FromWithin refers to poor people as burdens. Has he gone too far?
Yes.
Side Score: 15
|
 |
No.
Side Score: 11
|
|
|
|
|
1
point
FromWithin refers to poor people as burdens. Has he gone too far? Hello R: UNFETTERED capitalism throws people overboard if they can't compete. In my view, those people should be provided for, NO MATTER why they're hungry and broke. Yes, they SHOULD act better, but I'm not gonna consign 'em to die on the street like FromWtihin would.. excon Side: Yes.
The problem with FW is, whether she/he means it or not, she/he groups ALL "poor people standing in line" as "lazy". A small percentage of them ARE, certainly, but, MOST people don't "enjoy" being poor, don't enjoy "needing", don't enjoy seeing their children "needing" while feeling they have failed them. They don't "enjoy" not having a few small "luxuries", which are normal items to most of U.S.! Many have made mistakes in their life, many have had unfortunate tragedies through no fault of their own. I THOUGHT the Christian way was to assist these people …. it IS, but, seemingly it's not a priority of the many "un-likable" American Christians. There are many who DO help, they're the "likable" ones. Has FW gone too far?? Maybe, in his/her case, I guess it's up to his/her "Savior". To me, he's just one of those "Christians" that only follows what she/he thinks is important in the "Good Book". To hell with anyone who even NEEDS help, if they're in the line with those few who are lazy! (STOP using my tax money to feed people! SOME of them MUST be just … lazy! :-) Some Christians are really good people ... Side: Yes.
I, unlike YOU would not walk into ANYONES religious chambers and oppose their religion. I don't agree with ANY religion, but, they ALL do their share of good and they ALL have equal rights to me. What I am against is the radicals and haters they all have …. like YOU, if you even go to a church, (If you DO it should be the Church of Satan :-), and those within any religion that try to "shove it down everyone's throat that are not interested in it". The media has nothing to do with it but, yes, you are right, I would NOT walk into a Mosque and oppose that religion. I'll leave THAT up to people who think everyone that doesn't think like they do are crazier than THEY are!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;-) Side: Yes.
There are certain people who have used disability (either theirs or someone else's) as an excuse to use government funding to pay for their lifestyle, which means tax payers are essentially paying for them. An example of this was a friend long ago who said he couldn't work because of his eyesight and that certain lights hurt his eyes.....yet he spent all day playing games on a computer, doing things he could have done in a job but just didn't want to. That's an example of wanting government assistance, not needing. That is what I believe FW....in his own way....is trying to say is wrong, however he doesn't just stop there. He blames everything but his party, rejoices in his backwards mentality, and follows religion in name only; and in doing so he makes general blanket statements that are as wrong as they are bigoted and hypocritical. There IS a problem with some people who play to the victim mentality and use it to abuse a system meant to help people, but it's not as large as what FW wants to claim. The vast majority are absolutely deserving of help, Jesus walked with the poor and sinner alike and would be upset to know those who follow Him would see the poor as a burden. Side: Yes.
|
Anyone who is disabled and has suffered long term from their afflection should be entitled to benefits. They may feel they have the same rights as rich people but in reality they most certainly do not. Most of those within the spectrum, ( and it's a wide ranging spectrum) of what is considered wealthy are shrewd and will have made provision for most contingencies including old age and illness. I feel that FromWithin was referring to those older people who had sufficient income in their active years to save for their retirement but made a conscious decision to spend-spend-spend. Side: No.
2
points
You of course are correct. Intelligent people understand exactly the points I am making. When I speak to burdens, I am speaking to dead beat able bodied people who refuse to work, who live promiscuously, popping out baby after baby... all with different fathers, and expecting tax payers to support the mother's and father's. I'm always in favor of supporting the children because it is not their fault. I am talking about supporting the lazy able bodied parents who should be standing in food bank lines if they want food. THEY ARE BURDENS and not be pandered to. But of course the Democrat Party uses these people for votes. Side: Yes.
We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights such as: Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The Founding Fathers were clear, and so was Jesus when He said what ye do unto the least of these, ye do unto Him. Religion and politics are worthless without compassion for the poor. If the government should not help people like me, at least allow me to choose death with dignity, because people like you, are worse than me dying. Side: Yes.
2
points
Intelligent people understand exactly the points I am making. When I speak to burdens, I am speaking to dead beat able bodied people who refuse to work, who live promiscuously, popping out baby after baby... all with different fathers, and expecting tax payers to support the mother's and father's. I'm always in favor of supporting the children because it is not their fault. I am talking about the lazy able bodied parents who should be standing in food bank lines if they want food. THEY ARE BURDENS and should not be pandered to. But of course the Democrat Party uses these people for votes. Side: No.
|
