tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20889056.post7517587822310822974..comments2023-10-18T10:23:55.450-05:00Comments on liberalpastor in burnsville: Conservative Naiveteliberal pastorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11957506289805625578noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20889056.post-34419029353477339582007-02-16T08:55:00.000-06:002007-02-16T08:55:00.000-06:00Charities, faith-based initiatives, and the people...Charities, faith-based initiatives, and the people who volunteer or work for them do great works of service and compassion. No one challenges this. This work is transformative when it is done on a personal level both for the giver and the recipient and whatever government can do, this would should not cease. I am who I am because I volunteer. <BR/><BR/>However, make no mistake, government can do the greatest good for the greatest number of people! When government works best, it is not defending itself but it is helping others. After years of trying to determine what the basic difference between political party philosophies is I still come to the same conclusion as I did years ago. Those who favor a strong federal government see government as a tool for helping others and shifting wealth to see that all people live in dignity. Those who want to limit government believe that government can not be transformative of the lives of individuals in a positive way. I think this is a very sad view of government and if you look back over the history administrations of "small government" leaders, you can clearly see how this has played itself out.<BR/><BR/>When talking about how to help the poor, weak, suffering, etc. it is not an "either/or" question, it is a both! We need both government AND non-profits to do this work. There is much work to be done!<BR/><BR/>I whole-heartedly agree with Liberalpastor that when "small government" operates, Social Darwinism occurrs. Don't we as people of faith value human life and dignity more than this? Our faith must inform our politics as Christians and this is what the life of Jesus was all about--making sure government helped people rather than oppressed them.ProgressiveChurchladyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04329210342070396638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20889056.post-65470336061003965172007-02-15T08:33:00.000-06:002007-02-15T08:33:00.000-06:00Dave,Thanks for your reply. I do not believe that ...Dave,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your reply. I do not believe that I was badmouthing evangelical Christians in this post. I was challenging the reasoning of a conservative writer who is paid, probably very well, to shill for a conservative, free-market perspective. And I certainly agree that faith-based charities do great work.<BR/><BR/>My point was that faith-based charities cannot possibly meet every need. Our country recognized that when FDR signed into law Social Security in 1935. Prior to the advent of Social Security retirees were on their own when they left work, and it was up to families and faith-based charities to keep them out of poverty. Yet it is a fact that millions of Americans lived out their retirement years in poverty. Charity could not fill the void.<BR/><BR/>Social Security was and is an enormous success. It guaranteed that no senior citizen in this country would ever die in poverty. It is an enormous federal bureaucracy that efficiently delivers funds to millions of people every month. It delivers the kind of service that no charity could match. Would you, Dave, like to dismantle SS and replace it with private charity? Would you like your church to take on the task of supporting all of its senior citizens? I wouldn't.<BR/><BR/>There are some enormous and genuine needs charity cannot meet. It is my belief that there are those people, like the writer of the article, who know this and don't really care. They advocate dismantling the government (except for the military) and getting it out of the way of the free market. They know perfectly well that this would result in massive inequalities in our country. It would be "survival of the fittest:" those that are wealthy deserve it and those that are not don't. I believe we need a strong government to make sure this doesn't happen.<BR/><BR/>Regarding your example of FEMA, I would remind you that under the leadership of President Clinton and FEMA director James Lee Witt, FEMA was considered a highly effective agency. Witt came to his job with extensive experience in disaster-response management. He hired other people with similar experience and FEMA was widely hailed as a model federal program, again, doing a job on a federal scale that no charity could match.<BR/><BR/>But when President Bush was elected he replaced Witt and the entire senior staff with a bunch of political hacks who had no experience in disaster management. When Katrina hit we saw first hand what happens when we have a person (the President) in charge of government who doesn't really believe that government has a valid role to play in our lives. You get corruption, mismanagement, and millions suffer the consequences.<BR/><BR/>Charities have an important role to play in filling gaps in need, but I think that sometimes we forget how much we depend on government to deliver services like SS, Medicaid and Medicare, all enormous bureaucracies, and we forget how well they actually do it. We hear so much bad-mouthing of government. What we need, I believe, is to make sure that those who are always bad-mouthing the role of government are not the ones who are running it.liberal pastorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11957506289805625578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20889056.post-31686939898895156592007-02-15T06:26:00.000-06:002007-02-15T06:26:00.000-06:00When you give the government money, it mostly uses...When you give the government money, it mostly uses it on itself.<BR/>It is a huge bureaucracy.<BR/><BR/>The government is incredibly inefficient as a source of charity or aid to those who need it.<BR/>Look at how FEMA handled the gulf disaster.<BR/><BR/>I believe that faith based charities are doing a great job.<BR/>Food pantries, homeless misssions, habitat for humanity, Brethren disater relief...<BR/>These charities are funded with personal, business, corporate, and church donations. They do better without the government involvement.<BR/>(less paperwork, more good work)<BR/><BR/>Also, none of the conservative evangelical Christians I know are rich. Yet they volunteer and donate until it hurts. Please don't badmouth them. <BR/><BR/>love,<BR/>daveAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com