10 Reasons Why You Should Vote For Obama

[Castor Muscular]

The sinners who make up the majority of the Republican party are no different than the sinners that make up the majority of the Democratic party. 

That goes without saying.  But that doesn't make them morally equivalent.  Arguments for moral equivalence always sound "fair" but they're not always correct.  In this case, such arguments are not correct. 

I am not a Republican, by the way.  I am not registered with any party. 

 

[lnf]

Well said, graceandtruth.

There is such simple truth in your statement, "Our liberal and conservative views are simply incomplete reflections of God's image.  Generosity and Responsibility are both right.  Social Justice and Biblical Morality are both right. "  I pray that we, as a nation, would recognize this.  It would put us on the path to healing... 

 

[Castor Muscular]

Well said, graceandtruth.

There is such simple truth in your statement, "Our liberal and conservative views are simply incomplete reflections of God's image.  Generosity and Responsibility are both right.  Social Justice and Biblical Morality are both right. "  I pray that we, as a nation, would recognize this.  It would put us on the path to healing...

The Democrat platform is not one of generosity.  46 million people on food stamps is not generosity, and neither is the welfare state.  Such things are not Biblical.  While there may be some people who need a safety net, 46 million people on food stamps is not a case of a safety net -- it's the Democrat party building government dependence so that they can stay in power.  Are some people in need of that safety net?  Sure, but not 46 million, and it really should be the responsibility of the church, not the government.

Social Justice is not morally right.  There is nothing morally right about guaranteeing an equal outcome without an equal effort.  "If you're not willing to work, neither shall you eat" pretty much invalidates the entire Democrat platform of "generosity". 

 

[lnf]

Castor Muscular, I agree that the Democratic Party's "entitlement programs" are not "generosity".  In fact, it actually enslaves people by making them dependent on the government trough.  I also agree that it is biblical that the church has the responsibility to provide the safety net.  It is unfortunate that we, as a nation, have perverted "separation of church and state" to such a degree that we have forgotten that.

I do believe that we may have differing definitions of "social justice", though.  To me, it means "no respect of persons".  In other words, the color of one's skin, their socio-economic scale, and other of our "pet" prejudices should not prevent a person from benefiting from their efforts.  I also do not believe in guaranteed outcomes, but people should not be prevented from bettering themselves by those who hold power, simply because they can.

One last note.  I am considered to be a generous person.  I am a widow.  My husband left me well-provided.  I can certainly provide our son with food, clothing and housing for the rest of my life.  But he has a job.  Why?  Because he and I both believe God's word.  If he does not work, he does not eat.  My "generosity" does not enter into that particular equation.

 

[Castor Muscular]

I do believe that we may have differing definitions of "social justice", though. 

While you have have a more accurate definition of Social Justice, that isn't what the Democrats preach.  We have a Marxist president.  To Marxists, Social Justice means taking from the haves, and giving to the have-nots until there are no more classes.  There are many problems with this.  One is that it assumes the economy is zero-sum -- that if a rich person earns $1, then a poor person somewhere must have been cheated out of that $1.  Or, to put it another way, the pie is only so big, and it must be divided equally.  It is not possible to add more filling to the pie through innovation and hard work. 

Another problem is that this kind of social justice is difficult to achieve without first inciting class warfare, which is what Obama does continually.  He demonizes the rich for political gain. 

Or, the way I like to put it:

Justice:  When you punish people for stealing money.
Social Justice:  When you punish people for earning money.

 

[lnf]

Castor Muscular, we have reached agreement.  The democrats neither practice nor preach social justice. 

 

[graceandtruth]

Castor we agree.  The welfare state is not generosity but a new form of slavery.  The church is responsible to care for the poor not the government and the churches are not doing their job.

We have many clear examples in the Bible of the haves being required to give to the have-nots.  Let me give you a few.

• Fields, vineyards, and olive yards could not be gleaned so there would be something for the poor.
• Corners of the fields could not be reaped so there would be provision for the poor.
• The tithes every third year would go to the care of the poor.
• Every seventh year the crops were left in the field and the poor could eat of them.

These were examples of national care for the poor being mandated by law to teach us how we should willing act when guided by grace.  Dont' bother with the theocracy argument because God is still in charge and God's interaction with Israel was an example for us in the areas Christ has not fulfilled.  Also it is evident that Israel was much like America with a majority professing faith in Jehovah but it was only cultural not true conversion.  Strangely enough there are not qualifications for the poor that could benefit from the mandatory generosity/marxism imposed by God upon the nation of Israel.

I am against the government forcing people to give to care for the poor because it gives them the impression they are not selfish and the excuse of saying, "If they weren't being forced to give they would give to care for the poor on their own".  Whatever happened to lay not up treasure on earth?  Jesus' example was not one of American opulence but of austerity so that He could meet the needs of others and model dependence on God.  It also gives people in churches that are doing nothing for the poor all around them the impression that they are not responsible to hear the cry of the poor because the government is doing it.  This fools American Christians into thinking they are generous when a quick look at their personal and church budgets under the line items "the poor", "the fatherless",  and "widows" would reveal a total disregard for their needs and a total disobedience to the teaching of Christ and His example.

Social justice is not making all people economically equal because that will never happen.  Money makes people ruthless when they have it or want it.  Those who have it will do anything to keep it and justify their actions while those without it will do anything to get it and justify their actions.

Social justice is providing equal opportunities and equal footing for all.  America has never done this and from all appearances has no intention of doing so.  Discrimination for a plethora of reasons is rampant.  In order to understand and see it one would have to honestly dialogue with minorities (i.e. women, African-Americans, Hispanics, etc.) without calling the perspectives into question but instead listening and learning.  Let me illustrate.  I started working for a company with 12 years experience in my field. I did not have to be trained 1 day and a year later my employer hired a friend's son with a physical handicap and 0 years experience in any field and started him at the same amount that I was started at.  This is clearly not equal opportunity or equal footing.  I have had to be proficient and work much harder during my 2-1/2 years to earn merit raises and annual raises while he has been given the option to arrive when he wants and even has his father call the employer when I require him to do his job. He has received evaluations that were only 1 point from below average and been denied a raise by me and my supervisor and the employer has given him a raise each year he has been there.  Hard work is not the problem.  Equal reward for hard work is America's problem. Clearly there is no justice in this scenario but things like this happen all the time.

Social justice is providing quality education opportunities in all neighborhoods to all children.  Social justice is drug testing welfare recipients and politicians to ensure that neither is wasting the taxpayers dollars.  Social justice is providing assistance for families in need without separating the father from the family first.  Social justice is not cutting the assistance to those that are trying to get off assistance to a point that they cannot afford to live and have to go back on public assistance.  Social justice is providing home loans for minorities at the same interest rates as European-Americans when they qualify.  Social justice is providing equal legal penalties for all drug possession and trafficking instead of double the penalty for crack cocaine that is given for cocaine because of the demographics of those trafficking.  Social justice is not promoting single-parent situations by giving 17 year old unwed mothers apartments and food and money so they have the freedom to continue to have children out of wedlock.  Social justice is not stripping African-American males of their right to vote for life for felony charges that do not impair their ability to choose public officials.  As you can see my list of social justice, though incomplete, has very little with taking money from those that do not want to give it to help those they do not care about. 

 

[Sherryh]

graceandtruth, Are you a social worker because you have the facts..........Excellent post!!

 

[christundivided]

Social justice is providing equal opportunities and equal footing for all.  America has never done this and from all appearances has no intention of doing so.  Discrimination for a plethora of reasons is rampant.  In order to understand and see it one would have to honestly dialogue with minorities (i.e. women, African-Americans, Hispanics, etc.) without calling the perspectives into question but instead listening and learning.  Let me illustrate.  I started working for a company with 12 years experience in my field. I did not have to be trained 1 day and a year later my employer hired a friend's son with a physical handicap and 0 years experience in any field and started him at the same amount that I was started at.  This is clearly not equal opportunity or equal footing.  I have had to be proficient and work much harder during my 2-1/2 years to earn merit raises and annual raises while he has been given the option to arrive when he wants and even has his father call the employer when I require him to do his job. He has received evaluations that were only 1 point from below average and been denied a raise by me and my supervisor and the employer has given him a raise each year he has been there.  Hard work is not the problem.  Equal reward for hard work is America's problem. Clearly there is no justice in this scenario but things like this happen all the time.

I believe you should read

Mat 20:10  But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more; and they likewise received every man a penny.
Mat 20:11  And when they had received it, they murmured against the goodman of the house,
Mat 20:12  Saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day.
Mat 20:13  But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny?
Mat 20:14  Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee.
Mat 20:15  Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?

The agreed to a certain wage. What a employer gives to someone else, is that employer's business. There is no lack of "equality". The great thing about America....is you can move on somewhere else. Agree with someone else for a higher wage. What the employer has... is HIS however he wants to do with it. When you agree. You agree. Don't get mad at the terms later.

I get upset at such things myself.... but I always remind myself of such. The problem with your idea of "social justice".... is it ignores such things. Will you get mad if God, in eternity, lets someone get the same things you do that didn't work near as long or as hard? Too often we are actually thinking of ourselves when talk of others. Such is often the case when talking about "social justice". Everyone really only wants what is good for them. Its is the nature of mankind. Just like when a rich politician such as Obama wants to raise taxes on the so called "rich". He calls it their "fair share". Yet, he WILL ONLY pay more if EVERYONE that is just like him.... PAYS MORE.

Social justice is providing quality education opportunities in all neighborhoods to all children.  Social justice is drug testing welfare recipients and politicians to ensure that neither is wasting the taxpayers dollars.  Social justice is providing assistance for families in need without separating the father from the family first.  Social justice is not cutting the assistance to those that are trying to get off assistance to a point that they cannot afford to live and have to go back on public assistance.  Social justice is providing home loans for minorities at the same interest rates as European-Americans when they qualify.  Social justice is providing equal legal penalties for all drug possession and trafficking instead of double the penalty for crack cocaine that is given for cocaine because of the demographics of those trafficking.  Social justice is not promoting single-parent situations by giving 17 year old unwed mothers apartments and food and money so they have the freedom to continue to have children out of wedlock.  Social justice is not stripping African-American males of their right to vote for life for felony charges that do not impair their ability to choose public officials. 

You'll never have equality for "quality education" by enacting "social justice" at the federal level. "Quality education" is too dependent on "self education". It is the responsibility of parents and the "student" themselves to have quality education. With the seemingly endless supply of "information" available today... Education is not as dependent on "systems". Altering "systems" often leads to the advancement of some over others. The system just becomes unbalanced differently. You never remove the "imbalance.

Maybe you forgot the lessons of the recent housing crash. Home loans had been extended to those who could never afford to pay for them. Regulation in the name of "social justice" has been enacted to force lenders to extend loans to certain people regardless of their ability to pay. "Social justice" created a problem for everyone.

Crack cocaine penalties increased because of the increased addictive nature of "crack" over traditional cocaine... and the ability to make it "cheaper" increased distribution to the point that increased penalties were warranted. It had nothing to do with targeting minorities. Minorities happened to be the ones most involved with its distribution. "White" distributors get the same mandatory sentences.

Felony convicts no longer result in lifelong prohibition to vote for the convicted in most states. Only Kentucky and Virginia still have such "lifelong" bans. In Kentucky, you have your rights restored if you go through a "restoration process" to have your right restored.

As you can see my list of social justice, though incomplete, has very little with taking money from those that do not want to give it to help those they do not care about.

Who doesn't care about money?

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=christundivided]I believe you should read...[/quote]

That parable is about soteriology, not business ethics.

With that being said...

[quote author=christundivided]The agreed to a certain wage. What a employer gives to someone else, is that employer's business. There is no lack of "equality". The great thing about America....is you can move on somewhere else. Agree with someone else for a higher wage. What the employer has... is HIS however he wants to do with it. When you agree. You agree. Don't get mad at the terms later. [/quote]

Yes. (Although this doesn't negate the moral need of the employer to be equitable.)

[quote author=christundivided]You'll never have equality for "quality education" by enacting "social justice" at the federal level. "Quality education" is too dependent on "self education". It is the responsibility of parents and the "student" themselves to have quality education. With the seemingly endless supply of "information" available today... Education is not as dependent on "systems". Altering "systems" often leads to the advancement of some over others. The system just becomes unbalanced differently. You never remove the "imbalance. [/quote]

First, very odd use of quotes.

Second, there are individual and systematic aspects to education. One can address the second as an aspect of social justice without denying the first.

[quote author=christundivided]Maybe you forgot the lessons of the recent housing crash. Home loans had been extended to those who could never afford to pay for them. Regulation in the name of "social justice" has been enacted to force lenders to extend loans to certain people regardless of their ability to pay. "Social justice" created a problem for everyone. [/quote]

What you have described is not social justice.

[quote author=christundivided]Crack cocaine penalties increased because of the increased addictive nature of "crack" over traditional cocaine... and the ability to make it "cheaper" increased distribution to the point that increased penalties were warranted...[/quote]

No.

[quote author=christundivided]...It had nothing to do with targeting minorities. Minorities happened to be the ones most involved with its distribution. "White" distributors get the same mandatory sentences. [/quote]

Yes.

[quote author=christundivided]

As you can see my list of social justice, though incomplete, has very little with taking money from those that do not want to give it to help those they do not care about.

Who doesn't care about money?[/quote]

What?

 

[graceandtruth]

Come on CU. 

You know that my illustration is nepotism and it is not equal nor is it Christian.  I am sure you are familiar with the passages that indicate that God is no respecter of persons and we should not be either.  Using the fact that God grants salvation to the thief dying on the cross and receives him into heaven because of the works of Christ with the same standing as Paul after a lifetime of service is anything but accurate.

Saying education is the responsibility of the parents and students is a poor excuse for citizen funded, government ran schools that are not performing because children are not getting educated.  Let me say that we have and are currently homeschooling our 17 children.  The problem is that the best school that we pay for with our tax dollars in our area has a performance grade of D.  You do know that is one letter grade from an F.  Since there was a system in place to deprive certain parts of the citizenry of a valid education for almost 3 centuries surely systems to rectify this problem would not be unwarranted.

Let me bring some realism to your statements concerning the inequity in punishments for drug trafficking.  We can see from those in our entertainment industry that cocaine is highly addictive.  We also know from the name crack cocaine that crack cocaine is made with cocaine.  Now wouldn't it make more sense to prosecute and stamp out the trafficking of the base drug for crack cocaine if crack cocaine is such a problem.  Unless it is more acceptable and safer to prosecute those who have $100 in crack rocks in their pocket than to prosecute the rich who are trafficking the kilos of cocaine to the neighborhoods where it is being turned into crack cocaine. It is driven by demographics not danger or damage by the drug.

Felony convicts in the state of Louisiana are still stripped of their right to vote for life for felonies that do not hinder their ability to choose the leadership of the United States.  I know two of them personally. 

Oh yeah, I forgot about that housing crash.  That housing crash that was by produced ballon payments that they knew the people would not be able to pay.  That housing crash that resulted from increase in interest rates that doubled and tripled the mortgage payments of people who they knew could not make such payments.  The crash was not a result of the sub-prime rates that are the norm for minority groups but of the greed and wrong thinking of the banking industry.

CU you will remember that in a previous post I mentioned that we must listen to the other groups in our society in order to find out what they are experiencing.  We must see their lives as they see it to understand what solutions are viable for them.  We have too long dismissed the voices telling us what we do not want to here by walling them up in urban jungles and rural projects.  As with the evil of slavery we Christians are again standing by making excuses instead of acting in the Spirit of Christ and seeking to help the weak and edify others.  Instead of going into the neighborhoods around us with the Gospel and Grace we stand on the outside and demand they pull themselves up as we have pulled ourselves up forgetting that it was Christ that picked us up out of the miry clay and set our feet on the solid rock and established our goings.  We embrace God's grace for us but make excuses for bring that grace to others. 

Social justice is not the acts of the levite and priest that we choose to adopt but of the Samaritan who gave what he had to help a person without making excuses.  He gave without expecting repayment.  He gave expecting to have to continue to give.  He gave to one who had gotten himself in the situation he was in.  He gave knowing the man could go out and get himself in the same position again.  He gave like Christ has given and continues to give to us.  The Samaritan's actions are the social justice that we must embrace as biblical Christians.

Grace to you CU. 

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=graceandtruth]Saying education is the responsibility of the parents and students is a poor excuse for citizen funded, government ran schools that are not performing because children are not getting educated.  Let me say that we have and are currently homeschooling our 17 children.  The problem is that the best school that we pay for with our tax dollars in our area has a performance grade of D.  You do know that is one letter grade from an F.  Since there was a system in place to deprive certain parts of the citizenry of a valid education for almost 3 centuries surely systems to rectify this problem would not be unwarranted.[/quote]

It's not either/or. My kids go to one of the worst schools in our city, yet they are well above where they should be based on their grade standards. What higher quality schools do is allow those who already have personal drive (or drive via their parents in the case of children) to more easily go further than they could otherwise.

The key is balancing the need for high quality schools (which is largely driven by student population/drive) with the need for community-centered schools. The problem is where you have large areas where the academic drive is less (for whatever reasons). You can bring in others with high academic drives but you lose the community-centeredness of the school, or you can work on changing the motivations and ambitions of the people already in the community. This takes time (often generations) and is not easily measurable/recognizable so people tend to not see it or not care.

[quote author=graceandtruth]Let me bring some realism to your statements concerning the inequity in punishments for drug trafficking.  We can see from those in our entertainment industry that cocaine is highly addictive.  We also know from the name crack cocaine that crack cocaine is made with cocaine. [/quote]

Yes.

[quote author=graceandtruth]Now wouldn't it make more sense to prosecute and stamp out the trafficking of the base drug for crack cocaine if crack cocaine is such a problem.  Unless it is more acceptable and safer to prosecute those who have $100 in crack rocks in their pocket than to prosecute the rich who are trafficking the kilos of cocaine to the neighborhoods where it is being turned into crack cocaine. It is driven by demographics not danger or damage by the drug.[/quote]

Depends on what your objective is. With that being said, your last sentence here is incorrect.

[quote author=graceandtruth]Oh yeah, I forgot about that housing crash.  That housing crash that was by produced ballon payments that they knew the people would not be able to pay.  That housing crash that resulted from increase in interest rates that doubled and tripled the mortgage payments of people who they knew could not make such payments.  The crash was not a result of the sub-prime rates that are the norm for minority groups but of the greed and wrong thinking of the banking industry.[/quote]

The housing crash was the fault of the banks for giving out loans that the recipients couldn't afford. The housing crash was the fault of the government for encouraging (and even mandating) that banks start and/or accelerate this practice. The housing crash was the fault of individuals who knowingly took on more debt than they could reasonably afford.

The blame on one group in no way alleviates the blame of another (with the exception of mandates on banks by the government).

[quote author=graceandtruth]CU you will remember that in a previous post I mentioned that we must listen to the other groups in our society in order to find out what they are experiencing.  We must see their lives as they see it to understand what solutions are viable for them.  We have too long dismissed the voices telling us what we do not want to here by walling them up in urban jungles and rural projects.  As with the evil of slavery we Christians are again standing by making excuses instead of acting in the Spirit of Christ and seeking to help the weak and edify others.  Instead of going into the neighborhoods around us with the Gospel and Grace we stand on the outside and demand they pull themselves up as we have pulled ourselves up forgetting that it was Christ that picked us up out of the miry clay and set our feet on the solid rock and established our goings.  We embrace God's grace for us but make excuses for bring that grace to others. [/quote]

I agree, but we have to recognize that many (but definitely not all) of these wounds are self-inflicted, and it becomes pointless to keep trying to stop the bleeding when your patient will immediately cut themselves open again. In this particular case, there are major cultural problems that the individuals in these cultures have to address from the inside before significant progress can be made. So long as reckless behavior is glorified and responsible behavior is ridiculed by the culture, the individuals in said cultures will have a hard time bringing about transformative change without leaving the culture that vilifies them.

[quote author=graceandtruth]Social justice is not the acts of the levite and priest that we choose to adopt but of the Samaritan who gave what he had to help a person without making excuses.  He gave without expecting repayment.[/quote]

Yes.

[quote author=graceandtruth]He gave expecting to have to continue to give.  He gave to one who had gotten himself in the situation he was in.[/quote]

No.

[quote author=graceandtruth]He gave knowing the man could go out and get himself in the same position again.  He gave like Christ has given and continues to give to us.[/quote]

Yes.

[quote author=graceandtruth]The Samaritan's actions are the social justice that we must embrace as biblical Christians. [/quote]

The Samaritan's actions were individual, not systematic. It's poor application to treat them as systematic solutions.*

* It's also poor application because it's attempting to derive application from a parable that isn't based on the point the parable is making.

 

[christundivided]

* It's also poor application because it's attempting to derive application from a parable that isn't based on the point the parable is making.

You mentioned the point of the parable. Even though I somewhat disagree... IF it is as you say it is.... then the question this must be asked.... Why would you allow such an action taking place with your Master and then deny such a action taken by "ANYONE" that does the hiring?

The wage is the wage. You agreed to the wage. To then complain about that wage based on what you think of "treatment" of others, (at your expense).... is to not abide by the "agreement". Find someone else that will agree with you for more, but don't complain about the agreement. You have chosen to abide by it. Abide by it. The application is universal regardless of what you think about the overall teaching of the passage.

 

[graceandtruth]

rsc2a thanks for your comments.

I will not do a blow by blow in this instance but I would like to address the self-inflicted wounds. 

I agree with you that much of the problem in the lower income areas is self-inflicted.  These are however a result of actions and attitudes established as normal by outside influences that have since vacated the premises and wish to hide their hands and absolve themselves of the need to address the issue.  Let me explain.

We would all agree that a child that is abused physically, emotionally, or sexually may have problems responding physically, emotionally, and sexually throughout his/her life.  Now we must remember that there are people groups that were exposed to gratuitous violence as conditioning, punishment, etc. on a daily basis.  These people groups were systematically conditioned to accept as normal the arbitrary dissolution of their family unit and the violation of their marital vows by the rape of wives and studding out of husbands.  This type of conditioning does not go away with the passing of a law.  Just as it required a nation to condition people to these conditions it also takes a nation to reverse the effects of this conditioning.  Just as it took more than 30 years to train people to live like animals it takes more than 30 years to un-train them.  To ignore our national responsibility by claiming the wounds are self-inflicted is uncharitable to say the least.

You said that I was misapplying the parable of the Good Samaritan by applying it to social justice.  I am confused.  The parable was given to teach a conservative lawyer who his neighbor was and what it would look like to love his neighbor.  Is not social justice loving our neighbors? 

I laughed when I read that you said the Samaritan did not expect to continue to give.  Didn't he give the innkeeper the promise that if the money he had given was not sufficient that he would pay whatever the man required above that when he returned.  That means he is going to continue to give.  No misapplication here my friend.  Social justice is the heart of the second commandment to love our neighbor as ourselves and that is what the parable is about.

I have stated before that I do not support forcing people through taxes to provide for the needs of the poor because it fools the selfish into believing that they are generous and the ungracious Christians into believing they have an excuse for not caring for the least.

As for your statement on education, we must remember that we have generations of parents who are 7th and 8th grade dropouts.  So what about them?  Should their tax dollars be used to educate their children and meet the need that their parents are unable to meet?  Again where do we lay the blame if those who cannot help themselves are not helped by those who can.  This sounds  a great deal like the grace that God showed us.  We got ourselves into a mess with sin because of our father Adam and the things he did and we learned to do.  It shaped us to the point that we are naturally rebels and see nothing wrong with it.  Our sin was a self-inflicted wound yet Jesus came to earth and paid the sin debt we owe and died in our place.  Not only that but He continues to help us as we inflict ourselves through sin after salvation.  When God does that for us we call it grace.  When someone else points out we should do the same for others so that they can understand God's grace we call it liberalism.  Incredible.....

 

 

[christundivided]

Social justice is not the acts of the levite and priest that we choose to adopt but of the Samaritan who gave what he had to help a person without making excuses.  He gave without expecting repayment.  He gave expecting to have to continue to give.  He gave to one who had gotten himself in the situation he was in.  He gave knowing the man could go out and get himself in the same position again.  He gave like Christ has given and continues to give to us.  The Samaritan's actions are the social justice that we must embrace as biblical Christians.

Grace to you CU.

No. The action of the Good Samaritan was not something that would be endlessly repeated. If the Good Samaritan found the same man, in the same situation, every week..... no doubt he would no longer attempt to help him. You expect the Samaritan's action to set forth an example for all. Yet, the Good Samaritan could not help everyone in the same situation. He helped one person. You then expect everyone to act the same way. Such is social engineering. I don't expect everyone to act the same way. I expect some to act that way of their own free will. Not to be forced to do such. Forced Charity is not Charity at all.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that housing crash.  That housing crash that was by produced ballon payments that they knew the people would not be able to pay.  That housing crash that resulted from increase in interest rates that doubled and tripled the mortgage payments of people who they knew could not make such payments.  The crash was not a result of the sub-prime rates that are the norm for minority groups but of the greed and wrong thinking of the banking industry.

The inability of those to repay the mortgage caused the bundled mortgages to be worth much less. Creating a cascade effect because of the bundling. Interest rates have been low for years. Yes. People made bad decisions on variable rate mortgages and ARMS. Yet, they had options. They didn't have to choose such a mortgage. Don't blame that on the mortgage industry.

Saying education is the responsibility of the parents and students is a poor excuse for citizen funded, government ran schools that are not performing because children are not getting educated.  Let me say that we have and are currently homeschooling our 17 children.  The problem is that the best school that we pay for with our tax dollars in our area has a performance grade of D.  You do know that is one letter grade from an F.  Since there was a system in place to deprive certain parts of the citizenry of a valid education for almost 3 centuries surely systems to rectify this problem would not be unwarranted.

Do you want a one size fit all solution for this that arises from "social justice"? I don't. I've given up trusting any school system completely with such things. I send my children to public schools but I see them for what they are. The only way I see to combat the issue is to take matters into my own hands. Train my old children in the things they neglect. Give them a sense of self in making their own choices. "Social Justice" will not fix such things.

You know that my illustration is nepotism and it is not equal nor is it Christian.  I am sure you are familiar with the passages that indicate that God is no respecter of persons and we should not be either.  Using the fact that God grants salvation to the thief dying on the cross and receives him into heaven because of the works of Christ with the same standing as Paul after a lifetime of service is anything but accurate.

I think you greatly misunderstand such things. God is no respecter of persons. Yet, this does NOT mean that God DOESN'T threats people differently. He DOES and has always done such. He simply doesn't do such because of the individual themselves. In other words, God doesn't take individual accomplishment into account. Yet, to accomplish His will and His Plans, He most assuredly with treat people differently.

Let me bring some realism to your statements concerning the inequity in punishments for drug trafficking.  We can see from those in our entertainment industry that cocaine is highly addictive.  We also know from the name crack cocaine that crack cocaine is made with cocaine.  Now wouldn't it make more sense to prosecute and stamp out the trafficking of the base drug for crack cocaine if crack cocaine is such a problem.  Unless it is more acceptable and safer to prosecute those who have $100 in crack rocks in their pocket than to prosecute the rich who are trafficking the kilos of cocaine to the neighborhoods where it is being turned into crack cocaine. It is driven by demographics not danger or damage by the drug

Ever heard of Rob Lowe? or Robert Downey Jr? There are many others.

Crack cocaine took over the market for some time. It had nothing to do with "taking out the base drug" dealers. The dealers all sold crack. It was cheaper and MORE PEOPLE could afford it. This is why you saw MORE PEOPLE being affected by it.

 

[graceandtruth]

* It's also poor application because it's attempting to derive application from a parable that isn't based on the point the parable is making.

You mentioned the point of the parable. Even though I somewhat disagree... IF it is as you say it is.... then the question this must be asked.... Why would you allow such an action taking place with your Master and then deny such a action taken by "ANYONE" that does the hiring?

The wage is the wage. You agreed to the wage. To then complain about that wage based on what you think of "treatment" of others, (at your expense).... is to not abide by the "agreement". Find someone else that will agree with you for more, but don't complain about the agreement. You have chosen to abide by it. Abide by it. The application is universal regardless of what you think about the overall teaching of the passage.

Come on CU.  Admit that the Bible condemns nepotism and favoritism without exception.  God commands us to be no respecter of persons.  Because such actions are sinful and accepted as normal we must speak against them  like any other sin.  Work with me my friend.

 

[christundivided]

* It's also poor application because it's attempting to derive application from a parable that isn't based on the point the parable is making.

You mentioned the point of the parable. Even though I somewhat disagree... IF it is as you say it is.... then the question this must be asked.... Why would you allow such an action taking place with your Master and then deny such a action taken by "ANYONE" that does the hiring?

The wage is the wage. You agreed to the wage. To then complain about that wage based on what you think of "treatment" of others, (at your expense).... is to not abide by the "agreement". Find someone else that will agree with you for more, but don't complain about the agreement. You have chosen to abide by it. Abide by it. The application is universal regardless of what you think about the overall teaching of the passage.

Come on CU.  Admit that the Bible condemns nepotism and favoritism without exception.  God commands us to be no respecter of persons.  Because such actions are sinful and accepted as normal we must speak against them  like any other sin.  Work with me my friend.

I can't.... because the Bible doesn't teach such. Maybe you wish it did. But it doesn't.

Let me give you a clear example. The church has been commanded to take care of their own. They are not commanded to take care of everyone. First of all, they can't. Secondly, they can't. If you can't help everyone. You must choose someone to help. The very fact you must choose means there will be some you can't help.

Should we break out the dice and let the roll of the dice tell us who to choose?

I look forward to day that all men will truly be equal in Eternity. Such will never be the case with anything in this world. To try and force such a thing through "social justice" is a exercise in futility.

I will remind you.... that if you can't help everyone..... then you're creating a little pocket of "privileged" individuals yourself. I'm sure you prefer someone... somewhere for some reason.

 

[graceandtruth]

No problem CU.  Thanks for sharing your views and listening to the views of others.  We will clearly have to agree to disagree which is not a problem.

 

[rsc2a]

rsc2a thanks for your comments.

I will not do a blow by blow in this instance but I would like to address the self-inflicted wounds. 

I agree with you that much of the problem in the lower income areas is self-inflicted.  These are however a result of actions and attitudes established as normal by outside influences that have since vacated the premises and wish to hide their hands and absolve themselves of the need to address the issue.  Let me explain.

We would all agree that a child that is abused physically, emotionally, or sexually may have problems responding physically, emotionally, and sexually throughout his/her life.  Now we must remember that there are people groups that were exposed to gratuitous violence as conditioning, punishment, etc. on a daily basis.  These people groups were systematically conditioned to accept as normal the arbitrary dissolution of their family unit and the violation of their marital vows by the rape of wives and studding out of husbands.  This type of conditioning does not go away with the passing of a law.  Just as it required a nation to condition people to these conditions it also takes a nation to reverse the effects of this conditioning.  Just as it took more than 30 years to train people to live like animals it takes more than 30 years to un-train them.  To ignore our national responsibility by claiming the wounds are self-inflicted is uncharitable to say the least.

Your premise is flawed. Historically (i.e. 1870s-1950s), there wasn't a large disparity between the number of blacks (to use one example) and whites raised by single parents. In the 1960s, the trendlines shifted significantly where now, although both are higher, there is a large gap in these numbers. These numbers cannot be explained by an appeal to slavery, but they can be used to explain a myriad of other problems in the black community*.

* By black community, I mean a cultural community that is not defined by the amount of melanin in one's skin although this culture has traditionally been referred to as "black culture". One can be a major part of black culture regardless of the skin tone one bears.

[quote author=graceandtruth]You said that I was misapplying the parable of the Good Samaritan by applying it to social justice.  I am confused.  The parable was given to teach a conservative lawyer who his neighbor was and what it would look like to love his neighbor.  Is not social justice loving our neighbors?  [/quote]

Social justice is a societal and systematic response, not an individual action (although individuals can lobby for, and participate  in, social justice).

[quote author=graceandtruth]I laughed when I read that you said the Samaritan did not expect to continue to give.  Didn't he give the innkeeper the promise that if the money he had given was not sufficient that he would pay whatever the man required above that when he returned.  That means he is going to continue to give.  No misapplication here my friend.[/quote]

The Samaritan also knew the individual would eventually get better. There was a time when he knew he would no longer be needed in that capacity.

[quote author=graceandtruth]Social justice is the heart of the second commandment to love our neighbor as ourselves and that is what the parable is about.[/quote]

You have them backwards. The second commandment is at the heart of social justice.

Therefore, one can use the teachings of the second commandment to shape how (and for whom) they feel social justice should occur. That doesn't mean the parable is a parable about social justice.

[quote author=graceandtruth]I have stated before that I do not support forcing people through taxes to provide for the needs of the poor because it fools the selfish into believing that they are generous and the ungracious Christians into believing they have an excuse for not caring for the least.[/quote]

On this, we (somewhat) agree.

[quote author=graceandtruth]As for your statement on education, we must remember that we have generations of parents who are 7th and 8th grade dropouts.  So what about them?  Should their tax dollars be used to educate their children and meet the need that their parents are unable to meet?  Again where do we lay the blame if those who cannot help themselves are not helped by those who can.[/quote]

I don't understand what point you are trying to make and fail to see how this is an objection to what I stated.

Additionally, there is a great difference in those who cannot help themselves and those who will not help themselves (and there are both). 

[quote author=graceandtruth]This sounds  a great deal like the grace that God showed us.  We got ourselves into a mess with sin because of our father Adam and the things he did and we learned to do.  It shaped us to the point that we are naturally rebels and see nothing wrong with it.  Our sin was a self-inflicted wound yet Jesus came to earth and paid the sin debt we owe and died in our place.  Not only that but He continues to help us as we inflict ourselves through sin after salvation.  When God does that for us we call it grace.  When someone else points out we should do the same for others so that they can understand God's grace we call it liberalism.  Incredible..... [/quote]

1 - You just said we shouldn't do this on a societal level.
2 - Did I claim to be opposed to helping others?

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=christundivided]I can't.... because the Bible doesn't teach such. Maybe you wish it did. But it doesn't.

Let me give you a clear example. The church has been commanded to take care of their own. They are not commanded to take care of everyone.[/quote]

The church is commanded to take care of its own first, then others as it is able. This is quite a bit different from "the chuch isn't commanded to take care of everyone".

[quote author=christundivided]If you can't help everyone. You must choose someone to help. The very fact you must choose means there will be some you can't help. [/quote]

And?

[quote author=christundivided]Should we break out the dice and let the roll of the dice tell us who to choose?

I look forward to day that all men will truly be equal in Eternity. Such will never be the case with anything in this world. To try and force such a thing through "social justice" is a exercise in futility. [/quote]

There is nothing wrong with choosing who will receive help. The morality of the decision comes in how one selects who will receive the help.

[quote author=christundivided]I will remind you.... that if you can't help everyone..... then you're creating a little pocket of "privileged" individuals yourself. I'm sure you prefer someone... somewhere for some reason.[/quote]

And it could be a moral, amoral, or immoral preference. Preference isn't necessarily bad (or good) and is often wise. But there needs to be preference for the right reasons.