1 edit
@rajk999 saidhttps://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/spirituality/is-jesus-too-liberal-for-republicans.197706/page-4
It is also true that the rich needs to give to the poor and help, instead of being caught up with worshiping their money. The love of money is the sin. Having lots of money is not the sin.
I never said poor people were worthless trash .. another example of you being dishonest.
Rajk said:
How does a man get poor ? Here are the reasons
- broken homes with no faither
- weak parenting
- lack of education and work skills
- promiscuity
- laziness
- drugs and alcohol
- bad health, greed and gluttony
Laziness, absentee fathers, no education is a big part.
Maybe instead of spending your time condemning the rich and Christians, and slavery and God knows what else, start looking at the man in the mirror... have a chat with him about your ailment,,, and stop begging and looking for handouts. Grow some balls and have some pride. Go out there and work, and educate yourself and your buddies.
Certainly seems you're blaming the poor for their poverty.
But you're now saying that it's merely one reason among others. So I'll acknowledge you're at least improving.
https://blogs.worldbank.org/developmenttalk/half-global-population-lives-less-us685-person-day
Half of the global population lives on less than US$6.85 per person per day
2 edits
@vivify saidI certainly am blaming the poor for most of their poverty, because the bible did and you can observe that it is true for the most part.
https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/spirituality/is-jesus-too-liberal-for-republicans.197706/page-4
Rajk said:
[quote]How does a man get poor ? Here are the reasons
- broken homes with no faither
- weak parenting
- lack of education and work skills
- promiscuity
- laziness
- drugs and alcohol
- bad health, greed and gluttony
Laziness, absentee fathers, no educatio ...[text shortened]... 685-person-day
Half of the global population lives on less than US$6.85 per person per day
Give not sleep to thine eyes, nor slumber to thine eyelids. Deliver thyself as a roe from the hand of the hunter, and as a bird from the hand of the fowler. Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise: Which having no guide, overseer, or ruler, Provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth her food in the harvest. How long wilt thou sleep, O sluggard? when wilt thou arise out of thy sleep? Yet a little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to sleep: So shall thy poverty come as one that travelleth, and thy want as an armed man. (Proverbs 6:4-11 KJV)
There are exceptions.
How did you conclude that I said they were worthless trash. Jesus said that those who can must help the poor, even though it is mostly their fault.
Also I listed many reasons, not just laziness and stupidity.
@vivify saidIt is a ubiquitous conservative talking point in many places around the world that the poor are to blame for their poverty, just as you will find wealth is widely lionized as an indicator of virtue.
Certainly seems you're blaming the poor for their poverty.
That posturing aside, morally speaking, in your view, what would be the correct approach of our governments/societies to poverty in those instances where its source can, indeed, be traced back to the unwillingness of some poor people to do what's necessary to lift themselves out of their predicament?
@suzianne saidEvangelicals know full well Trump is no model Christian; Evangelicals know he's a lying, philandering, tax-evading, incompetent, vindictive, rude, ignorant, petty fool -- he doesn't even know which way the Bible is UP when he takes one with him for a photo op. But he's a useful fool: he got the SCOTUS to overturn Roe, so he's doing God's work in spite of himself.
Since Trump first announced he was running, I thought, "Oh, good luck getting the evangelical vote", and now look where they are.
Championing the interests of "the poor" is all well and good.
But if it's just a mixture of rhetoric and sneering at dissenters, then it is a stance that has scarcely any moral content.
Indeed, it becomes a kind of superficial exercise in 'identity politics'.
Championing the interests of "the poor" needs to be about action and policy: morality is about action and not about thoughts or opinions.
This may not be the right forum to discuss policies in detail, but there is a valid moral question we could address [aside from what obligations the non-poor have toward the poor].
And that is: what moral responsibilities do poor people have with regard to the economic burden that may be placing on people who are better off than they are?
1 edit
@fmf saidThis is a good question. Let me give you the biblical perspective. Jesus said that the poor will always be there. I take that to mean there will always be lazy and stupid people. You cannot escape that. What govts are supposed to do is to ensure that even the most lazy ones at least have something to eat and some kind of shelter. In the days of Moses the farmers were required to leave enough for the poor to glean off the crop so that they wont starve. Providing more that that is where the problem arises because govts in some countries are giving people enough to live comfortably so that there is no incentive to work. This leads to poor productivity and high % of dependent people, and eventually economic failure.
It is a ubiquitous conservative talking point in many places around the world that the poor are to blame for their poverty, just as you will find wealth is widely lionized as an indicator of virtue.
That posturing aside, morally speaking, in your view, what would be the correct approach of our governments/societies to poverty in those instances where its source can, indeed, b ...[text shortened]... nwillingness of some poor people to do what's necessary to lift themselves out of their predicament?
@rajk999 saidLet me give you the biblical perspective. Jesus said that the poor will always be there. I take that to mean there will always be lazy and stupid people.
This is a good question. Let me give you the biblical perspective. Jesus said that the poor will always be there. I take that to mean there will always be lazy and stupid people. You cannot escape that. What govts are supposed to do is to ensure that even the most lazy ones at least have something to eat and some kind of shelter. In the days of Moses the farmers were req ...[text shortened]... k. This leads to poor productivity and high % of dependent people, and eventually economic failure.
I don't agree that the meaning of the word "poor" also incorporates the notions of "laziness" and "stupidity".
@rajk999 saidProviding more than that is where the problem arises because govts in some countries are giving people enough to live comfortably so that there is no incentive to work.
This is a good question. Let me give you the biblical perspective. Jesus said that the poor will always be there. I take that to mean there will always be lazy and stupid people. You cannot escape that. What govts are supposed to do is to ensure that even the most lazy ones at least have something to eat and some kind of shelter. In the days of Moses the farmers were req ...[text shortened]... k. This leads to poor productivity and high % of dependent people, and eventually economic failure.
I have no doubt that I am more to the "left" on these matters than you, for what it's worth.
However, I can scarcely remember any poster on the "left" ~ here at RHP in all these years ~ being willing to address the issue of where the parameters should be set when relief for the poor is framed as an issue of moral obligation
@rajk999 saidYou're truly a piece of work.
This is a good question. Let me give you the biblical perspective. Jesus said that the poor will always be there. I take that to mean there will always be lazy and stupid people. You cannot escape that. What govts are supposed to do is to ensure that even the most lazy ones at least have something to eat and some kind of shelter. In the days of Moses the farmers were req ...[text shortened]... k. This leads to poor productivity and high % of dependent people, and eventually economic failure.