Is Socialism OK with Mormons now?


WhatMeWorry
 Share

Recommended Posts

The same peace of mind I have knowing that if I get sick tomorrow I can walk into a doctors and get treated without fear that my unavoidable illness will incur a mass of debt, or that if I get a chronic illness that may last for 6 months that causes me to lose my job and leaves me with expensive medical bills that I wont lose my home because of I'm dumped with an mountain of debt I have no means to pay for?

Try looking up something called HEALTH insurance. Look up Disability Income Insurance. Look up Long Term Care insurance. These are neat products for those who want to avoid massive medical bills and protect their income stream. It's not perfect, but it's better than what you're talking about - all or nothing.

For those who know how to plan well in advance to protect their financial castle, they know how to balance those priorities by building a personal financial moat as well.

Renting isn't like owning, increased property value is a negative thing for someone renting as it only means higher rent, so why should a renter's taxes go towards parks and open spaces which will only increase their monthly outgoings on rent with no return on that payment?

So, the "system" rewards those who own homes instead of rent, right? Gotta know how the system works. Did you know that homeowners can deduct the interest on their mortgage that they pay? There's no tax deduction for rent payments either! So, maybe you'd agree with me that renting just SUCKS!

Its very good that you appreciate such great people for such heroics, but it has no relevance to this argument. It's they kind of emotional sidestep politicians use to brainwash people with guilt that if you support A then you support B when in reality you do not support B.

So shouldn't they be privatised so that these heroes have an oppurtunity to earn more money? Also, do you not consider a doctor to be a hero when he saves countless lives in his career?

Let's consider how privatized fire services would actually WORK?

1. More than 1 number to call

2. Inconsistencies in service, training, equipment, etc.

3. Would you want to begin to see commercials on TV asking that you remember their number in case of the next fire?

4. If you prefer one department and they're not local to you, you might just say that the system is set up to discriminate one station against another.

Let's remember that the devistation of fire can and many times will affect more than 1 household in a community.

Your health seems to only affect your own household and family that doesn't necessarily live with you.

Community taxes need to be spent on where they do the COMMUNITY the most good. Individual health should be kept just that - individual.

This point is really making your argument confusing to me, you hold firefighters and millitary in higher regard than doctors but you would prefer firefighters and millitary to earn less money in a socialist system whilst the doctors reap the benefits of working in a privatised system. From a logical perspective this really makes no sense. Your willing to pay a % of your income for firefighters and millitary but instead of paying that small % to doctors you're willing to pay double or triple when you're sick?

Please see above. You can't just have "ideals" without practicality and common sense behind them. The way you mitigate the risk of high medical bills is through health insurance.

What you're asking for is the government to be the national health insurance company. When that much power is given to the government... well let's just say that "Absolute power corrupts absolutely".

That's just irrational fear, you live in a democratic country. Just because people vote for socialised healthcare doesn't mean they'll vote for a totalitarian system of government.

So, where would you draw the line?

Edited by skippy740
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 161
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You didn't answer the question. What this all comes down to is whether or not the individual is allowed his/her freedom. Freedom is not in food, clothing, shelter, and healthcare. They have all that in prison. Freedom is in choice.

then do what you are doing and speak up, start your own political party, get people to vote for you - after all its how the socialists got in in my country they didn't like the state of play and did something about changing the situation. Its why we have representatives in parliament in my country, you have the right to bend their ear, or to write to local papers, start petitions and whilst it may take time things can be changed. I mean personally I am not overly bothered about my taxes maintaing roads or schools as I have no need of either but willing to bet I am a minority and personally I don't like nuclear weapons so vote against them

However if you do not have the support of the majority or a large enough number then you won't get change. I have spent times in my life campaigning for higher taxes and better services - I didn't get what I was campaigning for but that does not mean my rights are erroded it means democracy won. Which is what the poeple I grew up around fought for,. my right to be able to say umm I don't like this can it be changed?

And quite frankly I find the socialists in charge of Scotland right now have always been the first to listen to their constituents and are very accessible etc I have actually but forward ideas to them and the party convener has used them

Instead of moaning about your rights being erroded use the ones you have to convince people you are right. Personally you would never get my vote but there are people who will listen

-Charley

Edited by gabelpa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try looking up something called HEALTH insurance. It's a neat product for those who want to avoid massive medical bills. It's not perfect, but it's better than what you're talking about - all or nothing.

[b

its a very expensive way of gaining healthcare that sometimes is mediocre - my national insurance and private health insurance bill for our family would be considerably less than my Mother in Laws medical insurance for herself and her family, and for that I get much better healthcare. My Doctor does come out to my house to see me if I can't make it in etc and I don't have to pay for my ambulances or contribute towards seeing my Dr. Right now being a Mum of an under 1 don't need to pay for dentist or eyecare

-Charley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try looking up something called HEALTH insurance. Look up Disability Income Insurance. Look up Long Term Care insurance. These are neat products for those who want to avoid massive medical bills and protect their income stream. It's not perfect, but it's better than what you're talking about - all or nothing.

Hahahaha. My wife is going to have a baby in a few months and it will probably wipe us out! Hospitals are +$4000 per bed per night. That's just ridiculus! I honestly don't have a problem with free healthcare so long as doctors salaries are determined not by the number of patients seen but by the quality of the services they render.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The trend I'm seeing on this thread is this:

Those that "have not" want things easier for them and want the government to step in. BUT THEY DON'T WANT QUALITY TO GO DOWN. (I'm sensing a paradox here.)

Those that "have" (from my experience) want to be in more control and do the planning to keep in more control.

So, what are our choices?

1 - Improve ourselves so that we can have the economic marketplace reward us more for the work we do.

2 - Continue to complain about the way things are and hope the government will do something about it.

One will empower and motivate us to do better for ourselves. The other is to put our power into the hands of others and wait for a (hopefully) favorable turnout.

Now, which of these 2 choices do you think the Gospel of Jesus Christ would have us do?

(Note: I won't answer that question as I'm sure that my opinion is obvious. But that's the question I pose to you.)

2 Tim 1:7

For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

political definitions change overtime and vary from culture to culture and country to country always have - I read Benson's comments as talking about stifling of freedom of action, which would be more totalitarianism than socialism in a UK or European sense. Or was he only talking to American's? since he was talking mostly about Eastern Europe I doubt that.... so what do I use as the term Liberal, Socialist, Left Wing, Right Wing, Conservative, Green etc do I use an American 2009 perspective to interpret it given as Benson died over 10 years ago, or do I use a British one for the period he was speaking or do I use the current British one?

Speculation. Who cares if it was ten years ago, Prophets words last forever. He was the Prophet of the world not just America!

Or perhaps I should ask my German and Italian LDS friends for their interpretation on the matter? As a Brit I have good media to build my opinions on is it biased and sometimes inaccurate sure but I was shocked by standard of reporting in the US know at least 2 false news reports about my country were broadcase whilst I was ther, And I have found it interesting how many American's don't know much about their history even recent history,

-Charley

President Benson was highly educated and I am positive he was more aware of history than any of us!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those that "have not" want things easier for them and want the government to step in. BUT THEY DON'T WANT QUALITY TO GO DOWN. (I'm sensing a paradox here.)

You're knowledge on this subject is obviously quite lacking. Do you have any idea on the quality of healthcare in developed nations outside the USA?

heres a quick summary from wikipedia, not the best source in the world but a good place to start.

Health care in the United States is provided by many separate legal entities. Including private and public spending, more is spent per person on health care in the United States than in any other nation in the world.[1] A study of international health care spending levels published in the health policy journal Health Affairs in the year 2000, found that while the U.S. spends more on health care than other countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the use of health care services in the U.S. is below the OECD median by most measures. The authors of the study conclude that the prices paid for health care services are much higher in the U.S.[2] In 1996, 5% of the population accounted for more than half of all costs.[3][4]

Active debate over health care reform in the United States concerns questions of a right to health care, access, fairness, efficiency, cost, and quality. The World Health Organization (WHO), in 2000, ranked the U.S. health care system as the highest in cost, first in responsiveness, 37th in overall performance, and 72nd by overall level of health (among 191 member nations included in the study).[5][6] The WHO study has been criticized in a study published in Health Affairs for its methodology and lack of correlation with user satisfaction ratings.[7] A 2008 report by the Commonwealth Fund ranked the United States last in the quality of health care among the 19 compared countries.[8] However, the U.S. is a leader in medical innovation, with three times higher per-capita spending than Europe.[9] The U.S. also has higher survival rates than most other countries for certain conditions, such as some less common cancers, but has a higher infant mortality rate than all other developed countries.[10]

As a proportion of GDP, public health care spending in the United States is larger than in most other large Western countries.[11] On top of that, there is substantial expenditure paid from private insurances. According to the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, the United States is the "only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not ensure that all citizens have coverage" (i.e. some kind of insurance).[12][13]

Now, which of these 2 choices do you think the Gospel of Jesus Christ would have us do?

(Note: I won't answer that question as I'm sure that my opinion is obvious. But that's the question I pose to you.)

2 Tim 1:7

For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

I know exactly what Jesus would do. Heal the sick... In fact, that is what HE ACTUALLY WENT AROUND DOING...

Matthew 8:3

And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.

Matthew 4:23

And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.

Mark 2

3 And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. 4 And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay. 5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. 6 But there was certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, 7 Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? 8 And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? 9 Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? 10 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) 11 I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. 12 And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.

Matthew 9:25

But when the people were put forth, he went in, and took her by the hand, and the maid arose.

Matthew 9

27 And when Jesus departed thence, two blind men followed him, crying, and saying, Thou son of David, have mercy on us. 28 And when he was come into the house, the blind men came to him: and Jesus saith unto them, Believe ye that I am able to do this? They said unto him, Yea, Lord. 29 Then touched he their eyes, saying, According to your faith be it unto you.

I could keep finding quotes to support this until the second coming, whilst your quote is vague and unrelated. Jesus put a far higher emphasis on healing the sick.

Edited by gaspah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, you want the Government to represent Jesus for all humankind? (I would suggest that that is the anti-christ.)

Look, this is a philosophical difference. I can find websites to support my philosophy because now we're ONLY talking about socialized medicine. Then you'd find ways to discredit what I post. So, I think out of the proper spirit of the forum, I won't do that.

I will simply say that a nation of people who have an "entitlement" mentality is not good for the spirit of the human race. It keeps the human spirit from asking "What can I do so I can have ____ in my life?"

As such, I particularly like the fable of the Ant and the Grasshopper. I simply don't want the Ant to have to pay for the gross negligence of the Grasshopper. If the ant FREELY gives of himself, that's different, but I don't want the ant (the hard working, saver & preparer in advance) to be TAXED or otherwise penalized for the lack of preparation by the grasshopper. Yet, the grasshopper "coulda, woulda, shoulda" prepared for this same calamities, but didn't. "In this version, the grasshopper receives government aid for his hedonistic lifestyle while the hardworking ant suffers."

The Ant and the Grasshopper - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here's one of my favorite versions of this fable:

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.

CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN , and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so ?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper, and everybody cries when they sing, 'It's Not Easy Being Green.'

Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ants' house where on the scene reporters film the group singing, 'We shall overcome.' Jesse then has the group kneel down to pray for the grasshopper's sake. Ted Kennedy and Barack Obama claim in an interview with Larry King that ants have gotten rich off the backs of the grasshoppers, and both call for an immediate tax hike on all ants to make them pay their fair share. Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

The ant is now fined for having failed to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.

Hillary gets her old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges that Bill Clinton appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients.

The ant loses the case.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant's former home, crumbles around him because he doesn't maintain it. The ant has disappeared in the snow. The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.

Edited by skippy740
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Ant and the Grasshopper isn't scripture. Also you're using 'scary stories' and 'emotional sidestepping' again with presenting facts.

You're talking as if only the unprepared suffer, where it is everyone that suffers. People think they are prepared, they have health insurance only for their claim to get rejected. Everyone suffers when healthcare is about money and not about healing the sick, health insurance companies protect their shareholders first and foremost, leaving the sick a cold second.There are countless legal loopholes that health insurance companies have used to deny treatment of sick patients who should be covered by their insurance. This is particularly the case with expensive and ongoing treatments such as cancer. Then insurance wont be given to people who will probably actually get sick, the list of conditions that disqualify someone for health insurance are endless, and if it is found that you had one of these conditions prior to applying for health insurance even if it is totally unrelated to your illness and you had no knowledge that you had it, your insurance will be canceled. Health insurance works on the exact same idea as social heathcare in the idea that funds are pooled by the larger community and the healthy people pay for the treatment of the ill, the only differences are that it is far more expensive and the level of corruption is far higher. This is directly observable by my previous post showing that despite the USA having the most expensive per person cost of healthcare they have the lowest level of health coverage in the world. All because of leeching and corrupt insurance companies feeding on the blood of the sick. It's not about "entitlement" its about the obvious failings of the current system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However not only Benson, but others have said the same things.......and in general conference, therefor it would be doctrine.....just as Nephi, Daniel, Ezekiel and John spoke of similar things that would happen in our day. I don't think these guys words are any less applicable today, or need to be taken into consideration. So I believe Bensons words still stand!

You have to remember Christ is at the head of this church, he calls the Prophet and the Prophet speaks on behalf. To remove that fact would make it confusion. Benson didn't have a split personality, he spoke of truths, truths that you and I don't know the half of, and let me tell you that I bet the Prophet of today is more aware of our government than you or I are! Socialism isn't the issue, it is the men behind it and what they want. Does Satan want to look after you? Is he in control of the government? Or is Christ? The answer is quite simple. Benson knew very well what he was talking about.....or he would have been removed from his position in an instant!

It seems to me that everybody here knows more about Socialism than the Prophet did. I tend to doubt that. This seems like the text book answer and OK fair enough. What Benson said then applies more today because I believe as THE PROPHET OF GOD he forewarned us of this happening....right? So when you meet him when we are looking at him in the judgement seat, then you can tell him that he had it a bit wrong.....not me!!! LOL

So then whats the problem? It obviously hasn't happened yet!

President Benson was highly educated and I am positive he was more aware of history than any of us!

You seem to be of a truly naive opinion: that a prophet knows everything, and knows everything about everything, and is an expert on everything. A prophet is a prophet, but he's still a man. As soon as he becomes prophet, he doesn't automatically have all knowledge of humankind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you wanted a scripture, how about this one?

Matthew 25: 14-30

14 For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.

15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.

16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.

17 And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two.

18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord’s money.

19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.

20 And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.

21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

22 He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.

23 His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

24 Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:

25 And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine.

26 His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:

27 Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.

28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.

29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.

30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

You can take this parable of scripture to fit MANY different scenarios.

Notice that the 1 talent was given to the man with 10 talents and it wasn't given to the one with 4. I wonder why?

What it tells me is that the Lord is a capitalist - in that he wants his resources used wisely and to the best of that person's ability. That's called stewardship. And if that person doesn't do well according to their abilities, then they are cast out.

Now, if you want to talk about failings in our current system... I'll agree with you that the current system isn't the best.

One of the problems is that under current law, no hospital can turn away anyone. Now that's in and of itself isn't a problem... except for the massive amounts of illegal aliens in our country. They don't have ANY health insurance and so they have to go to the ER to get their medical care. This is clogging up our system.

Now, there are two ways to handle this:

1 - create socialized medicine and get the illegals to other doctors for care (and reward criminal behavior - yes that's my bias)

2 - Deport the illegals and actually enforce our border patrol laws.

Let me state that all the examples you have stated are with countries that have better border enforcement than we do and they enforce the distribution of their healthcare much better that we do or would.

Now, I've side-stepped into another issue entirely, but it must be dealt with before implementing anything on a scale as large as our country. We simply can't have an "open-border" policy and have socialized medicine. The ECONOMICS of it would be that the US becomes the health care provider for the world... and who will pay for that? U.S. TAXPAYERS (of which I am one).

There isn't an endless supply of money. Just because the government can PRINT money doesn't mean that they can create WEALTH. They're just eroding the value of the current money in circulation, causing massive inflation and future tax increases to cover the money that they're printing.

There are a LOT of broken systems in our country. My solution is to NOT RELY on broken systems for your own economic well-being. Social Security? It's the largest legal ponzi scheme. Re-distribute wealth through the tax system to those who need support? That should be done through churches and charities. Healthcare? It's a right to those who can pay for it.

Now another problem we have is that all health insurance is SECONDARY COVERAGE to those who are eligible for Medicare. I think that's wrong, but it's a way for the insurance companies to lower their costs by coordinating coverage costs. I don't like it, but it is what it is.

The other system that's broken in our country is the Middle-Class. It's quickly evaporating. There will soon be only two groups of people in our country - the wealthy and the poor. The "middle class" jobs are being done overseas for much less than here in the USA.

But employment is not a RIGHT. It is awarded to those who have talents and it is given and kept by those who are profitable to a company. If you are not profitable... you are cast out looking for work. If you chose the route of self-employment, you are not entitled to have a profitable company. You can create a profitable company if you have the right skills. Otherwise your company will fold.

The more we can provide for ourselves as a NATION, the better our nation will be. It's not greed. It's enlightened self-interest. It's a noble ambition.

So, if you want to talk about broken systems... we have plenty. I think the solution isn't for the Government to control everything, but for individuals to know that they are empowered to take control for themselves.

Edited by skippy740
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You seem to be of a truly naive opinion: that a prophet knows everything, and knows everything about everything, and is an expert on everything. A prophet is a prophet, but he's still a man. As soon as he becomes prophet, he doesn't automatically have all knowledge of humankind.

I really don't see trulykiwi's comments in that light. I have to agree with trulykiwi in this respect: when a prophet of God, acting as such, tells us what is good and bad- and when the subject at hand is, (not so) coincidentally intimately related to his (very prestigious) professional career and training- we should listen instead of hanging to the old "the prophet isn't perfect" adage because we don't agree with his advice. The prophet is not perfect- however, he is still a prophet of God, and when speaking as such gives prophetic counsel. We dismiss his advice at our own peril.

We can't forget that Pres. Benson was also a seer and revelator- one who 'sees' things we don't, and then reveals to us those things that he sees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's interesting how political arguments turn into bashing people over the head with the scriptures here.

I dunno- I think, in this community, an appeal to scripture is the ultimate appeal to authority. It's not like skippy finagled the parable to mean something it demonstrably doesn't- his explanation makes a lot of sense to me, and it supports the public position of recent prophets of God. Skippy was also derided for not offering scriptural evidence to support his case- now he is, and he's still getting attacked for it.

The scriptures are meant to be a correctional tool as well as a source of knowledge.

Edited by Maxel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno- I think, in this community, an appeal to scripture is the ultimate appeal to authority. It's not like skippy finagled the parable to mean something it demonstrably doesn't- his explanation makes a lot of sense to me, and it supports the public position of recent prophets of God.

The scriptures are meant to be a correctional tool as well as a source of knowledge.

Yes, but in political arguments such as this, it's used as a trump card to end discussion. "After all, I have the scriptures on my side," etc. Disagreeing with the position presented suddenly becomes disagreeing with the scriptures somehow.

...which is why I'm not providing an argument to skippy's post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All because of leeching and corrupt insurance companies feeding on the blood of the sick. It's not about "entitlement" its about the obvious failings of the current system.

So, why not fix the system- why abandon it in favor of another one that, historically, has led nations down a path that We the People should not want to tread? This seems to me a cry to Big Government- 'come save us from our own failings!' Big Government would be more than happy to respond and give us what we want- for a time. Then, our freedom goes *poof*.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

-Benjamin Franklin

Edited by Maxel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and when the subject at hand is, (not so) coincidentally intimately related to his (very prestigious) professional career and training...

I fail to see how a lifelong study of agriculture relates to the evils of socialism. He was the Secretary of Agriculture, not State.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but in political arguments such as this, it's used as a trump card to end discussion. "After all, I have the scriptures on my side," etc. Disagreeing with the position presented suddenly becomes disagreeing with the scriptures somehow.

...which is why I'm not providing an argument to skippy's post.

In the past, I've seen people who are able to show how the scripture cited does not in fact validate the argument, or how it can be used differently. If the person really does have the scriptures (and therefore, God) on their side... that should be the ultimate trump card. The task for the other person is then elevated: show either how the scripture does not apply, can be applied in a different manner, or find other scripture that supports his/her viewpoint.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my take on the subject. There are two rules everyone must always remember.

1) Most government officials really do not care much for how tax money is spent because it is not their money.

2) If conditions are created where being productive is not rewarded overall productivity will decrease.

One final thought as well. Receiving gain from idle practices should not be rewarded. The Lord condemns such practices and we should do all we can to help ourselves and encourage others to earn your bread (or money) by honest work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fail to see how a lifelong study of agriculture relates to the evils of socialism. He was the Secretary of Agriculture, not State.

True; in my woke-up-an-hour-ago brain I mis-remembered that point. However, I would argue that becoming Secretary of Agriculture requires at least a minimal amount of political knowledge. And, with prophets, a little knowledge goes a long, long way. However, I recant that statement because, as you pointed out, he was Secretary of Agriculture.

However, even if he were a professional mechanic that doesn't change the fact that he was a prophet of God, acting as such to warn the people of God about an evil. Prophets warn us about some things because it is difficult to see the 'slippery slope' they lead people down- but that doesn't mean the slippery slope doesn't exist.

Edited by Maxel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, Skippy, why do you hate grasshoppers? Is it because your mom made you eat green vegetables as a kid and now you hate anything green? And speaking of hating green things, why do you hate the earth? I'll bet you own a chainsaw too, don't you? Do you really go out in the dead of night and cut down trees just so you can yell 'timber!!!' and kill sleeping squirrels? So what do you have against the owls who like to play with the squirrels you kill? And speaking of owls, since the mascot of Temple University is the Owls, why do you hate the temple? Is it because they make people present recommends to get in? Why do you hate people who you view as not being as righteous as you? Why all the hate, Skippy? Why? Why? Why? Can't you just learn to love your fellow man? If only you had love in your heart instead of all this hate, you would see that it is only fair and right for the ant to give up everything he worked so hard for and built with is own legs, and give it to the needy, even if he has to move out of his abode to do so. Where's the love? Is there any at all in your heart?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share