In the Law, there are some things that we might label as 'liberal.' Every three years, a tithe was collected to go to the economically disadvantaged: Levites, aliens, widows, etc.

The Law had a sort of simple social welfare 'safety net.' Think about all the Americans who put up 'no tresspassing signs' and would take a shotgun to someone who stole out of their watermelon patch if they could get away with it.

Under the Law, if a hungry man wanted to go eat some fruit or grain from anotehr man's field during daylight hours, he could do it. He had a righ to eat out of another man's field as long as he didn't take a container.

Every 50 years debt was cancelled. Israelites were instructed not to be greedy in lending to the poor. A hired man's wages had to be paid at the end of the day- for his protection. There are some 'social welfare' aspects to the Law.

The New Testament teaches that rulers are ministers of God, that they do not bear the sword in vain, and concerning taxes that they 'minister continually on this very thing.' Well-put, Paul. Rulers still continually collect taxes.

to hear some conservatives talk, the government is almost stealing 'your" tax money if they take yoru money and use it on high budget social welfare programs.

Some conservatives say they would take up arms against the government if it went too far, and that they are obligated to obey the constitution, not rulers. But the Bible says tha trulers are ministers of God, and Peter said to submit to rulers and to the king. Rome wasn't following its consititution and had sunk into dictatorship (emporership) when this was written. Yet the New Testament taught to submit to such rulers.

There ar some economic programs which are wise, and some that are foolish.There are alot of different countries in the world, and there are different economic policies that may work best for different countries.

From reading the Bible, I don't see where conservative economic policies are taught as a God-given ideal. I don't see in the Bible where Jesus was a Republican. It bothers me to see conservative Christians who treat conservative free-market economic policy as if it were a matter of Christian doctrine.

I live in a country which sure doesn't have much of a saftey net. Crazy people sometimes end up with large unkept hairdoes, living on the road, skin covered with dirt, wearing clothes wtih holes in them if anything at all. That's just one example. The US may charge a lot more in taxes, but it also has a lot mroe of a saftey net. There are even restaurant inspectors in the US.

If someone wants to start a business here, he can just spend $100 for a pushcart and sell noodles on the side of the street, without the hassle of permits and health inspectors. There is a lot more freedom to start businesses here. Is either the US's beaurocratic system with health in spectors, or the more free Indoensian system unbiblical? I don't see a scritpural reason to condemn either scenario.

There are some areas where faith in the Gospel should definitely effect our political beliefs, like about not killing little babies, not promoting sexual perversion, and other such things. But we shoudl recognize opinions about economics as just that -opinions.

The Bible doesn't teach that we have inaliable rights to demand from the government. It doesn't teach us to take up arms to keep our government in line.

-- Anonymous, May 11, 2001

Answers

Connie....

Show me one place (just one), in the Constitution, that says Americans have "a right"....to healthcare.

Also....do we really want the govt. overseeing healthcare?? I mean....they have done such a wonderful job with public education....right???

-- Anonymous, May 11, 2001

CG....I'm glad you agree that the Constitution does not name healthcare as a "right."

Let me tell you an interesting thing that just happened to me. I don't know if it adds anything to the discussion....but it's food for thought....

Last summer I had a physical including a stress test....and some other routine test. I had some chest pains....that turned out to be....nothing. But....at 41....it's time to start having regular checkups.

I have high deductible insurance...($1000). My doctor's office billed the insurance....and when they found out that they were not going to get anything....they sent me a bill.

However, the bill showed.......a $200 reduction in charges since I was paying in cash.

The point being....they purposely overbilled when they thought insurance was paying.....but immediately gave me a discount when they knew I would be paying.

I've been told that if you tell Dr's your are paying cash....they will reduce your bill immediately.

I got to believe that this vicious cycle of overbilling insurance....and insurance fraud.....(including medicare)....has caused a great deal of our high medical costs.

Like I said....I don't know that this adds anything except....I think the answer is certainly more complex than saying...."Make govt. pay"....after all.....they got their own problems with medicare....and I would hate to see that problem spread to everybody.

The govt. can probably have a role in straigtening out the mess....but I don't think they would do anything but make a bigger mess if 1/3 of the American economy is turned over to them.

-- Anonymous, May 12, 2001

Hi, Link.

I have become a one-issue voter: Abortion.

I agree with much of what you say.

It seems that God wants us to respect private property: "Thou shalt not steal", but also wants us, the church, to provide for the needy in our midst.

That is why I am against social practices which 'enable' people to not depend on God, but on the Federal Government for their needs.

It makes it easier to not turn to God when one has a spiritual need.

There is also the admonition: "He who does not work shall not eat". [Paraphrased from memory]. This is referring to able-bodied people, I am sure, and takes into account that the elderly, the children, the ill and even the prisoners need help.

I am not a rabid right-wing extremist (my position on guns alone absolves me of that charge) and come from a socialist father, but there is a middle ground where extremists do not bother to tread.

I believe that every able-bodied person has the responsibility to work for his/her own well-being, but I also believe that we have to help the fragile people in our midst. And I believe the church should do most of it.

Health care has become so expensive in this country that I believe the government should do a lot of that. And that should be equal to all ~ the government leaders should not have golden parachutes, medical or otherwise, and the needy low/middle class should not be ignored.

We need a lot of wisdom, and with that, understanding.

Respectfully,

-- Anonymous, May 11, 2001

Way to go link and Connie!

-- Anonymous, May 11, 2001

Danny

Why are "rights" only defined by the constitution? If that is the case we have no business chiding other countries on human rights. What they do in Singapore or the Sudan is perfectly constitutional THERE.

There is such a thing as human rights, and that may be broader than the constitution.

-- Anonymous, May 11, 2001

Healthcare in this country is cheap by American standards. But if you are sick in the hopsital in first class, you still have to watch your own IV bag when you sleep. You can get an embolism if they re- do it wrong. The quality seems to be better in the US. US hospitals have a lot more fancy gizmos even than Canadian hospitals, which run on a socialized medical system.

I think one thing the government could do to stop the increase of health costs is for the government to pass laws against litigiousness (sounds self-contradictory.) Those who bring frivilous lawsuits can be severely fined for clogging up the justice system. The US government could also set standards (maybe suggestions) for every type of malpractice problem. People who repeatedly take doctors and others to court and lose could be be fined higher fees, and if someone repeatedly abuses the justice system, this fact could be made a matter of record during later trials. $30,000 for a lost toe- that sort of thing. People suing insurance companies has driven up the cost of malpractrice insurance and medicine. Also, insurance companies are sometimes reluctant to give. If there were an agreed upon standard for compensation for every type of injury in every tpe of circumstances, maybe victims could easily settle with insurance companies without going to court.

-- Anonymous, May 11, 2001

Link,

I can go along with your ideas here.

Tort reform (and punishment for stupid lawsuits) needs to be made fact.

And I could also see a fixed price index on health care proceedures - you would not believe the discrepancies in pricing, not only from doctor to doctor, hospital to hospital, and State to State; but it even varies from patient to patient - depending on your Insurance status. 20 years ago my Dad had triple bypass surgery as did another fellow in his room. That man's bill was triple what my father's was because he had Insurance while my father had none. I consider this a criminal act because it wasn't a matter of helping out my Dad (he paid his bill 100%), it was a matter of the hospital "milking" the other fellow's Insurance company for all they could get.

There is no reason (other than greed) why 1 doctor charges $100 for a simple 10 minute office visit while another one down the road charges only $50 for the same service. Fix the price at a fair level (say $30 for example) - that would average at least $90 an hour for the office (based on a 20 minute appointment schedule) while saving the sick $20 to $70 in one fell swoop.

This would be a reasonable compromise between Socialized Medicine (which really doesn't work in the long run if you're prone to being sick) and the HMO / PPO debacle we wrestle with daily.

I really hate to give this power to the Gov't, as they have taken too many actual rights away already. But if they are going to dictate anything in this field, we all would be better off if they dictated price instead of the quality of care. This is the proverbial "being caught between a rock and a hard place".

-- Anonymous, May 11, 2001

I re-post to comment:

Show me one place (just one), in the Constitution, that says Americans have "a right"....to healthcare.

Also....do we really want the govt. overseeing healthcare?? I mean....they have done such a wonderful job with public education....right???

-- Danny Gabbard, Sr. (PYBuck12pt@cs.com), May 11, 2001.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Yes, we sent five children to Christian School because we couldn't abide what was going on in the public schools.

And of course there is always the alternative for people to go completely without health care, as people even here in this countr largely did in the early 1900s.

I think maintenance health care and immunizations and well-baby check- ups help everyone and should be paid for by everyone. Is anyone here old enough to remember polio? Or TB? Or the childhood diseases of measles, mumps, chicken pox, etc.?

I am thankful that the taxpayers have voted in the health care they have.

We know people from Canada and Italy, and they cannot understand why we wouldn't want socialized medicine. (I have been against it in the past, but if it were voted in, I wouldn't mind).

When parents work two jobs (as some have to) but still do not have health insurance coverage, that is unjust. What makes a legislator's job more important than the taxpayer's job which pays the taxes for the legislator's health insurance?

I do know that for wealthy Canadians, they come to the U.S. for better health care and because it takes some time to get in to see doctors in Canada.

We need wisdom and understanding. and Christian love.

Respectfully,

-- Anonymous, May 12, 2001

Hillary

I see you have many supporters for government controled medicine. There are those that feel you and Ted should get togeather and straighten out this health care thing in the US. They say you should put price controls in place. Maybe you could get Al to head this thing up since he has to work for a living now. He could put a committe into each hospital and Dr's office to make sure it is done as you think it needs to be. I'm sure this would cut the cost of medicine.

Speaking of cost. Can you believe the money those Dr's make? We have 3 of them in our family and they make more in a year than I make in 3 or 4 years. Just because they went to school for 20 years and for 2 or 3 years of that time worked up to 100 hours per week, did 2 year fellowships,are on call 24 hours a day 365 days a year,work 50 to 70 hours a week now,work with the church youth group,leave their home open to them,take them all over the country,give away far more than I make plus pay more in taxes than I make doesn't mean they should make so much money. And if they didnt pay for those other peoples medicine out of their pocket all the time they wouldnt have to make so much.But if you and Ted take this thing over it will be different then.Right? Besides they cause to much disruption during worship hour. They usually get up at least 3 times while the preaching and singing is going on to answer their beeper. They could at least wait till later to talk to those sick people. We are not going to invite them over to eat so much anymore.Their beeper keeps going off then also. Besides, its hard to enjoy your meal when they are sad or perhaps cry because of a hurting patient.

I have an idea for curing the high cost. I have a friend that has been a tool and die maker for almost 40 years. He told me the other night Dr's make to much money. He said he should make as much as they do because with his on the job experience he has as much education as they do. He is good with his tools.

So maybe the answer to cutting cost is when someone is having a heart attack,needs bypass surgery,etc. call a plumber, carpenter, cop or day labor.They didnt waste their time with all that extended schooling and are smart enough to only work 40 hours a week and to spend time with their family. And maybe they wont keep disrupting the preachers sermon.

I would like to take all the credit for this great idea but have to give most of it to some of the folks on the Christan Church Forum.

Keep the furniture. Whoops! I guess thats,Keep the faith.

Faris

PS.About this Dr.thing. The church is building a new building and somebody promised an awful lot of money at our missions rally,so if you could hold off on this for a while.........

PSS.

Do you know in some states some preachers make $20,000 and the one in the next town over may make $40,000. Thats a lot of money for just working 3 hours a week. And I know they dont need all that education. Ole Benny, Jessie, and Kenneth dont need it because they say the Lord speaks to them. We need to get someone on that. Is Bill doing anything?

-- Anonymous, May 12, 2001

I have a RN im my church who makes over $50K. I have an earned doctorate and make $40K. OK :)

But she tells me the folks in the hospital laundry make around $18K. But if they did not do their job, the entire hospital would be at risk. And they handle the soiled linens and infectous cloth from every patient, not just the few on one floor.

Now I am not saying they should make as much as the MD or RN. I am not saying I should either. But it seems to me there is too much of a dispairty. Martin Luther King was shot in Memphis while there trying to get sanitation workers a 25 cents per hour raise. Whether you liked MLK or not, he was correct when he saiid, "Sanitation workers are our first line of defense against epidemic."

What I want to know, is why so m any Republicans want people to make less than them, and want people to not have health care. If health care is not a right, how do we decide who should get it or not? By their checkbook balance?

I agree with what has been said about the poor here being better off than the rest of t he world. But why do those so well off resent even discussing these subjects? Why do they want for others to have less than them?

I had a secretary once who made as much per hour as I did. When the finance committee told me, I said, "So what?" It is not necessary to diminish the value of others to establish our own.

-- Anonymous, May 12, 2001

The most generous people I know are conservatives. They like to give to the works of Christ instead of to the government to finance abortions and the social agendae.

A well-to-do lady I know gave three houses to the Mission (houses she had inherited) and helped pay for their renovations for the needs of the Mission. These are homes the Mission uses to minister to the poor and addicted in our community who have made a commitment to Christ and have agreed to undergo the Christian training and other training (like budgeting and checkbook balancing and craft work). And to turn from their alcohol and drug addictions.

The main Mission serves the men and these homes serve single women and women with children. They are called 'Victory Centers'.

I know of many different Christian endeavors where paople commited to Christ give of themselves and their increase. Christian Cradle (to help mothers in their decision to not abort their babies ~ up to and including open adoption).

The thing is, while there are many needs, very few people in this country are left with no care. Do you see beggars on the streets? I don't. We also have a clothing store where people who need them can go for their needs. These clothes are quite nice, given by people who just want to clean out their closets.

Our church has a clothing exchange, also, which we announce in the community.

Medical care is given to the truly needy in this country. The ones who suffer are single income, middle class people who may be paying pretty high rates on their income. If a mother wants to stay home with her children (as my daughters-in-law want to and do)it can be quite a sacrifice. Fortunately God provides and my sons earn enough for their wives to be homemakers.

But in whatever job one has, if your business pays your health insurance, what makes your work more important or worth being subsidized than another's?

And while I certainly support a doctor's right to a good salary, as a friend of mine said when I defended doctors on the basis that they had to spend a lot on their educations, she said, "But do they have to make it all up the first year?"

Faris, I am sympathetic to doctors (have some in my family myself) but greed is not uncommon as a motivation for going into medicine.

I think there is enough condemnation to go around on this one.

If each 'side' would relinquish a little greed for the good of all, it would be better.

Respectfully,

-- Anonymous, May 12, 2001

As for Christians having 'rights', health care or otherwise, I don't believe that we have any 'rights' per se. We are called to be servants.

If we all ceded our 'rights' to the Lord, I cannot imagine that the Lord will not care for every one of the NEEDS of His children.

In fact, the Scriptures do say that when we earn more than others, the purpose is to share it with others.

-- Anonymous, May 12, 2001

CG,

I re-post to comment:

My son, who did not want to attend college (I tried to bribe him to go) started to work for GM about 24 years ago. He has a tremendous benefits plan, including glasses and dental. It was earned through union negotiations. He calls GM 'Generous Motors', and occasionally reminds me that he made a good decision occupationally.

He makes over $50,000. Until recently, he earned more than his college educated siblings.

And now, the relatively new final assembly plant where he worked, has been phased out and closed. He is retired at age 45 with FULL BENEFITS. GM is paying for his college education up through a doctorate, if he wants.

He is very talented mechanically and electrically, so his services are much in demand by family and friends. And he's willing to give those services. He cannot work for anyone else, or he will lose these benefits.

he does a lot for his church, as well. He is studying computers at our Community College, and will then go to MSU for a higher degree.

He is also getting additional flying training and hopes to be a pilot for a private company. He now flies for leisure. In fact he and his family are in Kansas this weekend for a wedding.

There could be a little more equity in determining benefits.

Jesus did say to Judas that we would always have the poor with us. And He also told us to care for them. But He said Mary was doing a good thing when she poured expensive perfume on Him.

I think sometimes people do not want to give from their own largesse, but salve their consciences by insisting the government do it. (Not you).

It is a problem which requires wisdom and understanding.

-- Anonymous, May 12, 2001

I forgot the re-post:

I have a RN im my church who makes over $50K. I have an earned doctorate and make $40K. OK :)

-- Anonymous, May 12, 2001

From another Christian forum:

The New Little Red Hen

She called all of her neighbors together and said, "If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?"

"Not I," said the cow.

"Not I," said the duck.

"Not I," said the pig.

"Not I," said the goose.

"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen.

And so she did; The wheat grew very tall and ripened into golden grain.

"Who will help me reap my wheat?" asked the little red hen.

"Not I," said the duck.

"Out of my classification," said the pig.

"I'd lose my seniority," said the cow.

"I'd lose my unemployment compensation," said the goose.

"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen, and so she did.

At last it came time to bake the bread.

"Who will help me bake the bread?" asked the little red hen.

"That would be overtime for me," said the cow.

"I'd lose my welfare benefits," said the duck.

"I'm a dropout and never learned how," said the pig.

"If I'm to be the only helper, that's discrimination," said the goose.

"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen.

She baked five loaves and held them up for all of her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share.

But the little red hen said, "No, I shall eat all five loaves."

"Excess profits!" cried the cow.

"Capitalist leech!" screamed the duck.

"I demand equal rights!" yelled the goose.

The pig just grunted in disdain.

And they all painted "Unfair!" picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities.

When the government agent came, he said to the little red hen, "You must not be so greedy."

"But I earned the bread," said the little red hen.

"Exactly," said the agent. "That is what makes our free enterprise system so wonderful. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide the fruits of their labor with those who are lazy and idle, it's now the law."

And they all lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, "I am grateful, for now I truly understand."

But her neighbors became very disappointed.....She never again baked any more bread.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I believe the so-called 'tough' stance of the consevatives in insisting that people work in some capacity for their benefits has brought these people self-respect. And people who are working are too tired to be out committing crimes. Having to get to a job has given people a reason to not take drugs. (Not in all cases, of course).

Automatic income from the government is a bad way to help people.

Bad behavior should never be rewarded, because you will get more bad behavior that way. That is why giving a child his/her way in response to a tantrum is a very bad thing to do. Eventually all you will get is tantrums.

After I developed a little maturity with my own children, I learned to NEVER give them their way if they were behaving in a way I did not want repeated.

Two year olds should not be 'boss'. Nor should sixteen year olds.

Respectfully,

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2001