United Liberty
Obama goes Christianist on tax policy
Fri, 02/03/2012 - 5:09pm | posted by Jason Pye
Welcome Instapundit readers!
During a speech on National Prayer Breakfast at the National Cathedral, President Barack Obama went partisan (shocker!) in what is usually a bipartisan event by invoking Jesus Christ to justify his push for higher taxes:
President Obama offered a new line of reasoning for hiking taxes on the rich on Thursday, saying at the National Prayer Breakfast that his policy proposals are shaped by his religious beliefs.
Obama said that as a person who has been “extraordinarily blessed,” he is willing to give up some of the tax breaks he enjoys because doing so makes economic, and religious sense.
“For me as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’s teaching that for unto whom much is given, much shall be required,” Obama said, quoting the Gospel of Luke.
I’ll admit upfront that I believe raising taxes is a terrible idea. It’s even worse of an idea in economy that just now seems recovering from an severe downturn, a point that the Congressional Budget Office recently echoed. But President Obama’s invocation of Jesus and religion to push tax hikes is sickening and it makes him no different from someone like Rick Santorum, who frequently uses his faith to justify authoritarian social policies.
While the First Amendment protects Freedom of Religion, meaning that have we a sovereign right to practice our faiths, that doesn’t mean that any religion has a right to force particular beliefs into law, especially when the target groups — such as gays, for example — are doing absolutely nothing to harm their fellow sovereigns. This is what John Stuart Mill called the “Harm Principle” in his essay, On Liberty.
Many on the Left share the view the libertarian view that government shouldn’t interfere with the rights of private, sovereign individuals, and agree that there is a clear boundry between Church and State. They should no doubt be decrying this because, even if they support the end goal, the arguments remain the same as those used by social conservatives to push gay marriage bans.
Christ certainly taught his followers to be generous and charitable to the poor, the fatherless, and the widowed; however, this is supposed to be done through voluntary action — either indivudually or through church ministry — not through government mandates or coercive tax policy.
President Obama’s religious views are simply irrelevent to tax policy — or any public policy issue, for that matter. As a Christian, the Bible is a handbook for you on how to live your life, not empowerment to use government force people to live by a certain set of morals or to be charitable or wage class warfare.
If Obama or any other Christian feels that they aren’t paying enough taxes, they can visit Pay.gov and send more money to Uncle Sam or they can find any number of churches or charities that are dedicated to assisting those in need.
When have private organizations ever been enough to really help the poor? I live in a county where there so so many churches, and the vast majority of the county is either catholic or protestant, with several religious minorities and nonreligious people that also give to charity. Yet, an emergency room visit at the local hospital costs at least almost a grand, and much more if you have to have any procedures done, even the most simple diagnostic procedures. And if you can’t pay, it gets sent to collections and ruins your credit, and hurts your ability to do things like getting an apartment. When housing and electric are as expensive as they are, and the minimum wage is as low as it is, healthcare and education need to be completely government funded so that people have a way up and don’t get held down by thousands of dollars of debt. I am not at all religious, but I was for about a decade and a half. The church was large, and needed to use much of the donations to keep running (like the government), which was fine, but it also sent large portions of the money to missionaries overseas or to specifically religious charities that don’t help the community at large, or don’t give everyone an equal chance to access their services. For such a conservative crowd, they didn’t seem too bent on proving to local voters that private organizations can take care of people’s needs. The amount it costs to go to the doctor, the dentist, the hospital, the community college, and local universities is outrageous, and just proves that conservatives are only interested in one thing: hoarding money. There is no way up for anyone who is stuck in poverty. Taxation and government programs simply provide an organized method of making sure that people are getting the programs they need to survive. It’s not “stealing” or “unfair” or “rewarding laziness”, it’s compensation for those people willing to (or stuck) working for crappy single-digit hourly wages. These people are your neighbors and friends, and it could be you. These people are often working close to full time in multiple jobs, going to school full time, and raising children, frequently all three at once! They aren’t lazy, they are unbelievably stressed and burnt out, and they don’t get things like paid vacation or health insurance to help them.
.
“Taxation and government programs simply provide an organized method of making sure that people are getting the programs they need to survive.”!
Yes.
For many people it is not the message that is important.
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
“Taxation and government programs simply provide an organized method of making sure that people are getting the programs they need to survive.”
And yet, if we listen to the left, it’s never enough ….
“It’s not stealing or unfair or rewarding laziness, it’s compensation for those people willing to (or stuck) working for crappy single-digit hourly wages.”
From which I take it you consider anyone who isn’t so “stuck” to be their oppressors? Otherwise, there’d be no reason for those who aren’t “stuck” to be “stuck” with paying the bill for those you’ve decided need compulsory charity.
‘The church was large, and needed to use much of the donations to keep running (like the government), which was fine, but it also sent large portions of the money to missionaries overseas or to specifically religious charities that don’t help the community at large, or don’t give everyone an equal chance to access their services. For such a conservative crowd, they didn’t seem too bent on proving to local voters that private organizations can take care of people’s needs.”
I’m sure you don’t see the hypocrisy in this statement, so I’ll help you out …
Money given to the church was given voluntarily, the church chose how to spend that money, you resent the choices it made - and, in your eyes, there’s nothing wrong with your attitude.
Meanwhile, the government takes money from citizens via taxation, the government chooses how it will spend that money …. and (in your eyes) anyone who resents the choices government makes is selfish, uncaring, etc.
Starting point:
#1) Jesus was talking about the gifts given by God, not cash.
#2) Even if he was talking about “cash,” the analogy doesn’t hold - if God blesses me financially, then He has a claim on what He’s given me … one He hopes I’ll respond to VOLUNTARILY (God doesn’t do ‘withholding’ or send out “God Revenue Service” agents to collect). Government isn’t laying a claim on what it gives taxpayers, it’s simply taking from some to give to others.
The part about the church was to illustrate that the mostly comfortably well-off attendees were having trouble spreading their sphere of influence to the lower class downtown because they had more than enough resources to help them but chose not to. There was some volunteered time for several services in the city, but it was mostly teenagers. It just seemed like the adult members thought they were way too good for the poor, which doesn’t seem like something Jesus would encourage. This church “shockingly” had a retention problem among people who had grown up in the church when they hit their early 20’s and saw how little the church puts into helping local poor people, even if they are members. Not all churches, by any means, I commend those that run their own food banks and shelters and do a lot to connect people with the social services they need, but this church didn’t, and that’s one of the reasons I became nonreligious around the age of 20 or so.
As for God commanding that a certain percentage of material goods be given to the poor, consider gleaning among ancient Judaism. The church and state were much more intertwined in that society (which wouldn’t work for our society because they were a theocracy), so it was like a tax that went straight to the poorest hungriest people, except it was crops straight from the fields.
Your problems are not my obligations. You expect others to work for free to benefit you. Do you work for free? I doubt it. If your health isn’t important enough for you work an extra job for or work out a pay plan it sure isn’t to me. And yes, paying forced taxes to support you is stealing from me and mine.
I actually do work an extra job.
Plus I go to school full time and usually take multiple summer classes, so it’s not like I’m refusing to work my way up. I major in chemistry, and I’m great at it and love it. If I took a semester off to work 80 hours a week instead of just a measly 50, I’d have to start paying back my stafford loans that I had to take out because I don’t get enough grant money because the federal government uses age discrimination to consider me “dependent” on my FAFSA, even though I am independent for my taxes and have no family, which definitely doesn’t help with the whole idea of working extra so I’d have $8000 in savings if I had a medical emergency. And I force myself to work jobs right now that require people skills that I have to work really hard to fake. Not only that, but single digit hourly wages, which is all you get until you get a degree or certification of some sort, are enough to sort of pay for rent, utilities, books for school, transportation, sometimes food although that’s a luxury, but not nearly enough for someone with health problems.
Try asking desperate people what they’re already doing before giving them advice. We’re not all the same stereotypical bums.
Oh, and one of my jobs is in a pharmacy so I know that a great many lower and even middle class people are struggling with outrageous medical costs, not just me. As part of my job, I have to commiserate with about one in every 3 people because they have to choose between some other basic life expense and their medication or their hospital bill.
I am shocked, shocked to find that our ever-so-enlightened President is now, evidently, clinging to religion! What next, will it be guns & religion?
Luke 12-48 refers to a trusted servant being watchful for his master, and not, as some are suggesting, that those with wealth provide money for the poor. It has to with preparation for the end times.
Just thinking, though. Does gay marriage do harm to children, in the sense of adoption? Is it preferable for children to have a more mainstream existence? Why do we all have to change what we call a Mom and a Dad, for example, in order to suit a small minority? Why do gays *need* a Christianist construct to make their lives better?
Your Bible is a poor guide to run a Government. One can make it say anything. Once we have politics and religion intertwined, we end up with something that looks like Sharia.
@ Anon
“Conservatives are only good at hoarding money”.
You are ridiculous.
There is ample academic evidence that through private givings (excluding even religious giving) that conservatives provide MORE than 3 times that of those who consider themselves “liberals”. The problem is conservatives VALUE their dollars because they, more often than not, have EARNED their dollars. The thought of the incessant bureaucratic waste that occurs when the government deploys capital (often creating capital destruction) is appalling simply because of the effort needed to create this wealth in the first place. The parasite doesn’t understand this commitment to wealth creation and EVERY answer to every problem a parasite has involves more blood from the host. The present administration is a prime example of this in more ways than one (ie, their miniscule/pathetic private giving, class warfare rhetoric, and lack of understanding how wealth is created). The fact of the matter is that private giving is inconsistent with liberal policy simply because it takes valuable dollars away from their ability to consolidate further power through graft.
Liberals actually don’t discourage private giving, as evidenced by the fact that they still want it to be tax-deductible. They just want an organized system in place. Remember why the second New Deal was created in the first place? Without any safety nets, close to half the population was living in extreme poverty because they were in a precarious position and a stock market crash of still debated cause was enough to create a decade of poverty, death, and misery. When has life ever been so hard since the Second New Deal? Never. Who benefited from people being so poor they couldn’t buy anything? Who benefited from a drastic rise in homelessness? Who benefited from farmers being paid so little they took a deal in which they destroyed crops that could have fed the starving inner-cities? I could go on and on and on.
Coerced virtue is no virtue at all……especially when it’s done under the threat of imprisonment or worse at gunpoint. There is no difference between the government sending you a demand to pay taxes in the mail or showing up on your doorstep and demanding your money at gunpoint. Don’t believe me…..stop paying your taxes and resist when they show up at your door.
Maybe that’s why I don’t like the religion part. Paying taxes that partially support programs that keep people from starving to death or becoming homeless for a couple years while they are trying desperately to become successful enough to make a living wage should not be seen as virtue. Virtue means nothing to an agnostic like me. I am way more concerned with ethics. You know, have a system in place that you would find ideal to have to fall back on if you were in that situation; put yourself in someone else’s skin and walk around in it for a while, that sort of thing. Virtue turns into an ugly topic where people keep bringing up Bible verses that not everyone believes in and talking about how it doesn’t mean as much if you don’t find it pleasant and so forth.
Wonder how Jesus would have said about Caesar collecting the tithe on behalf of the church?
You know the answer to that question … ;)
“Why would I have Caesar collecting what is to be rendered unto God? Especially when he’d take 95% of it for “administrative expenses” before he turned it over?”
If you are going to complain about faulty administrative expenses, complain about that, not about the existence of taxes. Jesus advocated paying taxes to Rome, which went to public roads, the aqueduct, magnificent bath houses, and so on.
Actually, what he advocat3ed was giving up all you own to the poor. At that point, your taxable income is nill.
Oh, quit whining Jason and stick it in your Pye-hole. Once the Muslims take over, you’ll be begging for the ‘Christianists’ to help.
How original.
If George Bush publicly stated that his personal religious views were the foundations of his policy decisions, the media would shriek for a month and Rosy O’Donnell would fall into a catatonic apoplexy on national television which would only end when she finally choked to death on her own tongue.
When you take the fruits of my labor with the threat of force or use of force with no benefit to me this is called slavery. This is what the government is doing. The purpose of government is to protect my GOD given freedoms when it gives my property to others it is of zero benefit to me. As for the BS that this is what Jesus would do well those saying this are not Christians GOD does not take by force Jesus never took anything from anyone by force. As stated in the bible over and over again we have free will it is our choice whether to give or to sin, in the end we will be judged not by man but by GOD. Government is force period!
No, slavery is when someone owns you and makes you work for free. Taxes are when you can still make a very good living, but a decent percentage is taken to run the country. Public programs do benefit everyone. How would you like a city with no roads, traffic lights/signs, public buildings, sidewalks, parking garages/lots, etc? How would you like it if college students without families had to become homeless or get horrible deficiency diseases despite having to work multiple jobs? How would you like it if the schizophrenic/PTSD/bipolar/drug and alcohol/whatever else homeless population had no access to treatment or any public assistance? Do you think it would be safe? I already get annoyed with the homeless that hang out at my college campus, I would not want them everywhere, and I certianly to have to worry about becoming temporarily homeless and having to run into a lot more of them. How easy do you think it would be for me to become a successful member of society who could contribute a lot more than I can now? Isn’t that what you want of students? People who are obviously on their way to becoming a successful professional should at least be given temporary help while they are still in school, but I would also say that people who, without help, would be a danger to society should also fall into that category. And don’t even get me started on health care. Imagine you had some abdominal pain, and they did a $4000 CT scan that your insurance didn’t cover, and found a tumor that needed $20,000 surgery. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you’ve just never been in this situation, not that you’re a monster.
Shorter seaturtle: pay your taxes no matter what the percentage is because someone somewhere has it worse. Plus someone might have a medical condition and you should pay for it. Even if most of the what is collected is wasted, streets still need to be maintained so pay up.
Well,this is the result of Barokeydoke Hubris Obozo spending 20 yrs listening to Jeremiah Wright at the Trinity United Church of Hating on Whitey….heresy in all it’s disgusting glory
The Gospel According to Rev. Wright!
Of course, “Il Dufe” will probably say anything to help himself get re-elected, but I often wonder how statist Christianists get around “Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor’s Goods.” If some of the adherents of the Social Gospel* who post here can let me know what the escape clause is, I’d like to know because I’d like to cut myself in on some of that Soros swag.
*The Social Gospel: Christianism, moonshine economics, plus the Cult of the State. Sort of the superstition trifecta.
Coincidentally, just after posting my comment above and exiting this blog, I visited the Ace of Spades blog and read Ace’s description of modern “liberal” (i.e., State-fellating) Democrats:
“Democrats are just a collection of rent-seekers, beak-dippers, and vig-skimmers, who have convinced themselves that it is not only acceptable that they should collect rents, dip their beaks, and collect a vig on everyone else’s transactions, but that to deny them such rents, dippings, and vigs constitutes the most hateful, vicious, and fundamentally un-American behavior they can conceive.”
Social-Gospel Christians just add Jesus. Hallelujah, and your money or your life! Because Jesus said so.
If Jesus was an Obama leftist he would have called for a welfare program from Rome, with increased taxes to support it. He did not, and in fact wanted Rome to stay as far away as possible, a libertarian position. Real Christian charity, as advocated by Jesus, involves each person using their own money, not cash forcibly extracted from taxes. That Obama would pervert true christian doctrine in this respect indicates how completely ignorant he is, either that or he knows better and is purposely perverting true Christian doctrine. Either way, it is comtemptable, and un Christian.
We are taking a step in the right direction with this sales tax exemption measure, but there is plenty more work to be done,” Miller added. “I’ll continue working to ease the financial burden on hardworking families and small businesses.mortgage calculator
We’ll be posting audio the Supreme Court provides of the oral arguments the day after they are made available.192.168.1.1&192.168.0.1
Post new comment