Comments on: The Compassion Forum http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/ A Quest for True Freedom Thu, 09 Feb 2012 06:53:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: TrueBeliver http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/comment-page-1/#comment-3235 TrueBeliver Mon, 14 Apr 2008 21:08:42 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/#comment-3235 The five points raised by Compassion sound just like they were taken out of a book entitled Personal Faith and Public Policy by Harry R. Jackson, Jr. and Tony Perkins which raised the same five points plus two additional ones. Things that make you go Um! The five points raised by Compassion sound just like they were taken out of a book entitled Personal Faith and Public Policy by Harry R. Jackson, Jr. and Tony Perkins which raised the same five points plus two additional ones. Things that make you go Um!

]]> By: Lyne G. http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/comment-page-1/#comment-3232 Lyne G. Mon, 14 Apr 2008 01:30:12 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/#comment-3232 Hmmmmmm - bummer! I totally forgot about the Compassion Forum...Our hosehold was totally taken by the game Montreal/Boston. Would the forum have been more exciting than that? :-) Hmmmmmm – bummer! I totally forgot about the Compassion Forum…Our hosehold was totally taken by the game Montreal/Boston. Would the forum have been more exciting than that? :-)

]]> By: ThirstyJon http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/comment-page-1/#comment-3210 ThirstyJon Sun, 13 Apr 2008 14:44:12 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/#comment-3210 Cara, Anti-gov. Hmmm. I am not anti-gov either. I am just anti-government doing things that do my harm than good. And that is why we must discuss and debate, do decide which things are doing more good than harm, and which things are doing more harm than good. Well, that is one reason anyway. :-) (passive aggressive?) ThirstyJon Cara,

Anti-gov. Hmmm. I am not anti-gov either. I am just anti-government doing things that do my harm than good.

And that is why we must discuss and debate, do decide which things are doing more good than harm, and which things are doing more harm than good.

Well, that is one reason anyway.

:-) (passive aggressive?)

ThirstyJon

]]> By: Cara http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/comment-page-1/#comment-3207 Cara Sun, 13 Apr 2008 06:46:42 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/#comment-3207 sorry lynn- i reread your comment and i think there is a lot we agree on- i think i just am looking at this from another perspective. i don't think that the church has ever said, 'that is your problem' to the government regarding poverty- and i don't think that is what you were saying either- sorry. the church has never stopped being the hands of christ- i agree with jon on taking it a few steps further, sticking our fingers in those things we may have left up to the government to fix. i'm just not anti-gov. not yet anyways. on the flip, i'm also not completely pro-church. and don't attend. we all have lots of room to grow. sorry lynn- i reread your comment and i think there is a lot we agree on- i think i just am looking at this from another perspective. i don’t think that the church has ever said, ‘that is your problem’ to the government regarding poverty- and i don’t think that is what you were saying either- sorry.
the church has never stopped being the hands of christ- i agree with jon on taking it a few steps further, sticking our fingers in those things we may have left up to the government to fix.

i’m just not anti-gov. not yet anyways.

on the flip, i’m also not completely pro-church.
and don’t attend.

we all have lots of room to grow.

]]> By: Cara http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/comment-page-1/#comment-3206 Cara Sun, 13 Apr 2008 06:27:15 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/#comment-3206 point the finger at ourselves! it is no ones fault but our own - what we have allowed our culture to come to. we are a government 'of the people' (mostly). it isn't 'us vs. them' ... this is us- this is what we have allowed. and there are Many reasons for the rise in homelessness among my younger generation- maybe some of it has to do with our cultural mindset and what our society says about value, belonging, function- or lack of it. i don't think it has anything to do with laziness - that is like the tip of the iceberg of problems that have been building for years. it is a product-- that has become an issue. again, it is a message of nothingness that has been fed to our generation. i heard an english pastor say, 'don't blame the dark for being dark- blame the light for not shining there'. i love that- put the ball back in our court- we're not the victims here. your last paragraph really just rubs me the wrong way- no one has 'removed' anything from us, like i said before- this is us, and we have handed it over. we wanted our government to take care of us. and we should never say 'well that is your problem' to something like poverty. it is a human problem that we all share in. point the finger at ourselves! it is no ones fault but our own – what we have allowed our culture to come to. we are a government ‘of the people’ (mostly). it isn’t ‘us vs. them’ … this is us- this is what we have allowed.
and there are Many reasons for the rise in homelessness among my younger generation- maybe some of it has to do with our cultural mindset and what our society says about value, belonging, function- or lack of it. i don’t think it has anything to do with laziness – that is like the tip of the iceberg of problems that have been building for years. it is a product– that has become an issue. again, it is a message of nothingness that has been fed to our generation. i heard an english pastor say, ‘don’t blame the dark for being dark- blame the light for not shining there’. i love that- put the ball back in our court- we’re not the victims here.
your last paragraph really just rubs me the wrong way- no one has ‘removed’ anything from us, like i said before- this is us, and we have handed it over. we wanted our government to take care of us. and we should never say ‘well that is your problem’ to something like poverty. it is a human problem that we all share in.

]]> By: Lyne G. http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/comment-page-1/#comment-3195 Lyne G. Sat, 12 Apr 2008 19:22:37 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/#comment-3195 I do not think there is a “one size fits all” solution to the problem of poverty, homelessness, and so on either. When I talk about making less available government aid for people in need, I am not talking about eliminating it completely for there are those who cannot do otherwise. What I am saying, is that you always have those who “suck up” to the government because, while they would be able to work, they have become so encased in their habits of receiving that they won’t even make an effort to try again. The rate of homelessness today is high amongst a younger generation (18-25). There is no reason for that. If our governments can control driving permits renewal by testing the elderly to make sure they can still drive, I don’t see why they couldn’t do the same with the recipients of welfare benefits. Many churches have services such as food bank, clothes exchanges. If yours does not have it, maybe it’s time for the congregation to act upon it. Lastly, who else should we point the finger at? Our governments have sort of removed the responsibility from families to take care of each other by supplying undiscriminately to the demands of the less fortunates. Now, they’re stuck with the problem. I do not think there is a “one size fits all” solution to the problem of poverty, homelessness, and so on either. When I talk about making less available government aid for people in need, I am not talking about eliminating it completely for there are those who cannot do otherwise. What I am saying, is that you always have those who “suck up” to the government because, while they would be able to work, they have become so encased in their habits of receiving that they won’t even make an effort to try again. The rate of homelessness today is high amongst a younger generation (18-25). There is no reason for that.
If our governments can control driving permits renewal by testing the elderly to make sure they can still drive, I don’t see why they couldn’t do the same with the recipients of welfare benefits. Many churches have services such as food bank, clothes exchanges. If yours does not have it, maybe it’s time for the congregation to act upon it.
Lastly, who else should we point the finger at? Our governments have sort of removed the responsibility from families to take care of each other by supplying undiscriminately to the demands of the less fortunates. Now, they’re stuck with the problem.

]]> By: Cara http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/comment-page-1/#comment-3190 Cara Sat, 12 Apr 2008 06:19:53 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/#comment-3190 i don't believe there is a 'one size fits all' solution to this problem- and i have a hard time with lynns comment that, "I think the less available those are, the more creative one gets in finding resources to survive." when we de-humanize the problem it can be a lot easier to offer cookie cutter solutions. Some of our social services are keeping people alive- or safe- or housed. There is never any shortage of need or poor- and if the Church isn't stepping up now in those areas, what makes us think that if the government cuts back that we will jump at the chance to step up? This problem is not contingent on what the government continues to do or not do- or what services they will dream up next. This is a question for the Church- what are we going to do? Stop pointing fingers at the government- it's not like there isn't enough need to go around. casper- i never said the church 'should' be the one offering help. i am saying that plenty of times they have been. And no matter what solutions are found- there will never be a utopian society-- but don't blame the 'church' for the starvation and disease in your dickens novels of 19th century england- there's a much bigger picture going on. hats off to those who attempt and fail- and some who succeed, how about zinzendorf? i'd rather be on the lookout for hope. i don’t believe there is a ‘one size fits all’ solution to this problem- and i have a hard time with lynns comment that, “I think the less available those are, the more creative one gets in finding resources to survive.”
when we de-humanize the problem it can be a lot easier to offer cookie cutter solutions. Some of our social services are keeping people alive- or safe- or housed. There is never any shortage of need or poor- and if the Church isn’t stepping up now in those areas, what makes us think that if the government cuts back that we will jump at the chance to step up? This problem is not contingent on what the government continues to do or not do- or what services they will dream up next. This is a question for the Church- what are we going to do?
Stop pointing fingers at the government- it’s not like there isn’t enough need to go around.

casper- i never said the church ‘should’ be the one offering help. i am saying that plenty of times they have been. And no matter what solutions are found- there will never be a utopian society– but don’t blame the ‘church’ for the starvation and disease in your dickens novels of 19th century england- there’s a much bigger picture going on. hats off to those who attempt and fail- and some who succeed, how about zinzendorf? i’d rather be on the lookout for hope.

]]> By: Lyne G. http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/comment-page-1/#comment-3184 Lyne G. Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:00:16 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/#comment-3184 I totally agree concerning social welfare benefits. Our government provides regardless of the ability of each recipient to work or in some way contribute to society. The more they receive, the harder it is to get out of it. I’d rather see work/improvement programs instituted as a condition to receiving benefits over a certain period of time. Like you say, the less care we take of our families, neighbours or anyone in need, the more our government will control us. I believe in the principle of “no strings attached” when it comes to this. The more entangled one gets with government’s benefits, the tighter the rope gets! The US Constitution mentions “PROMOTE the general welfare”. Could it be that our forefathers had in mind to INCITE people to take better care of eachother instead of chewing the worm for them...We need to get back to the principle of …”don’t ask what your country can do for you but rather what YOU can do for your country”. “Many in our nation have embraced a world view that sees people as helpless victims of their upbringing.” Having grown up with parents (my dad in particular) who came from a more or less middle class, I have a problem with the principle that they fell victim of their own background. With hard work and persistence, they made it very well, without any kind of subvention from the government whatsoever. I think the less available those are, the more creative one gets in finding resources to survive. I wonder how this present generation will do with everything that is available. I totally agree concerning social welfare benefits. Our government provides regardless of the ability of each recipient to work or in some way contribute to society. The more they receive, the harder it is to get out of it. I’d rather see work/improvement programs instituted as a condition to receiving benefits over a certain period of time.

Like you say, the less care we take of our families, neighbours or anyone in need, the more our government will control us. I believe in the principle of “no strings attached” when it comes to this. The more entangled one gets with government’s benefits, the tighter the rope gets!

The US Constitution mentions “PROMOTE the general welfare”. Could it be that our forefathers had in mind to INCITE people to take better care of eachother instead of chewing the worm for them…We need to get back to the principle of …”don’t ask what your country can do for you but rather what YOU can do for your country”.

“Many in our nation have embraced a world view that sees people as helpless victims of their upbringing.” Having grown up with parents (my dad in particular) who came from a more or less middle class, I have a problem with the principle that they fell victim of their own background. With hard work and persistence, they made it very well, without any kind of subvention from the government whatsoever. I think the less available those are, the more creative one gets in finding resources to survive. I wonder how this present generation will do with everything that is available.

]]> By: ThirstyJon http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/comment-page-1/#comment-3170 ThirstyJon Fri, 11 Apr 2008 04:45:13 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/#comment-3170 Hello Everybody! There is great danger in a government that is trying to "socially engineer" our nation into a place with no poverty or suffering - this is what "welfare" tries to do. It is all upside down and is based on a world view that believes people are changed primarily by their external reality. (Living conditions, "education", etc.) The people are to make the government, not the other way around. As long as we look to government to save us, we will be servants to government. If we work to "save" ourselves and our neighbors we can eventually end up with a government that serves us. If we turn over the financial well-being of our neighbor to the government, we will end up being slaves to the government as the government tells us <em>how</em> to help our neighbor. If we tell the government to butt out, we will be able to keep our national government doing what it is meant to do instead of trying to "socially engineer" us: <blockquote>"<a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.preamble.html" target="_blank" alt="Click Here to read the preamble to the U.S. Constitution" title="Click Here to read the preamble to the U.S. Constitution" rel="nofollow">...establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity...</a>"</blockquote> Many in our nation have embraced a world view that sees people as helpless victims of their upbringing. I recognize the reality of how one's upbringing can have a very real effect on one's life. However, if we create systems that see people that way, we will <em>not></em> free them. We will build systems that make them dependent. :-) ThirstyJon P.S. If all of the time, money and energy that was spent trying to "socialize" America was instead spent on individual, organizational, and church programs to bring help to those in need, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Hello Everybody!

There is great danger in a government that is trying to “socially engineer” our nation into a place with no poverty or suffering – this is what “welfare” tries to do. It is all upside down and is based on a world view that believes people are changed primarily by their external reality. (Living conditions, “education”, etc.)

The people are to make the government, not the other way around. As long as we look to government to save us, we will be servants to government. If we work to “save” ourselves and our neighbors we can eventually end up with a government that serves us.

If we turn over the financial well-being of our neighbor to the government, we will end up being slaves to the government as the government tells us how to help our neighbor. If we tell the government to butt out, we will be able to keep our national government doing what it is meant to do instead of trying to “socially engineer” us:

“…establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity…“

Many in our nation have embraced a world view that sees people as helpless victims of their upbringing. I recognize the reality of how one’s upbringing can have a very real effect on one’s life. However, if we create systems that see people that way, we will not> free them. We will build systems that make them dependent.

:-)

ThirstyJon

P.S. If all of the time, money and energy that was spent trying to “socialize” America was instead spent on individual, organizational, and church programs to bring help to those in need, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

]]> By: Casper http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/comment-page-1/#comment-3163 Casper Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:41:22 +0000 http://freedomthirst.com/2008/04/08/the-compassion-forum/#comment-3163 Hi Cara, Yes, I agree with you that many times the churches have been the only places that provided any civil services. Our eponymous blogger ThirstyJon calls for the return of those times and the dismantle of any portion of the government that does something besides protect property and invade other countries - especially welfare and food stamp offices. He claims that if only taxes were low enough, the churches could provide all of the social services that are needed. My counter to that is that never in history have the churches provided all that was needed - and the times when there were no other sources of help for the needy have been marked with starvation and disease. Ever read a Dickens novel? Churches did all they could in 19th century England, and yet London was overrun with "Street Urchins". Yes, religious charities do great works and I support them - but I do not believe that they could provide all the help that's needed no matter how low taxes are. Hi Lyne G. Wow, we agree on something! I wish food stamp and welfare programs could go away - and if churches and families could fill the need then the programs wouldn't be needed, and taxes could be lowered. But the churches never have,,, Jon, about the "man made myth" of global warming, tell me this. What happens if we do it your way, and you're wrong? Well according to that Al Gore movie it'll be a catastrophe of biblical proportions. Now, what happens if we do it our way, and it turns out we were wrong? Well I guess we'll be driving cars that get 100 miles to a gallon of corn oil, and we could have just stuck to the gasoline - but basically no harm no foul. So which is the more prudent course? It'll be interesting to see what this conference comes up with. Hi Cara,

Yes, I agree with you that many times the churches have been the only places that provided any civil services. Our eponymous blogger ThirstyJon calls for the return of those times and the dismantle of any portion of the government that does something besides protect property and invade other countries – especially welfare and food stamp offices. He claims that if only taxes were low enough, the churches could provide all of the social services that are needed. My counter to that is that never in history have the churches provided all that was needed – and the times when there were no other sources of help for the needy have been marked with starvation and disease. Ever read a Dickens novel? Churches did all they could in 19th century England, and yet London was overrun with “Street Urchins”. Yes, religious charities do great works and I support them – but I do not believe that they could provide all the help that’s needed no matter how low taxes are.

Hi Lyne G.

Wow, we agree on something! I wish food stamp and welfare programs could go away – and if churches and families could fill the need then the programs wouldn’t be needed, and taxes could be lowered. But the churches never have,,,

Jon, about the “man made myth” of global warming, tell me this. What happens if we do it your way, and you’re wrong? Well according to that Al Gore movie it’ll be a catastrophe of biblical proportions. Now, what happens if we do it our way, and it turns out we were wrong? Well I guess we’ll be driving cars that get 100 miles to a gallon of corn oil, and we could have just stuck to the gasoline – but basically no harm no foul.

So which is the more prudent course?

It’ll be interesting to see what this conference comes up with.

]]>