Alaska

[Cletus]

We have been duped into thinking fairness is what we want. Thankfully, God gives us grace instead of what we deserve. We should treat each other with love and kindness.

I just preached a sermon on this topic this morning--II Samuel 9:1-13

Mephibosheth and the Kindness of God toward us. 

OR had a sermon on that passage once.

In politics, I believe both responsibility and justice should work together.

Spiritually, it comes down to grace.

I still want to go to Alaska sometime, too!

[Mike Minyard]

Fairness is a condition of living in God's kingdom. It's in the Bible, Isaiah 33:15, TLB. "I will tell you who can live here: All who are honest and fair, who reject making profit by fraud, who hold back their hands from taking bribes, who refuse to listen to those who plot murder, who shut their eyes to all enticement to do wrong."

Fairness to me is defined by Matthew 7:12... So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

That sounds fair to me, and that God would like us to be fair unto others.

I think being fair is giving people exactly what they deserve... good or bad.

[SOLO_Gold]

Good point Mike, although people will say that we are not getting what we deserve when we accept salvation.

The bible tells us to stand up for those who cannot stand up for themselves. In my opinion much of the Bible leads to a narrative that says - Even though you don't deserve it, I'll go the extra mile.

You're right Terry - it's not "fair" but it is better than fair.

[OKC Eagle]

I absolutely agree the rich should not have to spport the poor. I'm pretty iffy on welfare and how much it really benefits people the way it was intended. But other social services are critical, and many are grossly under-funded.

However, I do believe the wealthy have an obligation to help support their country financially. Yes, it's their money and most have worked hard to get it (how they got it is another thing for some). But their sacrifices aren't as great as those who are really struggling to get by.

Those who are opposed to this... I have to question how many of you have ever really struggled. I question how many of you grew up in a house where your family of five was trying to survive on the $80 a week your mom made as the church secretary while your father was out dodging the Perfect Storm while fishing for scallops in the Atlantic, hoping to make $1000 for 12 days at sea and hoping to get to port in one piece.

To many (not all) on the Republican side, struggling is only driving one Mercedes, or having to sell your 5,000-square foot home to move into a 3,000-square foot home. I understand that there are several wealthy Democrats as well, but most of them have a better understanding of what I said above.

There is no perfect solution. But cutting taxes on those who can most easily afford to pay them just doesn't make sense to me.

The rich will always pay the lion's share of taxes--they are the ones with the money.  They are also the ones who emply most of the people.  The more the rich pay in taxes, the less money they have to pass on to their employees which results in either fewer jobs, lower pay or both.

The worst problem is the change in tax policy every time we have an election.  Probably the best thing for the economy is to settle on tax rates and let everyone know that they will not change again.  This would give certainty and stability to the business world and allow people to plan long term.

My main point throughout all of this was to try to separate the Christian commandment to care for the needy out of the goodness of their hearts from being forced to transfer wealth by the government.  The Church is far more efficient at helping the poor than the government ever thought about being.

By the way, Obama just suggested this morning that he might delay his planned increase in taxes on the rich if there is still a recession.  He realizes that tax increases on the rich will harm the economy but only cares if the economy is bad already.