Jesus paid special attention to the poor

The "rich" half of the country already pays their own taxes and shoulders ALL of the federal tax burden for the other half? What's immoral or anti-scripture about that?

Because your starting point for understanding morality is assumed, any coherence to your article can quickly get lost. I write this because your moral prescriptions seem to expect people to assent to your interpretations of the Bible.

Biblical theories concerning moral imperatives are complex and demand more analysis than your presumptions. So why do you impose your moral understandings of the New Testament onto the reader? I thought that was what good Liberals never do.

As you know, people throughout the centuries have used the gospels to pretext their arguments for their own agendas. The New Testament can be interprested as a real story about the Son of God entering into history to redeem, atone, save and reconcile followers of that same Son of God. I’m not saying this theological conclusion is true or untrue rather I’m saying the writers of the New Testament seem to be asking people to believe these things about Jesus Christ. And this belief gives compelling reason for one to conform to the teaching of the NT, including everything from care for the poor or responsible stewardship of God’s creation.

But this is NOT a simple teaching nor is it in anyway easy to accept or believe. Of course this doesn’t stop you from thinking otherwise.

I agree that Christians (believers in the orthodox teachings about Jesus Christ) ought to care deeply for the countless things God cares for. But to assume that any non-believer of Christ, any political entities and governmental policies ought reflect or conform to the prescriptions of the New Testament is foolish at best and a terrible and pretentious imposition at worst. As a Liberal you should know this as well as any writer who attempts to use a text to authorize his political agendas.

Actually, that would be incorrect. There was an admonishment to be aware that the love of money would prevent loving God.

But the bible states clearly we should not give undue respect to the wealthy OR the poor.

You'd be putting spin on the gospel to say that he gave special attention to the poor. That is untrue. When he stated that the poor would have the gospel preached to them, it was not poor in cash he was referring to. Charity was as much an expected part of life as brushing your hair. Sin is endemic in all, rich, middle, poor. That is what the bible is about. Being set free from sin. Its not about social change or political movements.

The bible is about a miraculous Holy Spirit led change of heart and mind in individuals, who would then be equipped by the Spirit to no longer be slaves to sin. It is not about politics or earthly kingdoms.

People do not read the book and are ripe for all kinds of misuse of it. Political use of scripture would only be like all politics, a tool for power over others. (the bible calls that witchcraft)

And Jesus also said, "Render unto Caesar..." He didn't say keep every last thing for yourself and let those who depend on the State go hungry. Rome, for all her slavery and ill treatment of people, was a major jobs creator. (You don't buold roads and aqueducts using a magic wand.

You could consider it the natural logic of things - you have to pay for what you want. lol.

You see, ten years ago I shed my worldly possessions and came out to the Third World to find some peace (I only needed worldly possessions because of her, America's exquisitely beautiful five foot eleven natural blond blue eyed slim daughter, and once she was no longer with us it didn't matter anymore). And then in 2003 I gave George W help for free, and in return his people paid my enemies on the ground in the capital city of this tiny little boonie country to steal from me and to try to kill me seventy four times in the past seven years (my kidneys bleed if I drink less than six liters of water a day, the toxins/poisons my enemies used damaged them that badly - I'd be dead in a week if I drank even a liter less water a day, so the doc said), so do I blame George W and his people and call them "Evil!"? No, I understand that because I didn't charge them money they naturally questioned my motives, my intellect and my sanity and figured they could just walk all over me, I should have remembered that was the culture in America (Stash, Cash or A$$, Nobody Rides For Free. lol). Since then I insist on charging America for helping America (I learned my lesson good. lol), though I am cheaper than the $100billion the U.S. government paid to the Indians and the God knows what the U.S. government paid to the Pakistanis combined (I am done bleeding for the sins of others). lol.

The mathematics of the U.S. economy is so complicated that one man in every generation can do it (at one time the Casinos in Vegas believed it was impossible to card-count in a four deck game of Black Jack - then some boys and girls from MIT took them to the cleaners for a decade before those Casinos wised up). Twice in the past three weeks I have stated things that officials in America tasked with finding those things out didn't know but then found them to be correct afterwards (like the corporations resorting to putting their profits into the stock market to beat inflation, and that the "surge" caused an excess of capital to flow into the U.S. economy), now if someone told you that I did that while sitting half way across the planet with no books nor data available to me right now wouldn't you just laugh them out of the room and say, "thats impossible"? lol.

I needed three (not so interconnected as they seem) one time moves back in 2003 to fix it, the Bush tax cuts were a "plausible explanation" designed to fool the economists, the Europeans and the rest of the world into believing the old lie sold to them over generations. We'll probably do a different set of moves or maneuvers this time, which is necessary because the paradigms have changed, but I've done it before and I can do it again. lol.

So this Christmas have some faith...;-).

That's some pretty twisted logic there, Billy. Jesus said give to the poor. Check. Now show me where he said to get the government to steal from the rich to give to the poor. Maybe you were thinking of Robin Hood. Easy to get confused on that one. But Robin Hood had the courage to do it himself, rather than outsource the dirty work.

Twisting the twists, the argument goes on that more government taking from rich people now will somehow prevent the government from taking from other people later on. It's never worked that way, and it never will.

Jesus' "higher way" of giving all your worldly possession to the poor applies to private individuals, not the state. Any private individual is free to follow this praise-worthy counsel, as many saints have done.

But any state that divested itself of all its resources to provide benefits to the current generation of the poor, but thereby deprived itself of the means to carry out its other duties, would be not only a failure in worldly terms, but would arguably be committing immoral acts against those others who had claims on the state's services.

To neglect defense, for example, as many high-minded British pacifists repeatedly urged their government to do in the 1930s, would have resulted in Britain's being taken over by Nazi Germany.

One last thing Bill, I suppose you believe that special interest groups lobbying for hand outs for themselves is also charity. The reason that Democrats are so adamant in such "charity" is they are such poor Christians that they are reluctant to open their own wallets to give true charity, donations from their personal wealth, given freely, without coercion.

Given the premise that we all should share at least part of the burden for keeping this democratic republic together, how does it square morally that almost half of our citizen workers pay nothing in the way of taxes? Yes, 47 percent of all workers pay nothing in the way of federal income taxes, leaving the rest of us to subsidize their citizenship. And a subset of this category not only pay no taxes, but receive net payments from the Treasury known as Earned Income Tax Credits. How moral will it be when that 47 percent rises to 51 percent and those non-taxpaying citizens control how much taxes the rest of us pay. Well, Bill, how say you?

I find it immoral that a left wing progressive pundit that would fight to the death any expression of religious beliefs in a public venue would stoop to alluding to what Jesus would do in the public square. And as I said before, extracting money from the people for charitable purposes under penalty of law is not charity, except for the purposes of Democrats.

Well, Bill, the coerced extraction of wealth from the populace for the purpose of transferring it to others is not truly charity, is it? If I don't pay that which the government demands that I contribute, then I go to jail. That's patently coercion. I doubt that Jesus would advocate such "charity".

Bill, nice try, but I don't think Jesus thought the Roman Gov't was the best way to provide for the poor. Couple of questions for you.

Where do most charities receive their funding? From the poor, the unemployed?

Most credible charities use less than 10% of the funds raised for administration. Can to share how much of every federal tax dollar is used on Administration.

Finally, on any given day, Catholic Charities provide more food, shelter, clothing and medical care to individuals than all gov'ts combined.

That's what Jesus would want.

You idiots have no idea what god would think and are arrgant as hell for suggesting you do. This seems to me no greater example of people so desperate to prove gods existence that they think they know how he would feel about tax cuts, I mean really.....

Some people see a piece of toast and think they see gods face in it, its just a peice of toast christs sake.

I agree the government should be charitable and help the poor including the unemployed. When they were working government gladly took their hard earned money. Not increasing taxs on the rich is a tactile move not a religious one. God has made these people rich for a reason, they are smart and efficient-even Polite was put in power by God as Jesus said. So "in God we trust". This move by the government may,which I believe, get the economy going and so empower the presently unemployed to get a job to pay down the debt.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Does not your master pay tribute?
He said, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What think you, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
Peter said to him, Of strangers. Jesus said
to him, Then are the children free?
Matthew 17

With rising costs, both emotional and financial, it there a truly Free World? Have we been duped into thinking there is only to preventing us from continuing the struggle?

The Christian Congress's endless exploitation of the poor is authorized in their scriptures more than once (and seepost below) It begins with rendering unto Caesar that which is his due. What the Christians failed to see is that NOTHING is due Caesar.

Now that the Christians have become Caesar, perhaps, other Christians see the problem. (The rest of us do.).

A different perspective is found in
Psalm 23, Hosea 2:19--חֶסֶד

Acts 5:1-11

1 Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. 2 With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.

3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”

5 When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened. 6 Then some young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.

7 About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?”

“Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”

9 Peter said to her, “How could you conspire to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”

10 At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11 Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.

Very interesting . . .
"Jesus paid special attention to the poor"

vs:

McConnell, Boehner, their followers together with Blue Dog Democrats PAY SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THE VERY WEALTHY.

IRONY? The GOP emphasizes that THEY are the "Christian" Party.

Geeze! How can so-called "Christian Voters be SO STUPID?

Wall Street Banks are awarding $143,000,000,000,000, That's right. One Hundred Forty Three BILLION dollars in bonuses and perks THIS YEAR!
DO YOU REALIZE THAT that would more than pay for the 2011 tax shortfall of ALL 50 STATES.
Think of the Jobs it would create for our much needed infrastructure.

"Christians" the GOP "Christians"?
What a LIE! Down right Amoral!

Not every one that says to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in tour name? and in your name have cast out devils? and in your name done many wonderful works?
And then will I profess to them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity. Matthew 7

Are there believers who wonder if Christ includes them in this? Everyone is righteous in their own eyes?

The separation of the sheep from the goats is similar in it's implications.

Is Christ addressing atheists by these words? "These people honour me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me."

How about these words of Christ?

These things say the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;
I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot: I would you were cold or hot.
So then because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth.
Because you say, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and know not that you are wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
I counsel you to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that you may be rich; and white raiment, that you may be clothed, and that the shame of your nakedness do not appear; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see.
As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.
Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
To him that overcomes will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

Are tax cuts for the rich immoral? Absolutely. But since the ruling ideas of any society of the ideas of the rulers, it is the blasphemous prosperity gospel instead of authentic Christianity (i.e. the social gospel and liberation theology) which dominate the hypocritical high steeple churches all across this land that worships money. God has a preferential option for the poor. America has a preferential option for the rich. The two forces are in contradiction to one another. Guess which one wins? Hint: not the one with the most nukes in silos or kooks in office.

Jesus and the poor...Yea right. If you described a guy like Jesus to the average "Christian" without giving away who you were talking about, the average "Christian" would fly into an uncontrolled rage about how Obama and the godless, gay socialists are ruining America.

In fact, it's hilarious to think that bin Laden and Jesus probably looked and dressed alike, so much so that if Jesus would to appear on Earth today, most Christians would try to kill him.

Two other interesting facts about Jesus: he never in any way condemned gay people and he never once justified killing another person for any reason.

When Jesus saw the Sweet Business deal between the Priests, Bankers and Merchants in The Temple at Jerusalem, he freaked out and for the 1st time in his Ministry, became a violent terrorist in overturning the Banker's money, both the secular currencies from the various parts of the world, and the Temple currency with which to buy the "Kosher" Merchant's merchandise at twice the price it was available off Temple property.

Jesus was condemned as a criminal according to the Law for that action.

In the 2000 years since then, the Bankers and Merchants, with a misguided or asleep religious leadership, up until the financial meltdown/economic Pearl Harbour-tsunami in the Fall of 2008, regained control of the Temple in getting an irreligious Society psyched up year after year to buy each other presents for His Birthday but leaving him out of it. Talk about miracles.

The reason why this question is so hard for Christians to answer may be unpalatalble for many. The fact of the matter is that Faith is irrelevant - it doesn't make you good or bad, it doesn't make you better or worse, it doesn't bring the rain and it doesn't raise the dead.
And of course, the contradictory ideas expressed in a book like The Bible, written by scores of different authors spanning many centuries, with conflicting moral codes, where fact, fiction, fantasy and fable are all mixed together with folksy platitudes, has no relevant answer to this question.

Jesus said the poor are always with you. It does not mean he approved of poverty. He went to great lengths to equate wealth with absence of godliness. His mission was to the poor and downtrodden. Gandhi probably borrowed from Christianity when he took the cause of untouchables in India. The early Christians lived a collective life pooling their resources and sharing them as each needed. Calvin tried to do the same thing in Geneva. This is almost like communism except that communists do not believe in God. Later we know capitalists in this country hijacked Christianity. That is how we have conservative Christians pushing class divisions. The way things are unraveling in this country one could foresee class conflict right here in the U.S. History will always repeat itself. May not be the same way it happened in Russia and China. If that happens, may God help us all!

This reminds me of the time I lived in Germany, the Ethiopian Ambassador was was right down the road. He had at least 3 Mercedes in his front driveway. One day, I was in the gym in the US Embassy watching CNN. They had a story about a food festival in Colorado where a handsome American chef was taking to the reporter about his new twist on Latin cuisine and shots of all the wealthy people from Denver and Aspen and all over eating there. On the bottom of the screen I noticed a large number with a lot of zero's scroll across. It was the number of people who died that year or month or whatever from starvation in, you guessed it, Ethiopia. I couldn't help but think how much lower that number might be if the ambassador had, say, only 2 Mercedes instead of 3. Or if the profits of this food festival were to go to a charity that helps end starvation (maybe it did?). Mostly, I just remember thinking "This has to change, one way or another, this HAS to change. But what am I gonna do about it? What is anyone gonna do about it?"

Well? I'm waiting people. I am waiting for you and you are waiting for me all we ever get is "Aaaaw, isn't that sad. Someone should do something."

Someone else, of course.

I think I know the reason why Conservatives are money-grubbing materialists and why they are so stingy when it comes to government assistance to the poor.

It has to do with the desire to get credit in God's eyes for personal donations. Being taxed to assist the poor is too distant, but personal donations earn immediate salvation points. Conservatives are afraid that their tax payments won't be seen by God as personal benevolence.

And how best to be able to donate "personally"? Get rich, of course!

Sure, those conservative GOPers always seem to forget the whole Jesus and the poor thing. Even as they preach how Christian they are.

They're more like an ad for Capital One: what's in your wallet?

Seeing Sodom entered the picture, this is an accurate report of a lunch with the Pope's Ambassador to CanaDa in 1985.

Lunch With The Pope's Ambassador

In 1985 Cormier was extended the rare honour and recognition of being invited to lunch with The Apostolic Nuncio to Canada. Passing through the main Dining Hall with it's seven foot fireplace and table seating at least fifty, The Nuncio, Charge D'Affairs, Secretary and Cormier entered a beautifully decorated, intimate Dining room with a table for twelve.

The dinnerware had a gold band around the edge with the Papal tiara crown in gold at the top. It was a formal setting. with the whitest linen tablecloth and flowers.

As the guest, the man for all seasons and reasons served Cormier first and the Secretary last, and at that point he deliberately picked up the dessert fork at the top of the plate to eat the rigatoni meat sauce appetizer with the most wonderful aroma.

The Pope's Ambassador stopped him, pointing to the fork on the side. Replacing it, Cormier said, "Excuse me, Your Excellency. It's been over ten years since I left the refinements of the business world where I negotiated multi-million dollar deals in Board Rooms and fine restaurants with Executives of Multi-National corporations. I've lost touch with that sense of refinement.

To tell you the Truth, Your Excellency, since I've been walking with Jesus, most of the people I encounter can't even afford to eat good food, let alone have matched dinnerware." Jesus was brutal talking to religious leaders.

Being a Diplomat and recovering, The Nuncio asked, What's on the mind of youth? Cormier said, "Sex, drugs, music, peace, love, friendship, money, security and work, not necessarily in that order of priority."

Oh! It's just like Sodom and Gomorrah was the reply. Cormier said, "Surely Your Excellency knows the Prophet Ezekiel said what the sin of Sodom was in Chapter 16:48.

It was pride, fullness of bread and abundance of idleness was in her and her daughters and she was haughty. Neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. It had nothing to do with sexual activity."

Sitting in the front seat of the limousine with the Man for all Seasons and Reasons, living in the gatehouse with his wife, and driving him home after lunch, he told Cormier his wife is a Cormier.

A few years back I heard a sermon where the pastor related a true tale of 400 top American executives gathered for some type of meeting. A speaker polled these men asking how many of them believed and accepted Christ. It was said that not one hand was raised upon the inquiry. If true, this would help explain why magnates behave in the manner they do.

A response to FarnazMansouri2 who quoted the story of Peter and Ananias et ux from Acts: The story was only tangentially about those who choose to follow Christ's call to "sell all that you have, give it to the poor and follow me."

The real reason that Ananias and his wife were punished was for their hypocrisy--wanting to appear that they were giving all they had while keeping some for themselves and then lying about it.

As one sees, most recently, from the tax cuts, the Christians do not believe their commitment to the poor extends beyond taking from them everything they have left. Steal, extort from others--Indeed, it is in their "New Testament" (sic):

Acts 5:1-11

1 Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. 2 With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.

3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”

5 When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened. 6 Then some young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.

7 About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?”

“Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”

9 Peter said to her, “How could you conspire to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”

10 At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11 Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.

Jesus started His public ministry by reading the Messianic Proclamation from Isaiah 61, quoted in Luke 4:18, stating that the Spirit of God was upon Him, and that He was anointed to proclaim Good News to the poor. And with over 350 verses of Scripture speaking of God's care for the poor and oppressed, it is a weak argument for Christians to not serve the poor as a main staple of the Gospel.

God loves all equally, but God does have a preferential option for the poor, not because they are better, but because they are more vulnerable. And as it has been said before: Good News to the poor is always bad news to the rich...

"Paying taxes is not charity and is neither moral nor immoral; it's an investment in wealth preservation--pure self-interest."
------------------------------
As, most recently, the tax cuts for the rich demonstrate--

"Now that the Christians have become Caesar, perhaps, other Christians see the problem. (The rest of us do.)."

[Earlier postng continues]

Judaism requires a commitment to the poor. Every family must give to those who have less. If you have little, there are those who have less, etc. Chesed. It is a matter of ending injustice.

See Psalm 23, Hosea 2:19--חֶסֶד

Posted by: FarnazMansouri2 | December 17, 2010 12:17 PM

"The Christians' problem begins with rendering unto Caesar that which is his due. What the Christians failed to see is that NOTHING is due Caesar."

---------

I have to disagree. Christ's injunction that you return to Caesar what belongs to Caesar (pointing to his image on the coin) is a very insightful take on the tax issue.

Money is printed by the government and only has value as part of a monetary system backed by a standing government. (Think of all that confederate script that became worthless when the Confederacy ended.)

If the gov't fails or is crippled by debt, hyper-inflation will destroy the value of the money. Paying taxes to keep the government solvent and strong helps to ensure the value of the money which people cling to so desperately. By paying taxes, you are paying to keep the game going--to maintain the illusion that these pieces of green paper are worth something.

Paying taxes is not charity and is neither moral nor immoral; it's an investment in wealth preservation--pure self-interest.

The Christians' problem begins with rendering unto Caesar that which is his due. What the Christians failed to see is that NOTHING is due Caesar.

Now that the Christians have become Caesar, perhaps, other Christians see the problem. (The rest of us do.).

Judaism requires a commitment to the poor. Every family must give to those who have less. If you have little, there are those who have less, etc. Chesed. It is a matter of ending injustice.

See Psalm 23, Hosea 2:19--חֶסֶד

As one sees, most recently, from the tax cuts, the Christians do not believe their commitment to the poor extends beyond taking from them everything they have left. Steal, extort from others--Indeed, it is in their "New Testament" (sic):

Acts 5:1-11

1 Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. 2 With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.

3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”

5 When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened. 6 Then some young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.

7 About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?”

“Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”

9 Peter said to her, “How could you conspire to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”

10 At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11 Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.

Our national morality has taken a nosedive and is about to get worse. The law recently enacted in Arizona making it a crime to aid an illegal immigrant comes disturbingly close to what Jewish tradition records as having been the law of Sodom and the primary reason for its destruction.

The Tea-Party Republicans who are about to take over the House have expressed support for that kind of law. They are also disdainful of the poor. Under their policies US law will come closer and closer to the laws of Sodom.

There are ancient rabbinic stories about young women being brutally executed in Sodom for the serious crime of providing food to poor strangers. The Hebrew text is without vowels, and in reading the text it is necessary to identify the words by filling in the vowels. Alternative choices of vowels have long been part of Jewish biblical interpretation. Some rabbis of antiquity pointed out that a slight change in vowels for the word R-B-H in the explanation of the destruction of Sodom makes the text read "because of the maiden," and refers to a young woman who was executed.

Some details and sources can be found at http://www.iwgonline.org/docs/sodom.html

I agree. The Christians who vote for politicians who say they are against gay marriage and abortion are basically Cafeteria Christians who ignore Jesus' message to care for the poor, the needy and sick.
Most of the politicians who vote against gay marriage and abortion vote for tax cuts for the wealthy, war, death penalty and vote against health care, food for poor children, and social safety nets of all kinds.
Nothing has changed. There are still money changers in the Temple and children and poor people are still suffering.

We all know Jesus said hardly ever will a rich man enter the Kingdom of Heaven and it is easier for a camel to enter through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom Heaven and other such injunctions. We know about the separation of the sheep from the goats at the end.

Where are those Christian Bible Fundamentalist Leaders highlighting or even just speaking this from James 5?

Go to now, you rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you.
Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth eaten.
Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. You have heaped treasure together for the last days.
Behold, the HIRE OF THE LABOURERS who have reaped down your fields, which is of you KEPT BACK BY FRAUD, cries: and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth.
You have lived in pleasure on the earth, and been wanton; you have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter.
You have condemned and killed the just; and he does not resist you.
Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waits for the precious fruit of the earth, and has long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain.
Be patient; establish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draws nigh.
Grudge not one against another, brethren, lest you be condemned: behold, the judge stands before the door.
Take, my brethren, the prophets, who have spoken in the name of the Lord, for an example of suffering affliction, and of patience.
Behold, we count them happy which endure. You have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender mercy.
But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest you fall into condemnation.

I agree this isn't a black or white issue, and I also think the tax cuts should have expired for those making over 250k. However, I don't think this should be phrased as making our children pay for tax cuts for millionaires. The millionaires paid for their own tax cuts. It was their earnings to begin with. I believe in Jesus' teachings to help the poor, but I don't necessarily believe it should be mandated through the government. No one gets any brownie points in heaven for good deeds they were forced to do. I also think that, if God only requires 10%, no one can claim it is more moral so to speak for any other entity to require more. But I supported the tax increase because I believe that the citizens who obviously benefit the most from the liberties, democracy, and capitalism in this country should lead the effort in paying down the deficit. It is only right in my opinion.

Beyond, Biblical morality, I think there is a very practical political reason not to extend tax cuts for the wealthiest. It is well recorded that the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest in the US continues to widen. History teaches us (if we listen) that this trend is unsustainable over the long run. Inevitably, the poor, out of desparation, revolt, usually violently. Thus, empires and governments seem to last, at most, 3 or 4 centuries before reaching this tipping point. We are long past our second centenial. I don't condone armed revolt in any way. But I remember my world history books and I see unsettling parallels as the wealthy seem to use (abuse?) their power for ever more wealth.

If faith is to be absent whenever an elected official makes a decision, what moral criteria ought to guide his/her duty “to serve the best interests of the people” instead? Is it morally realistic for elected officials to divorce themselves from their moral principles when making decisions that affect the best interests of their constituencies? Are we not taking elected officials to have multiple personalities when we make such statements? Subsumed in the duty to serve the interests of the people is the overarching one that a human being needs to proceed morally at all times. Even when buying a pair of tennis shoes we need to ask ourselves, am I buying stolen goods or merchandise that was manufactured through the exploitation of child labor? Such is precisely the meaning of what it means to be a moral being. That notion that at times we may abstain from being moral is a myth devoid of logical or philosophical rationality.

So, offshore drilling is not a moral issue. That would mean that offshore drilling could not possibly have any adverse impact on human lives, whether physically, emotionally or financially. That would mean that anyone could proceed without having to care for adversely affecting the physical, emotional or financial aspects of people. So, if in the name of greed, I choose to cut corners and affect the lives of one person or ten thousand people, would it not matter? Speed limits are enforced so that people would not kill each other on the roads; these regulations are the public or social expression of care for others, of concern for others. Is that not a moral issue?

The author’s problem lies with the basic definition of what it means to be a moral being. If the definition is lacking, well, the rest of the argument will be flawed.

J. Ricardo Planas
ReasonandPolitics.com

In a time of economic turmoil and record poverty levels, are tax cuts for the wealthy moral?
-----------------------
well based upon Jesus' ministry in the Gospels, his many passages on concern for the poor, in the Christian moral spectrum it would seem to be immoral.

As the rich get richer, we care for the rich instead of the poor in an appalling "reverse Robin-Hood-ism"; I cannot think of anything more unchristian.

When i was living in the United States i was surprised that poor people and poverty are very rarely mentioned in church services. Gay people, abortion, sexual behavior, church attendance were frequent motives in preaching. Poverty was not. America has transformed the christian message into dogma and personal ethics. Jesus message to the poor is lost.