Response to e-mail by Daniel J. Keelan dated Nov 9, 2008.
<<Our values are FIRST Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Who gives those rights to you? Seriously! Where do those rights come from? I want to know what people think about that.>>
Nobody gives them to us. We have them simply by virtue of being alive. They are ‘inalienable’ and given by the Creator according the Declaration of Independence. These are three rights enumerated but are only found ‘among’ ‘certain inalienable rights.’ They are not, as some seem to think, the ONLY rights. They are not the FIRST rights either, just three of ‘certain inalienable rights.’ What, pray tell, are these other rights? Could they include a right to food? To shelter? To health? Discuss.
<<Government should reflect our values and NOT attack a country that did not attack us. Agreed. Now, let’s quit talking about Korea and start talking about Vietnam and Iraq.>>
Clever. Nice way to avoid the issue, too. What justification did we have to invade Iraq even assuming Saddam had WMD? Do our values include spending billions to bomb the crap out of people on the other side of the earth, but gripe about spending millions to provide for our own citizens?
<<Who says it is not the job of my Federal Government to be charitable. Me. I say it. Who else says it? Many many others say it. And that’s how we are going to vote.>>
As long as you have the votes, it will go your way. No argument there.
<<Socialism is a dirty word in the context of government because it:
- is inefficient
- raises your taxes
- provides social services for those who do not pay taxes
- modifies the family structure so that families can maximize the welfare dollars and qualify for more of it (i.e. get a divorce for the husband, get a low paying job so you can max out your eligibility). It is called REGULATING THE POOR.>>
Let’s see some proof.
Assuming it is inefficient, how is it less efficient at delivering care to the needy than our current system?
Yes, it raises taxes. So does going to war with people who didn’t attack us. Not the issue. The issue is what we pay our taxes for, not how much taxes we pay. Are we getting what we pay for? Is it worth the price? Could we spend our money more wisely?
<< provides social services for those who do not pay taxes >> OH. MY. GOD! Those BASTARDS!
Only people who pay taxes should receive social services? Is that what you’re arguing? Really? How about this – if I pay more taxes than you I should get MORE social services. So the police should come be MY house first. The fire department should come the MY house first. MY street should be repaired FIRST. And if you pay less taxes than me even though you work as hard, are as patriotic, are as responsible, have as many children, have served your country, give to charity, help your community, are kind to children and small animals – tough tookus, you pay less taxes than me so your house can burn. And if you do all those things but don’t make enough money to pay any taxes your house can burn TWICE. Goddamn freeloader.
As for modifying the family structure and all that other yada, yada, yada, welfare and socialism are not the same thing- Sure some lazy people game the system. Name a system or devise one that can’t be gamed by someone. The ‘distortion of the family structure’ argument is a canard. take any program and one can find ways that it has ‘distorted’ the world, in good and bad and unintended ways.
If you’ve been paying attention I have not advocated that the government put everyone on welfare, and neither does socialism. I advocate that we, through our representative government, guarantee minimal standards of living so that no citizen will ever, ever, ever go without food, clothing, shelter, health care or education.
Nor am I advocating giving total control over your money and property to Nancy, Barney, Hillary or anyone else. I once gave control to George Bush, Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld and they decided to spend it on death and destruction, killing and/or maiming thousands of my fellow citizens for no purpose, not to mention threatening my liberty. Guess what, though, every four years I give control to another group of people. So do you. They all think they know how to spend our money better than you or I do. Deal with it. Maybe it’s time to give control to people who will spend it supporting life instead of destroying it.
Why do people get so incensed over the idea that the government might give some of their money to a someone else so they can put a roof over their heads, but don’t complain so much when the government gives money to death merchants, or to companies selling us over-priced, badly designed, ill-conceived weapons systems? Complain all you want about the most powerful and influential lobbyists – who the hell do you think they work for? The poor?
Go ahead and make your own charitable choices. I’m not getting in your way. I’m not suggesting anyone get in your way. I’m not suggesting anyone force you to do something you don’t want to do anymore than they already do. But consider this. I don’t have the option to refuse to pay taxes because the government spends money in ways I don’t like. Neither do you. Right now it’s not spending it in a way that represents me. But I’m still paying my taxes.
I am going to work to convince my government and my fellow citizens and my brothers and sisters that we, our government, we the people, should be spending our money protecting our citizens from dangers like hunger, exposure to the elements, preventable disease and the like.
And if I can convince them, are you going to still pay your taxes or are you going to hide your money?
Terry
****Original message****
On Nov 9, 2008, at 11:36 AM, Daniel Keelan wrote:
Our values are FIRST Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Who gives those rights to you? Seriously! Where do those rights come from? I want to know what people think about that.
The answers will be interesting and show why we differ on this point.
Some pursue THEIR CHOSEN values through: work and getting closer to God. Others through charitable acts. Others pursue the almighty dollar. Others public service. Others don’t care about any of it except for their little piece of heaven (happiness). Other’s values, in the big picture, are identical to mine…no doubt. Get down to priorities and down to tactics and execution and there is going to be a huge divergence.
Government should reflect our values and NOT attack a country that did not attack us. Agreed. Now, let’s quit talking about Korea and start talking about Vietnam and Iraq.
Who says it is not the job of my Federal Government to be charitable. Me. I say it. Who else says it? Many many others say it. And that’s how we are going to vote.
To the point of socialism being a dirty word….Christian organizations are a socialist – 100% agree. They are not the government. Socialism is a dirty word in the context of government. Socialism is A OK in the context of religious and NGO charitable organizing. Socialism is a dirty word in the context of government because it:
- is inefficient – raises your taxes – provides social services for those who do not pay taxes – modifies the family structure so that families can maximize the welfare dollars and qualify for more of it (i.e. get a divorce for the husband, get a low paying job so you can max out your eligibility). It is called REGULATING THE POOR. I see it as no different than shipping convicts to Australia.
I give to education in my charitable contributions. Through my Diocese (not my parish), I give to the poor. Those are the areas I chose to assist. My choice. Not yours. Not your like-minded folk. Not Nancy, Harry, Barney, Hillary, George, Dick, Trent etc. Not the most powerful or influential lobbyist. My choice. Mine mine mine and I am jealous enough to want to keep my choice.
Yes, look at our Public Education. You are right. Get the freak out of my schools Federal Government! Quit imposing and not paying. Read force my property taxes up. Quit promising more pay for teachers because you are not gonna be able to continue funding it and the local school board will have to RAISE my taxes to pay for them. NO WHERE in the Constitution (read it) No where does it say the federal government has acknowledged the right to education. EVERY state in the union (thank you John Adams and Thomas Jefferson for writing the models that the other states adopted) takes on in THEIR constitution the right to and responsibility for education.
A privilege to be charitable with my tax dollars? That has to be a lapse because I can not believe you think the government gives me privileges? God gives those to me. Dah it cost more to have this privilege….Well, skip me please. I do not want the privilege. So, let me opt out of your choices for charitable contributions and let me make my own thank you very much.
