Even better, when I told them I wanted to stay kosher, they tossed in some new dishes.

 

Parent #5 "The worse was that little independent Church on Algonquin Road. They had like 99 Gods, 200 lesser dieties, and you had to memorize them before lunch.

 

Nothing like keeping God in it.

Pray to MY Gods, or don't eat.

[sox4lifeinPA]

Kiwanis isn't religiously affiliated. you're presupposing that every private "community" entity would be of religious nature.