Would he he be pro universial health care or not?
Jesus lived 2000 years ago, in a society that was drastically different than ours. His beliefs would have been premodern, he would have been concerned with issues that we aren’t today, ignorant of issues that we find important, and his political beliefs probably wouldn’t be anything like either modern liberalism or modern conservativism.
I Caesar wanted to provide health care, Jesus would say to let Caesar collect taxes and provide health care.
I imagine it didn’t come up.
I think he’d be more into political revolution, replacing what we have with a nice authoritarian theocracy.
I’m sure he’d cross the aisle as needed.
It belatedly occurs to me that the only way to frame the health care debate is as a legislator making the decision, not a voter, making my prior post irrelevent.
Regarding Jesus’s likely opinion on a public policy framed to help the sick and needy, the whole ‘brothers keeper’ and good Samaratin thing leaps to mind. In the parable the Samaratin paid with his own money for the injuries of the other man to be tended. This would lead to believe that he’s not rigidly in the “everyone must pay for their own health care” camp.
The next question is, would he impose a tax? He’s clearly not opposed to taxes, per my prior post, but would he impose one? Here I’m afraid I can’t say; it honestly doesn’t seem correct to speculate from what he said people should do on their own, to what policies the government implement for the bettement of its people.
And as for whether it should be a state or federal issue I’m going to completely bow out.
Jesus would not depend on the government, just the Father.
As for political party, He would be on the side of God only, this scripture comes to mind:
I’m thinking the deceased schizophrenic jew vote leans republican.
One and done, I agree entirely. If you asked Jesus what he thinks about Universal Health Care, he would probably say “what is ‘health care’?”
Let’s see;
The whole “Give Ceasar what is due Ceasar, and God what is due God” doesn’t bode well for the anti-tax crowd.
“Give all you have to the sick and the poor” doesn’t bode well for the anti-healthcare and anti-welfare crowd.
“What you do the least of my children” doesn’t bode well for the “The Government has no business helping people out - let people take care of themselves” crowd.
The whole “easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven” thing doesn’t bode well for the party of the rich.
Conservatives support the status quo, the established institutions and traditions. Since Jesus came to change these things, I don’t think he’d be their poster child.
On the other side of the scale, I can think of a few things he wouldn’t like about our modern day liberals either, but I think he’d be a lot closer to them than the Republicans.
Damn sandal-wearing long-haired hippie!
Going back even further than Jesus, the ancient Israelites had subsidized health care for the poor enshrined into the Torah. The priests were the health care providers, such as there was, of the day, and if the priest cured you of an affliction, you were expected to make an appropriate sacrifice (the meat from which would feed the priests and their families, and which can therefore be considered payment to the priests for their services). For many afflictions, the Torah says things along the lines of “The one who was cured should sacrifice two healthy young rams, or if he cannot afford two rams, he should sacrifice a pair of doves instead”. The priests still have to feed their families, so if I can afford the rams, then I’m helping to pay for the health care of those poor folks who just have doves.
The whole “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” doesn’t bode well for the “use force to take money from other people” crowd.
Not only that, but they had built-in welfare. You were supposed to only take what you could get in one pass in your fields. Anything else was left to the poor to gather and eat.
But it does work nicely for a representative democracy where people vote for their representatives who in turn levy taxes as they deem necessary. Good try, though.
I suspect his position on UHC would be “you can DO that?!” We are after all talking about quite a bit more than priests binding wounds and the other exceedingly limited care they had back then. There’s no way to tell if he’d be angry or not that people were turning to and getting healing from non-divine sources, though.
Except that’s covered under the “render unto Caesar” part.
Al Franken’s Supply Side Jesus pretty well has it covered.
Well except it does, because everyone pays taxes, even the tax collectors. And everyone benefits from their usage. You can argue that people benefit disproportionately, but you can’t argue that you don’t benefit from government services.
J.C. would be a modern day communist.
In my mind the conservative Amish community is closer to the philosophy of Jesus.
Let the political bodies/government be what they be. Do not fight political systems, particularly. If Caesar demands a tax, render it.
But generally, live life with a goal to live peacefully on this earth. Be a good neighbor because God requires it; not because tax law requires you to take care of a neighbor. As for healthcare, don’t worry too much about diseases. Your kingdom is not of this world. Although Jesus healed the sick, he does not appear to be particularly overwhelmed with what a nice magic act it is do so…what’s the big deal, really, when this life is measured against eternal life, if you are ill?
In short, Jesus was apolitical, not conservative or libertarian or liberal.