Question for Chap

Callers to action, creators of Superpacs, and championers of causes great and small unite! Air all your political thoughts here. Whitened teeth, dyed hair, and spray-on tans not required but preferred.

Re: Question for Chap

Postby spongebob » Fri Sep 23, 2016 7:44 am

Chapabel wrote:I'm not a heartless fellow. I'm a person who sees how the system is being manipulated by countless individuals for their own gain. These people live for free in government housing, they receive EBT cards for free food, they receive free health care. But wait...these folks are also the drug dealers, pimps/prostitutes and gang members. Where they live are areas where shootings and other crimes take place.


Can you not resort to shallow rhetoric for once?

I live near a state park. There are signs everywhere prohibiting people from feeding the wildlife. The reason being the animals will become dependant on people for food and will lose their fear of people and pose a threat to us. The government is doing the same thing to people by housing and feeding them. They have become dependant on the government and they have lost respect for themselves and others. Treat people like animals and they eventually act like animals. Look at cities like Detroit, Chicago and Atlanta. Major urban areas run by Democrats. These cities are full of people living on the government's dole. They are also cities which are cesspools of crime.


Do you happen to know why cities like Detroit have such high poverty rates? I could tell you but I imagine you just wouldn't believe me.

You really want to help underprivileged people? Then educate and train them to be contributing members of society and stop enabling them. Until you liberals do that the problem will continue. But then you lose votes.


One of the most often promoted Democratic ideas for helping people out of poverty and helping people find better work when their company relocates to China is training programs and education, but Republicans routinely reject these ideas as too expensive and just another form of government assistance.

I was talking to a friend’s little girl, and she said she wanted to be President some day. Both of her parents, liberal Democrats, were standing there, so I asked her, ‘If you were to be the President, what is the first thing you would do?’

She replied, ‘I’d give food and houses to all the homeless people.’ ‘Wow - what a worthy goal.’ I told her, ‘You don’t have to wait until you’re President to do that. You can come over to my house and mow, pull weeds, and sweep my sidewalks and driveway, and I’ll pay you $50. Then I’ll take you over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the $50 to use toward food or a new house.’

She thought that over for a few seconds ‘cause she’s only 6. And while her Mom glared at me, the little girl looked me straight in the eye and asked, “Why doesn’t the homeless guy come over and do the work, and you can just pay him the $50?”

And I said, “Welcome to the Republican Party, sweetheart.”


Again, gratuitous use of rhetoric. You do know that I and KTR can do that as well, but I won't because it is beneath me.
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones.
~Bertrand Russell

:spongeb:
User avatar
spongebob
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Affiliation: Humanist - Bright

Re: Question for Chap

Postby spongebob » Fri Sep 23, 2016 8:18 am

I also want to ask how you can condemn government programs designed to help the poor while participating in church activities that do the same thing? I assume that since you are a Baptist, you give money to foreign missions and perhaps even participate in them personally. Why? How are those people any different?

And when it comes to assistance programs in the US, are you advocating for better programs or no programs at all? If it's the former then we are in agreement and the argument is all about rhetoric. If it's the latter then I just don't understand how you can be a Christian and have this position.

Also I want to comment on your reference to a homeless person. Are you aware that the leading cause of homelessness is mental illness? Does that have any bearing on your opinion of homeless people in general or are you just 100% sold on the idea that all homeless people are shiftless good-for-nothings?

And finally, I want to respond to your comment about me looking at "data". Chap, this is consistent with a long-growing tendency of conservatives to reject and even sneer at anything with roots in science or analysis (evolution, climate science, statistics on immigration and poverty...etc). I would like to understand this more. If I could give you statistical data (obtained through hard work) that say that 95% of all homeless people arrived at that position in life out of no fault of their own, would that have bearing on your opinion on the matter? (Note that I don't have such data; this is just hypothetical.) What I'm trying to get at here is why you appear to scoff at information I present from a position of hard data and I suppose use your own personal, anecdotal experiences to better guide you to developing your opinions. What is it about hard information that causes you to lack trust in it over your own, albeit more limited, personal experiences?
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones.
~Bertrand Russell

:spongeb:
User avatar
spongebob
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Affiliation: Humanist - Bright

Re: Question for Chap

Postby Simplyme » Fri Sep 23, 2016 9:50 am

I'm not a heartless fellow. I'm a person who sees how the system is being manipulated by countless individuals for their own gain. These people live for free in government housing, they receive EBT cards for free food, they receive free health care. But wait...these folks are also the drug dealers, pimps/prostitutes and gang members.


Maybe not heartless, no. But for sure CLUELESS.

You are starting to sound like Trump. I could not have insulted you anymore...............
I find it rather amusing, when thought of as ignorant or stupid(though I can be on many subjects). Especially by those who believe in a deity up in heaven watching our every move, and rewarding or punishing us after we have expired.
Simplyme
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5958
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:11 am

Re: Question for Chap

Postby Keep The Reason » Fri Sep 23, 2016 10:56 am

Chapabel wrote:I understand there are millions like you who do not get free stuff and still vote Democrat. I'm praying for y'all too.


I'd say that last sentence is the primary root of our disagreements. That and I'd say you are a pretty textbook case of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Which you'll probably consider an insult but I think you actually do represent that syndrome. This is why authoritarians flock to Trump. The less educated (academically or factually) a person is, the more likely they are to allow simply tribal notions to override well balanced rationale, and the more likely they are to buy into assertions that ignite their emotional satisfaction needs rather than actual solutions to problems. It was something also pretty much whitewashed over all your responses, even the gun debate.

You really do not care about demonstrable facts, you really do care about simplistic talking points that confirm your biases.

I'm not a heartless fellow.


Yes, actually I believe you are fairly heartless, but it's considered so run-of-the-mill that it gets a complete pass. Look, you believe in a worldview that assigns human beings to some kind of eternal torture for simplistic mistakes (like, being born into the wrong religion), and you not only have no real problem with such a horrific idea, you enthusiastically embrace it. And you're first in line to blame the victims, "Well you had your chance to choose right but you chose wrong so-- burn in Hell".

So yeah, I believe (and I believe it based on what you've displayed over and over) that deep down, you are, indeed, heartless. It's just considered "rude" to tell the people the emperor has no clothes. But-- you have no clothes.

Next, you actually think of prayer as some kind of effective tool. Prayer is a great way to convince narcissists that they are doing some great works while they are doing utterly nothing whatsoever except mumbling. Praying is wishful thinking, nothing more or less, and I know you think differently but... frankly, if things are as horrible as you say they are with the poor and homeless, than let me let you in on a little (completely obvious) secret: Your praying ain't doin' shit.

Except making YOU feel like you're doing something noble. (I wonder if, when people say "I'll pray for you", they even bother to actually do that little thing; it comes across as sincere a claim as "gesundheit!" does when someone sneezes; it's a deepity that means utterly nothing).

I'm a person who sees how the system is being manipulated by countless individuals for their own gain. These people live for free in government housing, they receive EBT cards for free food, they receive free health care. But wait...these folks are also the drug dealers, pimps/prostitutes and gang members. Where they live are areas where shootings and other crimes take place.


Why is this the case when you and billions like you are praying so hard to have it differently? Either god ain't hearing you, or he doesn't care, or your praying is a waste of time.

But of course you have a cartoon version (read: Fox News) of welfare. Most people who complain about it are in some ways on it or rely on it (generally without realizing it), most are only on it temporarily, and most people want off it. You are literally a walking textbook of all the myths of welfare, because you are, deep down, heartless and lack the very compassion you flail about defending in your very own god. This is why I state unequivocally that you, and countless Christians just like you, are the biggest and most obvious hypocrites imaginable. It's one thing to be heartless and lack compassion, it's completely another to be that way and at the same time promote a worshiping of a god who tells you directly to NOT be that way. But you don't really care because deep down -- heartless.

Here's some facts. This particular article simply sums it up succinctly but you could investigate each of these and find corroborating support that all of these myths are indeed myths.

Seven Lies about Welfare

Myth #1: Welfare Payments Are Too High
In reality, welfare benefits are modest at best, despite the continual attacks by conservative politicians who try, year after year, to reduce them.

Take the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps: The average benefit per person is $1.50 per meal.

Can you imagine trying to feed yourself adequately—not to mention healthily—on such an small amount of money?

Similar to SNAP, most other government assistance programs seek to provide only the barest minimum amount of help that an individual or family needs to survive.

Myth #2: Welfare Recipients Are Lazy
The idea that most people on welfare are able-bodied adults who are just too lazy to get a job and make an honest living is utterly false.

Most benefit programs require recipients to work in order to collect. Take Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), for example. Single parents receiving this grant must work at least 30 hours per week in order to be eligible, and two-parent families must work between 35 and 50 hours a week.

The fact is, blue-collar wages in America are simply not high enough to support workers in today’s economy. The wages paid by many large employers are so low that their full-time employees are eligible for welfare.

You heard that right: People are working full-time to support their families, paying their fair share of taxes, but are so underpaid that they can’t get by without relying on government assistance.

This is partly due to the disturbing fact that the federal minimum wage has not been increased in over five years (despite the incessantly rising cost of living in our country) and partly due to voracious corporate greed.

And furthermore, half of all food stamp recipients are children. More than 82% of all food stamp money goes to households that include children, elderly people, or people with disabilities.These are people who legally or physically cannot work and live at the mercy of the system.

So where are all of these able-bodied lazy adults who are luxuriating off of their benefits? They are a fabrication.

Most people on welfare are hardworking, taxpaying citizens, just like the rest of us. Or they are impoverished children, elders, or folks with disabilities.

But it’s a lot easier for welfare critics to take help away from people that they imagine are lazy and deceitful, so that false image lives on.

Myth #3: Undocumented Immigrants Are All on Welfare
Nope. Absolutely not.

In fact, undocumented immigrants in the US are not eligible for any benefits except emergency Medicaid (in the case that they are severely injured or sick).

According to the Social Security Administration, about half to three-quarters of undocumented immigrants pay federal, state, and local taxes, including billions in Social Security taxes for benefits that they will never see a penny of.

Yes, their kids can attend public schools for free, but undocumented immigrants are actually contributing more to the American economy than they take away—and they have no access to food stamps or other welfare programs, despite being one of the lowest-paid groups in the nation.

Myth #4: People Use Welfare to Support Their Drug Habits
Federal government research tells us that the population of welfare receivers on drugs is basically the same as that of the American population in general—in some cases, even lower.

Recent drug testing results from individual states also prove the falseness of this widely accepted myth.

In July 2014, Tennessee began testing their welfare applicants, resulting in a whopping 1-in-800 people testing positive for illegal drugs. That’s less than 1%.

In Florida, four months of drug testing revealed that only 2.6% of applicants tested positive (in contrast, 8% of Florida’s non-welfare receiving population regularly test positive for drugs).

Research proves time and time again that mandated drug testing costs taxpayers much more money than it saves. And since welfare naysayers never get the results that they want from the tests, you would think they would give up with this tired tactic already.

Myth #5: The ‘Welfare Queen Is Hoodwinking Us All
Ronald Reagan once made a speech in which he claimed “There’s a woman in Chicago. She has 80 names, 30 addresses, 12 Social Security cards… She’s got Medicaid, getting food stamps, and she is collecting welfare under each of her names. Her tax-free cash income alone is over $150,000.”

“Who is this woman and how dare she steal the money of innocent, hardworking people?”cried the voices of people across the nation.

Thus was born the infamous and still widely discussed “Welfare Queen.”

She stands for all welfare recipients that are (supposedly) lazily drinking the day away, popping out babies in order to “rake in” more welfare money, and fooling the system by getting more than their share of benefits and then using them to buy iPhones and lobster dinners.

Oh, and she’s obviously Black. Although Reagan didn’t specifically mention her race, he played upon white America’s racial fears to ensure that people assumed she was Black.

What’s more, she is the perfect scapegoat for us to blame for the problems of our nation, the perfect reason to not feel bad about voting for politicians who want to cut meager welfare benefits to struggling families.

There’s just one catch.

She doesn’t exist. Good old President Reagan made her up.

What’s much more important than the falsehood of that single example is the fact that this stereotype doesn’t hold up in general. As we’ve already discovered, most welfare recipients are people just like us—hard workers struggling to support themselves and their families in the wake of the Great Recession.

My advice? Speak out when people bring up the tired Welfare Queen and her 12 babies. A future in which people don’t begrudge struggling families their humble benefits based on a racist myth is possible.

Spread knowledge and knowledge will overcome.

Myth #6: Welfare Is Not Effective
Government assistance is extremely effective at helping people get out of—and stay out of—poverty.

Conservative groups like the Cato Institute try to convince the public that because of increasing demand for programs such as food stamps, welfare has failed. In fact, the economic damage done by the Great Recession is the cause of rising food stamp participants.

The question we should be asking is, where would we be without these programs?

Well, in 2013, for example:

Food stamps helped lessen the burden of poverty for 4.8 million people.
The Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit kept 8 million hardworking families from falling under the poverty line.
If Social Security didn’t exist, 27 million more people would be poor.
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

Every year, Census Bureau data proves that welfare programs are instrumental in helping people get back on their feet—and quickly.

This is exactly why these programs are necessary. And precisely why cutting their funding doesn’t make any sense.

In contrast, increasing funding to welfare programs would help alleviate poverty to an even greater extent, which would in turn help the economy grow and protect the middle class.

This brings us to the greatest myth of all—the myth that you or I will never, under no circumstance, need government assistance.

Myth #7: You’ll Never Need Welfare
Welfare, in some form, touches most people at some point during their life.

Maybe it was that few months of unemployment benefits that the war vet received when she was laid off. Maybe it was childcare resources that saved the single dad’s ass when he needed to go to work and leave the kids at home. Or perhaps it was the tax credits that got that working family through their roughest time.

No one can truthfully know that life will not throw them a curveball that severely impacts their financial situation. It’s crucial to understand that many of the welfare recipients people pity—or disdain—started out in a much more stable position.

And no matter what our current circumstances are, things change. Wealth, health, and good luck do not always last. Not one of us can know for sure that we won’t need to rely on welfare at some point in our lives.

Realizing this is just one important step towards cultivating empathy for those who are less fortunate than us.

Providing a safety net through government assistance makes our country stronger—and it’s time for Americans to stop spreading untrue and damaging rumors decrying the very programs that are creating a brighter future for our nation’s most vulnerable. It’s time for politicians to stop trying to cut meager benefits to struggling families.

Because there are millions of people out there who truly need these programs to help them get back on their feet. And you never know—someday, you might be one of them.


I live near a state park. There are signs everywhere prohibiting people from feeding the wildlife. The reason being the animals will become dependant on people for food and will lose their fear of people and pose a threat to us. The government is doing the same thing to people by housing and feeding them.


No it's not, except if your mind is a funnel for right wing mythology and Fox News bullshit. Add to that: A lack of compassion for the suffering of others, a religion that is rewards/punishment based on the most simplistic of levers (believe= win / do not believe = lose) and the inherent (and vast) sense of privilege and superiority such a belief system promotes ("I'm saved. I don't know WTF you're gonna do, but I'm saved!") and the decisive shift into emotions-based thinking this leads to (thereby limiting one's ability to self-educate beyond anything that doesn't adhere to his or her confirmation biases) and you have... you:

1. Filled to the brim with some local experiences you think serves as a global model when it doesn't.
2. Smug self-righteousness that you can "pray away" some issue rather than --you know -- actually do something
3. Awash in mythologies that are easily swept away simply by doing the research.
4. Condemned to continuing growing the problem because you have no actual solutions of any value
5. Resulting in a feedback loop that simply confirms 1 thru 4 above leading back to this 5.

They have become dependant on the government and they have lost respect for themselves and others. Treat people like animals and they eventually act like animals. Look at cities like Detroit, Chicago and Atlanta. Major urban areas run by Democrats. These cities are full of people living on the government's dole. They are also cities which are cesspools of crime. You really want to help underprivileged people? Then educate and train them to be contributing members of society and stop enabling them. Until you liberals do that the problem will continue. But then you lose votes.


Now we see the inherent racism. Nice job. Detroit, Chicago, and Atlanta. All known dog whistles for "black urban communities".

Further ignorance of how we got here; total ignoring of any systemic racism (which you yourself DISPLAY, right here, right NOW)

I was talking to a friend’s little girl, and she said she wanted to be President some day. Both of her parents, liberal Democrats, were standing there, so I asked her, ‘If you were to be the President, what is the first thing you would do?’

She replied, ‘I’d give food and houses to all the homeless people.’ ‘Wow - what a worthy goal.’ I told her, ‘You don’t have to wait until you’re President to do that. You can come over to my house and mow, pull weeds, and sweep my sidewalks and driveway, and I’ll pay you $50. Then I’ll take you over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the $50 to use toward food or a new house.’

She thought that over for a few seconds ‘cause she’s only 6. And while her Mom glared at me, the little girl looked me straight in the eye and asked, “Why doesn’t the homeless guy come over and do the work, and you can just pay him the $50?”

And I said, “Welcome to the Republican Party, sweetheart.”


You have no idea how this little tale of yours confirms the Dunning-Kruger accusation, and how it makes your entire political party out to be nothing but a heaping pile of jerks, do you?

First: "Yeah, fuck those homeless mentally ill vets slumped against the wall of the 7-11. Get a job, bitches! Cut my lawn! Go make my tacos! I don't care about your PTSD, pull yourself up by your bootstraps and cut my lawn while I make out another check to the RNC so they can shuffle it off to the military that's 50 times the size of all the world's militaries combined (hence is a massive socialist jobs program that drives billions in business across the country building weapons and shit we don't need), and to corporate welfare in the billions!"

Second: Why does it figure that your little parable here is grounded in the thinking level of a 6 year old, and this you champion as the foundation plank of Republicanism?

Oh, I know why. Because it's childishly simplistic, uneducated, unrealistic, ignorant, and does nothing to solve a problem (Dunning-Kruger!)... but it warms the cockles of the heart of the heartless conservative right winger.

(Oh, and PS: I love how the "Liberal mom glared at me" line is plugged in there for some kind of effect, lol. Yeah, those liberal Dems never have an answer to the incredibly clever responses of the conservative Republicans -- they just can only stand there and be mad! Must be because they are all Knee-Grows. Next thing you know they'll be rioting and taking away your guns and rights to be Christian!

LOL. Meanwhile, there's only a mountain of data that completely obliterates the conservatives visions that are self-admitted to be based on the thinking of a first grader, lol. Fail).
To cut some folks off at the pass, I don't advocate for violence, oppression, genocide, war, hatred or intolerance. Instead, I advocate for education, organization, activism, and the democratic process. ~~ KtR
User avatar
Keep The Reason
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 10416
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 4:50 pm
Affiliation: Reasonist

Re: Question for Chap

Postby spongebob » Fri Sep 23, 2016 12:22 pm

Those are all excellent points, KTR, and I thank you for taking the time and energy to compile them. I know how exhausting it is trying to muster an argument based on actual facts when the other side just retorts with empty rhetoric and denigrates facts and evidence and data. It is truly intolerable.

There are literally too many things to say on this subject. The anecdote about the little girl and the homeless man is just a precious example of conservative oversimplification. Of course homeless people have no excuse for not working; they are as able bodied and sound as an engineer working for Boeing, right? And jobs are just laying around on every street corner, right? Of course I'm not going to be guilty of the same emptiness as Chap; I will acknowledge that some people are shiftless, but that number is vastly exaggerated by people like him. The truth is that currently the job situation in the US is as dire as it has been since the great depression. There are many jobs that pay less than the basic cost of living. The number of jobs paying a comfortable wage have been dwindling for the last two decades. I'm concerned even for myself at times and I have a degree in Chemical Engineering with almost 30 years experience. This was once one of the highest paying degrees one could get, but there's been essentially zero movement in the last 20 years while the pay of people running hedge funds has increased exponentially. The very factories where I work used to employ thousands; now most of them make more product and more profit while employing maybe a quarter of the number of people. When I started out as a wee engineer, my company employed around 30 engineers at the plant where I worked. That same plant employs maybe 5 or 6 today. They do bring in contract engineers when they are needed, which is how I work today, but at a much lower price and benefits. And the CEO of that same company I once worked for gets payed at least four times the CEO when I was first hired. And this is the same guy complaining that corporate taxes are too high.

If you don't have a college degree now, your only hope of ever rising to the upper upper class rests solely on your ability to win the lottery. And the cost of getting a college degree now is at least 10 times what it cost when I went to college. So no, Chap, there's no reason anyone should want for good working opportunities, is there? High paying jobs are just everywhere.

Here's another example for you. I did a project for a company a while back and while I was there the workers told me about a particular line of products the company used to make that was very popular. The company stopped production of that product, shut down the equipment and sold it off because it didn't make enough profit. Not because it didn't make any profit; it just didn't make enough. Of course about a dozen workers lost their jobs because of that. This is sort of corporate driven, profit centered country we live in, Chap. It's a country where white men, sitting in offices 200 feet above the ground, wearing $5,000 suits make decisions that cost dozens of families their livelihood. But that's just the breaks, right? Go and get another job, right? Dig a little deeper, right? I just don't think this ideology of worshiping the mighty dollar over everything else can be rationally squared with an ideology of love and compassion for all mankind. In reality we are locked in an ancient struggle between the aristocracy and the common man. This has always been the struggle; the setting and details change but the struggle does not. You are not one of the aristocracy, but they have brainwashed you into fighting for them.
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones.
~Bertrand Russell

:spongeb:
User avatar
spongebob
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Affiliation: Humanist - Bright

Re: Question for Chap

Postby Keep The Reason » Fri Sep 23, 2016 2:10 pm

Here's another thing. When I was growing up in the 60s and 70s, my old man had a job. That's it. A JOB. We had a nice split level house in an offshoot of Levittown, NY. Classic Leave It to Beaver upbringing. He had 2.5 kids, a vacation a year, some credit cards, a Cadillac for himself and a Nova for his wife. We ate well, had new clothes for school each year, a dog, and allowances, plus really amazing Christmases (presents piled high every year) etc. We were considered lower middle class.

Now EVERY such family has to have 2 incomes just to make ends meet + they need assistance from government resources. It's a constant struggle. And we have CEOs who now make 10, 15 times what their employees make. Megacorps get away with off-shoring both their labor and their wealth, and pay nearly 0 in taxes. Of course, the churches pay nothing and they bilk their gullible followers of billions.

It's utterly obscene but the right wing has cultivated this hateful narrative for 20-30 years now, and look at the misery it's wrought. And then this guy Chapabel regurgitates nothing but empty Limbaughian bloviating points, and actually believes it.

Intolerable is precisely the right word for it.

Here's another example for you. I did a project for a company a while back and while I was there the workers told me about a particular line of products the company used to make that was very popular. The company stopped production of that product, shut down the equipment and sold it off because it didn't make enough profit. Not because it didn't make any profit; it just didn't make enough. Of course about a dozen workers lost their jobs because of that. This is sort of corporate driven, profit centered country we live in, Chap.


This is the inherent flaw with capitalism. If you are pushing for higher profits each quarter, you will eventually put yourself in a position that you cannot hope to make it without raising prices constantly and cutting costs. This is why we need caps on profits. Because what once cost $5.00 eventually will cost $50.00, and we can all see this happening. Who here can remember $1.00 gas? I remember gas at 25 cents a gallon. Now it's 3.00 a gallon, and no way has my pay increased over my Dad's pay that same degree of percentage (what is 25 cents to 3.00 in percentage? 50 cents = 100%, so it's like 700%?!) My pay isn't 700 times what my old man's was and I'll bet no one else's is either.
To cut some folks off at the pass, I don't advocate for violence, oppression, genocide, war, hatred or intolerance. Instead, I advocate for education, organization, activism, and the democratic process. ~~ KtR
User avatar
Keep The Reason
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 10416
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 4:50 pm
Affiliation: Reasonist

Re: Question for Chap

Postby Simplyme » Fri Sep 23, 2016 2:51 pm

He had 2.5 kids


How does one get half a kid?

:-)
I find it rather amusing, when thought of as ignorant or stupid(though I can be on many subjects). Especially by those who believe in a deity up in heaven watching our every move, and rewarding or punishing us after we have expired.
Simplyme
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5958
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:11 am

Re: Question for Chap

Postby Chapabel » Sat Sep 24, 2016 8:00 am

spongebob wrote:
Chapabel wrote:I'm not a heartless fellow. I'm a person who sees how the system is being manipulated by countless individuals for their own gain. These people live for free in government housing, they receive EBT cards for free food, they receive free health care. But wait...these folks are also the drug dealers, pimps/prostitutes and gang members. Where they live are areas where shootings and other crimes take place.


Can you not resort to shallow rhetoric for once?

The truth is "shallow rhetoric" to you? Again, what is your personal experience with these people? Do you talk to them? Have you visited their neighborhoods and sat in their homes? Probably not. You believe the stats, the figures put before you without any interaction with them, correct? I'm not hard or bitter against them. This is the culture they are accustomed to. They simply don't know better and the free stuff keeps them trapped. I don't blame them, I place the blame squarely on the programs that do not prompt people to take care of themselves. There is dignity in honest work but these folks don't understand that because they've never had to work. Everything has been given to them at the expense of others. That is one reason there is such an entitlement mentality in our nation.

And when it comes to assistance programs in the US, are you advocating for better programs or no programs at all? If it's the former then we are in agreement and the argument is all about rhetoric. If it's the latter then I just don't understand how you can be a Christian and have this position.

Better programs without a doubt. Programs that are temporary without all the loopholes that allow families to stay on them indefinitely. Believe it or not, but I have been on government assistance. When we had our first child we were on WIC. Even though I was in the military, I qualified for WIC. We used it as much as we could. When our second child came along, my pay was more than enough so we didn't even apply for it. We used it until we didn't need it any more.

I also want to ask how you can condemn government programs designed to help the poor while participating in church activities that do the same thing? I assume that since you are a Baptist, you give money to foreign missions and perhaps even participate in them personally. Why? How are those people any different?

If the government programs helped the poor, I wouldn't condemn them. Unfortunately, these programs don't help people as much as they handicap them. People get on these programs and they stay there. They work harder to stay on government assistance than they would at a regular job. Yes, I participate in mission work. The primary goal of missions is to introduce people to Jesus Christ not pay their electric bill. Our church helps people out every month in the community who are having a hard time. As soon as these people are back on their feet, the assistance stops. If we see the folks we're helping are not helping themselves, the assistance stops. Helping people should not be supporting people who can support themselves. 2 Thessalonians 3:10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.
To be right with God has often meant to be in trouble with men. -- A.W. Tozer
User avatar
Chapabel
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1575
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:11 am
Location: Tennessee
Affiliation: Baptist

Re: Question for Chap

Postby Keep The Reason » Sat Sep 24, 2016 12:12 pm

Oooh, Bible fight!

file.jpeg
file.jpeg (61.64 KiB) Viewed 474 times


Lemme see... What does the Bible REALLY say?

Oh, yeah...

(Luke 12:22-34)

25Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? 26Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? 27Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? 28And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: 29And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 30Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith? 31Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? 32(For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. 33But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

34Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.


My quote is way longer than yours, far better known, and directly contradicts yours. I win.
To cut some folks off at the pass, I don't advocate for violence, oppression, genocide, war, hatred or intolerance. Instead, I advocate for education, organization, activism, and the democratic process. ~~ KtR
User avatar
Keep The Reason
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 10416
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 4:50 pm
Affiliation: Reasonist

Re: Question for Chap

Postby Chapabel » Sat Sep 24, 2016 12:26 pm

One of my Bible professors always said, "When you see 'therefore' in the Bible, you need to see what it is there for." The word 'therefore' is a conjunction tying two thoughts together. You have only given one half of the equation. I would invite you to investigate and see what the other precept is before you claim victory.
To be right with God has often meant to be in trouble with men. -- A.W. Tozer
User avatar
Chapabel
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1575
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:11 am
Location: Tennessee
Affiliation: Baptist

Re: Question for Chap

Postby Keep The Reason » Sat Sep 24, 2016 1:39 pm

Parable of the rich man. Not relevant to working or not and therefore not eating.

In fact the message is to be aware of greed. You may want to check into this parable, Republican.

You still lose.

The Parable of the Rich Fool
13 Someone in the crowd said to him, “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me.”

14 Jesus replied, “Man, who appointed me a judge or an arbiter between you?” 15 Then he said to them, “Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; life does not consist in an abundance of possessions.”

16 And he told them this parable: “The ground of a certain rich man yielded an abundant harvest. 17 He thought to himself, ‘What shall I do? I have no place to store my crops.’

18 “Then he said, ‘This is what I’ll do. I will tear down my barns and build bigger ones, and there I will store my surplus grain. 19 And I’ll say to myself, “You have plenty of grain laid up for many years. Take life easy; eat, drink and be merry.”’

20 “But God said to him, ‘You fool! This very night your life will be demanded from you. Then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?’

21 “This is how it will be with whoever stores up things for themselves but is not rich toward God.”


Oh and while you're in Luke, reread 12:37. You know where your god tells the Pharisees they are the most damned of all because of their hypocrisy?

That's you, you know. That's you in spades.
To cut some folks off at the pass, I don't advocate for violence, oppression, genocide, war, hatred or intolerance. Instead, I advocate for education, organization, activism, and the democratic process. ~~ KtR
User avatar
Keep The Reason
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 10416
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 4:50 pm
Affiliation: Reasonist

Re: Question for Chap

Postby Chapabel » Sun Sep 25, 2016 4:31 am

Keep The Reason wrote:Parable of the rich man. Not relevant to working or not and therefore not eating.

In fact the message is to be aware of greed.

Exactly. You took that portion of scripture completely out of context in your response to 2 Thessalonians 3:10. But I encourage you to keep using scripture. The more you research and read the Bible, the better chance something might take hold.
To be right with God has often meant to be in trouble with men. -- A.W. Tozer
User avatar
Chapabel
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1575
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:11 am
Location: Tennessee
Affiliation: Baptist

Re: Question for Chap

Postby Simplyme » Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:16 am

Like we have not been reading the damn thing most our lives. And guess what? The only thing that has taken hold was my belly from laughing at all those who take it serious.
I find it rather amusing, when thought of as ignorant or stupid(though I can be on many subjects). Especially by those who believe in a deity up in heaven watching our every move, and rewarding or punishing us after we have expired.
Simplyme
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5958
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:11 am

Re: Question for Chap

Postby Keep The Reason » Mon Sep 26, 2016 10:31 am

Chapabel wrote:Exactly. You took that portion of scripture completely out of context in your response to 2 Thessalonians 3:10. But I encourage you to keep using scripture. The more you research and read the Bible, the better chance something might take hold.


Exactly? LOL, ok so -- yes, it's completely irrelevant to the part about god watching over everything so you've made no point whatsoever. I win yet again.

Look, learning the bible from an overt hypocrite like you merely would make me into a carbon copy --ergo, utter hypocrite -- like you.

What's the point of that? So that there'll be more liars, hypocrites, and unethical people in whatever fairy tale heaven you think you're going to? I don't care about that nonsense, but there's no way I'd join your ranks here in this life where ethics and principles matter to people of ethics and principles (hence, not to you) Look, it's an outright honor to be your polar opposite. You think you're some kind of caring loving person, and you're not. You're pretty deplorable in fact.

But I want to you and people like you kept just the way you are. I then get to point to you and say, "See what Christianity does to people? This."
To cut some folks off at the pass, I don't advocate for violence, oppression, genocide, war, hatred or intolerance. Instead, I advocate for education, organization, activism, and the democratic process. ~~ KtR
User avatar
Keep The Reason
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 10416
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 4:50 pm
Affiliation: Reasonist

Re: Question for Chap

Postby spongebob » Mon Sep 26, 2016 11:27 am

Chapabel wrote:The truth is "shallow rhetoric" to you? Again, what is your personal experience with these people? Do you talk to them? Have you visited their neighborhoods and sat in their homes? Probably not. You believe the stats, the figures put before you without any interaction with them, correct? I'm not hard or bitter against them. This is the culture they are accustomed to. They simply don't know better and the free stuff keeps them trapped. I don't blame them, I place the blame squarely on the programs that do not prompt people to take care of themselves. There is dignity in honest work but these folks don't understand that because they've never had to work. Everything has been given to them at the expense of others. That is one reason there is such an entitlement mentality in our nation.


Chap, you are invoking the "truth" as if it is an established, objective, measurable thing, but when I speak of data that has been carefully collected, you dismiss it out of hand and that seems totally unfair. I'm not dismissing your personal experiences as false, but I'm asking you to acknowledge that there's no way your specific experiences can be extrapolated to represent an accurate picture of everyone we are talking about. Sure, I do have experiences with people, too. There are people who take advantage of welfare, absolutely, and I don't condone that one bit. I want to see that problem fixed. There are also people who accept welfare who could probably do without it, but they'll take it if its offered. Those people should also have some incentive to not receive it in my view. And then there are people who are so bad off that they are on the verge of losing their life if they don't get some kind of assistance. Those people need help and they need it bad. What we have to do is fix the system so that we can reach that last category of people without the first two categories siphoning off all the resources. Can you agree with that? I can assure you that there is no Liberal agenda to keep millions of people on the government dole just because we like the programs.

Better programs without a doubt. Programs that are temporary without all the loopholes that allow families to stay on them indefinitely. Believe it or not, but I have been on government assistance. When we had our first child we were on WIC. Even though I was in the military, I qualified for WIC. We used it as much as we could. When our second child came along, my pay was more than enough so we didn't even apply for it. We used it until we didn't need it any more.


This may be the most important bit of information you have ever shared here. I sincerely feel for you because you are describing a situation that I absolutely abhor. I respect our military service members and I find it intolerable that members of the military should have need of government assistance. And the entire point of assistance is to get people on their feet so that they can support themselves. So, by communicating, it is clear that your idea of what government assistance is virtually no different from mine. That's what I'm talking about when I ask you not to rely on rhetoric and just communicate plainly.

It's also important to note that during the Presidency of Bill Clinton, welfare was reformed considerably. Means tests and limits were implemented. Not all of these reforms were from Democratic lawmakers I'm sure, but the thing to acknowledge here is that Democratic lawmakers voted for these laws and a Democratic President signed them into law. This is called compromise and it is something the GOP should look up in the dictionary and learn about.

If the government programs helped the poor, I wouldn't condemn them. Unfortunately, these programs don't help people as much as they handicap them. People get on these programs and they stay there. They work harder to stay on government assistance than they would at a regular job.


Again, you are painting with a giant brush when a pencil is required. SOME people abuse the systems, not everyone. By your comments here, you would be included in that group of offenders, but you have made it clear that you didn't rely on assistance as a crutch. So I'm asking that you make the distinction.

Yes, I participate in mission work. The primary goal of missions is to introduce people to Jesus Christ not pay their electric bill. Our church helps people out every month in the community who are having a hard time. As soon as these people are back on their feet, the assistance stops. If we see the folks we're helping are not helping themselves, the assistance stops. Helping people should not be supporting people who can support themselves. 2 Thessalonians 3:10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.


I suppose that's fair enough. My main point here is that I know many people who participate in foreign missions where schools are built, hospitals, homes and many other things. This requires a great deal of money and time and the purpose is to help people who presumably cannot help themselves. If you are willing to help people in Haiti, then why not do the same for fellow Americans? That's all I'm suggesting. I do question your ability to manage assistance programs, though. It would take a great deal of manpower to monitor the number of people in even a modest sized city who truly need help. I'm not even including those who might abuse the help. Churches can have thousands of members, but most of those people have full time jobs and no time at all to check up on people in the community who are down on their luck. This is why government programs were created in the first place, to institutionalize the practice of helping poor people. There are programs in many cities that are more hands on with the people they help and don't just hand out money. They help them find jobs, get them training, clothing for work, daycare for their kids and so forth. These tend to be very successful. But I wonder if you would just denigrate this as well as some Liberal agenda.
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones.
~Bertrand Russell

:spongeb:
User avatar
spongebob
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Affiliation: Humanist - Bright

PreviousNext

Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest