The strange origins of the GOP ideology that rejects caring for the poor

[Fweethawt]

https://thinkprogress.org/bad-theology-conservative-benefits-1d42ef90b387

 

The ongoing Capitol Hill brawl over health care and budget cuts is getting Biblical.

 

In recent months, GOP lawmakers have taken to spouting Christian scripture to defend conservative fiscal policy and their effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act. The first example came from Rep. Roger Marshall (R-KS), who argued in early March that Jesus would support his criticism of Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion, as aspect of health care reform that extended insurance coverage to additional low-income Americans.

 

“Just like Jesus said, ‘The poor will always be with us,’” Marshall told Stat News, quoting the Bible. “There is a group of people that just don’t want health care and aren’t going to take care of themselves.”

[Daffodil]

Yeah . . . I don't think that's what he meant . . .

[Thurisaz]

Now one could point them to the parts of da babble that tell them to give to the poor...

[Bhim]

As someone who doesn't care about the poor, I have to say I'm greatly enjoying the direction that the GOP has taken. As an evangelical Christian I always found them hypocritical, and willfully ignorant of the very obvious meaning of Biblical teachings such as "sell all you have, give to the poor, and come follow me." Now that I'm free of divinely-imposed compassion, I'm perfectly happy to ally myself with people who pay lip service to their god while disobeying his teachings, just to put a little more money in my pocket (it would be nice if they didn't also inundate the rich in further wealth, but I suppose that may be asking too much).

 

Having said all that, I must admit that I don't know if it's possible to formulate a truly Biblical position on wealth and charity. A lot of Biblical teachings on the matter contradict each other. Jesus did say to give to the poor, but he also stayed at the homes of rich people and fail to make similar pronouncements to them. Likewise, the early Jerusalem church practiced a communistic way of living, but the churches founded by Paul did not. And of course we could all cite many passages from the Psalms and Proverbs in which authors associate wealth with divine blessing. Like it does on so many other topics, the Bible appears to contradict itself in this matter.

[Daffodil]

 

As someone who doesn't care about the poor, I have to say I'm greatly enjoying the direction that the GOP has taken. As an evangelical Christian I always found them hypocritical, and willfully ignorant of the very obvious meaning of Biblical teachings such as "sell all you have, give to the poor, and come follow me." Now that I'm free of divinely-imposed compassion, I'm perfectly happy to ally myself with people who pay lip service to their god while disobeying his teachings, just to put a little more money in my pocket (it would be nice if they didn't also inundate the rich in further wealth, but I suppose that may be asking too much).

 

Having said all that, I must admit that I don't know if it's possible to formulate a truly Biblical position on wealth and charity. A lot of Biblical teachings on the matter contradict each other. Jesus did say to give to the poor, but he also stayed at the homes of rich people and fail to make similar pronouncements to them. Likewise, the early Jerusalem church practiced a communistic way of living, but the churches founded by Paul did not. And of course we could all cite many passages from the Psalms and Proverbs in which authors associate wealth with divine blessing. Like it does on so many other topics, the Bible appears to contradict itself in this matter.

 

Or you could say that the contradictions are what make the Bible so darn useful.  Anyone can make it support their particular cause.

[hockeyfan70]

 

As someone who doesn't care about the poor,

 

Well at least you're being honest.

[Bhim]

 

 

Or you could say that the contradictions are what make the Bible so darn useful.  Anyone can make it support their particular cause.

 

Interesting point. More than anything I feel that the Bible's vagueness is what makes it so useful. For example, Christians seem to assume, a priori, that abortion is a sin. It's then easy enough to construct a vacuous yet elaborate case in favor of their belief even if that means overriding the bodily autonomy of others. Now, with economic policy it's harder, since the Bible has a lot to say about money. But Jesus' command to "sell all you have, come follow me" is followed by "it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven." That vagary gives the believer license to claim that Jesus is not really even talking about money at all, but rather is referring to the impossibility of salvation without him. Indeed, the Bible is useful for a variety of political purposes.

 

 

 

Well at least you're being honest.

 

What can I say? I come from a model minority immigrant (and non-Christian) family. All of the stereotypes about us are true.

[Lucy]

 

 

Having said all that, I must admit that I don't know if it's possible to formulate a truly Biblical position on wealth and charity. A lot of Biblical teachings on the matter contradict each other. Jesus did say to give to the poor, but he also stayed at the homes of rich people and fail to make similar pronouncements to them. Likewise, the early Jerusalem church practiced a communistic way of living, but the churches founded by Paul did not. And of course we could all cite many passages from the Psalms and Proverbs in which authors associate wealth with divine blessing. Like it does on so many other topics, the Bible appears to contradict itself in this matter.

 

 

 

The Old Testament seemed to be more in favor of wealth. Wealth was a sign that you had won god's favor. The New Testament seems to favor the poor. The writers of the different books had different agendas. It seems more natural to think that god favors the rich. And perhaps it was revolutionary to say he favored the poor.

 

 

I am not registered Republican.  I am registered Libertarian in my state.  There are some blending in each party.  As for caring for the poor, I am for providing equal opportunity for everyone.  What I am not for is the state sticking a gun to the head of it's citizens and forcing them to pay for people who refuse to work.   If they are disabled, and I mean TRULY disabled, not some BS disability, then I don't have as much of a problem helping them.  If they are able-bodied and capable of working and just find reasons to not, FUCK THEM!

 

Fake disability is a real issue. Some people prefer to pretend there is no such thing. It's true that just because you can't tell if someone is disabled or not doesn't mean they aren't too disable to work. However I personally know several people who are on disability because they didn't want to work or just wanted extra money. I can't tell what can qualify someone for disability or not. Some people can get it for very minor things, and some people with serious issues can't get it. I know someone who has nothing wrong with her at all who got it because she knew the doctor would write it up for her. She's actually a hard worker. She just works around her homestead and wanted the additional income. She butchers her own cattle even.

[Bhim]

 

I am not registered Republican.  I am registered Libertarian in my state.  There are some blending in each party.  As for caring for the poor, I am for providing equal opportunity for everyone.  What I am not for is the state sticking a gun to the head of it's citizens and forcing them to pay for people who refuse to work.   If they are disabled, and I mean TRULY disabled, not some BS disability, then I don't have as much of a problem helping them.  If they are able-bodied and capable of working and just find reasons to not, FUCK THEM!

 

I believe I'm still registered Democrat myself. That said, I attended the Republican caucus last year to vote for Donald Trump, so I might as well re-register as Republican if the opportunity arises.  Anyway, your statements on the poor reflect my opinions as well, except for the last part suggesting I have intercourse with them.

 

As in the case of race and affirmative action issues, I believe that the government should not correct for the differing level of advantage that people start with at birth. Yes, someone born poor will have fewer opportunities for educational attainment than someone from a middle class background like myself. Then again, I'm at a disadvantage to a friend of mine from grade school whose parents were a Jewish doctor and lawyer (talk about stereotypes!), who is now a well-paid criminal defense attorney. I don't begrudge my friend's advantage over me, and I don't have any sympathy for the person who started at a disadvantage to me. To all this I'll add that my parents emigrated here from India with virtually no money at all, and despite not being the beneficiaries of "white privilege," they did quite well for themselves. So while economic barriers exist, they are not insurmountable. Yes, poor people have to work harder to advance their socioeconomic status, much as I have to work harder than white people to conform in a majority white culture. I've never been proud of the advantages that come from the circumstances of my middle class birth, nor have I developed an inferiority complex due to the disadvantages that come from not being white. That is why I do not accede to white liberals who ask me to take pity on the minority illegal immigrant dying in the streets for lack of healthcare.

[Bedouin]

I think all old white men should be stripped of power, in government, and a truly representative government installed.

[TABA]

 

I think all old white men should be stripped of power, in government, and a truly representative government installed.

 

How do we get a 'truly representative government'?

 

If by election, are we allowed to vote for old white men?  Are old white men allowed to vote?  

 

Would this be called 'apartheid' or do you have a nicer word for it?

[Bedouin]

 

 

How do we get a 'truly representative government'?

 

If by election, are we allowed to vote for old white men?  Are old white men allowed to vote?  

 

No, and no.  They've nothing to offer for the future, and have fucked up the present.

[buffettphan]

 

 

 

 

If by election, are we allowed to vote for old white men?  Are old white men allowed to vote?  

 

 

 

 

 

No, and no.  They've nothing to offer for the future, and have fucked up the present.

 

So if you had it your way, Florduh, for example, wouldn't be allowed to vote.        THAT is fucked up.

 

[Bedouin]

 

 

 

 

So if you had it your way, Florduh, for example, wouldn't be allowed to vote.        THAT is fucked up.

 

 

LOL.  Nor would I.  Ain't white, but I'm over 60.

[buffettphan]

LOL...next it'll be the old women who wouldn't be allowed to vote..  I'm over 60 (and never not voted in any election, although it was with a major nasty taste in my mouth with the last presidential one).   Then what/who.......a never-ending nightmare for sure.  

[TABA]

Just build concentration camps and gas chambers for those you deem unfit to live and all

will be right with the world. 

[Daffodil]

 

 

No, and no.  They've nothing to offer for the future, and have fucked up the present.

 

I can think of several other groups that would fit under that description.   Might not have anyone left to vote!

[Bedouin]

 

Just build concentration camps and gas chambers for those you deem unfit to live and all

will be right with the world. 

 

Nah.  That's the old white man answer to today's ills.  Always has been.

[Lucy]

I think stupid people shouldn't be allowed to vote and I should be the judge of who is too stupid to vote. I will start by declaring myself too stupid to vote. Hmmm......

[florduh]

We never had these problems before we gave women the vote. Just saying. 

[Bedouin]

 

We never had these problems before we gave women the vote. Just saying. 

 

Or non-land owning white people.  Or the blacks.

[Bhim]

 

I think all old white men should be stripped of power, in government, and a truly representative government installed.

 

Uh, I don't know about that. I'm a minority, and I'd rather be a minority in a well-run majority white country than a majority in a country run by people who don't know what they're doing. While I'm not a fan of British colonialism, it's undeniable that Indians failed at running their own country when given the reins of power. I'm not about to vote in a way so as to let that happen here.

 

To each his own, but I'm OK with old white men staying in power. Privileged old white men have been good to me, and for that they have my support in all political matters.

[Bedouin]

 

 

Uh, I don't know about that. I'm a minority, and I'd rather be a minority in a well-run majority white country than a majority in a country run by people who don't know what they're doing. While I'm not a fan of British colonialism, it's undeniable that Indians failed at running their own country when given the reins of power. I'm not about to vote in a way so as to let that happen here.

 

To each his own, but I'm OK with old white men staying in power. Privileged old white men have been good to me, and for that they have my support in all political matters.

 

Are you actually saying that only white people in general, and old white men in particular are capable of running a successful government?  All others are incompetent?  Are you really saying this?  Wow.  Just.  Wow.

[Daffodil]

 

 

Are you actually saying that only white people in general, and old white men in particular are capable of running a successful government?  All others are incompetent?  Are you really saying this?  Wow.  Just.  Wow.

 

"And for that they have my support in all political matters".  Yeah, I have to agree with Bedouin on this.  You are familiar with history and with all the ways privileged white men have screwed up the world?  I'm not blaming all of them by any means, but since they have been the dominant force in leadership for most of history, they have to be accountable for the bad as well as the good that has been done.  I personally look at a leader's past behavior to judge him/her rather than his/her skin color. If the best person for the job happens to be a white male, then so be it, but I will not assume anything based on skin color.

[Shinobi]

[][][][][][