Should we abolish ALL forms of government welfare, and let the poor wither and die?

Good Christian!

 

Nah.

 

False dilemma.

 

How do you figure? If someone is on public assistance, and all of that is removed, would it not then be up to that person to either live or die on their own merits?

 

While I believe in helping those who CANNOT help themselves, there is also a line at which people are able to help themselves, but choose not to.
At what point is helping others, a detriment to yourself? A question I have never gotten an answer to.

 

You've thrown certain defined factors into your statement. Medical bankruptcy has nothing to do with the physical or mental ability to earn a living and pay for one's bills. Those are not 'unfortunate' members of society.

 

Do you want a society of mature, responsible, sacrificial, honest, loving, dependable, trustworthy, hard working adults. Or do you want a society of irresponsible, slothful, dependent, angry people, who think they are entitled to charity and the fruits of others labors and sacrifices. In which direction do you want to go? The current crop of Democrats are pushing entitlements to food, housing, income, healthcare, education and so on. So clearly they don't want the former. In fact they are a product of the latter. How can people learn anything if they never face the consequences of their conduct or actions? People who find themselves in need thru no fault of their own, should be helped. But those who reject good counsel and good example and wind up in a bad situation, need to bear it so as to learn. Otherwise, they would be robbed of learning, understanding and overall betterment of their character and situation. Not everyone can be helped.

 

Bankruptcy is a form of welfare. When someone declares medical bankruptcy, the cost of that gets spread out among the rest of us. I happened to choose medical because its the most prevalent. But in the event that you couldn't do so anymore, it could easily lead to the loss of home. possessions, or even job.

 

Those who profess to be Christian should read the Book of Amos in their Bible. It reveals the misfortunes that are to befall a nation that abuses the poor. While many deluded right wingers believe welfare is the problem in this society, the Bible reveals that it is the lack of proper welfare, the lack of justice, and the abuse of the poor that are the real problem.

 

isn't this why you guys (dems) enacted 'retroactive abortion'...

 

That attitude is an example of right wing moral {sic} Christianity.

 

That's a personal choice.
Removal of assistance causes neither

 

So if there is to be no 'penalty' (loss of possessions) if one exceeds their capability to pay their debts, what is to stop anyone from dumping their debts on the public?

Just as we have to painfully accept the fact that society does absorb certain costs, we don't need to actively bear additional costs because someone isn't capable to repay their debts. I'm not even going into the 'work out a payment plan' portion of my position: be thankful.

 

it's a falsehood, spooky never said that. you lefties always twist and add words to peoples comments, along with actual personal attacks (many in this thread against another member, specifically @Spooky )...

the dems have no moral compass, nor direction but rather angst, disparagement, hatred, bigotry, and delusion... flip-floppin at will...

 

Abusing and forcing able bodied people to maintain themselves, are distinct from each other.

For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

 

the majority of people who receive food stamps assistance and millions who live below the poverty line are working poor:

https://www.google.com/search?q=mil...rome..69i57.6889j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

do your home work, kiddo:

1. At this point, should we also accept that, all people who rely on these systems either find their own way, or simply die off.
   
   ~ Turin
   

reply:

1. 
   SpookyWell-Known MemberDonor
   
   Yes.

CASE CLOSED

 

Moronic reply on your part. And I'm not a Dem.

 

again with the twisty stuff...

this is the op:

grammar 101, the question was, "Should ALL forms of governmental assistance be abolished?" for which spooky replied "yes"

the rest of the op was qualifiers, after the fact...

 

how convenient

 

Yup - damn those kids of poor people for having the crappy attitude that led them to pick the wrong parents. They should have worked harder pre-conception to select harder working parents.

You realize that the main beneficiaries of food stamps are kids, right?

 

Have you ever heard someone say: 'I can't work more hours, I'll lose my assistance'
I have. It makes my head spin, every time.

 

It's for the children!!
Sorry, I only believe that so far. There are some people who need the assistance, no argument, but seriously, the attempt at emotionalizing the problem by throwing the 'kids' part tells me one thing. If the parents actually worried about it, they would be feeding the kids, and THEY would be the ones going without.

 

They didnt work at getting a skill.
Too bad so sad

 

From my post: People who find themselves in need thru no fault of their own, should be helped.