Prolife And Hypocrisy

[The_Patriot21]

10 minutes ago, LadyKay said:

Why is everyone so upset with what I have said? If you are one who cares about the needs of the poor and taking care of them; then I am not calling you a hypocrite. Good for you I say, as you are doing what needs to be done and should be done. I call hypocrisy on those who refuse to help others. On law makers who proclaim to be pro-life then cut food and care for the poor. That is who I am calling out. Not the good people who are pro-life and care for the good of others. But to those who say I am pro-life but I am sick of supporting the ones who can't support themselves.

Because of your false assumption-your claim that if we don't support welfare, then we don't want to help the poor, and its simply not true 

[Ezra]

4 hours ago, LadyKay said:

I hear a lot of talk from people calling themselves Christians about how they are pro-life and against the right to choice abortion.

That is the correct interpretation of pro-life, which also means anti-abortion.

4 hours ago, LadyKay said:

But then these same people complain about "their" tax money going to people on welfare and on food stamps. 

That's because welfare is a much abused system both by the politicians as well as many recipients, who are able-bodied but choose to live off welfare.  BTW there is also corporate welfare, which is an even bigger scam, but hardly gets noticed because both the politicians and the media want to perpetuate it.

[Churchmouse]

The argument put forth by the OP is a logical fallacy called a Non Sequitur, meaning, Does not follow.The idea that if a person favors life than they must, by nature agree with supporting that life in what may very well fraudulent circumstances is absurd.  Life does not flourish  by being tied down to the good graces of the government, who have time and time again shown it's indifference to it. Charity is what the entitlement program is all about, but government charity is not to help anyone except to imprison those within it to a perpetual existence of servitude. It offers just enough to cling to life without allowing the precipitant to live and punishes those within its system for trying to remove themselves from it. It is the equivalent of placing an bean counter in charge of you prosperity and charging them with saving as much money as possible without killing you.

 

Charity is to provide a step up. Entitlements just provide a noose with a feeding tube.

 

[ayin jade]

4 hours ago, LadyKay said:

What is has to do with is how are babies born to people who can not afford them cared for? Perhaps this post was mostly about the people in office. Whom get praised by us for being pro-life, yet they want to cut food stamps and other government programs. While their are some who may very well be cheating the system, when these programs get cut; they get cut for all. Not just the ones cheating but the ones who are truly in need. You say abortion is immoral. Would taking food away from the hungry be immoral as well? I am not supporting abortion here. I am wanting people to see things for the way they really are. Sure our law makers care about the unborn. But many of them care less once they have been born. Out of the same mouth that comes the phrase "I am pro-life" Comes the speech that they will cut food stamps and care for the poor! I am saying we as Christians need to be aware of these things. And not be so quick to give our support to someone in office just because they proclaim to be pro-life. There is more to being pro-life then just caring about the unborn.

The bible says that he who doesnt work should not eat. Meaning someone who can work but doesnt, shouldnt get handouts. 

As for moms who dont get abortions ... they can give the kid up for adoption. How many families are on 2 year plus waiting lists to get a child? And quite frankly, if they cant afford to have a kid, they shouldnt be having sex to start with. 

So while we help out those who truly need it, we shouldnt be giving money to those who game the system. 

Do you really think the money given by the govt to people helps them in the long run? Shouldnt we be helping them out of poverty? 

My husband grew up in dire poverty, in the 19th poorest county in the entire country. His family had commodities, freebies given out to those in the worst poverty. He was taught that any job was better than nothing. Each one of his brothers and sisters, as well as he, went to school and ended up with good paying careers. They worked hard to get ahead. Many, if not the majority, of those on welfare should work hard too and get out of poverty. Instead there are generations of families living on welfare. We have lost that work ethic in this country. Now its an entitlement mentality.

[ayin jade]

2 hours ago, LadyKay said:

Why is everyone so upset with what I have said? 

Read your first post. And your second post. They come across as lashing out. 

[LadyKay]

14 minutes ago, ayin jade said:

They come across as lashing out. 

I've seen others do the same here. Perhaps it does not work for me when I do it. I mean well with what I say.

[ayin jade]

7 minutes ago, LadyKay said:

I've seen others do the same here. Perhaps it does not work for me when I do it. I mean well with what I say.

Perhaps it might take the sting out of it if you start with something like "I dont mean this as criticism of anyone here but something Ive noticed that concerns me is ..." then express your topic. That might help in getting a good discussion started instead of folks feeling defensive. 

[Churchmouse]

There is another thing, I had not thought of about the welfare state that i hope no one else has thought of. Not because it will benefit me in any way I just don't want to steel someone elses thunder. we all need to be acknowledged what we add to this place. We are all fearfully and wonderfully made and we all have our own bits and pieces of wisdom that the lord has given uo and we deserve the thankfull appriciations for the efforts here. We are all humbled by God almighty. Aman.

With the advent of the welfare system the government removed one of our greatest strengths, which was the gift of compassion as we were no longer needed to feed and cloth the sick and by that show others the love of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior. They created a false image to worship, hoping that the government would give them what they need for the body to survive and simply forgot about the soul.

Now, they could stay shut up in their homes and watch life pass them by, hoping against hope that some bureaucrat doesn't loose the paperwork needed for their next monthly payment. They were removed from society and lost the link of humanity that had always bound us together.  If I was to place a beginning point on the birth of radical partisanship, I would place it on the day some people found out they no longer needed others. They needed the government.

[Dennis1209]

As for myself, for many of the reasons previously listed and more.

The nanny state has replaced the church, community, family and charitable organizations that once helped the needy. High taxation and government welfare programs greatly diminish my ability to feed, clothe, house, educate and provide for my own family's needs. It now normally takes two working parents to make ends meet, where previously it only took the head of household working. What do you suppose caused that?

I'm morally, legally and financially responsible for myself and my family and the decisions I make. I planned my family and the number of children I had, and my ability to support them was a factor. I'm not responsible nor do I care to participate in a system that provides all of a persons needs, generation after generation. If I wanted to live in a socialist country, I wouldn't have went to Vietnam, spent 20 years in the military. I would have moved to a socialism / communist country where my needs would be met and I'd be a happy camper. Veterans don't serve, fight and die for communism / socialism and sloth.

Talk about a contradiction of words, my Federal retirement I also paid into and earned is officially called a 'benefit'. All welfare programs are officially called 'entitlements'.

What more can the government give to the non-deserving, a hefty COLA? They get free or reduced housing (section 8), free food (WIC, food stamp, etc.), Obamacare, utility assistance, even free cell phones! Maybe we can give them a free college education funded by taxpayers (oops).

How many hard working blue collar tax payers see the person(s) in front of them in the checkout line buy expensive food, steaks, snacks you can't even afford, and pay with food coupons, now EBT / debit cards. Then hop into their late model / new car that you wish you could afford, and go directly across the street to purchase alcohol and smokes. The system is gamed and abused by the majority participating, and it continues generation after generation with no relief in sight.

I'd list a lot of documentation why our founding fathers knew government welfare in any form was a bad idea and prohibited, but it would be too time consuming. Suffice it to say that, they wouldn't even support government financial assistance for Revolutionary War widows or war orphans.

Charity is not charity when your earned money (labor) is 'stolen' from you by force of law (taxation), and redistributed to the politicians choice of beneficiaries (votes). Forced compassion by force of law is not compassion. 

Edited October 10, 2016 by Dennis1209

[ayin jade]

2 hours ago, Dennis1209 said:

How many hard working blue collar tax payers see the person(s) in front of them in the checkout line buy expensive food, steaks, snacks you can't even afford, and pay with food coupons, now EBT / debit cards. Then hop into their late model / new car that you wish you could afford, and go directly across the street to purchase alcohol and smokes. The system is gamed and abused by the majority participating, and it continues generation after generation with no relief in sight.

Long ago I worked in a county hospital. There was a woman who fought and argued to get her meds for free. She got them and then turned around and got into a chauffeur driven limousine. She was living with a rich man but wasnt married so she could continue to get freebies from the govt. Nothing we could do about it back then either.