It is rare that I loan this space to the writings of another. But I ran across this piece and was so struck by its simple truth that I just had to share it with you.
"The principle purpose of government is to provide the optimal conditions through which human beings can acquire their most important necessities -- the highest of which is dignity.
While governments provide many essentials for their citizens, from law and order to social services, from good roads to education, the one human essential that government cannot provide is human dignity.
"The very premise of dignity is something acquired through personal effort. Dignity is the human aura that comes through self-reliance. Its underlying premise is independence. A dependent life is a fundamentally undignified life. Self-respect is earned through the sweat of one's brow. An heir to a great fortune may travel the high seas in a hundred-foot yacht and soar through the air in a Gulfstream V. But he will remain fundamentally bereft of dignity so long as he is living on someone else's dime.
"The effort to recapture the dignity that springs from self-reliance is what the tea party, at its core, is all about.
"America's rapid rise to the forefront of global economic power was not an accident but the direct result of the cultivation of a fierce individualism and a rugged self-reliance on the part of its citizenry.
"For all its flaws, capitalism fosters an independence that promotes dignity, while socialism creates a reliance that subverts self-esteem. Yes, government must provide a safety net for a rainy day. But only self-reliance creates a sunny life.
"The tea party is far from perfect. But in emphasizing self-reliance, it taps into a hidden human desire to live a life crowned with self-esteem."
Rabbi Shmuley Boteach
/
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Friday, November 12, 2010
Social Justice - Right or Wrong?
Folks on the left, including the current Obama administration, and now many churches are espousing the importance of "social justice" - to take from the "haves" and give to the "have nots". And they tell us it is "the Christian thing to do."
But is it?
There are numerous places in the Bible that tell us it is absolutely wrong to participate in "social justice" EXCEPT where it is the individual who, by his own choice, is charitable to another. It can never be by force, nor should it ever benefit the unworthy.
In Luke, Jesus offers the parable of the farmer, which clearly states we should only sow our seed on fertile ground, not on barren or thorny ground. In other words, only to those who are worthy. For it is also said that "The Lord helps those who help themselves." This would indicate that the Lord does not help those who do not help themselves - and neither should we.
But perhaps the most compelling Biblical passage that tells us that "social justice" is unChristian is the parable of the bags of gold, recited here:
MATTHEW 25:14 “Again, it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted his wealth to them. 15 To one he gave five bags of gold, to another two bags, and to another one bag,[a] each according to his ability. Then he went on his journey. 16 The man who had received five bags of gold went at once and put his money to work and gained five bags more. 17 So also, the one with two bags of gold gained two more. 18 But the man who had received one bag went off, dug a hole in the ground and hid his master’s money.
19 “After a long time the master of those servants returned and settled accounts with them. 20 The man who had received five bags of gold brought the other five. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with five bags of gold. See, I have gained five more.’
21 “His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’
22 “The man with two bags of gold also came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with two bags of gold; see, I have gained two more.’
23 “His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’
24 “Then the man who had received one bag of gold came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘I knew that you are a hard man, harvesting where you have not sown and gathering where you have not scattered seed. 25 So I was afraid and went out and hid your gold in the ground. See, here is what belongs to you.’
26 “His master replied, ‘You wicked, lazy servant! So you knew that I harvest where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered seed? 27 Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest.
28 “‘So take the bag of gold from him and give it to the one who has ten bags. 29 For whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 30 And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ "
The moral of the story, of course, is that those who EARN MORE are ENTITLED TO MORE, and should be blessed, while those who do not shall suffer God's wrath. It is the way of the world. The "haves" should be blessed with more because they have earned it. And the "have nots" have exactly what they deserve.
However, if any individual chooses to be charitable to the "have nots", then that individual has earned God's blessing. But the "have nots" are not so blessed.
Social justice - it is as un-Christian as anything could possibly be. And the reason is as simple as nature - survival of the species, which is God's intent. The species will survive as long as it remains strong. To remain strong, the weak are not supposed to survive, as survival of the weak will weaken the species. When we take from the strong and give to the weak, we do not strengthen the weak - we only weaken the strong.
Case in point - you have $100 and the next guy has nothing. Someone takes $50 from you and gives it to the guy who has nothing. You are now poorer - weaker. And the guy who had nothing will blow his $50 (if he knew how to handle money he would not have been broke - see the parable, above), and the weak is still weak.
So, all that has been accomplished is to weaken the strong, which is contrary to nature and survival of the species.
And that is what the parable of the bags of gold was all about.
/
But is it?
There are numerous places in the Bible that tell us it is absolutely wrong to participate in "social justice" EXCEPT where it is the individual who, by his own choice, is charitable to another. It can never be by force, nor should it ever benefit the unworthy.
In Luke, Jesus offers the parable of the farmer, which clearly states we should only sow our seed on fertile ground, not on barren or thorny ground. In other words, only to those who are worthy. For it is also said that "The Lord helps those who help themselves." This would indicate that the Lord does not help those who do not help themselves - and neither should we.
But perhaps the most compelling Biblical passage that tells us that "social justice" is unChristian is the parable of the bags of gold, recited here:
MATTHEW 25:14 “Again, it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted his wealth to them. 15 To one he gave five bags of gold, to another two bags, and to another one bag,[a] each according to his ability. Then he went on his journey. 16 The man who had received five bags of gold went at once and put his money to work and gained five bags more. 17 So also, the one with two bags of gold gained two more. 18 But the man who had received one bag went off, dug a hole in the ground and hid his master’s money.
19 “After a long time the master of those servants returned and settled accounts with them. 20 The man who had received five bags of gold brought the other five. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with five bags of gold. See, I have gained five more.’
21 “His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’
22 “The man with two bags of gold also came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with two bags of gold; see, I have gained two more.’
23 “His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’
24 “Then the man who had received one bag of gold came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘I knew that you are a hard man, harvesting where you have not sown and gathering where you have not scattered seed. 25 So I was afraid and went out and hid your gold in the ground. See, here is what belongs to you.’
26 “His master replied, ‘You wicked, lazy servant! So you knew that I harvest where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered seed? 27 Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest.
28 “‘So take the bag of gold from him and give it to the one who has ten bags. 29 For whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 30 And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ "
The moral of the story, of course, is that those who EARN MORE are ENTITLED TO MORE, and should be blessed, while those who do not shall suffer God's wrath. It is the way of the world. The "haves" should be blessed with more because they have earned it. And the "have nots" have exactly what they deserve.
However, if any individual chooses to be charitable to the "have nots", then that individual has earned God's blessing. But the "have nots" are not so blessed.
Social justice - it is as un-Christian as anything could possibly be. And the reason is as simple as nature - survival of the species, which is God's intent. The species will survive as long as it remains strong. To remain strong, the weak are not supposed to survive, as survival of the weak will weaken the species. When we take from the strong and give to the weak, we do not strengthen the weak - we only weaken the strong.
Case in point - you have $100 and the next guy has nothing. Someone takes $50 from you and gives it to the guy who has nothing. You are now poorer - weaker. And the guy who had nothing will blow his $50 (if he knew how to handle money he would not have been broke - see the parable, above), and the weak is still weak.
So, all that has been accomplished is to weaken the strong, which is contrary to nature and survival of the species.
And that is what the parable of the bags of gold was all about.
/
Getting Our House In Order
By Bill Vaughn
The United States has a serious problem of financial instability. It is caused, in part, by the simple fact that we no longer manufacture very much, export even less, and import huge amounts from China, who keeps its currency devalued so we are not able to compete with their prices.
And that fills WalMart's (and most other Big Box stores) shelves. And we get cheap products, which saves us money so we can buy more cheap products.
And all of this leads to a loss of American jobs as Chinese manufacturer's rule - because they make products so cheaply.
And this, in turn, is destroying our entire economy. So, what can we do?
Actually, getting back on the right path and building a strong economy is quite simple. Unfortunately, we as consumers, and therefore our leaders who must depend on consumers to get elected - well, neither has the backbone necessary to make the changes that are necessary.
Here is what should be done:
1) Place a 25% tariff on any and all imports from China until they stop manipulating their currency
2) Apply that tariff income toward paying off our debt to China - pay them off with their own money
3) Reduce corporate income tax rates in America to 15% - the same as China, so American business will have more incentive to stay in America
4) Reduce the power of unions that strangle businesses with ever-increasing benefit costs. Place limits on benefits, which will permit American businesses to compete more effectively.
That is what is needed, and it would not cost our government a dime.
But they will never do it, because we, the people, are addicted to "stuff". And as long as China can produce "stuff" cheaply, we can all have a lot of "stuff".
The consumer does not want to pay a fair price for goods. They demand bargain prices. So Congress will never do what is necessary because our leaders want to get re-elected.
The only way we will straighten out this mess is if we, the people, tell our leaders that we WANT them to do this, even if it hurts us a bit. Maybe we won't have as many toys and games, but that is not a bad thing. On the other hand, a bankrupt, weakened nation that can no longer protect us from our enemies is, indeed, a VERY bad thing.
Come January when the new Congress takes over, call your Representatives and Senators and tell them that they need to do this even though you recognize it will hurt your own pocketbook for awhile. Remind them that it is their job to protect us - even from ourselves.
/
And all of this leads to a loss of American jobs as Chinese manufacturer's rule - because they make products so cheaply.
And this, in turn, is destroying our entire economy. So, what can we do?
Actually, getting back on the right path and building a strong economy is quite simple. Unfortunately, we as consumers, and therefore our leaders who must depend on consumers to get elected - well, neither has the backbone necessary to make the changes that are necessary.
Here is what should be done:
1) Place a 25% tariff on any and all imports from China until they stop manipulating their currency
2) Apply that tariff income toward paying off our debt to China - pay them off with their own money
3) Reduce corporate income tax rates in America to 15% - the same as China, so American business will have more incentive to stay in America
4) Reduce the power of unions that strangle businesses with ever-increasing benefit costs. Place limits on benefits, which will permit American businesses to compete more effectively.
That is what is needed, and it would not cost our government a dime.
But they will never do it, because we, the people, are addicted to "stuff". And as long as China can produce "stuff" cheaply, we can all have a lot of "stuff".
The consumer does not want to pay a fair price for goods. They demand bargain prices. So Congress will never do what is necessary because our leaders want to get re-elected.
The only way we will straighten out this mess is if we, the people, tell our leaders that we WANT them to do this, even if it hurts us a bit. Maybe we won't have as many toys and games, but that is not a bad thing. On the other hand, a bankrupt, weakened nation that can no longer protect us from our enemies is, indeed, a VERY bad thing.
Come January when the new Congress takes over, call your Representatives and Senators and tell them that they need to do this even though you recognize it will hurt your own pocketbook for awhile. Remind them that it is their job to protect us - even from ourselves.
/
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
The California "Missile" Controversy
Now we have the "experts" telling us the "missile" that was videotaped off the coast of California is an airplane. Perhaps. But I think not, and here's why...
1) An airplane's trajectory is not that erratic. The trajectory of a missile is, however, erratic by design due to its guidance system.
2) All commercial and military aircraft have transponders that "talk" to radar stations, telling them exactly where they are in the airspace. And there are (11) radar stations within range of this sighting. Yet, the authorities cannot tell us the flight number of that "airplane".
3) The famous, and obsolete, B-52 is the only aircraft with a large contrail starting at the plane's engines - all others have a narrow contrail that only widens as atmospheric conditions dissipate the trail. No B-52's were reported in the area by the military.
4) Marcos Caceres, senior space agency expert is also convinced it to be a missile. And he knows missiles.
5) Exactly 11 months ago to the day, another video, nearly identical, was taken off the coast of California in the same area. It, too, was never identified by authorities.
I really hate to think that some entity other than our military is experimenting with missiles within 35 miles of our coast...
And I REALLY hate to think they could do it without our government having any clue...
/
1) An airplane's trajectory is not that erratic. The trajectory of a missile is, however, erratic by design due to its guidance system.
2) All commercial and military aircraft have transponders that "talk" to radar stations, telling them exactly where they are in the airspace. And there are (11) radar stations within range of this sighting. Yet, the authorities cannot tell us the flight number of that "airplane".
3) The famous, and obsolete, B-52 is the only aircraft with a large contrail starting at the plane's engines - all others have a narrow contrail that only widens as atmospheric conditions dissipate the trail. No B-52's were reported in the area by the military.
4) Marcos Caceres, senior space agency expert is also convinced it to be a missile. And he knows missiles.
5) Exactly 11 months ago to the day, another video, nearly identical, was taken off the coast of California in the same area. It, too, was never identified by authorities.
I really hate to think that some entity other than our military is experimenting with missiles within 35 miles of our coast...
And I REALLY hate to think they could do it without our government having any clue...
/
Our Youths Do Not Know The Word
Being somewhat older than many folks, I can remember a fair amount of American history - either through personal experience, or the teachings from the personal experiences of my parents - which goes back to the 19th century!
And it is clear that throughout American history - and even world history - there have always been "hard times". Just since the birth of our nation, when George Washington and his army suffered at Valley Forge; Washington D.C. was burned by the British in the War of 1812; over 100 patriotic Americans were slaughtered at the Alamo; millions died and tens of thousands maimed in the Civil War; WWI, the Great Depression; WWII, the Korean Conflict; Viet Nam; --- and through it all, Americans who lived through those trials learned the meaning of a very important word - SACRIFICE.
My parents sacrificed everything to get through the Great Depression. During WWII, families across America were unable to get sugar for their coffee, or tires for their cars. My mom sacrificed her life to insure her children could grow up in a better world. My dad had to quit college and work in a sweat shop to support his family in the other depression of 1920.
But todays youths do not know the meaning of the word "sacrifice". They have been raised to believe everything should just "come" to them; that they are entitled. We have seen it in the riots of Greece, France and now the UK, as youths believe they should get a free ride at the expense of others, and demand that it continue.
Todays youths have no desire - or intention - of sacrificing anything.
And that is where we, as a society, have gone wrong. We allowed them, even encouraged them to believe in entitlements.
/
And it is clear that throughout American history - and even world history - there have always been "hard times". Just since the birth of our nation, when George Washington and his army suffered at Valley Forge; Washington D.C. was burned by the British in the War of 1812; over 100 patriotic Americans were slaughtered at the Alamo; millions died and tens of thousands maimed in the Civil War; WWI, the Great Depression; WWII, the Korean Conflict; Viet Nam; --- and through it all, Americans who lived through those trials learned the meaning of a very important word - SACRIFICE.
My parents sacrificed everything to get through the Great Depression. During WWII, families across America were unable to get sugar for their coffee, or tires for their cars. My mom sacrificed her life to insure her children could grow up in a better world. My dad had to quit college and work in a sweat shop to support his family in the other depression of 1920.
But todays youths do not know the meaning of the word "sacrifice". They have been raised to believe everything should just "come" to them; that they are entitled. We have seen it in the riots of Greece, France and now the UK, as youths believe they should get a free ride at the expense of others, and demand that it continue.
Todays youths have no desire - or intention - of sacrificing anything.
And that is where we, as a society, have gone wrong. We allowed them, even encouraged them to believe in entitlements.
/
Don't Feed The Bears - Part II
Awhile back I wrote an article about why the signs in state and federal parks say "Don't Feed The Bears". If you feed bears, they begin to think they are entitled to the food, and when you no longer have any to give, they attack YOU.
The point of the article had to do with the rioting and attacks in Greece, France and other socialist nations that provide entitlements they can no longer afford to give. The folks, mostly youngsters who have never known self-reliance and believe entitlements really are something they are ENTITLED to are angry at being told the entitlements will shrink, or even disappear. The bears attack.
Well, now it has hit what was once a bastion of capitalism that has, in recent decades, become rather socialist - the United Kingdom. Today, youngsters who have never known anything but entitlements have been told the entitlements will be shrinking, and university tuitions will be going up, have begun rioting. Over 50,000 stormed buildings that house many businesses and tore them apart. They say it is only the beginning.
It is pathetic - young people insisting that taxes be raised on OTHER people just so they can continue to get free benefits.
Wake up, America. You are looking at your own future if you continue on the road of entitlements. It ALWAYS ends badly. No exceptions. The reason is as Margaret Thatcher once said, that sooner or later you run out of other people's money to give away. More and more people decide it is easier to accept the dole than to actually work hard to support themselves. Eventually you have more people collecting than are paying in. And that can only result in bankruptcy.
Currently in America, 49% of all working Americans pay ZERO taxes to support our system. We are only 1% away from the point of diminishing returns, with more people collecting than paying.
We are feeding the bears. And someday, there will not be enough food for them all. And that is when America will cease being the great, powerful, wealthy nation it once was.
Is that what you want for YOUR children?
Certainly, as a society we should help those who cannot help themselves. But there should be no ENTITLEMENTS to it. It should never be seen as a "right". Charity is not a right. And it should never, ever be extended to anyone who simply refuses to support themselves, or those who make poor choices. It should only be extended to those who CANNOT support themselves because of severe physical or mental incapacity.
Those who WILL not support themselves can and should starve. When they get hungry enough, they will work.
/
The point of the article had to do with the rioting and attacks in Greece, France and other socialist nations that provide entitlements they can no longer afford to give. The folks, mostly youngsters who have never known self-reliance and believe entitlements really are something they are ENTITLED to are angry at being told the entitlements will shrink, or even disappear. The bears attack.
Well, now it has hit what was once a bastion of capitalism that has, in recent decades, become rather socialist - the United Kingdom. Today, youngsters who have never known anything but entitlements have been told the entitlements will be shrinking, and university tuitions will be going up, have begun rioting. Over 50,000 stormed buildings that house many businesses and tore them apart. They say it is only the beginning.
It is pathetic - young people insisting that taxes be raised on OTHER people just so they can continue to get free benefits.
Wake up, America. You are looking at your own future if you continue on the road of entitlements. It ALWAYS ends badly. No exceptions. The reason is as Margaret Thatcher once said, that sooner or later you run out of other people's money to give away. More and more people decide it is easier to accept the dole than to actually work hard to support themselves. Eventually you have more people collecting than are paying in. And that can only result in bankruptcy.
Currently in America, 49% of all working Americans pay ZERO taxes to support our system. We are only 1% away from the point of diminishing returns, with more people collecting than paying.
We are feeding the bears. And someday, there will not be enough food for them all. And that is when America will cease being the great, powerful, wealthy nation it once was.
Is that what you want for YOUR children?
Certainly, as a society we should help those who cannot help themselves. But there should be no ENTITLEMENTS to it. It should never be seen as a "right". Charity is not a right. And it should never, ever be extended to anyone who simply refuses to support themselves, or those who make poor choices. It should only be extended to those who CANNOT support themselves because of severe physical or mental incapacity.
Those who WILL not support themselves can and should starve. When they get hungry enough, they will work.
/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)