O'Reilly Fired by Fox

The place to discuss politics and policy issues that are not directly related to matters of faith.

Moderator: KeithE

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Jon Estes » Thu May 18, 2017 11:40 am

KeithE wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:
Sandy wrote:There are other issues requiring moral discernment besides abortion. Sanctity of life goes far beyond nine months of gestation, which is just a fraction of time for most people. Where's the passion and the advocacy for health care as a basic human right, which is also a sanctity of life issue? Where's the protection in schools from someone with a gun who decides to shoot randomly until he hits something? If you think Trump gives a rip about anything more than how to stuff his pockets and his friends', then I'd like to talk to you about buying my beachfront property in Arizona.


Other moral issues? Agree.

Health care a human right? Disagree.

From NESRI - https://www.nesri.org/programs/what-is-the-human-right-to-health-and-health-care

What is the Human Right to Health and Health Care?

The human right to health means that everyone has the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, which includes access to all medical services, sanitation, adequate food, decent housing, healthy working conditions, and a clean environment.
The human right to health guarantees a system of health protection for all.
Everyone has the right to the health care they need, and to living conditions that enable us to be healthy, such as adequate food, housing, and a healthy environment.
Health care must be provided as a public good for all, financed publicly and equitably.


If the above is how you define human right for healthcare, then I disagree. If you rally believe this then you need to support the same care for every human in the planet. Not only give support for it but work to have everyone pay for it. Is that where you want to go? Or, do you want to keep your rule to the USA? If the latter, then you rally don't believe?

Guns? The issue isn't guns but sick people. Regulating guns out of peoples hands will not remove them from those who should not have them.

Trump cares? I thin khe does but differently than you. I think better.


You can argue about whether or not health care is a “right" or not all you want. I believe it is strongly desired for any country and the better the care, the better we are meeting human need.


Keith - The argument is not is it better if they have or not. I think Sandy and I would agree on this. The issue is... is it a human right to have healthcare. If it is, someone needs to cover the cost. If it is not, then individual responsibility takes the lead.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby KeithE » Thu May 18, 2017 6:46 pm

Jon Estes wrote:
KeithE wrote:You can argue about whether or not health care is a “right" or not all you want. I believe it is strongly desired for any country and the better the care, the better we are meeting human need.


Keith - The argument is not is it better if they have or not. I think Sandy and I would agree on this. The issue is... is it a human right to have healthcare. If it is, someone needs to cover the cost. If it is not, then individual responsibility takes the lead.


You act as if one declares a service a right or not, is all there is to making a decision of the advisability of a country performing that service for people or leaving it to individual responsibility.

That is not so. If that service helps people, it should be at least considered for government performance of that service. If it can be done better (or cheaper) in the larger scale by government, it should be offered. An economy of scale often plays a role. Experience around the world demonstrates that health care be performed better (a little bit) and much cheaper by factors of 2-3.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8022
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Jon Estes » Thu May 18, 2017 7:14 pm

KeithE wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:
KeithE wrote:You can argue about whether or not health care is a “right" or not all you want. I believe it is strongly desired for any country and the better the care, the better we are meeting human need.


Keith - The argument is not is it better if they have or not. I think Sandy and I would agree on this. The issue is... is it a human right to have healthcare. If it is, someone needs to cover the cost. If it is not, then individual responsibility takes the lead.


You act as if one declares a service a right or not, is all there is to making a decision of the advisability of a country performing that service for people or leaving it to individual responsibility.

That is not so. If that service helps people, it should be at least considered for government performance of that service. If it can be done better (or cheaper) in the larger scale by government, it should be offered. An economy of scale often plays a role. Experience around the world demonstrates that health care be performed better (a little bit) and much cheaper by factors of 2-3.


If it is a human right, as Sandy says, then as Christians we must do everything to meet the need. It is pointless to argue that person "A" has a human right and we should collectively come together to meet that human right because they live in the US and then not make the same argument just as loudly for human "B" because they live under a different government system.

Again, the argument is NOT what could be best but if healthcare is a human right.

I am not acting in the way you claim. If it is a human right, as Sandy says, then as Christians we must do everything to meet the need... not try and convince me to join their parade to call it a human right. To take such a position demands action to see that human right met, not just argue about it on a discussion board.

I don't hear anyone saying we can't do more if we do it together. There are a lot of things we can do collectively that have nothing to do with human rights. We live in a fallen world and as a result, we lost a lot of rights. One of those is the right to be cared for, even if it is a good and noble thing, by others. We can take care of others, even make it a law out of compassion for those without but that doesn't make it a human right. The reverse works also. We can make a law to take the life of the unborn but that child is losing his right to live... be cared for... love... be loved...

You seem to be either trying to steer the conversation in a different direction or making a point that makes no sense to the subject Sandy and I are debating.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby KeithE » Thu May 18, 2017 10:17 pm

Sorry we are talking past each other, Jon.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8022
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Sandy » Fri May 19, 2017 11:10 am

Jon Estes wrote:We can make a law to take the life of the unborn but that child is losing his right to live... be cared for... love... be loved...


There is no such thing. There is a court ruling which allows a woman to determine whether or not to carry a pregnancy full term, or abort it prior to birth, and there are laws regulating the termination procedure, but there is no law to "take the life of the unborn." The philosophical argument for that is lengthy, but the fact of the matter is that in a democratic republic that is secular in nature, with a majority of the population outside the influence of the Christian church, not all court rulings will be consistent with Christian principles or morality, and this is certainly one of them.

But it is inconsistent to advocate for the government to protect the life of the unborn, and not advocate for the same level of government protection for that life, once born, for a lifetime. The person does not become any less valuable a human being once born, or once they reach a certain age. The principle is still the same. Whatever the reason, maintaining the quality of life is part of protecting "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." The insurance and medical care system that we have now gets us down the road toward this. If you are insured, part of what you pay in premiums goes to someone else's health care. You buy insurance against the risk that you might one day need it, and at current costs, there are few people who can afford to pay for care without it. Across the board, about two thirds of people who have insurance will wind up paying far more in premiums than they will ever get back in benefits, while a third of the people who have it will get more benefits than they pay in premiums. But the balance, after all the costs are covered, leaves most insurance companies with about half of what they collect to pay to their shareholders in dividends, not medical care for policyholders. And ultimately, insurance companies are protected from the greatest level of risk by medicare. It doesn't seem like it would be much of a leap to a single-payer, government operated system that does exactly what our system does now, except pay dividends to shareholders. It would also cover everyone, at a lower cost because the cost of indigent care, or required emergency care would not get passed along, since there wouldn't be any. That's consistent with a belief in the sanctity of human life.

Apparently Trump believes this is the way to go. He complimented the Australian prime minister on his country's wonderful health care system, "better than ours is," he said. Australia has socialized medicine. It is a good system, works well, and provides high quality care, at least equal to that of the US.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 7794
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Jon Estes » Fri May 19, 2017 1:55 pm

Sandy wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:We can make a law to take the life of the unborn but that child is losing his right to live... be cared for... love... be loved...


There is no such thing. There is a court ruling which allows a woman to determine whether or not to carry a pregnancy full term, or abort it prior to birth, and there are laws regulating the termination procedure, but there is no law to "take the life of the unborn." The philosophical argument for that is lengthy, but the fact of the matter is that in a democratic republic that is secular in nature, with a majority of the population outside the influence of the Christian church, not all court rulings will be consistent with Christian principles or morality, and this is certainly one of them.

But it is inconsistent to advocate for the government to protect the life of the unborn, and not advocate for the same level of government protection for that life, once born, for a lifetime. The person does not become any less valuable a human being once born, or once they reach a certain age. The principle is still the same. Whatever the reason, maintaining the quality of life is part of protecting "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." The insurance and medical care system that we have now gets us down the road toward this. If you are insured, part of what you pay in premiums goes to someone else's health care. You buy insurance against the risk that you might one day need it, and at current costs, there are few people who can afford to pay for care without it. Across the board, about two thirds of people who have insurance will wind up paying far more in premiums than they will ever get back in benefits, while a third of the people who have it will get more benefits than they pay in premiums. But the balance, after all the costs are covered, leaves most insurance companies with about half of what they collect to pay to their shareholders in dividends, not medical care for policyholders. And ultimately, insurance companies are protected from the greatest level of risk by medicare. It doesn't seem like it would be much of a leap to a single-payer, government operated system that does exactly what our system does now, except pay dividends to shareholders. It would also cover everyone, at a lower cost because the cost of indigent care, or required emergency care would not get passed along, since there wouldn't be any. That's consistent with a belief in the sanctity of human life.

Apparently Trump believes this is the way to go. He complimented the Australian prime minister on his country's wonderful health care system, "better than ours is," he said. Australia has socialized medicine. It is a good system, works well, and provides high quality care, at least equal to that of the US.


Let's see... you use scripture to support the right of heath care for all but ignore scripture when supporting th4bgivernments right to ok the taking the life of an unborn child.

Not sure a Christ follower should keep changing allegiance to how to treat life (born or unborn). I guess if that is the path chosen then the Christian morals and biblical worldview flip flops with the changes of culture.

The issue is not court rulings but God's Word. When the courts get it wrong, scripture trumps court. At least for the Christ follower it should.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Haruo » Fri May 19, 2017 2:01 pm

Sandy wrote:But it is inconsistent to advocate for the government to protect the life of the unborn, and not advocate for the same level of government protection for that life, once born, for a lifetime. The person does not become any less valuable a human being once born, or once they reach a certain age. The principle is still the same.

Amen.

Jon, as to your comeback about scripture trumping the courts, amen to that, too, but to quote proverbs, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Trump's policies in many areas are having a deleterious impact on the health of many born, in areas where Obama's policies did not have such an impact.
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11331
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 8:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby KeithE » Fri May 19, 2017 2:59 pm

Jon Estes wrote:The issue is not court rulings but God's Word. When the courts get it wrong, scripture trumps court. At least for the Christ follower it should.


My sense is that Trump is trumping Christ in many Christians’ minds.

On another point, imo, the bible is trumping Christ and His Spirit in many Christians’ minds. The bible is inspired by God but written by fallible human beings with real limitations of language, transmissions, translations, scientific understanding, and trans-cultural understanding to overcome if one wants to defend inerrancy or infallibility. Not itching for a fight here, but just informing you on what I have thought ever since I read the bible myself as an analytical teenager who cross-checks.

I sense conservative Christians get their black/white dogmatism from religious authority arguments and have transferred that dogmatism to the political realm.

I agree with you (Jon) on abortion (a fetus is one of the “least of these”). That does not lead me to agree with any abortion foe on other issues (health care, economics, climate, ....).
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8022
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Sandy » Fri May 19, 2017 3:50 pm

Jon Estes wrote:Let's see... you use scripture to support the right of heath care for all but ignore scripture when supporting th4bgivernments right to ok the taking the life of an unborn child.

Not sure a Christ follower should keep changing allegiance to how to treat life (born or unborn). I guess if that is the path chosen then the Christian morals and biblical worldview flip flops with the changes of culture.

The issue is not court rulings but God's Word. When the courts get it wrong, scripture trumps court. At least for the Christ follower it should.


No, that's not what I said. What I said was that if you use scripture to support your position on life beginning at conception and being protected from that point by the government, then the same scripture doesn't stop supporting that position at birth, it continues on throughout life, as long as the person lives. So it is inconsistent to support protecting unborn children because their live is sacred in God's eyes, and not continue to support that sanctity with the best health care available after they are born. If you hold a scripturally consistent position, then setting aside any aspect of health care as an economic commodity is just as Biblical and just as important as protecting the life of an unborn child.

There's an awful lot of personal interpretation and judgment involved in your last statement. I agree that when the court gets it wrong, for the Christ follower, scripture trumps court. So what does that look like, when the court has decided that a woman has the right to an abortion? Is that directive satisfied by voting for "the right guy" because he gives lip service to a position he knows he has to take to win a nomination of his political party, but lives his life like none of the rest of scripture even exists? Or does it mean that Christ followers redirect their actions from lip flapping and hollering about it, to figuring out why women get abortions, things like, oh, I don't know, poverty, or being abandoned by the guy who was involved, and providing a way to help them make a better choice?
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 7794
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Jon Estes » Fri May 19, 2017 11:53 pm

Sandy wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:Let's see... you use scripture to support the right of heath care for all but ignore scripture when supporting th4bgivernments right to ok the taking the life of an unborn child.

Not sure a Christ follower should keep changing allegiance to how to treat life (born or unborn). I guess if that is the path chosen then the Christian morals and biblical worldview flip flops with the changes of culture.

The issue is not court rulings but God's Word. When the courts get it wrong, scripture trumps court. At least for the Christ follower it should.


No, that's not what I said. What I said was that if you use scripture to support your position on life beginning at conception and being protected from that point by the government, then the same scripture doesn't stop supporting that position at birth, it continues on throughout life, as long as the person lives. So it is inconsistent to support protecting unborn children because their live is sacred in God's eyes, and not continue to support that sanctity with the best health care available after they are born. If you hold a scripturally consistent position, then setting aside any aspect of health care as an economic commodity is just as Biblical and just as important as protecting the life of an unborn child.

There's an awful lot of personal interpretation and judgment involved in your last statement. I agree that when the court gets it wrong, for the Christ follower, scripture trumps court. So what does that look like, when the court has decided that a woman has the right to an abortion? Is that directive satisfied by voting for "the right guy" because he gives lip service to a position he knows he has to take to win a nomination of his political party, but lives his life like none of the rest of scripture even exists? Or does it mean that Christ followers redirect their actions from lip flapping and hollering about it, to figuring out why women get abortions, things like, oh, I don't know, poverty, or being abandoned by the guy who was involved, and providing a way to help them make a better choice?


2 Thessalonians 3 speaks for being fiscally responsible and financially carrying your own burden. This is not implying in any way that as Christians should not be charitable and help... but it is not biblically mandated. I think it would be a no brained that if we don't work we don't eat... then... if we can't afford to pay for health insurance, we don't get it. We need to be personally responsible instead of demanding or expecting a free ride.

Maybe the discussion needs to be on the level of our compassion instead of demanding taking from others by law to meet the need.

Personal interpretation and judgment in my words? You misinterpret Acts to make it fit what it does not say and tell me how much a buffoon your President is and I'm the judgmental one.

Sheesh. This discussion has run its course. No one is going to change their mind. You want more given to cover cost... give it (oh, you want those with more to cover you when you can't). I want more kept to provide for my family... I'll keep what I must.

1 Tim. 5:8

That's my final word in this thread. You can have your final rant.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby KeithE » Sat May 20, 2017 9:00 am

Let me throw in here over 100 biblical verses asking us to help the poor, hungry, sick, orphans, widows (in general the hurting) to counter Jon’s take on 2 Thess 3.

http://home.snu.edu/~hculbert/poor.htm

OT Passages
"Do not take advantage of a widow or an orphan." Exodus 22:22
"Do not deny justice to your poor people in their lawsuits." Exodus 23:6
"During the seventh year, let the land lie unplowed and unused. Then the poor among your people may get food from it, and the wild animals may eat what they leave. Do the same with your vineyard and your olive grove." Exodus 23:11
"Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:10
"Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly." Leviticus 19:15
"When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 23:22
"If one of your countrymen becomes poor and sells some of his property, his nearest relative is to come and redeem what his countryman has sold. . . . If one of your countrymen becomes poor and is unable to support himself among you, help him as you would an alien or a temporary resident, so he can continue to live among you. . . . If one of your countrymen becomes poor among you and sells himself to you, do not make him work as a slave." Leviticus 25:25, 35, 39
"If an alien or a temporary resident among you becomes rich and one of your countrymen becomes poor and sells himself to the alien living among you or to a member of the alien's clan, he retains the right of redemption." Leviticus 25:47-48
"He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the alien, giving him food and clothing." Deuteronomy 10:18
"At the end of every three years, bring all the tithes of that year's produce and store it in your towns, so that the Levites (who have no allotment or inheritance of their own) and the aliens, the fatherless and the widows who live in your towns may come and eat and be satisfied." Deuteronomy 14:28-29
"However, there should be no poor among you, for in the land the LORD your God is giving you to possess as your inheritance, he will richly bless you." Deuteronomy 15:4
"If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the towns of the land that the LORD your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward your poor brother." Deuteronomy 15:7
"Be careful not to harbor this wicked thought: The seventh year, the year for canceling debts, is near, so that you do not show ill will toward your needy brother and give him nothing. He may then appeal to the LORD against you, and you will be found guilty of sin." Deuteronomy 15:9
"There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land." Deuteronomy 15:11
"Do not take advantage of a hired man who is poor and needy, whether he is a brother Israelite or an alien living in one of your towns." Deuteronomy 24:14
"Do not deprive the alien or the fatherless of justice, or take the cloak of the widow as a pledge." Deuteronomy 24:17
"When you are harvesting in your field and you overlook a sheaf, do not go back to get it. Leave it for the alien, the fatherless and the widow, so that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work of your hands. When you beat the olives from your trees, do not go over the branches a second time. Leave what remains for the alien, the fatherless and the widow. When you harvest the grapes in your vineyard, do not go over the vines again. Leave what remains for the alien, the fatherless and the widow." Deuteronomy 24:19-21
"'Cursed is the man who withholds justice from the alien, the fatherless or the widow.' Then all the people shall say, Amen!'" Deuteronomy 27:19
"He raises the poor from the dust and lifts the needy from the ash heap; he seats them with princes and has them inherit a throne of honor." 1 Samuel 2:8
"as the time when the Jews got relief from their enemies, and as the month when their sorrow was turned into joy and their mourning into a day of celebration. He wrote them to observe the days as days of feasting and joy and giving presents of food to one another and gifts to the poor." Esther 9:22
"When daylight is gone, the murderer rises up and kills the poor and needy; in the night he steals forth like a thief." Job 24:14
"because I rescued the poor who cried for help, and the fatherless who had none to assist him." Job 29:12
"Have I not wept for those in trouble? Has not my soul grieved for the poor?" Job 30:25
"If I have denied the desires of the poor or let the eyes of the widow grow weary." Job 31:16
"The LORD is a refuge for the oppressed, a stronghold in times of trouble." Psalm 9:9
"But the needy will not always be forgotten, nor the hope of the afflicted ever perish." Psalm 9:18
" Because of the oppression of the weak and the groaning of the needy, I will now arise, says the LORD, I will protect them from those who malign them. " Psalm 12:5
"You evildoers frustrate the plans of the poor, but the LORD is their refuge." Psalm 14:6
"This poor man called, and the LORD heard him; he saved him out of all his troubles." Psalm 34:6
"My whole being will exclaim, Who is like you, 0 LORD? You rescue the poor from those too strong for them, the poor and needy from those who rob them.'" Psalm 35:10
"The wicked draw the sword and bend the bow to bring down the poor and needy, to slay those whose ways are upright." Psalm 37:14
"Yet I am poor and needy; may the Lord think of me. You are my help and my deliverer; O my God, do not delay." Psalm 40:17
"A father to the fatherless, a defender of widows, is God in his holy dwelling." Psalm 68:5
"Your people settled in it, and from your bounty, 0 God, you provided for the poor." Psalm 68:10
"The poor will see and be glad — you who seek God, may your hearts live! The LORD hears the needy and does not despise his captive people." Psalm 69:32-33
"Yet I am poor and needy; come quickly to me, O God. You are my help and my deliverer; O LORD , do not delay." Psalm 70:5
"He will defend the afflicted among the people and save the children of the needy; he will crush the oppressor." Psalm 72:4
"For he will deliver the needy who cry out, the afflicted who have no one to help. He will take pity on the weak and the needy and save the needy from death." Psalm 72:12-13
"Do not let the oppressed retreat in disgrace; may the poor and needy praise your name." Psalm 74:21
"Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless; maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed. Rescue the weak and needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked." Psalm 82:3-4
"But he lifted the needy out of their affliction and increased their families like flocks." Psalm 107:41
"For he stands at the right hand of the needy one, to save his life from those who condemn him." Psalm 109:31
"He has scattered abroad his gifts to the poor, his righteousness endures forever; his horn will be lifted high in honor." Psalm 112:9
"He raises the poor from the dust and lifts the needy from the ash heap;" Psalm 113:7
"I will bless her with abundant provisions; her poor will I satisfy with food." Psalm 132:15
"I know that the LORD secures justice for the poor and upholds the cause of the needy." Psalm 140:12
"He upholds the cause of the oppressed and gives food to the hungry. The LORD sets prisoners free" Psalm 146:7
"The LORD watches over the alien and sustains the fatherless and the widow, but he frustrates the ways of the wicked." Psalm 146:9
"I know that the LORD secures justice for the poor and upholds the cause of the needy." Proverbs 13:23
"He who despises his neighbor sins, but blessed is he who is kind to the needy." Proverbs 14:21
"He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God." Proverbs 14:31
"The LORD tears down the proud man's house but he keeps the widow's boundaries intact." Proverbs 15:25
"Better to be lowly in spirit and among the oppressed than to share plunder with the proud." Proverbs 16:19
"He who mocks the poor shows contempt for their Maker; whoever gloats over disaster will not go unpunished." Proverbs 17:5
"He who is kind to the poor lends to the LORD, and he will reward him for what he has done." Proverbs 19:17
"If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered." Proverbs 21:13
"A generous man will himself be blessed, for he shares his food with the poor." Proverbs 22:9
"He who oppresses the poor to increase his wealth and he who gives gifts to the rich — both come to poverty." Proverbs 22:16
"Do not exploit the poor because they are poor and do not crush the needy in court." Proverbs 22:22
"A ruler who oppresses the poor is like a driving rain that leaves no crops." Proverbs 28:3
"He who gives to the poor will lack nothing, but he who closes his eyes to them receives many curses." Proverbs 28:27
"The righteous care about justice for the poor, but the wicked have no such concern." Proverbs 29:7
"those whose teeth are swords and whose jaws are set with knives to devour the poor from the earth, the needy from among mankind." Proverbs 30:14
"Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy." Proverbs 31:9
"She opens her arms to the poor and extends her hands to the needy." Proverbs 31:20
"If you see the poor oppressed in a district, and justice and rights denied, do not be surprised at such things; for one official is eyed by a higher one, and over them both are others higher still." Ecclesiastes 5:8
"Learn to do right! Seek justice, encourage the oppressed. Defend the cause of the fatherless, plead the case of the widow." Isaiah 1:17
"The LORD enters into judgment against the elders and leaders of his people: It is you who have ruined my vineyard; the plunder from the poor is in your houses. What do you mean by crushing my people and grinding the faces of the poor?' declares the Lord, the LORD Almighty." Isaiah 3:14-15
"to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless." Isaiah 10:2
"With righteousness he will judge the needy; with justice he will give decisions for the poor of the earth. He will strike the earth with the rod of his mouth; with the breath of his lips he will slay the wicked." Isaiah 11:4
"The poorest of the poor will find pasture, and the needy will lie down in safety. But your root I will destroy by famine; it will slay your survivors." Isaiah 14:30
"You have been a refuge for the poor, a refuge for the needy in his distress, a shelter from the storm and a shade from the heat. For the breath of the ruthless is like a storm driving against a wall." Isaiah 25:4
"Once more the humble will rejoice in the LORD ; the needy will rejoice in the Holy One of Israel." Isaiah 29:19
"The scoundrel's methods are wicked, he makes up evil schemes to destroy the poor with lies, even when the plea of the needy is just." Isaiah 32:7
"The poor and needy search for water, but there is none; their tongues are parched with thirst. But I the LORD will answer them; I, the God of Israel, will not forsake them." Isaiah 41:17
"Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen: to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free and break every yoke? Is it not to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter — when you see the naked, to clothe him, and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?" Isaiah 58:6-7
"If you spend yourselves in behalf of the hungry and satisfy the needs of the oppressed, then your light will rise in the darkness, and your night will become like the noonday." Isaiah 58:10
"The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners." Isaiah 61:1
"On your clothes men find the lifeblood of the innocent poor, though you did not catch them breaking in. Yet in spite of all this you say I am innocent.'" Jeremiah 2:34
"I thought, These are only the poor; they are foolish, for they do not know the way of the LORD, the requirements of their God.'" Jeremiah 5:4
"(They) have grown fat and sleek. Their evil deeds have no limit; they do not plead the case of the fatherless to win it, they do not defend the rights of the poor." Jeremiah 5:28
"if you do not oppress the alien, the fatherless or the widow and do not shed innocent blood in this place, and if you do not follow other gods to your own harm," Jeremiah 7:6
"This is what the LORD says: Do what is just and right. Rescue from the hand of his oppressor the one who has been robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the alien, the fatherless or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place." Jeremiah 22:3
"'He defended the cause of the poor and needy, and so all went well. Is that not what it means to know me?" declares the LORD." Jeremiah 22:16
"Sing to the LORD! Give praise to the LORD! He rescues the life of the needy from the hands of the wicked." Jeremiah 20:13
"Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy." Ezekiel 16:49
"He does not oppress anyone, but returns what he took in pledge for a loan. He does not commit robbery but gives his food to the hungry and provides clothing for the naked." Ezekiel 18:7
"The people of the land practice extortion and commit robbery; they oppress the poor and needy and mistreat the alien, denying them justice." Ezekiel 22:29
"This is what the LORD says: For three sins of Israel, even for four, I will not turn back [my wrath]. They sell the righteous for silver, and the needy for a pair of sandals. They trample on the heads of the poor as upon the dust of the ground and deny justice to the oppressed. Father and son use the same girl and so profane my holy name.'" Amos 2:6-7
"Hear this word, you cows of Bashan on Mount Samaria, you women who oppress the poor and crush the needy and say to your husbands, Bring us some drinks!'" Amos 4:1
"Hear this, you who trample the needy and do away with the poor of the land." Amos 8:4
"Buying the poor with silver and the needy for a pair of sandals, selling even the sweepings with the wheat." Amos 8:6
"Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the alien or the poor. In your hearts do not think evil of each other." Zechariah 7:10
" So I will come near to you for judgment. I will be quick to testify against sorcerers, adulterers and perjurers, against those who defraud laborers of their wages, who oppress the widows and the fatherless, and deprive aliens of justice, but do not fear me,' says the LORD Almighty." Malachi 3:5

NT Passages
"Jesus answered, If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.'" Matthew 19:21
"For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in." Matthew 25:35
"They devour widows' houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. Such men will be punished most severely." Mark 12:40
"The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because He has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed." Luke 4:18
"So he replied to the messengers, Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor.'" Luke 7:22 [ E-book: The Kingdom strikes back ]
"Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys." Luke 12:33
"But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind." Luke 14:13
"When Jesus heard this, he said to him, You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.'" Luke 18:22
"Beware of the teachers of the law . . . They devour your widows' houses . . . Such men will be punished severely." Luke 20:46-47
"'Why wasn't this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year's wages.' He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it." John 12:5
"In Joppa there was a disciple named Tabitha (which, when translated, is Dorcas), who was always doing good and helping the poor." Acts 9:36
"Cornelius stared at him in fear. What is it, Lord?' he asked. The angel answered, Your prayers and gifts to the poor have come up as a memorial offering before God.'" Acts 10:4
"After an absence of several years, I came to Jerusalem to bring my people gifts for the poor and to present offerings." Acts 24:17
"On the contrary: If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.'" Romans 12:20
"For Macedonia and Achaia were pleased to make a contribution for the poor among the saints in Jerusalem." Romans 15:26
"All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do." Galatians 2:10
"Give proper recognition to those widows who are really in need." 1 Timothy 5:3
"Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world." James 1:27
"Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in shabby clothes also comes in. If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, 'Here's a good seat for you,' but say to the poor man, 'You stand there' or 'Sit on the floor by my feet,' have you not discriminated among yourselves and becomes judges with evil thoughts? Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom He promised those who love Him? But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court?" James 2:2-6
"If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth." 1 John 3:17-18


If you must find a harmonization between 2 Thess 3 (vs 6-15 gives immediate context, underlines mine) and the above
6 In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers and sisters, to keep away from every believer who is idle and disruptive and does not live according to the teaching[a] you received from us. 7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you, 8 nor did we eat anyone’s food without paying for it. On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you. 9 We did this, not because we do not have the right to such help, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you to imitate. 10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”

11 We hear that some among you are idle and disruptive. They are not busy; they are busybodies. 12 Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the food they eat. 13 And as for you, brothers and sisters, never tire of doing what is good.

14 Take special note of anyone who does not obey our instruction in this letter. Do not associate with them, in order that they may feel ashamed. 15 Yet do not regard them as an enemy, but warn them as you would a fellow believer.


one can easily and naturally interpret the Thessalonians passage as applying to idle believers only. So the consistent inerrantist should approve of helping poor, hungry, sick as long as the receivers are not idle, unwilling to work believers. So modify ObamaCare to disapprove any idle, unwilling to work Christian (TIC). I won’t go there, but as absurd as that sounds, I would think the inerrantist would have to. That would leave the inerrantist to still be mandated to help all the sick with the exception of idle, unwilling believers.

True, these over 100 verses do not “mandate” government be generous to the poor, hungry, or sick, but it does mandate the people of God to be generous. I have to believe God is happy when He sees collections of people (e.g. churches, governments, charitable organizations) helping each other as opposed to saying ‘no work, no eat’ or as Jon has generalized it to ‘not enough money, no health care”.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8022
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Sandy » Sat May 20, 2017 10:15 pm

Jon Estes wrote:2 Thessalonians 3 speaks for being fiscally responsible and financially carrying your own burden. This is not implying in any way that as Christians should not be charitable and help... but it is not biblically mandated. I think it would be a no brained that if we don't work we don't eat... then... if we can't afford to pay for health insurance, we don't get it. We need to be personally responsible instead of demanding or expecting a free ride.

Maybe the discussion needs to be on the level of our compassion instead of demanding taking from others by law to meet the need.

Personal interpretation and judgment in my words? You misinterpret Acts to make it fit what it does not say and tell me how much a buffoon your President is and I'm the judgmental one.

Sheesh. This discussion has run its course. No one is going to change their mind. You want more given to cover cost... give it (oh, you want those with more to cover you when you can't). I want more kept to provide for my family... I'll keep what I must.

1 Tim. 5:8

That's my final word in this thread. You can have your final rant.


As expected, and typical, a single passage is lifted out of context, and applied apart from it. Many in the church at Thessalonica believed that the return of Christ was imminent, and that working was no longer a necessity. The likelihood that the church was still sharing communally certainly led to inequities within the body because of those who had decided that working was no longer necessary. I've gathered that Jon's perspective is that anyone who doesn't have the same means he does is a deadbeat just looking for a handout, which is not anywhere near realistic in terms of either the culture at large, or his perception of it.

If you want a health care system where everyone pays for what they get, then you are going to have to be OK with half of what you pay simply being transferred into someone else's pocket as profit, because the providers and insurers will take about that much. If you'd rather keep more to provide for your family, then this paradise for corporate insurers that we have now won't be the way to go. You'd keep at least 50% more under a single payer, government operated system, even with some of that going to those who work hard, but still can't afford the cost.

I'd think Christians would be a little more sympathetic to the plight of others. I remember the acronym JOY, that was always shouted at camp and VBS, Jesus first, others second, yourself last, but over the course of a lifetime, what I've seen is the church grow into a big mutual admiration society, large congregations that are smorgasbords and cafeteria lines of "gimme gimme" and the easy dismissal of the obligation to meet the needs of others by relegating them to the status of deadbeats looking for a handout. That's what I learned out of this conversation. Political expediency and money trump Christ.

]
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 7794
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Rvaughn » Sun May 21, 2017 12:08 am

KeithE wrote:Let me throw in here over 100 biblical verses asking us to help the poor, hungry, sick, orphans, widows (in general the hurting) to counter Jon’s take on 2 Thess 3.

KeithE wrote:The bible is inspired by God but written by fallible human beings with real limitations of language, transmissions, translations, scientific understanding, and trans-cultural understanding to overcome...
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Rvaughn » Sun May 21, 2017 12:11 am

Interestingly enough, I just wrote a piece on 2 Thessalonians 3:10. I won't take the time to rehash it; if anyone wants to read it, it is found here:
http://baptistsearch.blogspot.com/2017/05/no-work-not-eat.html

Isn't the real issue about what and how much role government and taxation is proper in helping the poor and needy, rather than it being a question of whether Christians should help others?
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby KeithE » Sun May 21, 2017 8:47 am

My morning tweet:

I appreciate Sandy's and RLVaughn’s suggested background for 2 Thess 3:6-15 (which includes the much misused verse 10), namely that the Thessanolikan Christians were living in a time when they believed the second coming was coming soon (I have heard this suggestion in con (my upbringing), mod (CBF), and lib (Spong) preaching). That background is a reasonable guess as is the guess that they were living in a communal life ala Acts. But neither background is demanded.

I’ll note that neither assumed background excuses the attitude of the Anti-Government-Social-Program views of Trump-Ryan-others (those with The Attitude).

RL is right to conclude:

1. “If any would not work, neither should he eat” is a valid principle for today, and should be applied in the proper circumstances.
2. “If any would not work, neither should he eat” is not a club with which to beat the poor, and does not absolve us from helping those in need.
3. “If any would not work, neither should he eat” at the least means meddlesome Christians should not be aided and abetted and encouraged on their way by the good will of the Christian community.


1. I too believe that “tough love” needs to be applied in some circumstances (but only after much listening prayer). It can be a help to push the employable lazy into employment or other constructive activity. But when a person is sick, is not the time to use “tough love” - that would be cruel. And to let an individual be subject to bankruptcy by not having insurance is also cruel. Btw, the “tough love” application to the unemployed is much more likely to be successful if we have jobs - where's the infrastructure program??

2. Exactly.

3. This passage also includes a warning about meddlesome Christians (be they self-sufficient or not). I read this as a warning against personal meddlesome activity like judgmentalism (a frequent theme of Jesus). Not really relevant to this health care discussion unless you believe Paul was instructing the Thessanolikans to not “meddle” with the governing authorities (quite a stretch).

RL asked:
Isn't the real issue about what and how much role government and taxation is proper in helping the poor and needy, rather than it being a question of whether Christians should help others?


The New Testament is fairly silent on what specifically governments should and should not do about social needs. But I believe what is recommended for people (care for the poor/sick/otherwise marginalized) is recommended for government as well. OT is rife with instructions meant for the Israelites as a nation.

Here's a good discussion about the biblical role of government.

Some extracts:
But I want to suggest that what size the government should be is the wrong question. A more useful discussion would be about the purposes of government and whether ours is fulfilling them. So let's look at what the Bible says.


The words of Paul in the 13th chapter of Romans are perhaps the most extensive teaching in the New Testament about the role and purposes of government. Paul says those purposes are twofold: to restrain evil by punishing evildoers and to serve peace and orderly conduct by rewarding good behavior. Civil authority is designed to be "God's servant for your good" (13:4). Today we might say "the common good" is to be the focus and goal of government.


So the purpose of government, according to Paul, is to protect and promote. Protect from the evil and promote the good, and we are even instructed to pay taxes for those purposes. So to disparage government per se — to see government as the central problem in society — is simply not a biblical position.


"Hate evil, love good; maintain justice in the courts" (Amos 5:15 NIV).


Jeremiah, speaking of King Josiah, said, "He defended the cause of the poor and needy, and so all went well."


Psalm 72 begins with a prayer for kings or political leaders: "Give the king your justice, O God, and your righteousness to a king's son. May he judge your people with righteousness, and your poor with justice. May the mountains yield prosperity for the people, and the hills, in righteousness. May he defend the cause of the poor of the people, give deliverance to the needy, and crush the oppressor."


Ron Sider has said:
The biblical understanding of justice clearly includes both procedural and distributive aspects. That the procedures must be fair is clear in the several texts that demand unbiased courts (Exodus 23:2-8; Leviticus 19:15; Deuteronomy 1:17; 10:17-19). That distributive justice (i.e., fair outcomes) is also a central part of justice is evident not just from the hundreds of texts about God's concern for the poor ... but also in the meaning of the key Hebrew words for justice (mishpat and tsedaqah).

Time and again the prophets use mishpat and tsedaqah to refer to fair economic outcomes. Immediately after denouncing Israel and Judah for the absence of justice, the prophet Isaiah condemns the way rich and powerful landowners have acquired all the land by pushing out small farmers (Isaiah 5:7-9). It is important to note that even though in this text the prophet does not say the powerful acted illegally, he nevertheless denounces the unfair outcome.


Notice that Sider says "fair outcomes" and not "equal outcomes." The political right's continuing accusation against all who would hold governments accountable for justice is that we are really aiming for equal outcomes from public policy. But that simply is not true.

Indeed, the historical attempts by many Marxist governments to create equal outcomes have dramatically shown the great dangers of how the concentration of power in a few government hands has led to totalitarian results. The theological reason for that is the presence and power of sin, and the inability of such fallible human creatures to create social utopias on earth.


So fair outcomes, and not equal ones, are the goal of governments.


What is “fair” I can hear William saying. It is not the outcome of laissez-faire economic theory or Marxist theory (both have proved to be inadequate).

The radically anti-government ideology of the current right wing Tea Party ideology is simply contrary to a more biblical view of government, the need for checks and balances, the sinfulness of too much concentrated power in either the government or the market, the responsibilities we have for our neighbor and the God-ordained purposes of government — in addition to the churches — in serving the common good and, in particular, to protect the poor.


That was more than “a tweet”.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8022
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Rvaughn » Sun May 21, 2017 10:38 pm

KeithE wrote:I appreciate Sandy's and RLVaughn’s suggested background for 2 Thess 3:6-15 (which includes the much misused verse 10), namely that the Thessanolikan Christians were living in a time when they believed the second coming was coming soon (I have heard this suggestion in con (my upbringing), mod (CBF), and lib (Spong) preaching). That background is a reasonable guess as is the guess that they were living in a communal life ala Acts. But neither background is demanded.
Just a remark on this briefly, and hopefully time for more on the broader topic later. I agree that these (views on the second coming & church communal life) are only reasonable possibilities and not necessary to make sense of the verse.

One thing I think would be valuable for discussion of the topic would be for Christians who agree on helping others to not rail on each other when differing on what form helping others ought to take.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby KeithE » Mon May 22, 2017 2:14 pm

Rvaughn wrote:
KeithE wrote:I appreciate Sandy's and RLVaughn’s suggested background for 2 Thess 3:6-15 (which includes the much misused verse 10), namely that the Thessanolikan Christians were living in a time when they believed the second coming was coming soon (I have heard this suggestion in con (my upbringing), mod (CBF), and lib (Spong) preaching). That background is a reasonable guess as is the guess that they were living in a communal life ala Acts. But neither background is demanded.
Just a remark on this briefly, and hopefully time for more on the broader topic later. I agree that these (views on the second coming & church communal life) are only reasonable possibilities and not necessary to make sense of the verse.

One thing I think would be valuable for discussion of the topic would be for Christians who agree on helping others to not rail on each other when differing on what form helping others ought to take.

OK I won't rail against the “form” of help, but when the help itself is cut, I'll continue to point out it’s cruelty and unChrist-like nature. Heath care, food, shelter for the poor (and guaranteed jobs for the abled-bodied or able-minded) should be covered in this rich country - that would begin to “Make America Great Again”.

Other “forms" to meet the same goal (e.g. guaranteed workfare, universal health care), I'm all ears.

Instead what we have is Trump's budget to cut $800B over 10 years from Medicaid in addition to stopping the Medicaid expansion with no additional aid to states to pick up the pieces (millions of families subject to bankruptcy or no care). Nor is there any infrastructure or jobs programs in the works (as promised) that may help the unemployed find a viable life.

Sorry if that is “railing” but the Trump proposed actions (currently the AHCA, and tax plan) certainly looks after the rich by cutting their taxes (AHCA tax break to those over $250K/year income stands at $600B/10 years lost revenues plus the tax plan cuts the top tax rate from 39.6% to 35%). Enough aid to the rich - the money board has been tilted to the rich and corporations for 40 years already - see plots here and comment. That would be "Making America More of an Oligarchy than it already is”.

Meanwhile the Trump budget decimates most social programs to the tune of $1.7T over 10 years - more details on his budget coming this week. Should also hear from the CBO on the new GOP Health Plan (AHCA) supposedly Wednesday.

Happy times for the rich; middle/lower class to be plunged into greater poverty.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8022
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Rvaughn » Mon May 22, 2017 10:26 pm

The main thing I wanted to add is re "No. 3."
“If any would not work, neither should he eat” at the least means meddlesome Christians should not be aided and abetted and encouraged on their way by the good will of the Christian community.
I think this principle could properly apply to the class of folks who have both the ability and opportunity to work and deliberately choose not to, but rather just sponge off of others -- and not to just Christians/church members who do so. On the other hand, a person who is able to work but can't get a job could use some help. Even the able opportune lazy sponger would not be left to wallow in his blood on the side of the road when the Good Samaritan passed by.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby KeithE » Mon May 22, 2017 11:12 pm

Rvaughn wrote:The main thing I wanted to add is re "No. 3."
“If any would not work, neither should he eat” at the least means meddlesome Christians should not be aided and abetted and encouraged on their way by the good will of the Christian community.
I think this principle could properly apply to the class of folks who have both the ability and opportunity to work and deliberately choose not to, but rather just sponge off of others -- and not to just Christians/church members who do so. On the other hand, a person who is able to work but can't get a job could use some help. Even the able opportune lazy sponger would not be left to wallow in his blood on the side of the road when the Good Samaritan passed by.


Not what I think "meddlesome” means.

But taking your definition (meddlesome = those who refuse to work), did you men to say “should” instead of the red “would”? If so, I will agree with the above. That Good Samaritan could be our government prodding and enabling people to take jobs that can benefit society (including training). But to just ignore is sub Christian, imo. The day churches meet those needs, I’ll call off the call for governmental action.

And many people are not either abled-bodied or abled-minded enough to work; they need to be cared for and not thought of a “lazy bums” but as unfortunates.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8022
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Haruo » Mon May 22, 2017 11:46 pm

And then there is automation. And globalisation. And a horde of other factors that make it appear to me that the standard work week should probably be no more than ten hours.
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11331
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 8:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Jon Estes et al re abortion

Postby Stephen Fox » Tue May 23, 2017 6:26 am

In his biography of President Carter, Randall Balmer offers many names, James Dunn and several others who were frustrated at the use of abortion as a political weapon in the arsenal by the far right to further mobilize Pressler, Adrian Rogers and other SBC fundies and upend Carter's conservative base in 1976.

And I have linked innumerable times on this board what I consider the definitive piece on the politics of abortion, Stansell's Holy War in the New Republic.

I respect the gut felt convictions of many on the issue.

What I think is of the Devil is how the abortion issue has been weaponized in political strategies. The Bushes in particular are most hypocritical on the issue and Trump is beyond hypocrisy.

The politics of abortion are major political building block keeping Alabama in the 19th Century.

Stansell said the Right has perfected the issue, one a long time chocked full of "MENDACITY".

fOR THE umpteenth time, Mendacity is not a Christian virtue
"I'm the only sane {person} in here." Doyle Hargraves, Slingblade
"Midget, Broom; Helluva campaign". Political consultant, "Oh, Brother..."


http://www.foxofbama.blogspot.com or google asfoxseesit
Stephen Fox
 
Posts: 8826
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 9:29 pm

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby KeithE » Tue May 23, 2017 11:00 am

Haruo wrote:And then there is automation. And globalisation. And a horde of other factors that make it appear to me that the standard work week should probably be no more than ten hours.


I doubt that but other countries have moved to less than 30 hours a week effectively (namely Netherlands, Germany, Norway, Denmark, France).

Image

More up to date DATA here.

Germany works an average of 26 hours/week and it is a very prosperous country with less poverty (6.1%) than the US (13.5%).

Many but not all of those near the bottom of the list in terms of hours worked are (not surprisingly) the happiest.

Ranking of Happiness 2014-2016 (top 20)
1. Norway
2. Denmark
3. Iceland
4. Switzerland
5. Finland
6. Netherlands
7. Canada
8. New Zealand
9. Australia
10. Sweden
11. Israel
12. Costa Rica
13. Austria
14. United States
15. Ireland
16. Germany
17. Belgium
18. Luxembourg
19. United Kingdom
20. Chile
Source: 2017 Happiest Countries

As part of the Discovery Center’s efforts at ministry development, I have two individuals (a black part time minister and a DMIN candidate who has been to prison and therefore cannot find ministerial work - he is an excellent sermons giver) that are just starting to develop a ministry to help those people who are recently released from prison - most probably minor drug offending blacks. We plan to be an “incubator” for such ministries teams, recruiting helpers and funders and holding weekly meetings to discuss progress starting in August. They tell me most releasees are HS grads, but they are struggling to find any job - turned away when prison is mentioned. They have mentioned some positive examples (3 who they hope to elicit “testimony” from as the black minister says) who have gotten themselves out of poverty by working 2 or 3 jobs at near min wages to get there.

Yesterday, I saw gain a lady at McDonald’s (about 45 years old, black, attractive, articulate, “manager” at McD's) that I have talked with several times over the years and she confirmed that she is still working at McDonalds and Publix just to make ends meet; she is single (kids are grown, divorced as I remember). She has been doing so for over 20 years.

So while other countries are making progress at lowering the necessary hours worked to make a living, we have many of our working poor that are having to work more than 40 hours to survive.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8022
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Jon Estes et al re abortion

Postby KeithE » Tue May 23, 2017 11:12 am

Stephen Fox wrote:In his biography of President Carter, Randall Balmer offers many names, James Dunn and several others who were frustrated at the use of abortion as a political weapon in the arsenal by the far right to further mobilize Pressler, Adrian Rogers and other SBC fundies and upend Carter's conservative base in 1976.

And I have linked innumerable times on this board what I consider the definitive piece on the politics of abortion, Stansell's Holy War in the New Republic.

I respect the gut felt convictions of many on the issue.

What I think is of the Devil is how the abortion issue has been weaponized in political strategies. The Bushes in particular are most hypocritical on the issue and Trump is beyond hypocrisy.

The politics of abortion are major political building block keeping Alabama in the 19th Century.

Stansell said the Right has perfected the issue, one a long time chocked full of "MENDACITY".

fOR THE umpteenth time, Mendacity is not a Christian virtue

I too detest the politicization of the abortion issue but not so much as to become Pro-Choice.

Definition of mendacious
: given to or characterized by deception or falsehood or divergence from absolute truth

Sounds like Trump,imo.

For the sake of completeness:: Stansell's Holy War April 6, 2011 published by New Republic. Leads off with Mike Pence.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8022
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Rvaughn » Tue May 23, 2017 1:02 pm

KeithE wrote:Not what I think "meddlesome” means.
Meddlesome was my word choice. According to a Greek Bible Online with lexicon that I used, busybodies is "περιεργαζομένους: [meaning] 1) to bustle about uselessly, to busy one's self about trifling, needless, useless matters 1a) used apparently of a person officiously inquisitive about other's affairs." (So I don't think meddlesome is inappropriate either.) My point is to try to understand what might be the larger principle we take away from this, or must we be pinpoint specific? Some persons I know who do not work use their time to bother others, sponge off others, lie to and deceive others. Seems that shouldn't be too far away from the sense of it.
KeithE wrote:But taking your definition (meddlesome = those who refuse to work), did you men to say “should” instead of the red “would”? If so, I will agree with the above. That Good Samaritan could be our government prodding and enabling people to take jobs that can benefit society (including training). But to just ignore is sub Christian, imo. The day churches meet those needs, I’ll call off the call for governmental action.
I meant to say "would" but did not write the sentence well. The type of Good Samaritan of whom Jesus spoke would stop and help that person, any person, he found wallowing on the side of the road in his or her own blood -- even when he might not feed that person but rather exhort that person to go to work if that person were like the busybodies of 2 Thessalonians chapter 3.
KeithE wrote:And many people are not either abled-bodied or abled-minded enough to work; they need to be cared for and not thought of a “lazy bums” but as unfortunates.
I did not say otherwise.
Last edited by Rvaughn on Tue May 23, 2017 3:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Chris » Tue May 23, 2017 2:32 pm

Timothy Bonney wrote:How many male employees of Fox will be left if the get rid of all the those committing sexual misconduct?


Where's the LIKE button!
Jesus paid the price for me and everybody.
Chris
 
Posts: 4153
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 8:29 pm
Location: Newport News, VA

Previous

Return to Politics and Public Policy Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest