How do you know? Is there a Big Book o’ Rights somewhere?
What authority do you rely on for the truth of your proposition - an authority that presumably you expect me to agree is valid as well?
You forgot to add, as you often do, that they enjoy beating off to video footage of those people suffering. :rolleyes: Do you ever wonder why no one on this board takes you seriously, Der Trihs? You should, and if you do, that’s why. I can’t think of anyone who spreads more ignorance around here more often than you do.
Well, your example sounds like the desparate ploy of an overwrought 12 year old imagining the most horrific, but still unrealistic, example he possibly can to support his view.
And what, pray tell, is this mysterious set of circumstances under which a person would find “no legal means to food”?
Oh…really? You do, of course, have hard data with which to back up that claim, right?
That is the silliest, and most illogical you have been yet. We are only generous because we are wealthy? (cite?).
And the second part of your “argument” is sillier still. “Take away the wealth and people will be left to starve…”.
Well, take away the wealth and DERRRR, there won’t be anything for most people to GIVE, as in the depression, people will largely be in the same boat. So, if they have nothing, or next to nothing, but the bare minimum needed to keep life in THEIR bodies and their families bodies, where does this fantastical notion you have that “society wants to kill you” come in? In your very own example of the depression, “Society” is pretty much all struggling along in the very same mess, certainly not greedily trying to kill bums.
And yes, Yes,…I’m sure you’re going to bring up the nasty evil rich people who did Just fine during the depression, but yet refused to assist their struggling fellow Americans. Not very good folks, agreed.
Der, requiring inmates to work while incarcerated is in no way, shape or form slavery. Step back, take a deep breath and really think about this line of argument.
I still believe that we are only “Entitled” to what we are willing to work for. No one was providing food for the people who settled this country…it was work for it, or starve. Was there some sharing that went on? Certainly, and there is today. This belief that we as humans are entitled to whatever we think we need without working for it is in my opinion, total bullshit.
Well, actually, the first colonies were collectives. Everyone ate from the common store. This, of course, failed because few people were working, spending their time looking for riches instead. Later on, they parcelled up the land and made each person responsible for growing their own food.
And it worked pretty darn well. I’m still not saying that charities are a bad thing. It’s good for people to give a little of what they’ve worked hard for. I just think that too many people who live off the charity of others could, perhaps with a little use of that charity, find a means of making a productive life for themselves. Granted there are the hard luck cases that cannot do anything for themselves because of physical impairment. That does not mean however that they can’t do something to pass the charity that they receive onto someone else, by doing some sort of voluntary community service.
I have to agree with this. I have been thinking about this statement from irishgirl:
I think that to a degree, she is right…living in a society obviously means that you are a member of it. However, I think there has to be more to it than that. If one is going to reap the benefits of living in a particular society, then one also has some kind of obligation to contribute to that society, in whatever way it is possible for them to do so. I also believe that one of the obligations of society is to help enable people to provide support for themselves as much as it is possible for them to do so. Of course, this means that the burden on society is lessened, which is good. What is even better is that self-support leads to independence, which leads to self-determination, which I believe is necessary to human dignity.
’
I agree with you in spirit, but part of that has to include making people feel they are a valued member of society. Often, the poor end up disinfranchized because of the scorn and shame they experience. (Read some previous welfare threads about lazy “welfare queens” who have babies just to bump up their benefits. The venom that some people spew toward the poor in general is amazing.)
My point being that people who have been outcasts would be hard pressed to feel inclined to “give back” to the community when they feel that every bit of the assistance they got is grudging at best. (Whether or not that feeling is appropriate is immaterial.)
Hubby sees a similar problem with the inmates who are released from his prison. Some of them have put enormous efforts into their rehabilitation, going through many training programs and learning job skills while doing community service projects. When they get back out on the streets, they find that the community doesn’t want them. They can’t find good jobs because of their past, and some become very bitter at society for it.
Yes.
BTW, Orlando Weekly has a good article about the issue.
Maybe all the homeless can get jobs as Telemarketers. I hear there is plenty of openings for them, and they are willing to take on the handicapped, single mothers, the mentally retarded, the mentally ill and drunks who can’t keep a job elsewhere.