Why the Christian right is against the safety net.

Do you ever feel bad by absolutely destroying another leftist OP? It all comes down to the left's dependence on a socialist people-dependent government and a globalist viewpoint that is 100%
the opposite of what our Constitutional Republic and our Founding Fathers wanted and strived for to MAKE AMERICA the greatest country on GOD's Republican/Conservative earth.
I'd be lying if I said I did. And you're absolutely right. :flagsal:
 
Religion, in particular in our world Christianity, is behind a lot of this resistance to helping others. "The poor will always be with us," suffering is part of life so suck it up and be good and you'll get a better deal in Heaven, God made the world this way so deal with it, etc.
Those are phony Christians. True Christians are more the give the shirt off your back kind of people. Americanized Christianity is often a distorted and nearly completely politicized version. Only in America would we come up with prosperity Christianity.
 
Religion, in particular in our world Christianity, is behind a lot of this resistance to helping others. "The poor will always be with us," suffering is part of life so suck it up and be good and you'll get a better deal in Heaven, God made the world this way so deal with it, etc.
That's just sick.
 
That's just sick.

Agree. From a sociological POV, socieities that provide for disadvantaged members fare much better than those which go in for the "rugged individualism" schtick. Societies with a festering underclass don't typically last long without authoritarism and brute force. It's interesting that Trump managed to climb to the top despite his total lack of qualifications or competence. He did so by creating a grievance-filled underclass of MAGATs and feeding on their feelings of fear and economic and cultural inferiority.
 
True Christians do not buy that, Crepitus. I have known so many good ones. And, unfortunately, a whole of poseurs.

Same here. Real Christians quietly practice generosity and charity to others whether that's helping provide them with basic necessities, or standing up for them during periods when certain politicians are trying to push them further into poverty.
 
Agree. From a sociological POV, socieities that provide for disadvantaged members fare much better than those which go in for the "rugged individualism" schtick. Societies with a festering underclass don't typically last long without authoritarism and brute force. It's interesting that Trump managed to climb to the top despite his total lack of qualifications or competence. He did so by creating a grievance-filled underclass of MAGATs and feeding on their feelings of fear and economic and cultural inferiority.
And then somehow convinced then that the billionaires are their saviors.

Which is even sicker.
 
Back
Top