This crazy article appeared in my feed on fb: www.redletterchristians.org/fradulent-freedom-and-the-needs-of-the-poor/
I’ve never seen anything like it before, but I guess the argument (if you can call it that) isn’t new.
Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars.
That’s the first time I’ve heard that/ Usually Christians assert that the whole giving thing it should be individual charity.
Most Christians would agree that the government ought to help the poor.
There are also some Christians who are upset at what they see as the highjacking of Christianity by evangelical preachers who preach against evolution, focus on being anti-abortion, anti-gay, etc. They’re upset that the GOP postures as the party that supports Christians (Catholics, for instance, lean slightly Democratic).. There’s a small group of such Christians who are trying to get their message out to other Christians. For instance, they argue the the sermon on the mount is central Christian doctrine.
The Christians I know are for taxation ‘to help the poor,’ 11.5 months a year.. with the exception being the first two weeks in April, when their own taxes are due. Still, this is the only article I’ve seen that says: it doesn’t matter how the needy get money, as long as they get it. “Not free choice but the necessity for the rich to relinquish their advantage for the sake of the needy is the real lesson..”
The funny part is that Watts uses bible verses to say: you are not supposed to compel or coerce others to do anything.. then turns right around and acknowledges taxation is coercive. His justification? “Unless one is calling for this sort of sweeping withdrawal [of government], it is grossly hypocritical to target programs that help the most vulnerable by claiming Jesus ‘never advocated stealing from the rich to give to the poor.’”
I think Ayn Rand explained this article’s underlying problem very well:
http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reg_ar_faith_and_force
I think Ayn Rand explained this article’s underlying problem very well:
Amen! 