Wednesday, January 30, 2013
Mr. Obama was able to get himself re-elected by winning the hearts of many dedicated yet easily fooled voters. One issue he used was his ideas of taxing the rich heavily and making them pay a higher percent than the rest of the people. While that may sound good to many on the surface, if you really look at this technique you know that it just won't work.
The problem is that whether you believe it is right or wrong to do this, the problem is that the rich won't let it happen. You have to understand how a rich person thinks. While I am not rich, I know many who are and understand their mindset. They have a set amount in their mind of how much they need to survive. Is that an amount that many of us would to have half of? In many cases, the answer is yes. Nonetheless, they each have the amount they feel they need in their head and they will find a way to keep that amount whether there is a democrat or a republican in office.
Therefore if you try to tax them heavily, they will beat the system in ways that could hurt people. They may have to lay people off because they can't afford to pay them anymore. They could also hide assets somewhere else. Another technique is buying a space and doing nothing with it so they can write it off as a loss. That takes the opportunity away from a small business owner. Therefore, when Obama was boasting about how he would tax them, I guarantee most were laughing at him.
While middle class people might think that that mindset seems selfish, I ask "Is it really?"
Don't we all have a set amount we need to survive on and if we go under that amount we do what we have to to get it back? That amount we have in our heads is probably one that a homeless person would love to have half of. Does that sound familar? So is it our obligation to give to homeless and invite them into our home? I sometimes do give a homeless guy some cash to get something to eat because I know that is what God wants. Others do that too, but it is by their own free will to do so. Should the government make those middle class people who choose not to give to homeless do it? Of course not and I don't think too many middle class people would support that.
The problem is greed here and I will acknowledge that. However, the middle class is ignoring their own greed. Many of them want the rich to give to them but they won't give to homeless. Talk about hypocrisy.
Everybody thinks those who have more should give until it is your turn to give. That includes the middle class many of whom don't put a penny in the tithe and offering basket on Sunday. I have seen that.
Wednesday, January 16, 2013
As we prepare for four more long years of what David Barton calls the most anti-biblical president in history, it scares me to think of how much more the church can get isolated by 2016. Considering how this man who I refuse to call president has already stated that we are not a Christian nation although the founding fathers clearly intended us to be, I am afraid of what mandates the government will try and place on churches.
The sad part is that they removed the bible and Ten Commandments from schools saying that there was a separation of Church and State. The liberals have totally gone against what that term was supposed to mean. It was supposed to be that one could not be jailed or punished for his beliefs. It never was supposed to mean that prayer couldn't be part of public school or other public venues.
What Separation of Church and State means is that there are certain roles for the church and certain roles for the state. Mark 12:17 states
Give what is Caesar's to Caesar and what is God's to God.
The liberas cry about this being a violation of the separation of church and state, yet they fail to recognize how they violated this concept. There a couple I can think of that many will not call separation of church and state issues.
Marriage is clearly defined early in the bible in Genesis 2:22-24
Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called 'woman, ' for she was taken out of man." For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.
Yet this liberal government has tried to redefine what marriage is. Marriage is a church issue, not a government one. Therefore, government needs to stay out of this altoghether. Why aren't there crys about separation of church and state here.
You may think that welfare is not a violation of the concept of church and state but it really is.
2 Corinthians 9:7 states
Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
That means that providing for those who are less fortunate is a matter for the church, and not the state. That is the whole point of the 10 percent. If everyone gives a little nobody has to give a lot. But people can't be mandated to give, it needs to be on their own free will. Otherwise, it doesn't count.
Therefore, government assistance agencies such as welfare and child support never should have been created. In the state's defense here though, people did stop tithing like they did before. It is on the people to understand that the 10 percent makes sense and there is a purpose to it and start tithing like they used to. Then the government needs to do away with programs such as this which do nothing but create more debt.
We know where Obama stands on the idea of us being a Christian nation and it is just terrifying to think how much further away from that we will get over the next four years. God help us.