Before I get to the actual blog on health care I have to say something pre-emptively to set the stage. The big-picture function of my blog, basically, is to argue the current liberal political viewpoint from a biblical standpoint… an argument that seems almost entirely neglected. Throughout the blogs: Those who agree with me do not post (let’s dangle some juevos people!!!), and there are those who don’t agree who use this argument: Combining religion and politics is not relevant, ie. we don’t live in a “theocracy”. My message to this argument is: stop.
I agree with the sentiment that our government is (and should be) secular. But to argue from a Republican standpoint that one should not use biblical arguments to support one’s perspective on American government is profoundly, PROFOUNDLY, hypocritical. I mean, it’s just a new level, a new brand of hypocrisy. I feel like the church and the majority of Christians (who would otherwise be apolitical like Jesus) have been sucked up into the conservative mindset based on two hot-button, theological issues… regardless of (godless) economic policy. Most Christians that I know supported the war in Iraq based on these two ideologies.
So my message is this: stop. Just stop. The only reason I’m arguing liberalism biblically is to counteract the mammoth (mis)use of biblical precepts to argue conservatism. If you want to argue against my view by: using countering scriptures; attacking my interpretation of scripture; or simply arguing conservative policy from a secular standpoint (ouch, good luck with that one), then that’s fine. There is one particular blogger (hindleg that’s you) who does great with this. But arguing against my blog just because I use the bible is so contradictory coming from a conservative that I have to ask you to stop.
Level the playing field: take this silly abortion clause out of the health care reform bill: take gay marriage off the table when running for office (on both sides), then I’ll be THRILLED to close this blog and take on the easy task of arguing for liberal fiscal policy from a secular standpoint. As a business owning, non-health insured, tax-paying employer, I have a 42-gallon barrel of whoop ass to open up!!!
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Thursday, October 8, 2009
My 100 dollar dare
My $100 dare
That's it. I'm frustrated. I'm fed up. Republicanism chaps my hide. The fact that the republican state congress and senate was put in power partially in thanks to Christians is just pure injustice, a defamation against the Spirit of God.
We passed a budget. I don't even want to talk about how embarrassing the whole situation is. But, our fair governor, backed by his Republican representatives, line item vetoed 100% of state funding to domestic violence prevention and service programs. I am drawing this conclusion simply based on fact:
Democrats advocate for the widows and the orphans.
Republicans advocate for taxpayers.
I say, raise my taxes. I'm a business owner, I pay double the taxes you do, quit complaining. Raise my taxes and use that money to help women escaping irreversible violence so they can start a new life with their children.
Republicans across the land are saying "don't raise my taxes, it should be the responsibility of the individual to sponsor charities." Fine. I will buy your argument that you are advocating for upper and middle class taxpayers out of a God given duty. I will sponsor your argument if you prove it to me. To everyone of my readers who voted for a republican state congressman, (or for a guy who starred in Kindergarten Cop or the pregnant guy in “Junior”), who is advocating for no additional taxes, please consider this carefully: Donate $100 to CPAF, a domestic violence shelter my wife formerly worked at, which just had ALL state funding cut in order to preserve our current tax structure. Donate the precious $100 that you just saved in taxes this year to the people who actually need it. Here is the link:
https://co.clickandpledge.com/sp/d1/default.aspx?wid=28231
Donate $100, send me the confirmation email, and I will shut-up with my belief that Republican ideals are godless and selfish. That's it.
If you think that's unfair or inaccurate or over-simplied, then I have one simple question for you: Name one moment in Jesus' life where he advocated for himself...
...
Still thinking?
I cannot possibly think of any defensible spiritual argument one would have that lower taxes is worth women and children facing violence. Advocating for lower taxes over the needs of widows and orphans is in direct violation of a slew of doctrine that I don't even need to begin listing. Our governor is an outrage and an embarrassment. This is injustice.
That's it. I'm frustrated. I'm fed up. Republicanism chaps my hide. The fact that the republican state congress and senate was put in power partially in thanks to Christians is just pure injustice, a defamation against the Spirit of God.
We passed a budget. I don't even want to talk about how embarrassing the whole situation is. But, our fair governor, backed by his Republican representatives, line item vetoed 100% of state funding to domestic violence prevention and service programs. I am drawing this conclusion simply based on fact:
Democrats advocate for the widows and the orphans.
Republicans advocate for taxpayers.
I say, raise my taxes. I'm a business owner, I pay double the taxes you do, quit complaining. Raise my taxes and use that money to help women escaping irreversible violence so they can start a new life with their children.
Republicans across the land are saying "don't raise my taxes, it should be the responsibility of the individual to sponsor charities." Fine. I will buy your argument that you are advocating for upper and middle class taxpayers out of a God given duty. I will sponsor your argument if you prove it to me. To everyone of my readers who voted for a republican state congressman, (or for a guy who starred in Kindergarten Cop or the pregnant guy in “Junior”), who is advocating for no additional taxes, please consider this carefully: Donate $100 to CPAF, a domestic violence shelter my wife formerly worked at, which just had ALL state funding cut in order to preserve our current tax structure. Donate the precious $100 that you just saved in taxes this year to the people who actually need it. Here is the link:
https://co.clickandpledge.com/sp/d1/default.aspx?wid=28231
Donate $100, send me the confirmation email, and I will shut-up with my belief that Republican ideals are godless and selfish. That's it.
If you think that's unfair or inaccurate or over-simplied, then I have one simple question for you: Name one moment in Jesus' life where he advocated for himself...
...
Still thinking?
I cannot possibly think of any defensible spiritual argument one would have that lower taxes is worth women and children facing violence. Advocating for lower taxes over the needs of widows and orphans is in direct violation of a slew of doctrine that I don't even need to begin listing. Our governor is an outrage and an embarrassment. This is injustice.
How do you spell GMs demise? “EV1” (green and bling pt II)
Hello hello, as usual it’s been a long time since I’ve posted; I’ve been touring and teaching and traveling and trying to find balance in my priorities. Thank you all who have taken the time to read my blog, especially those who have posted (my question is why do ppl who voice support of my views tell me outside of my blog post? [in other words WTF]). Despite all the happenings in my personal life, when it came to GM’s bankruptcy, I just couldn’t resist the need to write… I drove an American car for 10 years of my life… you may now shower me with your sympathy.
Now, I drove a Ford, so for any of you who drove a Beretta or a Prizm, I know I shouldn’t complain; I suppose my Ford is a shining, radiator fluid-bleeding beacon of American auto-engineering compared to GMs Clunkers. But, I have smacked my forehead the second time my Detroit transmission stopped shifting out of second; I have rolled up the windows on a Pontiac with my bare hands (I mean, using my hands to physically lift up the window); I have laboured hands-on-the-hood of a Saturn that gave up on going in reverse… I know the pain GM owners must feel. I’ll admit it: I’m a bitter, Prius driving, recovering American car driver.
Biases aside, I feel that the American People felt a vague sense of vindication when we all heard about GM’s mammoth financial problems and when Obama forced them into a structured bankruptcy. Diseased by debt and crippled by its dependence on increasingly larger and more powerful vehicles… how do you spell GM’s demise? EV1, or Electric Vehicle One.
Over a decade ago in 1996, GM released the vehicle, a battery powered pure electric vehicle: no exhaust, no hybrid system, it had a range of approx 160 miles, with sporty power to boot. I had the pleasure of riding one with my friend Adam who worked for a California efficiency agency in Sacramento shortly after we graduated from Davis. The car was quiet, impressive, environmental, and sexy… less than a year later GM scrapped the program: that car, every other EV1 in creation, all of GM’s R&D and advertising cash, and GM’s hopes for staying solvent in 2009 laid crunched up in a junkyard. Over a decade later GM files for bankruptcy.
(This is the fruit of capitalism)
Rather than doing the RIGHT thing: going after a vehicle that would be right for our society, for our environment, for our foreign policy, for those who fell in an unnecessary war, and mainly just asking the simple question “aren’t Hummers stupid?” GM did precisely what capitalism rewards the most, the most PROFITABLE thing: they built larger and stronger cars to get bigger profit margins and scrapped a program that could be giving GM Toyota Prius levels of profitability/notoriety today.
Toyota on the other hand took a loss on the Prius. The first generation looked like it was off an episode of Star Trek Deep Space 9, like they were trying their hardest to appeal to dweebs and engineers who bring up vectors as conversation topics with girls. It barely got better mileage than efficient combustion engine cars, and it had as much power as my cell phone on vibrate. Toyota lost money on every Prius sold, and how many of those 1st gens do you see on the road now? But, our chain smoking Japanese friends stuck with the car and now the Prius is one of the main reasons Toyota is the largest car manufacturer in the world. General Motors was too busy snorting up W’s SUV tax breaks and getting high off the lie that soccer moms needed to drive over granite boulders and flooded riverbeds to pick up cookie dough at the store.
In my opinion, the most alarming observation I’ve made is how GM’s behavior as a corporation is mirrored by our behavior as individuals. Just like debt and useless/harmful cars disabled GM, Americans are crippled by the complications of obesity and diabetes. GM needed the government to perform bankruptcy, Americans are committing themselves to gastric bypass or lipo suction surgery everyday. The rise of GM’s dis-ease over the last 50 years ascended in tandem with the disease of Americans. We are incapable of exercising and eating right on our own just like GM was incapable of managing debt and investing in healthy cars. GM’s failure is not just a symbol of capitalism’s great failure; it is a warning sign to our participation in it as individuals.
And that’s the issue. Honestly, I don’t think God really cares whether GM fails or not, He’s interested in the hearts of us as individuals and communities. My criticism of pure free-market capitalism because of its failure financially is only tertiary. My greater concern is that our system rewards consumption and the accumulation of wealth in us as Christians, as churches, and it has defiled us. I leave you with this simple question: If GM was an individual, and you met this person, would GM be a spiritually healthy child of God? Or would he be a decrepit, gangrene-infested, bed-riddened-by-obesity, Godless man on life-support? It would be hard to argue that he is not the latter, and that he is not the very first candidate to need the loving redemption of Christ... but GM has no soul to save. As a corporation he exists for one purpose: profit.
Now, I drove a Ford, so for any of you who drove a Beretta or a Prizm, I know I shouldn’t complain; I suppose my Ford is a shining, radiator fluid-bleeding beacon of American auto-engineering compared to GMs Clunkers. But, I have smacked my forehead the second time my Detroit transmission stopped shifting out of second; I have rolled up the windows on a Pontiac with my bare hands (I mean, using my hands to physically lift up the window); I have laboured hands-on-the-hood of a Saturn that gave up on going in reverse… I know the pain GM owners must feel. I’ll admit it: I’m a bitter, Prius driving, recovering American car driver.
Biases aside, I feel that the American People felt a vague sense of vindication when we all heard about GM’s mammoth financial problems and when Obama forced them into a structured bankruptcy. Diseased by debt and crippled by its dependence on increasingly larger and more powerful vehicles… how do you spell GM’s demise? EV1, or Electric Vehicle One.
Over a decade ago in 1996, GM released the vehicle, a battery powered pure electric vehicle: no exhaust, no hybrid system, it had a range of approx 160 miles, with sporty power to boot. I had the pleasure of riding one with my friend Adam who worked for a California efficiency agency in Sacramento shortly after we graduated from Davis. The car was quiet, impressive, environmental, and sexy… less than a year later GM scrapped the program: that car, every other EV1 in creation, all of GM’s R&D and advertising cash, and GM’s hopes for staying solvent in 2009 laid crunched up in a junkyard. Over a decade later GM files for bankruptcy.
(This is the fruit of capitalism)
Rather than doing the RIGHT thing: going after a vehicle that would be right for our society, for our environment, for our foreign policy, for those who fell in an unnecessary war, and mainly just asking the simple question “aren’t Hummers stupid?” GM did precisely what capitalism rewards the most, the most PROFITABLE thing: they built larger and stronger cars to get bigger profit margins and scrapped a program that could be giving GM Toyota Prius levels of profitability/notoriety today.
Toyota on the other hand took a loss on the Prius. The first generation looked like it was off an episode of Star Trek Deep Space 9, like they were trying their hardest to appeal to dweebs and engineers who bring up vectors as conversation topics with girls. It barely got better mileage than efficient combustion engine cars, and it had as much power as my cell phone on vibrate. Toyota lost money on every Prius sold, and how many of those 1st gens do you see on the road now? But, our chain smoking Japanese friends stuck with the car and now the Prius is one of the main reasons Toyota is the largest car manufacturer in the world. General Motors was too busy snorting up W’s SUV tax breaks and getting high off the lie that soccer moms needed to drive over granite boulders and flooded riverbeds to pick up cookie dough at the store.
In my opinion, the most alarming observation I’ve made is how GM’s behavior as a corporation is mirrored by our behavior as individuals. Just like debt and useless/harmful cars disabled GM, Americans are crippled by the complications of obesity and diabetes. GM needed the government to perform bankruptcy, Americans are committing themselves to gastric bypass or lipo suction surgery everyday. The rise of GM’s dis-ease over the last 50 years ascended in tandem with the disease of Americans. We are incapable of exercising and eating right on our own just like GM was incapable of managing debt and investing in healthy cars. GM’s failure is not just a symbol of capitalism’s great failure; it is a warning sign to our participation in it as individuals.
And that’s the issue. Honestly, I don’t think God really cares whether GM fails or not, He’s interested in the hearts of us as individuals and communities. My criticism of pure free-market capitalism because of its failure financially is only tertiary. My greater concern is that our system rewards consumption and the accumulation of wealth in us as Christians, as churches, and it has defiled us. I leave you with this simple question: If GM was an individual, and you met this person, would GM be a spiritually healthy child of God? Or would he be a decrepit, gangrene-infested, bed-riddened-by-obesity, Godless man on life-support? It would be hard to argue that he is not the latter, and that he is not the very first candidate to need the loving redemption of Christ... but GM has no soul to save. As a corporation he exists for one purpose: profit.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Green and Bling pt. I
For those Americans (and it’s only Americans) who believe that humans do not cause global warming you have a strong kinship with that .00001% of the population that needs to be told how to buckle your seatbelt in an airplane (Two metal things fit one way, when connected, a single mechanism releases it=Humans polluting, Earth warming). I just have a very brief commentary for you hundred-thousandths-club people. If you are a secularist, well, there’s a simple motive for your ignorance: money. For example, you own a coal factory… or you are fortunate enough to sit over a division of a large corporation called “Hummer”.
But for Christians, you really have no excuse for ignoring this. The scriptures that point us toward environmental stewardship are few and far in between (unless you count the thousands of indirect quotes of God revealing himself to us via nature found in the Psalms and the book of Job). I will make my point for environmental stewardship by quoting a single verse.
“Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’” Genesis 1:26, NIV, italics added.
God has given us “rule” over all the Earth, thus according to this we can do whatever we want with it, right? No, God says in the same sentence that we are made in his likeness, thus we are to rule in his likeness. Does God rule us in a self-destructive way? Does God command us to live addictive and non-sustainable lives? No, God commands us to live modest lives sustained by Love, not consumption. Why do we need to wait for more than the 99.9999% of scientific agreement to get another (effing) 9 on the end?? Believers should be the first ones to lay down their rights for others and for this Earth we are to Christ-like-rule.
This single verse should be enough to galvanize the church into green living. We have taken 1 or 2 verses about abortion and homosexuality and blown them way out of proportion (and the effect is not only dis-unifying but hurts our credibility in the world). If the Faithful were pioneers of conservation and sustainable living, we would be effective organic saltshakers and fluorescent lights to the world.
But for Christians, you really have no excuse for ignoring this. The scriptures that point us toward environmental stewardship are few and far in between (unless you count the thousands of indirect quotes of God revealing himself to us via nature found in the Psalms and the book of Job). I will make my point for environmental stewardship by quoting a single verse.
“Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’” Genesis 1:26, NIV, italics added.
God has given us “rule” over all the Earth, thus according to this we can do whatever we want with it, right? No, God says in the same sentence that we are made in his likeness, thus we are to rule in his likeness. Does God rule us in a self-destructive way? Does God command us to live addictive and non-sustainable lives? No, God commands us to live modest lives sustained by Love, not consumption. Why do we need to wait for more than the 99.9999% of scientific agreement to get another (effing) 9 on the end?? Believers should be the first ones to lay down their rights for others and for this Earth we are to Christ-like-rule.
This single verse should be enough to galvanize the church into green living. We have taken 1 or 2 verses about abortion and homosexuality and blown them way out of proportion (and the effect is not only dis-unifying but hurts our credibility in the world). If the Faithful were pioneers of conservation and sustainable living, we would be effective organic saltshakers and fluorescent lights to the world.
Monday, March 16, 2009
The free market IS correcting itself… by nationalizing, stupid.
And by “stupid”, I don’t mean YOU are stupid if you don’t see the whole nationalizing thing, I’m merely riffing off Clinton’s 90s slogan: “It’s the economy, stupid”, hmm, maybe I should edit title, nah, blogs have to be linear the train has left the station, I’m already thinking about the second paragraph!
Panic on wall st about banks nationalizing of late is somewhat of a farce historically, don’t we think? If I could quote from TIME magazine’s Justin Fox:
“You could also say bank nationalization began in 1984 when regulators decided that Continental Illinois, then the nation's seventh largest bank, was too big to fail and put the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in charge of it. Or maybe the crucial moment came in 1933 when Congress decreed that small depositors should be protected from bank failures by the FDIC. Or in 1913 when Congress created the Federal Reserve System to halt banking panics and regulate the money supply…”
Fox goes on to trace the process of nationalizing banks all the way to 1791.
Still, economists and talking heads (on Fox news) are screaming socialism and using the other “S” word (ends with a “weden”) all over the media (Fox news). Wait, don’t capitalists claim that a pure free market will correct itself? Well, then, it IS correcting itself, by turning to a regulated hybrid-socialist model, silly (does “silly” sound nicer?). I don’t understand how one could make the argument that “let markets go, they will correct themselves” and then after this model fails to argue “allow it to correct itself by turning back to the same models that got us here”… that’s absurd! Talking heads across the world (Fox news), let the market correct itself, don’t bash Obama and Geithner for doing what your own model said it would do!
I have to suspect that the fear of allowing banks to nationalize must arise from some antiquated cold-war sentiment that once we socialize we can’t go back; as if once the government becomes 51% shareholder of Citibank the immortalized Lenin will come out of exile and begin his dictatorship over the United Soviet States of America with an iron fist… either that or conservative economists really, REALLY, revile the rancid aroma of Swedish meatballs. You know, there is such a thing as democratic-socialism, silly. Ooh, did anyone see the new “Blorg” coffee table at Ikea, oops, digressing!
To speak in real terms, the answer is greed. I don’t really believe that free market capitalists and republicans truly have (more than an sub-conscious) fear of either of the suspicions stated above; the true answer is that the consuming love of money guides our legislation; Christianity a bystander to the political process was pulled in to get votes.
Search your hearts, Faithful, find me a compelling scriptural argument for the following model: “Make as much money as you want, hurting as many people as necessary in the process, and keep it all for yourself.” Of course, one could argue: “well, I don’t hurt people, and I will give on my own volition,” but I’m speaking of a model for a secular government. Capitalism is run by the masses, not by the church, therefore people will be hurt (and are hurting) and people do keep $$ for themselves (look at our bank’s current lending practice). After searching my heart and searching scripture, I’m ready to make this statement:
Capitalism is counter-biblical.
I won’t nearly go so far as to propose a preposterous statement such as “Socialism is biblical” because that’s a farce. The word of God is not a political document. However, and it’s my desire to argue here, that Socialism promotes the fruits that scripture has called us to: Love for the needy, Generosity, Graciousness, trying to do Good even when it fails, trying to Give even when you are taken advantage of… to name a few. Capitalism promotes the self, and that is counter-biblical.
Despite the fact that the new testament clearly points to a more socialist type of rule, the paradoxical reason that Capitalism prevails under the democratic rule of a mainly Christian population is simple: The richest 2% of the population wants to get richer, they want to control legislation and lobby government to enable them to do so. But how can they do such a thing as only 2% of the population? They have created an infuriating and insidious lie that they are partnered with the church, and have used hot-buttoned non-political issues like abortion and gay-marriage to perpetuate their wealth. (Obama, please tax away).
I believe, although it grieves me, with my eyes wide open, that 99 out of 100 of the richest Americans will be in Hell by the time I’m sipping rootbear floats with Peter chatting about why we hiccup. The Godless wealthy have manipulated politics to their own means and have put their fingers into all constituencies to further their greed. Christians around America, be bold, stop this madness.
If you are still skeptical ask yourself this one question, I will paraphrase from Rick Warren’s sentiment: Is it true that the public sector, the private sector AND the church (all three) are needed to serve justice to the “widows and orphans”? That is, can’t government do what business and the church cannot do, can’t the church do what the other two can’t and so on? If we are truly called to look after the widows and orphans in their distress, as James describes as “PURE RELIGION”, shouldn’t we call on any and all means necessary? Shouldn’t we call on the government to reach the masses in the way that no one else can? Shouldn’t we call on the private sector for its creativity and immense resources? And shouldn’t we call our own lazy, fat, and decaying churches to be the grass-roots human contact that Jesus Christ was to the people?!?!?
Whew, my heart rate is up and my blood pressure is currently at double-quarter-pounder-with-cheese-supersized rates, which means I wrote a good blog☺ Ok, you know it, I know it, I probably said some pretty heretical impassioned stuff on this one. Please, please share your own thoughts. Oh, and btw, I’ve been off for a long time (I know) due to touring and wifing etc. sorry about that and thanks so much for reading.
Oh, here are all the sites from my blog:
Justin Fox on “Nationalizing Banks: What's All the Fuss?”
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1881992,00.html
Ikea.com (“Blorg” is not an actual piece of furniture, it just sounds funny… and swedish)
Tax cuts to the wealthy under the bush administration
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/30/americans-income-doubled-bush/
Some fruits of the spirit
Galatians 5:19-26
The difficulty the wealthy have of entering heaven
Matthew 19:24
Rickwarren.com, his work with the peace plan project is inspiring:
http://www.thepeaceplan.com/
“Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after widows and orphans in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.”
-James 1:27
The number of calories in a double quarter pounder with cheese: 740
http://nutrition.mcdonalds.com/nutritionexchange/nutrition_facts.html
Panic on wall st about banks nationalizing of late is somewhat of a farce historically, don’t we think? If I could quote from TIME magazine’s Justin Fox:
“You could also say bank nationalization began in 1984 when regulators decided that Continental Illinois, then the nation's seventh largest bank, was too big to fail and put the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in charge of it. Or maybe the crucial moment came in 1933 when Congress decreed that small depositors should be protected from bank failures by the FDIC. Or in 1913 when Congress created the Federal Reserve System to halt banking panics and regulate the money supply…”
Fox goes on to trace the process of nationalizing banks all the way to 1791.
Still, economists and talking heads (on Fox news) are screaming socialism and using the other “S” word (ends with a “weden”) all over the media (Fox news). Wait, don’t capitalists claim that a pure free market will correct itself? Well, then, it IS correcting itself, by turning to a regulated hybrid-socialist model, silly (does “silly” sound nicer?). I don’t understand how one could make the argument that “let markets go, they will correct themselves” and then after this model fails to argue “allow it to correct itself by turning back to the same models that got us here”… that’s absurd! Talking heads across the world (Fox news), let the market correct itself, don’t bash Obama and Geithner for doing what your own model said it would do!
I have to suspect that the fear of allowing banks to nationalize must arise from some antiquated cold-war sentiment that once we socialize we can’t go back; as if once the government becomes 51% shareholder of Citibank the immortalized Lenin will come out of exile and begin his dictatorship over the United Soviet States of America with an iron fist… either that or conservative economists really, REALLY, revile the rancid aroma of Swedish meatballs. You know, there is such a thing as democratic-socialism, silly. Ooh, did anyone see the new “Blorg” coffee table at Ikea, oops, digressing!
To speak in real terms, the answer is greed. I don’t really believe that free market capitalists and republicans truly have (more than an sub-conscious) fear of either of the suspicions stated above; the true answer is that the consuming love of money guides our legislation; Christianity a bystander to the political process was pulled in to get votes.
Search your hearts, Faithful, find me a compelling scriptural argument for the following model: “Make as much money as you want, hurting as many people as necessary in the process, and keep it all for yourself.” Of course, one could argue: “well, I don’t hurt people, and I will give on my own volition,” but I’m speaking of a model for a secular government. Capitalism is run by the masses, not by the church, therefore people will be hurt (and are hurting) and people do keep $$ for themselves (look at our bank’s current lending practice). After searching my heart and searching scripture, I’m ready to make this statement:
Capitalism is counter-biblical.
I won’t nearly go so far as to propose a preposterous statement such as “Socialism is biblical” because that’s a farce. The word of God is not a political document. However, and it’s my desire to argue here, that Socialism promotes the fruits that scripture has called us to: Love for the needy, Generosity, Graciousness, trying to do Good even when it fails, trying to Give even when you are taken advantage of… to name a few. Capitalism promotes the self, and that is counter-biblical.
Despite the fact that the new testament clearly points to a more socialist type of rule, the paradoxical reason that Capitalism prevails under the democratic rule of a mainly Christian population is simple: The richest 2% of the population wants to get richer, they want to control legislation and lobby government to enable them to do so. But how can they do such a thing as only 2% of the population? They have created an infuriating and insidious lie that they are partnered with the church, and have used hot-buttoned non-political issues like abortion and gay-marriage to perpetuate their wealth. (Obama, please tax away).
I believe, although it grieves me, with my eyes wide open, that 99 out of 100 of the richest Americans will be in Hell by the time I’m sipping rootbear floats with Peter chatting about why we hiccup. The Godless wealthy have manipulated politics to their own means and have put their fingers into all constituencies to further their greed. Christians around America, be bold, stop this madness.
If you are still skeptical ask yourself this one question, I will paraphrase from Rick Warren’s sentiment: Is it true that the public sector, the private sector AND the church (all three) are needed to serve justice to the “widows and orphans”? That is, can’t government do what business and the church cannot do, can’t the church do what the other two can’t and so on? If we are truly called to look after the widows and orphans in their distress, as James describes as “PURE RELIGION”, shouldn’t we call on any and all means necessary? Shouldn’t we call on the government to reach the masses in the way that no one else can? Shouldn’t we call on the private sector for its creativity and immense resources? And shouldn’t we call our own lazy, fat, and decaying churches to be the grass-roots human contact that Jesus Christ was to the people?!?!?
Whew, my heart rate is up and my blood pressure is currently at double-quarter-pounder-with-cheese-supersized rates, which means I wrote a good blog☺ Ok, you know it, I know it, I probably said some pretty heretical impassioned stuff on this one. Please, please share your own thoughts. Oh, and btw, I’ve been off for a long time (I know) due to touring and wifing etc. sorry about that and thanks so much for reading.
Oh, here are all the sites from my blog:
Justin Fox on “Nationalizing Banks: What's All the Fuss?”
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1881992,00.html
Ikea.com (“Blorg” is not an actual piece of furniture, it just sounds funny… and swedish)
Tax cuts to the wealthy under the bush administration
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/30/americans-income-doubled-bush/
Some fruits of the spirit
Galatians 5:19-26
The difficulty the wealthy have of entering heaven
Matthew 19:24
Rickwarren.com, his work with the peace plan project is inspiring:
http://www.thepeaceplan.com/
“Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after widows and orphans in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.”
-James 1:27
The number of calories in a double quarter pounder with cheese: 740
http://nutrition.mcdonalds.com/nutritionexchange/nutrition_facts.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)