| Thursday, October 20, 2005 |
| Why I Favor Oppression |
As we see the aftermath of the different hurricanes ravaging the southern area of the U.S. we have heard a great deal about "social justice" and the "oppression" of certain groups. Kayne West has accused George Bush of "hating black people", the Nation of Islam president stated that "being black in America is not an inconvenience but a death sentence", and Barbra Bush drew fire for stating that some of the people suffering from the hurricane had improved living conditions (she was referencing the homeless who now had consistent shelter, food, and clothing).
Certain groups have used the unfortunate situations in Louisiana to suggest that our country has a serious poverty and unemployment problem. They would cite the homeless numbers in New Orleans, their low per capita income, and high crime rate. What is overlooked in all of this is that this was a city and state that had been dominated by a group that favors Socialist programs under the auspices of aiding those less fortunate.
Certain members of the Wesleyan educational system would have you believe that raising minimum wage and taxes so that more money can be given away to those without education (they are in high supply and not so high demand) would be a solution to our problems as a society. How can a nation which, for so long, has denied religious ties- especially to Christianity- be expected to act in any other way than one that benefits the national economy? Why would the rich want to give their money for the same amount of work? Why would people desire education when they can make great money dropping out of high school because the government raised the minimum wage?
The tension of the worker doing the least amount of work for the most amount of pay and the employer paying the employee the least amount of money for the most amount of work and then selling the product at the highest cost with the lowest actual value is the tension that holds capitalism together. Just recently I stated to an individual well versed in economics that socialist systems were failures. He retorted that this claim was ridiculous because "look at France and Germany- they are based on socialist systems". Yeah, and Germany's unemployment rate is what? 30%? That would be nearly EIGHT TIMES that of the U.S. unemployment rate. Quick, let's be like Germany because obviously they are succeeding.
On a theological note: one cannot support the idea of "social justice" (a misnomer because "justice" indicates what one deserves") biblically. Paul writes in Romans 13:1-7 that we should submit to those in authority over us for "...there is no authority except that which God has established." Even if we are oppressed where does it say that we have the right to be otherwise? Matthew 5:39 tells us that we are to "turn the other cheek". The Bible is not a retalitory book but one of peace and submission. Our liberty, despite some radical theologians, is not one of this world but of the next. In Luke 16, Jesus tells the parable of the rich man and Lazarus when both die. Does anyone, after reading that story, wish to have what the rich man did?
What is this all about then? Are we to tell those who suffer that it is simply their lot in life and maybe the next one will be better? NO! We are to love them, to help them, and to tithe to our churches to reach out to a hurting world. Educate an illiterate world, feed a starving one, heal the sick, teach them but, in God's name, don't read "social justice" into the message of Christ when you preach to them. That message is yours, not His.
|
posted by D.M. @ 9:00 PM  |
|
| 1 Comments: |
-
First is somewhat of a grammerical note. I believe that when you refer to "Socialist programs" that it may be a little confusing. The word "socialist" refers to an individual, so it would have to be stated as a socialist's program. Programs that support the ideology of socialism would be socialistic. I may be wrong on this, but this is my opinion.
Second, I was reminded of something while reading your piece. I instinctively refer to old westerns a lot, as you know. In John Wayne's film, "McClintock", the Duke is confronted repeatedly by a desperate young man (his own son in real life) that needs a job to support himself and his widowed mother. When McClintock finally hires him the boy says "thanks for giving me a job". With Wayne striking a classic pose and pointing a finger at the young man he says "Son, I'm not GIVING you anything. You're gonna get a fair days pay for a fair days work, nothin' more". That is capitalism at its best, and is a concept that has elluded many that try to heal the ills of our society. Galatians 6:7 says "...whatever a man sows, this he will reap also". Instead of handing out billions of dollars of free aid to the residents affected by natural disasters, we should impliment a work program for clean up and reconstruction that will enable the able bodied men to work to earn the support of their families. Everyone would feel a lot better about themselves if this happened. Instead we give unconditional handouts that require nothing in return. We house them and feed them and give them all debit cards for purchases with no strings attached, and some people with a socialistic philosophy of the world feel better because they don't have to watch others suffer. Except for the debit cards, isn't this the same treatment we give zoo animals? There is much implied in the way we, as a people, treat our fellow man. There is no motivation inherent in socialism. There is no reason to change. Instead of sowing so as to be able to reap, they sow not and yet reap. The only action which will elevate a persons sense of pride and worth is that which he earns for himself. People have been encouraged for several generations now to take more than they give, or earn. This has developed to the point of being a "cultural tradition" and is viewed as a right. Areas like New Orleans and other inner city areas will be very resistant to change any time soon because of the expectations that our society is responsible to "take care" of their needs. This shift of responsibility is not biblical but is the result of foolish thinking. God help us!
|
| |
| << Home |
| |
|
|
|
| "Memento Mori."- Remeber that you will also die. |
| |
|
| Saying what needs to be said but everyone is afraid to say. |
| About Me |
|
Name: D.M.
Home: Overland Park, Kansas, United States
About Me: I've lived at least 5 years in the last two but come out. After trials of fire and flame we are marching on and if we don't take the world we'll sure as heck die trying.
See my complete profile
|
| Previous Post |
|
| Archives |
|
| Shoutbox |
After one of the most difficult ministry years of my life I made it back to another fall. I hope my posts find you well and encourage thought and discussion. |
| Other things |
| The Trinity. The Virgin Mary. The saints. Peyton Manning- in that order. |
| From Left to Right |
|
| Template by |
 |
|
First is somewhat of a grammerical note. I believe that when you refer to "Socialist programs" that it may be a little confusing. The word "socialist" refers to an individual, so it would have to be stated as a socialist's program. Programs that support the ideology of socialism would be socialistic. I may be wrong on this, but this is my opinion.
Second, I was reminded of something while reading your piece. I instinctively refer to old westerns a lot, as you know. In John Wayne's film, "McClintock", the Duke is confronted repeatedly by a desperate young man (his own son in real life) that needs a job to support himself and his widowed mother. When McClintock finally hires him the boy says "thanks for giving me a job". With Wayne striking a classic pose and pointing a finger at the young man he says "Son, I'm not GIVING you anything. You're gonna get a fair days pay for a fair days work, nothin' more". That is capitalism at its best, and is a concept that has elluded many that try to heal the ills of our society. Galatians 6:7 says "...whatever a man sows, this he will reap also". Instead of handing out billions of dollars of free aid to the residents affected by natural disasters, we should impliment a work program for clean up and reconstruction that will enable the able bodied men to work to earn the support of their families. Everyone would feel a lot better about themselves if this happened. Instead we give unconditional handouts that require nothing in return. We house them and feed them and give them all debit cards for purchases with no strings attached, and some people with a socialistic philosophy of the world feel better because they don't have to watch others suffer. Except for the debit cards, isn't this the same treatment we give zoo animals? There is much implied in the way we, as a people, treat our fellow man. There is no motivation inherent in socialism. There is no reason to change. Instead of sowing so as to be able to reap, they sow not and yet reap. The only action which will elevate a persons sense of pride and worth is that which he earns for himself. People have been encouraged for several generations now to take more than they give, or earn. This has developed to the point of being a "cultural tradition" and is viewed as a right. Areas like New Orleans and other inner city areas will be very resistant to change any time soon because of the expectations that our society is responsible to "take care" of their needs. This shift of responsibility is not biblical but is the result of foolish thinking. God help us!