Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
We're "a city upon a hill."
Comrade Pope backs carbon tax
- Thread starter drbrumley
- Start date
Right Divider
Body part
:rotfl:
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
You laugh at America? :think: You don't believe in the Second Amendment? :liberals:
Hmm.
Right Divider
Body part
I laughed at your silly comment.
Was that really hard to understand for you?
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Yes it was. What was funny about calling America "a city upon a hill," especially in the context of the US uniquely and singularly defending the inalienable right to bear arms, e.g., the land of the free and home of the brave, where assault weapons are readily available to almost every American, almost everywhere in America? Do you find it funny that defending such right provides for that "the poor and the powerless are empowered?" lmk.
Right Divider
Body part
The reply was not about guns... it was about redistribution of other peoples money.
Is Pope Francis a socialist? In my eyes it's undeniable. He's been a fan of socialist doctrine most of his life and he thinks being called a socialist is a compliment. That this pope sees parallels between communism/socialism and Christianity is very revealing. Karl Marx hated Christianity and Christian values. That the head of a Christian religion would see Marx's ideology which advocats the destruction of all religion as Christian is pretty mind boggling.
https://spectator.org/pope-franciss-communist-mentor/
https://spectator.org/pope-franciss-communist-mentor/
Such deliberate distortion is disgusting.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
LOL. Because I'm conservative and despise leftist ideology, you say I hate the poor. Sorry, but you're an idiot. I am poor. My income is less than $1000/month. Does that qualify me as being poor, or must I have less income than that to qualify as poor? The way I see your statements is that In your mind I'm a self-hating fool. But the reality is much different.
I believe that the love of God, the keeping of the commandments of God, is expressed in the Golden Rule: doing unto others as I would have them do unto me. Does that also qualify as hatred for anyone in your mind?
This is just another example of how internet communication was widened and deepened the gulf between all of us.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
The way you see that statement is through your bias filters, one of which is personalizing everything I say to yourself. I'm not thinking of you every time I post, ffreeloader.
Does that mean you'd like to be called an idiot? Because I'm not inclined to do that even though you might be.
Somehow, I suspect that even a face-to-face interaction with you would end up pretty much the same.
anna,
Here are your words:
Ummm.... Just why would "right-wingers" not want to help the poor? And since I'm obviously a "right-winger" in your eyes I'm some type of self-flagellating, self-hating fool since I wouldn't want to help myself. Why? Because your statement carves out no exceptions in the "right-wingers". It is all-inclusive of all people on that side of the political spectrum. Here is the great divide between your thinking and mine. Helping myself does not include taking money out of other people's pockets like your side of the political aisle loves to do. Becoming dependent on government, or anyone/anything else, destroys self-respect, self-reliance, and ambition. Its effect is destructive to the recipient of the so-called government largesse.
Helping myself, in my eyes, is the opportunity to work, to earn my own living, and does not include taking money out of other people's pockets at the point of the government's gun. That falls under the rubric of treating others the way I want to be treated. Taking their money by force is repugnant to me because I find that having what I have earned taken away from me by force is reprehensible too.
The laws of economics teach us that government debt and deficit spending causes inflation, and inflation hurts poor people far worse than it hurts any other economic class of people. Why? Because poor people do not have the reserve spending power needed as a hedge against it. Thus government entitlement programs hurt the poor far more than anyone else. All big government does for the more money spent on government the more inflation we have, and the more the poor are hurt financially.
So, to help myself I need smaller government and the accompanying reductions in government spending. That increases my chances of holding on to what I have. It also increases the likelihood of finding a job for the reduced government regulation opens up the ability for small businesses to hire more people and increase production. That right there increases the total wealth in the economy and I get a share of it. Wealth is built upon production, not spending, as no one has ever spent their way to wealth. It's impossible. We can work and save our way to wealth, but we can never, ever, spend our way to wealth, and every policy you push has at it's basis the idea of spending our way to wealth. It's the biggest, and most successfully promulgated, of all the lies taught by Maynard Keynes with his deceiftul economics. His greatest life's ambition was to defraud the general public and he succeeded in that beyond his wildest dreams.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
all right-wingers?
some right-wingers?
a majority of right-wingers?
a small proportion of right-wingers?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
It runs all through their political outlook. Sad, but true.
I don't know if you're a right-winger. I know you're a conservative, but I don't know if you're a wingnut kind of conservative. I don't know/don't remember enough about you to know that, and again, you're personalizing.
Great divide? I don't think so, I think you'd do the same if you flipped the script to those who hold the "leftist" viewpoint you "despise" ("leftist" often used to label anything to the left of right-wing rather than left of center).
How do you feel about Social Security, Medicare, Disability, Aid to Families With Dependent Children?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
almost missed this side of it:
all the poor?
some of the poor?
a majority of the poor?
a small proportion of the poor?
Last edited:
What runs "all through their political outlook"?
Conservatism is part of the right wing of politics. It most definitely isn't part of the left. You would most likely consider me a "wingnut" kind of conservative for I'm a Consitutionalist, and conservative economically and theologically. I consider large parts of the federal government to be in violation of the Consitution as there is zero evidence in it that gives the federal government the authority to stick it's nose into those areas. Our government is now upside down in its power structure from how it was conceived and first put into practice. The main seat of power in the beginning was the township. The next step down from that was the county level. Then the state, and then the federal government. That put most decision making at the local level in the hands of the people who were affected by what was voted on. Now the federal government has usurped control of almost everything. Our nation has gone from bottom up leadership and power to top down power and control.
Leftist to me is anything that flows from collective ideology.
I think SS is a ponzi scheme created to take in tax revenue under false pretenses. Medicare is another scam. If all the money I paid into Medicare was in my hands I would use it far better and far more efficiently than the federal government. The way it is, I get absolutely nothing out of all the money I paid in taxes. It's a 100% bust. Disability is another scam. It's not made to help. It's made to make people dependent on government. I've had enough personal experience with it to know. Its rules are designed to control, not to actually help. Any time government gets involved at that level it becomes a bureaucratic nightmare that is there to support the bureaucracy, not help the people it is supposed to. All of the government entitlement programs do the same thing. The money is spent with little regard to efficiency and great regard to the bureaucracy and it's power and continuation of that power and thus its continued existance.
We the people would be much better off with a government greatly reduced in size and scope and the power and decision making returned to those it really belongs to and who know far more about their own circumstances than any bureaucrat or law maker. We would also have a currency that has actual value rather than being debt which means the purchasing power of our dollar would be almost 100% greater than it is now. that would be a major help to the poor. Along with being able to purchase what they needed they would have jobs and the confidence, self-reliance, etc... that comes from supporting themselves not being made dependent on bureaucrats who could care less about them.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
I'd say right-wingers are the radical right of conservatism.
I consider myself more a Constitutionalist than many Trumpers.
Again, I don't think conservative and right-wing are necessarily interchangeable. Think of it as more like a Venn diagram.
That's way too broad.
Did you collect disability? Are you of Medicare and Social Security age? If you use/used these programs, did/do they benefit you?
I'll check back here in a week or so, I'll be out of town and offline during that time.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Good question. A constitutionalist is someone who believes our Constitution is the supreme law of the land and that any department of government, law, legislation, etc... that does not comply with the intent of the founders when they wrote the Constitution is null and void. The same goes for the legal system and the Supreme Court decisions for the SC has been slowly destroying our Constitution for many decades with their decisions. And, the legal system has completely abandoned how law is administered compared to how this was done originally. Today everything is based on precedent, but that has only been since latter half of the 1800s. Before then the basis of our law and legal system was Blackstone's theory of law which is based in Christianity. The SCs role has become an 9 person oligarchy that is ruling this nation by fiat of legal decisions rather than staying within the Constitution's guidelines for the limits of its authority.
The move to precedent was intentional as it allows the legal system to change the focus and direction of society without the need to enact legislation or appeal to the voters.
So, tracing the roots of ideas and their consequences in society is way too broad of a yardstick? Huh?
What other valid yardstick is there? The idea of taking each issue as if it is unrelated to anything else is a sure recipe for destroying/denying principles. As principles are very stubborn things which rear their heads every time we violate them ignoring them is something we do to our own hurt. I do not collect disability. I'm of age for SS and Medicare. However, that has nothing to do with whether SS is a ponzi scheme. SS taxes are placed in the general fund and spent as they come in and not reserved strictly for SS disbursement. If a citizen was to run a business like this they would be tossed in prison for fraud, you know, like Bernie Madoff. That is why SS is going bankrupt. The money has long ago been spent, not held and invested for the benefit of those who paid into the scheme. Medicare is in the same boat. It relies a great deal on the general fund, which is basically destroyed because of all the debt and borrowing by the federal government. The state of these socialistic programs is due directly to the corruption always found in government as it is impossible to hold politicians responsible for irresponsible spending. It just proves we cannot place our trust in government.