Christianity is what's wrong with American politics.

It's a moral duty to take money from some, by force, to give to others? How is that moral? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

How is it not moral? The state is by definition, force. Your argument, taken to it's logical conclusion, would make taxation for any purpose, including mutual defense, immoral. And yes, making every member of a society who can afford to pay, fund the obligations of a society is absolutely moral. What is immoral is to leave the obligations of a society to chance or charity, so that some pay and others skate.

...so that some pay and others skate. Originally Posted by TexTushHog

How is it moral that you are making money off the tax paying citizens of the US and will take your retirement to another country instead of reinvesting in the communities you bilke... er I mean billed your rates?

Christianity is not what is wrong with American politics. Politicians that go to DC and believe they are there for a purpose greater than what the constitution states is what is wrong. That can be the christian fundamentalist that believes he should be a spokesman for his religion or the liberal that thinks he knows what is best for everyone and wants to use the government to force his or her agenda on everyone. The constitution has specific guidelines that dictate their roles, they should stick with that.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in the flag carrying a cross." ~ Sinclair Lewis, 1935 Originally Posted by BigLouie

BTW, your quote is misattributed. It is actually a quote taken from Halford E. Luccock's Keeping Life Out of Confusion (1938): “When and if fascism comes to America it will not be labeled 'made in Germany'; it will not be marked with a swastika; it will not even be called fascism; it will be called, of course, ‘Americanism.’”
Misattributed by Harrison Evans Salisbury in his The Many Americas Shall Be One, p. 29. Published by W. W. Norton, 1971. [wiki, et al]

Christianity is not what is wrong with American politics. Politicians that go to DC and believe they are there for a purpose greater than what the constitution states is what is wrong. That can be the christian fundamentalist that believes he should be a spokesman for his religion or the liberal that thinks he knows what is best for everyone and wants to use the government to force his or her agenda on everyone. The constitution has specific guidelines that dictate their roles, they should stick with that. Originally Posted by Laz

+1

somebody here wanted a list of atheist charities

http://www.thinkatheist.com/notes/Secular_charities

How is it moral that you are making money off the tax paying citizens of the US and will take your retirement to another country instead of reinvesting in the communities you bilke... er I mean billed your rates? Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

Why shouldn't capital, just like labor, be free to move across arbitrarily drawn international borders? I made lots of my money here, but I've made good bits elsewhere through investments in international companies. By your theory, if I make $50,000 of selling shares of Sony, do I have to go to Japan to spend it? If I make $100,000 off of selling shares of Petrobas, do I have to go to Brazil to spend it? If I settle a law suit and the insurance coverage is provided by a Lloyds syndicate, to I have to go to the UK to spend my fee?

Your statement is nonsensical.

A biblical verse has always confused me.
But now I think I understand.
It refers to the latter days
I paraphrase-
Wherein he that has much,
much shall be given.
He that has little, much shall be taken

Also Jesus Himself said not to be overly
concerned with the poor;
FOR THE POOR WILL ALWAYS BE WITH YOU.
Hello, that means we will never be able
to eliminate poverty. That or you can try
to make Jesus a liar.
LBJ's war on poverty has spent over
a trillion dollars and the percentage
of poor is the same.

The Lord uses poverty to teach those
affected a life lesson. If you try and
interfere the Lord will make it where
your meddling will cease and very well
drag you into the equation.

History bears this out.

TTH, so you DO believe in legislating morality. Or just your own morality. How is that moral? How is it moral to take something I have earned, by force, and give it to someone else, simply because YOU think the other person "needs" it more than me? What gives you the right to determine what I can keep, and what I must give up? Do your social engineering with your own money, God knows you like to brag about it here enough. You're simply displaying that liberal guilt that comes from having money. You believe it is right to help the poor, so long as someone else is paying.

The answer is to change the tax system that doesn't require force to collect. But you love this code so much, because it gives your buddies power and control, so you can feel generous without giving up much of your own. Damn it must suck to be you.

"... Take something I have earned, by force, and give it to someone else, simply because YOU think the other person "needs" it more than me..."

To believe otherwise is to reject the legitimacy of the taxing power of government, period.

Do we need a national defense? Then we take money, by force, from those we decide to tax and give it to a person or corporation that "needs" it more. How is that any different?

Or to pay the salary of a cop? Or a judge? All taxation is by force. All taxation redistributes wealth to supposedly higher uses.

I always find it funny that the weakest minded, feeble and vacuous people always resort to how many people they will kill or have killed to somehow give themselves credibility or that this somehow proves their virtue as humans or that they are real tough guys. As if killing a person takes some effort. Children under ten years old kill other people every day in America and all over the world. If killing were such a proof of your manhood why can children do it? Killing is at the very beginning of the human story in the bible. It is first nature to the human being, it’s as human as taking a shit and takes less thought and intelligence then taking a shit, so if this is how you prove your manhood you are a pathetic waste of "manhood" as well as the air that you breath. I would easily wager everything I own that a Congolese child soldier would have you Marshall in submission in a matter of minutes. Marshall if you are such a Christian warrior take a walk over the Khyber Pass by yourself or even better yet, take your soap box and book a one way flight to Peshawar Pakistan and do all of the damage you want you big, tough, American badass. Prove yourself where it matters. Or shut the hell up. Originally Posted by buzzworm86

LOL! go back to your video game kid and tell your mama to bring you another Mountain Dew.................

Tell me, why do you get to choose the priorities? Why do you get to choose who pays?

Let's see. National Defense, in the Constitution? Yep, there it is. Providing government (taxpayer) charity to citizens, in the Constitution? Nope, not there.

The income tax was not in the Constitution until the citizens were duped into passing the 16th Amendment in 1913, the year freedom died. Even with that, the tax has grown to monstrous proportions from what the original proposal was.

This is why I support the FairTax. People only pay the tax if they buy a new good or service. Don't want to pay the tax? Don't buy the stuff. Simple. And if you refuse to buy something subject to the tax, no one with guns will show up at your house taking your stuff, and putting you in jail. And don't give me that "It's regressive" bullshit. It's not. I guarantee you will pay more under the FairTax than I do because you have a need to show off your money and will always buy a new, expensive car, new house, new boat, etc. I will buy used and avoid the tax. So don't come back here criticizing the FairTax without reading the book or the website, or both.

The FairTax represent a return to freedom, and takes control away from Congress. That is why it will never pass, because it can't be used to funnel breaks to their cronies. It's sad.

But don't tell me someone else needs my money more than I do. You can't know what I "need". And you have no right under any moral system to steal from me what I have earned.

What the hell am I doing? Getting a lecture on morality from self-important, spoiled rich boy on a SHMB. I need to get some sleep.

when liberal policies clash with human nature, human nature always ends up winning......if you take a person's money away from him by force and prevent him from spending it on his children and give that money to some undeserving, lazy and stupid person, they will do something to try and stop you.......

if you have a lazy and stupid welfare queen, most people think her family and friends should help her out instead of the taxpayers who don't even know who she is.....most feel that if her family and friends will not help her, then she should suffer and go without as a lesson to those other lazy and stupid people about the perils of irresponsible behavior.....

we have a Constitution which is our contract between the governed and the governing....its about limited government and enumerated powers...the poor are not the problem of the tax payers......

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in the flag carrying a cross." ~ Sinclair Lewis, 1935 Originally Posted by BigLouie

LoL! He was a communist! Funny, all fascist regimes I can think of are atheistic communist or socialists......did you mean the Odumbo regime? He does believe in liberation theology and does wear the flag pin now....and I did here him say the other day that God wants us to handle our problems........yes, Odumbo is a fascist......

COG, I don't get to decide, we all decide via our representatives in government. Just like defense. Just like crop support programs. Just like corporate welfare, etc.

And explain to me how your claimed solution isn't "forced" anymore than this system. People have to consume at some level. A VAT tax like the so-called "Fair Tax," not matter how narrowly drawn, is mandatory when one triggers the conditions precedent, just like an income tax in mandatory when one's income triggers the conditions precedent. If I buy a newspaper, I am "forced" to pay the tax. If I buy lumber to build my house, I'm forced to pay a tax.

Your notion that any tax is theft simply won't wash.