A tale of two Pauls

I am a socialist. I am a Christian. I am not hidden about the fact that I believe the Bible is (first a document of love, but secondarily) a document of socioeconomic *equality*, aka socialism. While not a central theme in scripture, I have made it a central theme in my personal Christian paradigm for two reasons: 1. I believe that advocating for the poor is simply a more relevant, modern expression of who Christ is (more-so than saying non-Christians will burn) and 2. because the vitriolic rhetoric from the right, beneath the flag of Christianity, is so antithetical to who Jesus is that I must raise my voice. The best example of the latter is Paul Ryan's recent use of his "Catholicism" to justify cutting $133 billion in food stamps while cutting taxes for the rich.

I have always pointed toward the early Acts church as the prime example of what a God-centered socialist community should look like, when Peter and Luke were swashbuckling church planters collecting and distributing wealth (and God striking down dead folks who lied about about their wealth in order to give less). But, I just stumbled across this scripture, which, I have found to be an even more precise thesis of where the bible stands on Socialism v. Capitalism... and it's from the words of Paul:

"Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality. At the present time your plenty will supply what they need, so that in turn their plenty will supply what you need. The goal is equality, as it is written: 'The one who gathered much did not have too much, and the one who gathered little did not have too little.'"

-2 Cor. 8 13-15, reference in v. 15 is from Ex. 16:18 

Context, context, context: in the days of the early church Paul was gathering a "collection" for churches who were struggling while taking means-based gifts from churches who could give. (Interestingly, he was often gathering donations from gentile churches to save the struggling Jewish churches). But his message transcends the subject of "tithing" (donating to churches) and really captures the Apostle Paul's perspective on wealth and giving in general: The concept of those with means helping those without not only comes from Paul himself, but he is drawing from the ancient story of the Israel, fresh out of Egypt gathering the bread of Mana.

(Read Exodus 16 if you need to, I'm assuming you know the story). For Paul to use this passage as a reference for why we ought to give is profound. This truly and deeply demonstrates that it is NOT God's will for his followers to have more than what we need, rather it is God's provisions ONLY that sustain; anything over that ought to be given away. The single Corinthian passage combines the Old  and New Testament sentiments succinctly and powerfully. The grandest point is that Christ himself referred to his body as "our daily bread", so, whenever we partake of communion we are not only remembering his death and sacrifice, but also that he alone is what we need for sustenance; the accumulation of wealth is complete pure nonsense for the Christian.

Now let us go back and compare Ryan's sentiments above with those of Paul's here. Cutting benefits to the poor to cut taxes for the rich, it not only differs from the Corinthian passage, it is entirely the opposite! It is a tragic misinterpretation of scripture that is beyond the point of egregiousness, it is malicious. The Catholics have a term for when paths of followers become this divergent: "excommunication".

A sidenote on Extremism:
Christianity, the most populous religion on Earth, currently lacks much extremist action. Arguably the Norway shootings are the most contemporary, but beyond that Islam exponentially carries the most extremist actions in our world today. There are great examples of Christian extremism throughout history (The crusades, the inquisition, the Jewish Genocide, the KKK), but currently there are few active extremists under the flag of Christianity. Why is this?

I'm no expert, but I'd assume that the answers would range from the practical (Christians are in charge of most of the world's leading markets) to the theological (Jesus Christ is simply a non violent ambassador of sacrifice). But an additional factor I'd like to develop as a cautionary tale is this: us. The answer is us, that is, us moderates. Us Christians who live out practical daily lives, trying our best to mimic Christ's love... it is our responsibility to speak out against extremism! And in the absence of our admonishment of extremism, extremism has one more shady damp spot where it can fester and rot.

Outrageous fundamentalist interpretations of scripture MUST be opposed by moderate Christianity, both for the sake of preserving our faith and for the resistance of extremism. When you hear "God hates fags", "God is calling me as a catholic to cut food stamps for the poor", or "God doesn't want healthcare for all" we cannot simply disassociate ourselves, we must actively fight for the moderate voice that is our faith, a faith of love and sacrifice before all.


A final word as a plea for moderation:
As a socialist, I believe that there should be
 -A $5/gallon tax on gas
-75% reduction in defense spending
-90% tax on the rich.
-Free healthcare for all (especially aliens)
-Free Masters level education for all
But I don't advocate for such preposterous propositions; why? Because I'm a toothless, spineless, coward who doesn't believe in his convictions? Because I'm really not a Christian since I won't stand un-bendingly for what I believe? No. Because I'm a pragmatist. I vote for Obama not because I believe he can put into action my convictions above, rather because he can, as a moderate, steer our country in that direction. Why can't the other side meet me here, despite your more extreme convictions...

Let us recognize that in a democracy of this size we must meet in the middle to get anything done. Thanks for reading.

A plea to conservative Christians: The Ryan budget proposal is immoral

A plea to conservative Christians: The Ryan budget proposal is immoral

A budget is a whole lot more than just number crunching. A budget declares and/or exposes core values. As Luther puts it: "There are three conversions necessary: the conversion of the heart, mind and the purse." “Purse” being the last to convert shows just how defining it is. Thus, how we budget as a nation indicates where our hearts are and what we truly believe.

For Christian voters, it’s time to declare what we TRULY believe.

Paul Ryan’s budget proposal is a red-meat-republican’s budget. Nothing groundbreaking, just pure Republican ideals along with some crafty economics… Here is the review of it, in as objective terms as possible.

1. Cut Medicare by giving new elderly folks vouchers (a stipend) to pay for care, thus limited resources should encourage elderly to spend more wisely (less)… Health care needed above the vouchers are paid for out of pocket.
2. Medicaid (healthcare for the poor and disabled) would be cut overall and then given over to the states to administrate over; most states will likely offer fewer benefits.
3. Reduce Taxes for the richest Americans from 35% to 25%. That’s the tax rate on an annual combined income over $373,650/year.

Usually, when pontificating Republican ideals, the fact that they are advocating for the rich by shifting burden (and blame) onto the poor and middle class is more carefully hidden under the guise of American ideals: prosperity for all, and no gay marriage or abortion. Now, it seems like they are skipping the formalities and cutting straight to the bone, they are saying this straight to our faces:

Cut from the poor, disabled, and elderly and shift the savings to further cuts for the super wealthy.

I must declare that the statement above, from a biblical standpoint is immoral. As Christians, we must not allow blasphemous rhetoric like these be associated with the core values of biblical truth; in my opinion, it’s not spanking the kid urinating on the cross. If you are a politically minded Bible believer you must reject this budget proposal as heresy. If you will not, and somehow believe that a budget like Ryan’s is consistent with scripture, then your theology is deeply faulted.

However, there is one circumstance where I could see it fit for a believer to endorse this budget, one must adhere to both of the following points:

1. One must believe that scripture is not a political document, rather a document focused on individual living.
2. One must genuinely believe that the benefits of such a budget outweigh the tremendous moral pitfalls inherent thereof.

If this is the case for you, then I respect that, but I must reason with you.

If you conform to the first point above, I respect your belief and I do agree with you… to an extent. You must agree that there is some sort of tension between our obligations as individual Christians and Churches that has some overlap with our obligations as citizens and voters. If you believe in the amorality of politics absolutely, then you must abstain from all political debate wholly, including abortion and gay marriage, but if you agree that there is some tension, your biblical calling to advocate for the poor must at least compel you to vote against a representative that would support such a budget.

Now, to the second point: the economist. I can also respect the belief that the positive effects from job/economic growth coming from lower taxes/smaller government would outweigh the moral consequences. But, I must argue against it… before I do I just need to make clear that the issue of helping the poor is a moral, biblical one. The job/economic growth issue is an amoral, political (non-biblical) one. To let the amoral issue take precedence over the biblical one has hypocritical implications and conflicts heavily with the first point, above.

Independent of the moral issue, the secular argument is faulty at best. Remember, economists from all political backgrounds CANNOT find basis for “Reagonomics” or the philosophy that a freer market and smaller government giving power and control to wealthy will “trickle down” wealth to the lower classes. Not only is there no expert support for such reasoning, there is no evidential support. W. Bush made tax cuts in 2002 to support job growth, and that’s what happened until the great recession of 2007; after which job growth has been stubbornly slow. Why? Because we ended the tax cuts? No. Evidentially tax cuts for the rich have nothing to do with job growth.

The wealthy store their cash in untraceable off shore accounts. Logically, when they pay less in taxes, they ought to hire more workers… in reality, jobs are being shipped overseas at an exponential rate. Multi-national corporations use tax loopholes by shifting profit to countries that have the most relaxed corporate tax code. Most American Corporations paid NO corporate taxes in 2010 (like G.E. and Exxon), all the while reporting 10s of Billions (with a B) in profits. As my friend Matthew Overby says, “you know what they say, only sh*t rolls down hill.”

As I conclude, in a stroke of moderation, I realize that a debt is a debt and liberals and conservatives have to do something about it. I can easily accept all of the demands conservative politicians have been making over the past few months: cuts to public sector salaries, (gulp) furlough days for teachers, cuts in pensions, cuts in medicare and Medicaid… IF the Republican Party acquiesced to a 35% to 50% tax rate hike on annual household income over $200,000. I realize that times are bad, but cutting from the lower and middle classes while increasing benefits for the ultra rich is (immoral and) showing favoritism.

My final word: please, PLEASE, believers, I am pleading with you to stop defaming my faith by associating Christian values with this budget. To non-Christians, please forgive us for misinterpreting scripture, forgive us, this not who we truly are. Let all read below from the passage in James and let the TRUTH speak last… and loudest.

My brothers and sisters, believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ must not show favoritism. Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in filthy old clothes also comes in. If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, “Here’s a good seat for you,” but say to the poor man, “You stand there” or “Sit on the floor by my feet,” have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?

Listen, my dear brothers and sisters: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him? But you have dishonored the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? Are they not the ones who are blaspheming the noble name of him to whom you belong?

-James 2:1-7

Reposted from FB: The tragedy in Madison

Wow, I’m just furious. Between running a business, witnessing the collapse of my band (and performance career), and supporting the growth of a young marriage, time to blog has been quite hard to come by. With everything happening in the media, particularly Giffords and Egypt; I’ve put my “Fiscal Liberalism from a Christian Perspective” Agenda on hold… but after today’s immoral act I could not help but act.
 
I’m sure you have heard that decades of workers rights was signed away over the course of two hours in the Wisconsin State Capitol today. Despite the fact that public unions in that state made concession after concession, Republican Governor Scott Walker would not rest until he could destroy the heart of what unions are and their only chance to regain the concessions made: Their right to bargain.
 
(Click here for more of the details)
http://www.npr.org/2011/03/10/134419331/protests-swell-after-wis-senate-curbs-union-rights
 
Here's why this is such a big deal: The four hundred (400) richest Americans in the U.S. now possess more wealth than the poorest one hundred and fifty million (150,000,000). The disparity between the rich and the poor in the U.S. is outpacing that of the third world. It is a fact that the middle class is disappearing, and, since the advent of Reaganomics, the wages of the middle class have remained stagnant, as the income of the richest Americans has grown exponentially upon exponentially.
 
(The following link is not from Michael Moore’s website, rather a fact checking website)
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/mar/10/michael-moore/michael-moore-says-400-americans-have-more-wealth-/
 
Now, we find ourselves in a bind as a country. As liberal as I am fiscally, I agree that the amount of debt we are taking on is not good (can we get some A.I.G. execs in prison, PLEASE??). Our federal government did not hesitate to bail out banks with $700 trillion, but, now that Wisconsin has a shortfall of $3 billion, we have to take it out on teachers?!?!? Is anyone reading this? Maybe this would be acceptable if we had no other options… but we do. Here are two examples:
 
One idea would be to cut from defense. The air force has been dragging out their decision as to which company should receive their $35 billion contract for a flying gas station. I have an idea, give that money to the people of Wisconsin! Scripture literally describes an ideal world as one where “He will judge between the nations and will settle disputes for many peoples. They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.” (Isaiah 2:4)
 
Tax the rich. Tax the rich. SOMEONE PLEASE SHOW ME THE SCRIPTURE THAT ADVOCATES FOR THE RICH AND I WILL SHUT UP. Show me the verse, and I will answer you with one thousand references calling us to look after the poor. Show me your twisted, generalized, mis-contextualized scripture advocating for general freedom (not specifically for the rich) and I’ll describe a banquet where those with means would not attend and so the it was filled instead with “the poor, the crippled, the blind and the lame.” (Luke 14:21). I dare you to challenge my knowledge of scripture and I guarantee you that I will absolutely wreck and shank your argument with precision and the weight of truth on my side. If you call yourself a Christian and believe that it is right to tax school custodians before billionaires, you are a hypocrite and your faith has fallen into complacency; God may have grace for you at the end of your life, but I have only judgment against you now. You are cheapening my faith and my Jesus with your selfishness and distorted perspective of economics, corrupted by your money. Repent for the kingdom is near, you will be paying for your tea party membership when you sit in poverty in heaven.
 
Remember, to the faithful, and to all, this issue is much greater than the unionized workers of Wisconsin. The Federal Republican House, just months ago, put their careers on the line to protect tax cuts for the richest Americans; now the state politicians in Wisconsin are putting their careers on the line to cut from the working class. This fight defines the fundamental struggle to keep the middle class alive, to make it more possible, not less, for someone to rise out of poverty.
 
If you are angry like I am, if you agree that there was an injustice committed (I’d like to add that the way in which the Republicans passed the bill was on the fringe of legality) here is what you can do. Donate to the efforts to recall those that were responsible for this. Polls already show that public sentiment is cascading toward the favor of the unions and that several of these senators are vulnerable to a recall. The recall election would be legal and grass roots induced. As out of state voters, this is the least we can do. Make a donation like I did.
 
(Click here to find out more about giving to the recall effort)
http://www.recalltherepublican8.com/
 
I will end with this scripture from the book of Amos:
 
“You levy a straw tax on the poor and impose a tax on their grain. Therefore, though you have built stone mansions, you will not live in them; though you have planted lush vineyards, you will not drink their wine. For I know how many are your offenses and how great your sins…
 
But let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream!”
 
Amos 5:11-12 and 24

Uncle Kai's 2010 Midterm Election Debrief

Well, well, well. I know, I’m not a very good blogger if I only blog semi-annually. But this election certainly deserves some comment from your resident Christian-Socialist. If my complete and utter lack of frequency weren’t enough to destroy any credibility among my trickle of readers, I’d like to add that I was heavily in favor of prop 19 (decriminalizing Marijuana in California). Pot is less harmful than alcohol, and I lack so many vices (except for video games) that I’d love to have a chance to toke it up, if it were only legal (Romans 13:1)

As you know, I believe that the essence of Christ: Selflessness, directly contradicts the essence of Capitalism: Self-Interest. Thus, I believe that the Tea Party Agenda is ultimately flawed: De-Regulation enables Capitalism and thus galvanizes the richest 5% of Americans to continuously f___ (screw) the middle class.

But, the original Tea Party was all about taxation without representation. In theory, the original Tea Partiers would have been ok with a tax if they had an MP in Parliament representing them. Since we are now a free democracy, they deserve their representation and they got it. They ran, got legitimate support from a grass roots insurgency, and won the majority in Congress. I will say in plain English that the Tea Party is deluded in thinking that smaller government is the solution to the problem that it caused, but I admit their victory is substantial and I applaud them for it. My prayer is that the deluded public will figure out that they were bamboozled before re-election time for Obama.

Indeed, these next two years will be fraught for the Dems. I want to say here that the carnal part of me wants the dems to return the favor to the Republicans. I want the Minority Party to block every legislation the Republicans would try to pass: to embarrass them into a party that accomplishes nothing with Obama’s vetoing pen. BUT, my true wish is for Dems to take the high road. (It burns me up inside that this is NOT good politics, and that they won’t get the same outcome the Republicans did this year), but I do want the Dems to compromise, do the work that politicians do, and pass effective Jobs, Immigration, and (hopefully) climate change bills (yeah I know I’m dreaming on that last one). So this is my olive branch, you guys were stubborn, fillabustering curmudgeons, but for the sake of the American People, I think we ought to be loosey goosey flip floppers…. sigh.

The ray of sunlight here is that Fiorina will not win tonight and Harry Reid’s frail body arose from the grave (I could kiss that wrinkly face). I’m thankful that at least Californians and Nevadans are sane enough to see that some of the aspirations of the Republican Party, like cutting from Education before reversing tax cuts for the super rich, is nothing less than criminal (Matthew 19:14). The moderates in the U.S. still have a voice (be it a voice drowned out by the shouts of the belligerent). There is a remnant of sanity in 2010.

My lightening reactions:
Brown>Whitman: Did anyone ever doubt it?
Boxer>Fiorina: Whew, crisis averted (chaos averted, at least Whitman is competent!)
Chiang>that other guy: HELL YES, GO CHINA! Err, and, yes, he did tell the governator to go shove it during last years budget fiasco.
Cooley?Harris: wait, what? Did Cooley stick his foot in his mouth? Crossing my fingers for Harris
Newsom>Maldonado: Don’t ever call me a Pinko again, I voted for Maldonado. Any Republican who will cross party lines to get stuff done is an ally to me. Newsom will be Governor (if not President) some day so he doesn’t need my vote yet.
No on 19: 2012 babies, it’s happening
No on 21: C’mon guys, it’s just $18 dollars to keep State Parks from closing! Go visit a Park gosh dammit!!
No on 23: California remains the leader in Green Tech and stemming Climate Change. “Every time an oil company fails, an angel gets its wings!”
No on 24: I own a business and I voted yes on this. Looking after widows and orphans takes money.

“Today Nevada chose hope over fear.”
-Harry Reid

Health Care part II: Den of Robbers

Thank you all very much for reading, please do stay in touch with me and leave your thoughts here. I do read them and consider them; I just don’t have the time to respond to them all. ***And, you may notice that my language gets a little more… particular… in this blog… that is, I believe that the Republican Party has gotten us into this mess that we’re in yet they are blaming the problem on the current administration (wars, economy, unemployment, inept health care, bank bonuses, all their fault) and it’s time for us Dems to go on the offensive. I’ve been more general in my terminology as I didn’t want to kick a Republican on the ground after losing the white house and both houses of congress, but now that’s all changed. So, fiscal conservatives take your overpriced hypertension meds and hang on to your butts!

Health care is such a mammoth issue that I’ve had trouble coming up with a way to approach the subject. I’ve also been supremely busy, but, as today is Lincoln’s birthday and my students have the day off (but everyone else has to work) I’ve found myself with an odd commodity: time! Plus, I heard in the news today that Anthem Blue Cross CA is increasing their rates nearly 40% and that just pisses me off.

I want to begin with the thought that inspired me to write about health care in the first place months ago: my own story. I own a business. I have a pre-existing condition (one that I was born with). After graduating from college there was no way in Hades I could get health insurance. I in particular need health reform. BUT, even if I wasn’t biased towards reform, even if I knew that the plan was flawed and would not lead to results right away, even if I knew it meant higher taxes (it doesn’t), shouldn’t I as a Christian willingly offer my treasure to help someone else (I don’t even know) get covered? Isn’t it my calling to put the needs of the tens of thousands of uninsured over my own? My simple answer is, yes.

Now, there is a lot of complexity in the statement I just made, not all of which I can get into but I will comment on this: First, I’ll say that my personal situation flies in the face of Republican sentiment that they are the ones advocating for small business and “Joe the Plumber.” Eff Joe the Plumber, how about “Mr kai the guitar teacher?” If I were to get sick right now, not only would my business go under, my parents would probably have to sell their house to save my ass (tangent here into those small business owners who don’t have that cushion). Republicans who are unwilling to reform Health Care, well, that’s all of them, are hypocritical in their claim to support small business. Hey Palin, you want to cut taxes for small business? “YOU LIE!!” Small business owners everywhere are paying a tax of our own blood every time we get injured, every time we get sick, we are on the brink of collapse.

Now, the pervading resistance to health care seems to be the cost: a legitimate concern, if it were only… true. Uh, our current health care plan is bankrupting our country, and Obama’s plan will save us money and reduce the deficit over the next 10 years (if any of you don’t understand why it needs to lose some money in it’s first few years please take freshman econ). So my whole sentiment of feeling willing to give up some treasure if I were an employed and insured Asian man is only a half truth, my desire for reform will not likely cost me anything and will probably save my children and grand children boat loads.

Now, lies like “death panels” seem to race like lightening through the media, but the old statistical truths are neglected. I’d like to remind you all we are bringing up the rear amongst industrialized nations on all health care data: life-expectancy, infant mortality etc. We also have the most expensive health care in the world BY FAR. Based on this data alone, all of you should be pro-reform. If you are a republican and your reasoning is “yes we need reform, just not this bill”, well, I would like a republican drafted centrist bill… but I think we all know that no one from the GOP is working on it (or even contributing to the ones dems are trying to pass).

(Defend this if you can) Republicans aren’t interested in the health of the American people or the preservation of small businesses like Tritone Music Academy, they are interested in two things: 1) Having Obama fail, and 2) preserving the status quo. Meanwhile coffers from the Health Care lobby are stocking your campaign funds with money dirtied by the blood of those denied health insurance due to pre-existing conditions. This is corruption and bribery. The simple reality is that free market capitalism has failed us, we have the most expensive mediocre health care in the world, and it’s only getting more costly. The market should correct itself, right? How do you reconcile what Anthem Blue Cross is doing? (For the LA times story click here)

I’ll conclude as I usually do with a site from scripture. I want to remind you all that although Jesus is known as the Prince of Peace and a pacifist, he was incited to violence at a single point in his life: When God was used for profit. The insurance industry is a mammoth, seething monstrosity, growing even in the midst of economic implosion. For Republicans to use socially Christian subjects to garner votes then use their power at the whim of the health insurance lobby is a crime that, in my opinion, would incite Jesus to violence and chase some senators around the capital building with a braided whip. DO NOT advocate for the unborn in the same house where you advocate for 30 million Americans to continue living without access to the resources they need to be healthy, you have made that House into a “den of robbers” (Mark 11:15-17).

Finally, Mr kais blog on health care, part I

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!!!

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.