What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Would Jesus Be a Democrat or a Republican?

Drew said:
It most certainly is not.

Circular reasoning involves assuming the very thing one is trying to establish by argument.

I am, of course, doing no such thing.
Click to expand...

If you voted for X, you voted for Y; if you voted for Y, you voted for X.

Where does it stop?
 
theLords said:
If you voted for X, you voted for Y; if you voted for Y, you voted for X.

Where does it stop?
Click to expand...
I never posted anything of the form you appear to be suggesting here. I am, however, guilty of this: the phrase "you freely vote to get x" should really have been rendered as "the society (50 % + 1) freely votes to get x".

Yes, some individuals will be "forced" to do something they did not vote for. That is the price of being committed to being a member of a society. Just like marriage - I may have no interest at all in colour schemes for drapes, but I "have no choice" but to get involved in all that stuff in virtue of my free will decision to get married.
 
Drew said:
Yes, some individuals will be "forced" to do something they did not vote for.
Click to expand...

Point proven ;)

hsc1671l.jpg
 
theLords said:
Point proven ;)

hsc1671l.jpg
Click to expand...
Not exactly.

The point remains: Members of a society, as a collective freely decide to be taxed. Does this mean that those people who, foolishly of course, would not want to be taxed, are "forced" to pay taxes anyway? Of course! This is how a democratic society works.

I would have thought you give me more credit than to try and argue that people are not legally obliged to pay taxes. My (intended, anyway) argument all along has been at the "society" level - that the society as whole chooses to be taxed. If most people do not want to pay taxes, no taxes. And Somalia will be the result -a failed nation where chaos reigns.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Drew said:
No.

The point remains: Members of a society freely decide to be taxed.

I am not sure why so many of you deny this manifest truth.
Click to expand...

How? They vote against taxation, and yet they freely decide to be taxed? As you said, "They are forced" [to be taxed].

A + B ≠ C
 
First the 16th Amendment is a scam. It was never ratified by the 3/4ths majority of the states in 1913, which was required by the Consitution. Therefore, the 16th Amendment is unconstitutional.

So what does the U.S. Constitution say about taxes? It says 'No Direct Taxes on its citizens'. Meaning? No income tax, no property tax, no business tax, etc. So how does the governement then get its money to operate? By tarrifs (the tax on the importation of goods).

Biblically, Jesus spoke out against the rich but he also told us that we should 'keep the commandments'. One of which is “You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's" (Exodus 20:17).

So if the poor vote for higher taxes on the rich to "spread the wealth around", isn't that not coveting?
 
gunghorjc said:
Biblically, Jesus spoke out against the rich but he also told us that we should 'keep the commandments'. One of which is “You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's" (Exodus 20:17).

So if the poor vote for higher taxes on the rich to "spread the wealth around", isn't that not coveting?
Click to expand...
I doubt it very much.

Stealing is one thing, forming a democratic society governed on "majority rules" principles is quite another. Besides, right-thinking rich people will realize that they have a moral obligation to share their wealth with the poor. Failing that, they should be motivated by pragmatic self-interest - a desperately poor lower class will rise up in desperation and "take" the wealth of the rich.

I suggest that the signficant majority of "rich" people are more than happy to pay taxes to assist the poor.

Let's remember - the "rich" need the poor (e.g. to work in their factories, etc.). So the rich have a motive to help the poor, even if not a noble motivation.
 
I'm not trying to defend the mega-million dollar businesses that are operating, either. They run afoul to the bearing of the consitution as well. We were given a system in which, yes, there are those who succeed and those who fail, but they were allowed the opportunity through hard work to change their own life.

The bailouts prove that. The businesses that needed them, that were "too big to fail" made very bad business deciscions. They should've been left to reap what they sowed. So a bunch of people would've lost their jobs. Hard working people who may have already just been scraping by. 'Neccesity is the mother of invention'. Therefore, out of the neccesity for finding a job and providing for their family, they'd have said 'Hey, I worked for these people who made a bunch of bad mistakes and I know what they did wrong. Let me put everything I have into it and I'll make a business that has grown out of the old.'

However, I'm sorry, I must disagree with you that someone saying 'You worked hard, you have a lot. I've worked hard, I have a little. I'm going to vote for part of what is yours to become mine," is covetous.
 
Hm guess if i need a job i should find a poor man to ask for employment.

I am still trying to remember all these times i have voted for taxes...
 
That's not what I'm trying to say, Reba. I'm sorry if my point was confusing.

What I'm trying to say is, I'll use General Motors as an example, they had X amount of workers working for them. If General Motors had not been given a bailout, they'd have failed. There would no longer be a General Motors. So what do all those who lost their job do? They use what skills they've learned, and they put it into practice creating a new company. You'd have seen X amount of small car companies start up. No, they'd not have been able to employ the same amount of people individually as a giant such as GM is, but you'd have a lot more smaller businesses, a lot more opportunity to growth that is not stagnated.
 
reba said:
Hm guess if i need a job i should find a poor man to ask for employment.

I am still trying to remember all these times i have voted for taxes...
Click to expand...
Did you vote for either a Republican or a Democrat?

If yes, then you almost certainly voted for income tax. I suggest you will not find one Democratic or Republican candidate at any level that does not support income tax and promised you that s/he would try to get rid of it.
 
Drew said:
Did you vote for either a Republican or a Democrat?

If yes, then you almost certainly voted for income tax. I suggest you will not find one Democratic or Republican candidate at any level that does not support income tax and promised you that s/he would try to get rid of it.
Click to expand...

Have you actually listened to Ron Paul? I mean, seriously watched and listented or read any transcripts of his speeches?
 
Let's remember - the "rich" need the poor (e.g. to work in their factories, etc.). So the rich have a motive to help the poor, even if not a noble motivation.
Click to expand...

Gongho, My reply was to the above I followed you.
 
In 1913, the 16th Amendment to the Constitution made the income tax a permanent fixture in the U.S. tax system

I know i am old but that was even before my Mom was born... Nope i never voted for income taxes

That is the truth
​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top