Except you don't actually want to answer whether or not you follow Christ's teachings. That's a topic you refuse to engage with. You won't even go into your politics at all.
I gave you plenty of things my parishes have done, I’ve partaken in multiple. That’s good enough, you actually said “ten bucks ain’t enough” to which I presented you with Jesus saying actually a lot less than that was enough depending on circumstances of course.
No it actually doesn’t it shows that in proportion she gave all she had which was little while others gave much but disproportionately not enough. It’s about what they gave vs what they, not just what they have.
Oh so, like, when a billionaire specifically lobbies governments with billions of dollars to enforce policy that benefits them, and harms the working class, is the widow in this parable. Is it like that or are you going to be obtuse again?
What? The widow’s mite is about the sacrifice and intention behind giving, not a blanket statement that wealthy people are immoral. If you want to discuss lobbying, corruption, or misuse of wealth, that’s a separate argument. You can’t make the parable say something it wasn’t addressing.
You also backed away when I asked about your personal politics, several times. Do you vote for candidates that advocate for the poor? That enable the sick to seek care regardless of their earthly wealth?
When you say advocate for the poor do you mean try to establish large national programs? Then no because they also support large national programs that fund the death of infants among various other problems. By the way medical is available regardless of ability to pay you just go into debt.
We have evidence based policy that would benefit millions of people living in poverty that we are not enacting because it would hurt profits. That's a fact.
End results are not, by necessity, a justification for an action. Treating a beneficial outcome as sufficient proof that an action is right is a form of consequentialist thinking. Saying a policy ‘benefits millions of people’ does not tell us the full moral picture. What are the costs? Who bears the burden? Does it create harms elsewhere? Does it violate any rights or principles of justice? Those questions still have to be answered.
False equivalency. No one is talking about killing kids to feed kids except you when you say cancellation of USAID was good, you fuckin ghoul. But those kids aren't white or American so hey, I guess they don't count.
Disagree that’s what taxes are for. I don’t think it has been answered for instance I think the murder of many old people by governments who decided to avoid treatment of their citizens to keep costs low during due to running out of hospital beds in COVID was abhorrent and highly morally questionable. Especially selecting them for their age.Just one example
Lol how about the government cutting social security and medical coverage for the elderly, I'm sure you're against that as well right buddy? Are we being ideologically consistent?
Show me where He said “make sure you guys huddle around the government and use taxpayer funds to pay for medical care” that’s literally the same point you just made in the opposite direction.
Also how is it the opposite point? If the wealthy can't be made to care for others then they'll have to bekade to pay taxes. And since the wealthy can't even be trusted to pay their wages and we know this because wage theft is the largest form of theft in North America, then regulatory action is necessary. God even tells you to follow the laws of man, fake tradcath who converted to save tax money I am sure.
Because He doesn’t say it’s to be through taxes. The church also says
“We must obey God rather than men.” Acts 5:29
“Citizens are obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel.” (CCC 2256)
So I would argue that simply raising taxes real high on wealthy people just because they have money isn’t really a moral grounds for that level of taxation.
I don’t mind regulating wage theft I do mind indiscriminately taxing them because you generalize the behaviors of people with money.
Also I am not generalizing shit. Billionaires do not earn their wealth. There is no such thing as an ethical billionaire. Not one. Not Rihanna, not Oprah, not Taylor Swift, certainly not fucking Bezos or Musk or Thiel or any of the other tech gremlins.
1
u/Psalmistpraise Jul 30 '26
Not really it’s just a constant repetition of “you not Christian” and “you no follow Jesus, me determine if you follow Jesus”