As far as I can tell, I’m not looking for any loopholes; if he said to resist not evil and turn the other cheek and judge not and forgive trespasses and don’t cast the first stone and so on, then I’m the one applying that across the board. Now, people looking to pass judgment and use force against somebody in this or that individual situation – man, they’re the folks in need of a loophole okaying such an exception to the rule just this one time.
Except, well, I’ve tried parsing his words with the finest of combs for such a loophole and, AFAICT, it just ain’t in there.
As a former card-carrying member of the Christian Right (Moral Majority, Christian Coalition, the more interfaith John Birch Society), it’s more the Right aspect that is bothered by greater gov’t funding/direction of health care than the Christian aspect. Basically, the fear is that demand will exceed supply, leading to gov’t rationing, overwhelming taxation, innovation-stifling regulation, and medical personnel shortages as they leave either the profession or the country rather than becoming on-call non-profit civil servants. The Christian part is bugged by the degree to which abortion services may eventually become publically subsidized. Catholics & some hardline Protties extend that to public subsidization of contraceptive services. Another Christian objection is that it’s just another step towards the economic statism that is symbolized by The Mark of the Beast.
My experience is this: it’s because their candidate(s) or party has told them to be against it. Republicans usually run on a heavy, religious-based platform and that’s why some Christians back them. The Dems pass this bill, the Republicans are up in arms, so their supporters follow suit. A friend of mine told me that when George W was running for his second term, the pastor of their church told the congregation to vote for Bush not because of his policies, but because he was a God fearing man.
So I don’t think it’s fair to say that Christians are against HCR. They’re just against the Dems version of it. If this passed under a Republican president, they’d have no problem with it and see it as a victory.
*I realize I’m painting with a broad stroke here. My comment doesn’t apply to everyone on this board, just the majority of my Christian friends and family. YMMV.
If Obama proposed a full ban on abortion, and mandatory school prayer in public schools, the Religious Right would oppose it as a means to increase the Democrat voting base and a way to turn the U.S. Islamic.
But a cut in Medicare would mean less forced taxation.
It’s also worth pointing out that HCR does not automatically entail higher taxes. It can be paid for by moving money around in the budget. Would Jesus consider the military budget to be as sacrosanct as Republicans do?
But in the end I’m skeptical that Jesus would be so quick do drop his support for helping the sick because protecting the rich from having their taxes un-cut is a higher priority.
I hate to do a “me too” post, but that’s a great question that I’d like to hear the answer to.
So, Waldo, let’s pretend the health care bill didn’t raise taxes by even a single penny, but payed for it by cutting military expenditures. Would you still have been opposed to it?
My dad’s a member of the Religious Right, and he thinks that the VA medical system is the best medical care anywhere in the world, that health care reform is essential, and that it should include stopping the health insurance companies from discriminating on pre-existing conditions, letting people buy any health insurance they want regardless of where and whether they’re employed, and so on. In short, he agrees with absolutely every actual point of the new law, and several that got compromised out. But he’s absolutely adamantly 100% opposed to the law.
The only actual objection he’s been able to put together is that the bill has funding for prenatal care, and since that provision was written by evil liberals who care about nothing than ensuring that everyone has gay sex and abortion, obviously “prenatal care” is code for “abortions”. I’ve tried to explain to him that prenatal care is exactly the opposite of that, but he’s never had any interest whatsoever in “women’s work”, and so is completely clueless about the fact that a pregnant woman who wants to deliver a live, healthy baby needs medical attention.
Well, in fairness he has me pretty accurately pegged.
Abortion seems to be the biggest concern, which again I don’t understand. Abortion is already legal and I doubt there are many women who decide not to get one just because the government won’t pay for them. Most women’s clinics will work with you on payment, and obviously an abortion is far cheaper than having a baby both to the mother and to society. (And again and again and umpteen agains, why is it so many of the same people screaming “BABY KILLER!” don’t seem to give a damn about the kid once it’s born?)
So, you’re saying that a Christian should never vote in favor of new taxes, and should always vote in favor of lowering taxes? Is that without exception? If there are exceptions, why are they exceptions, and HRC isn’t?
Why? I don’t see that a single Christian, acting alone, should authorize the use of force to get money from someone who doesn’t want to pay it; I don’t see that a single Christian working in concert with two people, or two hundred people, or two hundred million people, gains any extra justification.
I don’t think there are any exceptions to the former. I’m not entirely sure about the latter.
There is actually no Biblical or doctrinal basis for that position whatsoever. Jesus never objected taxing people to provide social services. Descriptions of early Christian communities in Acts say that those Christians lived communally, with no private ownership of property, so it sounds like Jesus was a collectivist to me. Youy might try to argue that Jesus wasn’t saying the government should impose that, but I would suggest that isn’t true, since he constantly spoke of these ideals of representing the “kingdom of God,” and the eventual government of the Messiah.
Jesus also preached monarchism, not democracy, so the will of the people was irrelevant to him. His political ideal was totalitarian, monarchic communism.
You guys never disappoint.
Is there a Firefox app you use? Or simple elbow-grease scouring the SDMB for the word “Christian”?
…a tax-deductible donation maybe?
Well, that’s an odd way of putting it. Let’s see if we actually disagree on the big-picture issue; I answered your questions, perhaps you’ll answer mine in turn.
Imagine someone tells you he’s a Christian, whereupon I walk up and smite him on the cheek; as per Christian belief, should he smite me back or turn the other cheek? Imagine someone tells you he’s a Christian, whereupon a number of people ask him whether they should stone this here person who committed adultery; as per Christian belief, should he authorize that or tell 'em that only someone without sin should cast the first stone? Imagine someone tells you he’s a Christian, and then someone else asks whether he should forgive men their trespasses and judge not and – well, otherwise pretty much quotes Jesus directly, as it were, as per the OP; should that Christian reply by likewise quoting Jesus, or by advocating the exact opposite?
I’d answer that “turn the other cheek” question by saying that such a Christian should turn the other cheek; doesn’t that answer have everything to do with actual Christian beliefs? I’d answer the “cast the first stone” question in a like manner, and ditto for the whole “forgive men their trespasses” and “judge not” bit – and I don’t see that such answers fail to address actual Christian belief.
The OP pointed to two things Jesus said: that you should give your own property to the poor, and that you should pay your taxes. I merely pointed out that neither of those has anything to do with taking someone else’s stuff and giving it to the poor; I then added that I’m not aware of Jesus ever saying anything to that effect, and I added mention of various other things he said – resist not evil, turn the other cheek, judge not, forgive trespasses, don’t cast the first stone, and so on.
We’re not talking about Christians in general. The OP asked specifically about the “Christian right” which is a distinct political faction. Most liberals are Chrisians. Obama is a Christian. My wife is a Catholic. My kids go to a Catholic school. I have nothing against Christians. I’m not talking about Christians. I’m talking about a particular, politicized religious group within the US.
