|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Right wing people can possibly be Christian?
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
A paraphrase of Matthew 25, starting at v 31.
'You were hungry and thirsty, so I eliminated funding for Meals on Wheels and food banks. You were a stranger so I vilified you and demanded that you be deported. You were naked so I called you an evil liberal who hates conservative family values. You were sick so I repealed your only chance for health care. You were a prisoner, so I tortured you.'
How can right wing views be reconciled with Jesus? Particularly the wish to be wealthy, the wish to be a unitary culture with one kind of culture and family, to ignore social conditions and blame people for their poverty, to be wilfully blind to the social conditions that create crime? Tell me please, because I really want to see how this is possible.
[ 10. January 2014, 21:03: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
They have a punitive God. You know, God had to kill someone to punish for sin, couldn't just forgive, punishment must precede forgiveness and love, someone had to die, had to be a horribly painful death not an easy death because PUNISHMENT is demanded by God. An easy death wouldn't be sufficient punishment to satisfy God. Good thing for us Jesus volunteered or we'd all go to hell because God would be barred by law from loving and caring for us.
Or something like that.
If you worship a God who values punishment and rigid "righteous" law ahead of forgiveness and love and caring, that attitude creeps into your soul and you believe "they" are bad and "deserve" only punishment.
"They" being non-Christians, you know, the ones Jesus didn't die for. If you said the sinner's prayer (and are anti-abortion even to save a life and tithe and go to the right kind of church and got baptized by full immersion as an adult and etc) then you deserve forgiveness no matter what you do, but everyone else is worthless scum who don't deserve any kind of help.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Yo, I smell stereotyping here. There is a difference between right or left wingism, or central wingism (shoulderbladism?) and pure assholery. Assholes come in every political stripe.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og, King of Bashan
Ship's giant Amorite
# 9562
|
Posted
Social conservatives probably ask the same thing about you, N.P. While I tend to be with you on what we, as Christians, should focus on, it is important to ask to what extent any political party can help us show others that the Kingdom of God is at hand.
--------------------
"I like to eat crawfish and drink beer. That's despair?" ― Walker Percy
Posts: 3259 | From: Denver, Colorado, USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
I's not the social conservatives. It's the rich ones who associate their wealth with social conservatism so as to justify themselves. Having decided that both riches and their rigid ideas about social order are God-given, violating some of the basic ideals of the Christianity's founder. It's not about political parties either. Though it does puzzle how progressivism, the ideas of elevating the masses through education and opportunity which were clearly based on Christian ideals, somehow became something to criticize and denigrate, even though in many places, these were clearly the product of social gospel. It is difficult for a rich person to get into heaven.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
I's not the social conservatives. It's the rich ones who associate their wealth with social conservatism so as to justify themselves.
If only Jesus, Paul, and James had said something definite about rich people and their attitudes.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The5thMary
Shipmate
# 12953
|
Posted
Well, I can assure you that labeling people as right wing or left wing will almost guarantee that no real dialog will ever take place. Yes, SOME people who consider themselves social conservatives have some rather odd ideas about the poor. Then again, some liberals also have some odd ideas about poor people. I have heard my really, really, REALLY liberal friends say to me, in all seriousness, that poor people SHOULD steal from the rich, or "THE MAN" and that capitalism is evil and the rich should be forced to give up their money, so that everyone in the world would be equal.
Good thing Jesus loves the rich con-evo as well as the loony liberal. As for changing attitudes, one of my good friends came out to her very conservative father and he accepted her and his political beliefs have mellowed, over the years. Perhaps, instead of attacking each other about our differing viewpoints, we ought to try and find one thing that unites us and go from there. Just a thought.
--------------------
God gave me my face but She let me pick my nose.
Posts: 3451 | From: Tacoma, WA USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Yo, I smell stereotyping here. There is a difference between right or left wingism, or central wingism (shoulderbladism?) and pure assholery. Assholes come in every political stripe.
Yeah, you're right. I need to calm down. I had just come from a chat with a Conservative Christian friend who thinks we should nuke Iraq because "they are dirty, they don't bathe." Yesterday it was a chat with someone who believes criminals should be locked up for life unless they convert to Christianity in which case they should be let out. And oh the opposition to making health care available to all citizens!
I need to go spend a weekend with some of my atheist friends. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
I's not the social conservatives. It's the rich ones who associate their wealth with social conservatism so as to justify themselves. Having decided that both riches and their rigid ideas about social order are God-given, violating some of the basic ideals of the Christianity's founder.
Actually, my Conservative Christian "all true Christians are Republicans and oppose all governmental social programs" friends are not earning much. A carpenter, a Walmart employee etc.
Some have no health insurance but oppose Obamacare because it's "Big Government" and "socialism" both of which are not just wrong but "part of the devil's plan to destroy" the God-founded USA.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
aaaah, we're talking about America here! Phew, for a minute we were talking about normal people ... ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
I think the best thing that anyone can do in this country or Africa, is to create a job for someone so they can exist on their own with their pride and self-worth intact. Does that make me right-wing ? Generally speaking Handouts rob people of their self-respect, although obviously they are sometimes necessary. I give at least 10% of my earnings to Charity. I try to give to Charities that invent simple ways of improving sanitation or cooking, or that provide a well for clean water. I most certainly do not give to beggars in the street. Right-wing or not ?
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
I don't think anyone on the left is against good jobs for everyone capable of working. It's just that not everyone is capable, and the market does not provide those jobs on its own. Indeed current right wing economic thinking requires that around 5% of the population be unemployed.
Public services aren't about handouts anyway; they're about paying collectively for things that are too costly or unpredictable to pay for individually. You never know when or if you're going to need healthcare, unemployment insurance, housing (remember that council housing was meant to be a viable alternative for everyone, rather than a safety net for the poorest) etc. In any case, receiving benefits from a society that acknowledges that you would work if you could but that you currently can't is far less demeaning than having to go to a food bank and beg for food.
Refusing to give to beggars when you can afford to is certainly right wing, and certainly contrary to scripture.
[ 05. October 2013, 08:13: Message edited by: Arethosemyfeet ]
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
I can see a case for having a view that it's not my role as influencing the government* to enforce Christian values [or that the private sector is more efficient at proviging them etc...].
But in that case
(a) the chap should be voluntary living like the laws were communist (I exaggerate slightly).
(b) it also applies to the dead horses (although potentially only as directly state related).
But it definitely ought to constrain the way you can be right wing. Similarly there are some ways of being left wing that are dodgy.
*in my case as a voter and very weak producer/consumer.
[ 05. October 2013, 08:55: Message edited by: Jay-Emm ]
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Gosh, this takes me back to my teens: the happy whiff of self-righteousness, naivety, idealism, unreality and earnestness.
Yes, NP, we've all guessed you've got Miliband minor in your mind somewhere.
And before I'm drowned out by a howling lynch mob, do tell me the difference between pointing out the Miliband father was a marxist - deemed not cricket - and pointing out that Cameron father worked hard to send his son to Eton - so the son pilloried for the choice made by his father?
The inconvenient thing in the Miliband case is that it was Ed M who actually brought his father into play in the first place: personally I deplore the language being used by the Mail and the actions of its journalists over the memorial service are vile and beyond any justification. But the fact remains that Ed brought his father into the equation so he was either being naive or incredibly stupid not to expect his papa's Marxism to become an issue.
As for the original question [Can right-wing people possibly be Christian] - if the original poster means this to be "Can conservatives be Christian" this is crude and offensive. Being socially conservative doesn't make you incapable of having feeling for your fellow man, of living a life full of genuine compassion for those less fortunate and of being genuinely charitable.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
MrsBeaky
Shipmate
# 17663
|
Posted
Looking at the OP: surely anybody can be a Christian? Even people who I think are completely misguided or downright wrong. The thing I've learnt to recognise is that we bring who we are and all that has formed us from the familial through to the cultural into our understanding of the faith and its outworking and into our relationships both with God and people.
I've lost count of how many times fellow Christians from all sorts of different backgrounds have expressed opinions which jarred with my own ethical/ social/ political perspectives. Each and every time this happens I have to return to Christ and ask him for the grace to engage.....regardless of how I feel the gospel should look politically/ socially. I've learned to live confidently in my sense of revelation but also humbly enough to accept that everything including our political perspectives is an unfinished work, requiring the Holy Spirit to bring it to completion and that fact is quite frankly a level playing field.
That said, in the interests of transparency I feel I should state that I'm currently working with the poorest in the community here in Kenya and that I try to give food to people on the streets both here and in the UK as that is how I understand part of the call of the gospel.....but my right wing friends see things very differently!
--------------------
"It is better to be kind than right."
http://davidandlizacooke.wordpress.com
Posts: 693 | From: UK/ Kenya | Registered: Apr 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
I think the best thing that anyone can do in this country or Africa, is to create a job for someone so they can exist on their own with their pride and self-worth intact. Does that make me right-wing ? Generally speaking Handouts rob people of their self-respect, although obviously they are sometimes necessary. I give at least 10% of my earnings to Charity.
Potentially makes you Left Wing
(I'm trying to find a nice link on the USSR's policy*)
The issue is do you actually create the job? What you do to those who you don't create a job for? What rights do you give and take from those you create the job for?
*which I don't need to say wasn't always nice to workers, or particularly in accordance with socialism.
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
MrsBeaky
Shipmate
# 17663
|
Posted
Looking at the OP: surely anybody can be a Christian? Even people who I think are completely misguided or downright wrong. The thing I've learnt to recognise is that we bring who we are and all that has formed us from the familial through to the cultural into our understanding of the faith and its outworking and into our relationships both with God and people.
I've lost count of how many times fellow Christians from all sorts of different backgrounds have expressed opinions which jarred with my own ethical/ social/ political perspectives. Each and every time this happens I have to return to Christ and ask him for the grace to engage.....regardless of how I feel the gospel should look politically/ socially. I've learned to live confidently in my sense of revelation but also humbly enough to accept that everything including our political perspectives is an unfinished work, requiring the Holy Spirit to bring it to completion and that fact is quite frankly a level playing field.
That said, in the interests of transparency I feel I should state that I'm currently working with the poorest in the community here in Kenya and that I try to give food to people on the streets both here and in the UK as that is how I understand part of the call of the gospel.....but my right wing friends see things very differently!
--------------------
"It is better to be kind than right."
http://davidandlizacooke.wordpress.com
Posts: 693 | From: UK/ Kenya | Registered: Apr 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
anteater
Ship's pest-controller
# 11435
|
Posted
Well the answer may depend on how you define your terms, and both Right Wing and Christian are pretty fluid.
I prefer to use the word Christian in the sense of someone who self-identifies as belong to some branch of the orthodox christian church .
So in that sense, some who are right wing in the sense of Fascist or near-Fascist are clearly christian, including Generals Pinochet and Franco, (Catholic) and Efraim Rioss-Montt (probably wrong spelin - who was Pentecostal).
Then there are those "right-wing" christians whose main aim is to reduce the size of government. I have known some of these who were exemplary in giving of themselves and there resources to others, but were deeply suspicious of Government and Politicians (Can you believe it???). That seems a perfectly respectable position for a christian to hold.
So yes, christians (whatever that means) can clearly be right-wing (whatever that means).
Of course if you are really asking whether self-satisfied mega-rich fat cats whose main reaction to the poor is to piss on them, are close to the heart of God, then that is really a rhetorical question. Or maybe just a daft one.
--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.
Posts: 2538 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
It's just confirmation bias, isn't it? This is like a lens, through which most people view a body of teachings such as Christianity, and use it to filter out stuff which doesn't fit their bias.
I would say that most people have such a bias, both left and right (and centre), and they are usually incredulous about the other lot, because they have a different lens.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
To the OP. Like everyone, in so far as we see Christ clearly to follow. Our weakness, ignorance, projection(ignorance), fear(ignorance), inculturation(ignorance), unexamined assumptions(ignorance) get in the way.
Poison Christianity regardless of politics.
With damnationism.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglo Catholic Relict
Shipmate
# 17213
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
How can right wing views be reconciled with Jesus?
I have no problem with conservatives who want to make the world a better place; that is consistent with the Gospel. I also have no problem with liberals or socialists with the same aim, even if their methods differ.
What is less easy to reconcile with the Lord are those who do not care about making anything better for anyone but themselves, and who are happy to live in comfort, regardless of how others live.
In other words, imo it is the complacent and apathetic who are contrary to the Gospel, not those who strive for change, of whatever kind.
Posts: 585 | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
pererin
Shipmate
# 16956
|
Posted
What a strange question. Of course right-wing people can be Christian, and neither of those things makes them any more stupid or evil or insincere than anyone else (and alleging any of those things is just nasty and bigotted and well on the way to the sort of disregard for one's fellow man and his freedom that encapsulated Soviet Russia).
There's been a fine tradition of a Christian Right. There's also been a fine tradition of the Christian Left allying itself with the Irreligious Left against the Christian Right, which does not seem to be making Christianity as much of a priority as it should be.
I'll leave you with a thought from every Tory's favourite Methodist:
"No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he only had good intentions; he had money too." — Margaret Thatcher
--------------------
"They go to and fro in the evening, they grin like a dog, and run about through the city." (Psalm 59.6)
Posts: 446 | From: Llantrisant | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
pererin
Shipmate
# 16956
|
Posted
There are strands of both liberty and equality running through those texts. It's a matter of emphasis, and also a matter of to what extent one views the state as an appropriate vehicle for advancing those aims.
--------------------
"They go to and fro in the evening, they grin like a dog, and run about through the city." (Psalm 59.6)
Posts: 446 | From: Llantrisant | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707
|
Posted
Surely a look at history tells us that Christianity has been the religion of people with very many different political beliefs, including some which are not on the current democratic spectrum at all.
--------------------
We've evolved to being strange monkeys, but in the next life he'll help us be something more worthwhile - Gwai
Posts: 2210 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I find it hard if not impossible to reconcile Christianity with right-wingery.
In the US, statistics show that social conservatives give far more money to charities that help the poor than social liberals give.
Government programs are frequently very inefficient, and many needy people fall through the cracks.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I find it hard if not impossible to reconcile Christianity with right-wingery.
In the US, statistics show that social conservatives give far more money to charities that help the poor than social liberals give.Moo
Charity merely papers over the cracks while keeping injustice and a bad social (dis)order in place.
So I don't see 'charity' as a mark of a Christian.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I find it hard if not impossible to reconcile Christianity with right-wingery.
In the US, statistics show that social conservatives give far more money to charities that help the poor than social liberals give.
Government programs are frequently very inefficient, and many needy people fall through the cracks.
Moo
If memory serves those statistics are distorted by the association of conservatism with religion in the US - it's religion rather than conservatism which is the predictor.
Governments are actually much more efficient than charity or private enterprise in many situations. Comparing the NHS with the US healthcare system makes that pretty clear. Cracks tend to be a result of cuts to public spending, which is why there has been a massive growth in food banks in recent years.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Yep, Christianity is all about Left Wing Politics and not being a complete narcissist (a little narcissism is OK...individualism and all that).
Thanks for your honesty no prophet.
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I find it hard if not impossible to reconcile Christianity with right-wingery.
In the US, statistics show that social conservatives give far more money to charities that help the poor than social liberals give.
Government programs are frequently very inefficient, and many needy people fall through the cracks.
Interesting stats, the ones I've read say conservatives give more but are giving to their churches and not to community charities. If you are giving 10% to the church you probably don't have money remaining to give to the public library or the free health clinic or the food pantry or the adult literacy program or the mentoring at risk school children program or etc.
I agree government programs are inefficient and people fall through the cracks, but most (all?) programs were created because far more people were falling through the cracks of private charity before the program. The failure of private giving is why governments got involved.
We need a better solution than either current government programs or private charity whims. I don't know what.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Yep, Christianity is all about Left Wing Politics and not being a complete narcissist (a little narcissism is OK...individualism and all that).
Thanks for your honesty no prophet.
It might be worth reflecting that there probably wouldn't be a political left wing as we understand it, without Judaism (Marxism) or Christianity (Social democracy). The ideals which drive "Left wing" politics predate those politics by at least two millenia. Where did these people get their ideas from? It's all in the Book.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
Universal provision is generally the best way of improving efficiency and avoiding people falling through gaps. If you rely on means testing then you duplicate work done in the tax system in the benefits system. Raise taxes and institute a citizen income (leaving the average person no better or worse off) then you avoid both benefit traps and benefit fraud. Every hour of work done is worthwhile and improves your situation.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
agingjb
Shipmate
# 16555
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Universal provision is generally the best way of improving efficiency and avoiding people falling through gaps. If you rely on means testing then you duplicate work done in the tax system in the benefits system. Raise taxes and institute a citizen income (leaving the average person no better or worse off) then you avoid both benefit traps and benefit fraud. Every hour of work done is worthwhile and improves your situation.
True. Tax all income and make benefits universal. Anything else produces the poverty and affluence traps that so delight our rulers.
--------------------
Refraction Villanelles
Posts: 464 | From: Southern England | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
I think it a good idea for people who are unemployed to have to work for benefits. I think this is regarded as 'right-wing'. I can't see any difference between people who say have to help with Recycling projects for their benefits to those that are actually employed by the Government such as Bin-collectors. I believe it is the Governments duty to create work where it doesn't exist. Moving Government Jobs to the North is part of this. There are 1000s of Council Woodlands that are dying out because of lack of tree and shrub maintenance and reverting back to scrub and thorns, there are 1000s of footpaths where the stiles have collapsed and are impassable becuase of over-growth, there are 1000s of Charities (843 to be precise in Reading) that want volunteers. I can't see why the unemployed should not be 'forced' to take those positions in return for Benefits plus say a bus pass. So how would everyone else define the latest Governments scheme linking work to Benefits ? Or maybe thats a seperate post altogether ?
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
A post=script. I regard entrepreneurs like Wonga with contempt. They really need Government action to limit their exploitative interest rates. And I would expect all Conservatives and 'right-wingers' to agree.
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
There is absolutely no doubt at all that authentic Christianity involves compassion towards the poor, the weak and the vulnerable. Those who despise the poor simply for being poor ("they are obviously not blessed by God") are not Christians, as far as I am concerned. (That is not to say that we should not acknowledge that some people are poor through their own wilful irresponsibility, although these also deserve help and compassion, perhaps of a more robust kind!)
However, the idea of having compassion on the poor is not the sole preserve of the political left. What they are saying is that it is the State that should provide for the poor, and this could actually undermine the responsibility of all of us to care. We can walk past a beggar and assure ourselves that "the State looks after people like that, so obviously it's his own choice to be in that destitute condition." The left provides the biggest excuse to not help the poor.
I certainly believe in a welfare state, and if it were not for the NHS I would probably be dead. I deplore the 'marriage' of Christianity and what can only be described as Social Darwinism in the USA (although such people would be horrified to be associated with Darwin, of course!). But it is quite wrong to claim that so called "right wing" people have no compassion for the poor on account of their being "right wing". It may very well be that many of them affirm that it is down to individuals and communities to administer this compassion rather than a bureaucratic state. Which, to be honest, is an understandable position to take.
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
I think it a good idea for people who are unemployed to have to work for benefits. I think this is regarded as 'right-wing'. I can't see any difference between people who say have to help with Recycling projects for their benefits to those that are actually employed by the Government such as Bin-collectors. I believe it is the Governments duty to create work where it doesn't exist. Moving Government Jobs to the North is part of this. There are 1000s of Council Woodlands that are dying out because of lack of tree and shrub maintenance and reverting back to scrub and thorns, there are 1000s of footpaths where the stiles have collapsed and are impassable becuase of over-growth, there are 1000s of Charities (843 to be precise in Reading) that want volunteers. I can't see why the unemployed should not be 'forced' to take those positions in return for Benefits plus say a bus pass. So how would everyone else define the latest Governments scheme linking work to Benefits ? Or maybe thats a seperate post altogether ?
If these jobs need to be done (and I can think of many more important tasks that are not currently being done but could be) then these people are no longer unemployed but employed. Therefore they should be paid proper wages and not fobbed off with 'benefits.'
Nobody on the left wants to see anyone who can work having to rely on benefits. There should be enough jobs for all who want them or can do them. But benefits should be generous and available to all who need them. 'From each according to their ability, to each according to their need.'
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Gosh, this takes me back to my teens: the happy whiff of self-righteousness, naivety, idealism, unreality and earnestness.
Yes, NP, we've all guessed you've got Miliband minor in your mind somewhere.
And before I'm drowned out by a howling lynch mob, do tell me the difference between pointing out the Miliband father was a marxist - deemed not cricket - and pointing out that Cameron father worked hard to send his son to Eton - so the son pilloried for the choice made by his father?
The inconvenient thing in the Miliband case is that it was Ed M who actually brought his father into play in the first place: personally I deplore the language being used by the Mail and the actions of its journalists over the memorial service are vile and beyond any justification. But the fact remains that Ed brought his father into the equation so he was either being naive or incredibly stupid not to expect his papa's Marxism to become an issue.
As for the original question [Can right-wing people possibly be Christian] - if the original poster means this to be "Can conservatives be Christian" this is crude and offensive. Being socially conservative doesn't make you incapable of having feeling for your fellow man, of living a life full of genuine compassion for those less fortunate and of being genuinely charitable.
Erm, the problem is the Daily Heil saying that Ralph Miliband hated Britain when in fact he fought bravely for it in WWII, instead of you know, supporting fascism like the Mail. Nobody is objecting to pointing out Miliband Sr's Marxism at all, it's the idea that Marxism = hating Britain.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
It may very well be that many of them affirm that it is down to individuals and communities to administer this compassion rather than a bureaucratic state. Which, to be honest, is an understandable position to take.
The problem is that history amply demonstrates that, by and large, without the state the hungry don't get fed, the naked don't get clothed, and the sick don't get healed. Engineering a society in which people do all those things without state intervention is a goal I think all of us would support; the problem we are faced with is that with the current state of society withdrawing government help means people will die of starvation, exposure and disease. The "compassionate conservative" position is based on a fantasy just as remote as that of the communists. Given the preponderance of evidence one does start to question whether such conservatives are being entirely genuine in their arguing.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
I think it a good idea for people who are unemployed to have to work for benefits. I think this is regarded as 'right-wing'. I can't see any difference between people who say have to help with Recycling projects for their benefits to those that are actually employed by the Government such as Bin-collectors. I believe it is the Governments duty to create work where it doesn't exist. Moving Government Jobs to the North is part of this. There are 1000s of Council Woodlands that are dying out because of lack of tree and shrub maintenance and reverting back to scrub and thorns, there are 1000s of footpaths where the stiles have collapsed and are impassable becuase of over-growth, there are 1000s of Charities (843 to be precise in Reading) that want volunteers. I can't see why the unemployed should not be 'forced' to take those positions in return for Benefits plus say a bus pass. So how would everyone else define the latest Governments scheme linking work to Benefits ? Or maybe thats a seperate post altogether ?
Working for benefits = working for less than the minimum wage, and thus should be illegal. Why not give working people an actual wage, as opposed to using unemployed people for cheap labour? There is a huge difference between working for benefits and being employed - those working for benefits are not being employed, and are not being given a proper wage. It is certainly the government's responsibility to create jobs (something that seems to have passed this government by) but they should be actual jobs and not unwaged labour. Why not actually employ people for recycling or council woodland jobs?
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
I can't see any difference between people who say have to help with Recycling projects for their benefits to those that are actually employed by the Government such as Bin-collectors.
Jobseeking Benefits will be less than £71/week*, employment wages won't. If they get proper pay for their work then it becomes more like Labour's plan or that used in the USSR (at least in theory).
*this excludes child benefit and housing allowance, (which will obviously be the case for the easier targets e.g. the "earn or learn" but not for others) and of course the employed will then pay basic tax&council tax and NIC. So it's not quite so simple in practice.
[massive X post]
[ 05. October 2013, 16:48: Message edited by: Jay-Emm ]
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
I don't think any man-made political system is espoused by the Bible, although decentralised socialism/mutualism is the closest to Biblical politics that I can tell. However, economic conservatism/classical liberal economics (NOT the same thing as social liberalism) are totally at odds with the Gospel and as such cannot be held in tandem with true Christianity. It is serving both God and Mammon. Putting profit above people - and giving to charity after the fact doesn't change this - is an un-Biblical economic stance to take. There are, of course, un-Biblical political ideas on the left too! I don't see state control as being Biblical, for instance. Personally, the Biblical model looks far more like something under the umbrella of social anarchism than it does traditional socialism.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
What Rothermere's 'daddy' did in the war.
Rothermere's great grandfather and owner of the same newspaper was a British fascist and German Nazi sympathiser up until 1939. He personally congratulated Hitler on his takeover of Czechoslovakia and encouraged him to take out Romania.
Apples. Trees. Fall. Near.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
Really complicted isn't it ? How do we create jobs and what do we pay people who do them ? How do we encourage people to look after themselves whilst at the same time not let them get too greedy or successful. I used to like the idea of everything being 'privatised' but owned by the workers. Whenever Governments get involved efficiency goes out the window. And Governments are very keen on wars (left as much as right) and wasting money on Aircraft Carriers with no planes. No right-wing person would invest in schemes like Millenium Dome or High Speed 2 rail line because they aren't profitable. Keeping your skilled work-force from becoming ill and educted/trained is a good investment. Jesus seems to be a free-marketeer with parables like the Talents and the Bad Servant ?!?
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
What Rothermere's 'daddy' did in the war.
Rothermere's great grandfather and owner of the same newspaper was a British fascist and German Nazi sympathiser up until 1939. He personally congratulated Hitler on his takeover of Czechoslovakia and encouraged him to take out Romania.
Has the current Lord Rothermere made a big deal out of being inspired by his great-grandfather? If he has then, fine; the fascism and support of Hitler is fair game. But if not, then ISTM it's very different from the Ed / Ralph Miliband situation.
Ed has said many times that his father was an inspiration for his political views which, coupled with Ed saying the other day that he intends to bring back socialism, makes Ralph Miliband's political views and actions thoroughly newsworthy, I think.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
I don't think anyone, including Ed Miliband, has an issue with his father's political views being discussed. The issue is with the wilful misrepresentation of them for current present day political ends. To take, out of context, one quote from a 17 year old and conclude that the author "hated Britain" is the worst kind of gutter journalism.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153
|
Posted
The principled argument for right wing politics is that it is wrong to take (an excessive amount of) other people's money for the purpose of economic redistribution.
The practical argument for it is that economic freedom (including the freedom to enjoy lawfully acquired obscene wealth) tends to make society as a whole more prosperous than the known alternatives.
Nothing unchristian about either, IMHO.
And there are positive right wing values: freedom, equality, individual and family responsibility - which are thoroughly consistent with Christian ethics. I appreciate that not all right-wingers hold them ('right wing', after all, including both laissez-faire liberalism and social conservatism, traditions which are often in tension and sometimes diametrically opposed).
I count myself as centrist rather than right wing. Some right wing views (the Texas voters interviewed on the BBC this week saying Obamacare was the worst thing that had ever happened to their country) appal and scare me. But that's not because they are right wing, but because they are fucking mental. There are some sane right-wingers out there.
--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"
Richard Dawkins
Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Yep, Christianity is all about Left Wing Politics and not being a complete narcissist (a little narcissism is OK...individualism and all that).
Thanks for your honesty no prophet.
It might be worth reflecting that there probably wouldn't be a political left wing as we understand it, without Judaism (Marxism) or Christianity (Social democracy). The ideals which drive "Left wing" politics predate those politics by at least two millenia. Where did these people get their ideas from? It's all in the Book.
Really? None of the God approved governments in the Bible look anything like what Left Wingers want. Marxist governments in Eastern Europe and East Asia did resemble theocracies without God. Actually, following the policy proposals of Christian Reconstructionists like The Chalcedon Foundation would give the United States a government the ancient Jews would recognize. Of course, those policies are bat shit crazy, biblical, but bat shit crazy.
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
