Est. May 2008

28 January, 2015

Please Do

This ought to be interesting.
Democrats in Congress Urged to Be 'Bold' Like Republicans With God Talk; Assert Christian Faith Supports Gov't Funding for Planned Parenthood, Welfare
'Interesting' in that I'll be educational to see just how far they're willing to twist Scripture to justify their governmental overreach.

Reps. Sheila Jackson Lee, R-Texas, Emanuel Cleaver, D-Missouri, and James Clyburn, D-South Carolina, claimed that the biblical call to "feed" and "clothe" the needy, has influenced their continual advocacy for welfare assistance programs like the food stamp program[.]

-snip-

Cleaver, who cited Matthew 25 in his explanation of how the Bible calls on people to cater to the poor, said the biblical call for charity is why it is imperative for the government to provide poor women with the medical and family planning services they need, through public funding to the abortion giant Planned Parenthood.

-snip-

Compelled by the second chapter of James, Clyburn has also been a strong advocate for providing for the indigent.

"If your brother or sister comes to you unrelenting, it is not enough to tell them to go in faith, you have to feed them you have to clothe them because faith without works is dead," Clyburn said in quoting the Scripture.

I don't think these folks realize it, but their very words show the dissonance of their views: Representative Cleaver, in one breath, says that 'the Bible calls on people to cater to the poor'; in the next breath he says, ' it is imperative for the government to provide poor women with the medical and family planning services they need'. In the same manner, Representative Clyburn says, '"If your brother or sister comes to you unrelenting, it is not enough to tell them to go in faith, you have to feed them you have to clothe them because faith without works is dead[.]"', yet works tirelessly to have the government provide for them.

With Representative Cleaver's referral to Matthew 25, I can only imagine he's speaking of verses 31 to 46, where we read (emphases mine):
“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’

"Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
Do you, gentle reader, see any indication within that passage that Jesus was talking about government taking money and distributing it to the poor? Neither do I. What I see is Jesus telling individuals that it's their responsibility to provide assistance to the poor.

Oh, and I also don't see anything in Jesus' words indicating that Rome ought to use tax money to provide 'medical care', whether it included abortion or not.

Notice, too, that James isn't talking about government charity – he, too, is talking about individuals providing for the poor; in fact, he (like every other New Testament epistle writer) is directing his words at believers and no one else.

Scripturally speaking, provision for the less-fortunate among us is an individual responsibility: we are called to provide, but how much, what type, and how often (among other things) are all voluntary. By inserting government into charity, it ceases to be charity because it is no longer the responsibility of the individual – it becomes the responsibility of government – and because it ceases to be voluntary – paying taxes isn't voluntary, it's required, and it's from those tax monies the government provides their 'charity'.

And while we're on the subject, yes, Jesus did say we were to pay our taxes. But Roman taxes went to improve the lives of Romans (particularly the Emperor, the statesmen of the empire, and the military), not the people in the provinces. Caesar didn't pay for food for indigent Gauls, houses for poor Thracians, or clothes for Egyptians. Neither did he pay for 'women's health' – whether it included abortions or not – or, for that matter, the health of anyone outside the military and the Emperor.

So, as I said, please, Democrats, do tell us how Scripture informs you that government is supposed to be in the charity business, and that it ought to pay to feed, clothe, house, and provide medical care for everyone. Oh, and don't forget to include how Scripture informs you it's acceptable to dismember unborn babies and have them torn from their mothers' wombs when they're deemed 'unpersons'.

Go right ahead.

No comments: