Busara said:
"saying im not a christian? course, we shouldnt forget, 'judge not lest ye be judged.'
and the majority of christians do vote repub.
Pew Forum : Religion in 2008 Presidential Campaign, Opinion Polls, Compare Candidate Issues, States
in '04 78% of white evangelicans voted repub. what changes the numbers for all christians in an election is blacks, who overwhelmingly vote dem. but even taking that into account, more than 50% of all christians vote repub. thats a majority. to me, 'most' means a majority.
and to Gunny, the churches I'm complaining about was one with about 220 members, one with 150 members, and one with 1,200. i think i saw a wide enough spectrum to form my opinion, not just one megachurch as you seem to think.
yes, repubs want non govt agencies to help the poor, but as far as i can tell it has never been a central platform. it is rarely discussed. if all social programs were suddently stopped, do you think the giving of people to charities would vastly increase to make up the difference? maybe dems dont give as much to charities because their govt's are working on it. sure, it's debateable how much the repubs actually want to help the poor, but far too often their attitude toward poverty is that people are there purely because theyre lazy."
I'm not the one judging. I'm arguing with those who think that non-Christians are in a position to judge the Christianity of Christians. Nor did I imply you were, or weren't, a Christian. You are interpreting my comments through your own assumptions and bias.
"White evangelicans". That leaves out a LOT of people, busara. And why would it be a political platform to tell people to donate privately? How, exactly, would that fit in with running a campaign? It doesn't, of course. You can't base a platform on things which have nothing to do with the government...unless you intend to bring the church into politics, which despite the wailing of the left, the right really has no interest in doing.
Which brings me to this interesting tidbit. When T.Jefferson referred to a division between church and state (and not in the constitution but via a letter) he was referring to curtailing the government's ability to interfere in church matters. The bible also tells us to keep the two things distinct.
And yes, if all government programs were stopped, the poor would still be cared for. Perhaps not in the manner to which they have become accustomed, but there would be no sudden dying-off of welfare mothers and their children.
The dems don't give as much to charity because they don't CARE as much about the poor. They want the government to pay for it because THEY DON'T WANT TO. Do you get it yet? The same government which serves the dems serves the Republicans...and still the Republicans give more. I think that says a lot about who truly "cares" for and about the needy.
And I'd like to see a link which proves your insulting and bigoted comment that "by far" Republicans think the poor are poor because they're lazy. Otherwise, we'll just acknowledge it for what it is...hate-filled rhetoric which has no basis in fact.
your first sentence was that non christians arent in a position to judge. why would you put that if you werent implying that i myself was not in a position to judge. i gave my opinion on the situation based on what i experienced. so i can very well make claims about the people whom i observed. and i find it unlikely that only those 3 churches contain similar problems.
i posted a link that showed the majority of evangelicals voted repub. did you conveniently not see it?
the dems dont care, they want the govt to do it huh? where does the govt get their $? taxes. from people, including dems. your claim is not based on fact, yet you get upset when i post my opinion?
Editor at Large: Bush: "Poor people are lazy"
Think Progress Glenn Beck: Poor people are ‘lazy.’