Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by Gatorstooth, Sep 20, 2013.
It's Tennessee - Toothless!
Bah, I'm done. You don't argue any of your own points with any consistency or continuity. You say one thing, I respond, then you have another post almost completely ignoring the previous exchanges -- it's literally an endless discussion where you just keep talking and seemingly ignoring what the other person has to say. The only consistencies in half of your arguments are that they consistently lack clarity and continuity.
I've heard this argument from the fringe right ad nauseum. The argument goes that if Jesus said we’d never get rid of the poor, it’s foolish for the liberals to try. Of course that’s specious because again Jesus finished that very sentence by saying “and whenever you want, you can do good for them.” You might want to direct your attention to another verse to which Jesus was probably speaking.
11 For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.’
I have literally never once heard that argument, and it's not the argument I'm trying to make. You still haven't answered multiple questions I've posed to you in this thread.
Given the fact that you're losing badly it might be a wise decision.
Hey, how about this. Admitted Heathen reading scriptures trying to buck up liberal political and anti-religious sentiment.
Who woulda' ever thought ?:huh:
Wow, this literally makes me laugh out loud. You guys are seriously ridiculous sometimes. If you want to think you're the winner, when you don't even respond to half of the things people say to you -- have at it.
What have you asked me that I haven't responded to?
Did you ever realize that while you might be responding to something that I'm posting responding to something you wrote earlier?
You know what food desert is?
If you don't then you can't really make the comments you posted.
(and that is the main topic of this discussion)
What is it you want me to respond to specifically?
I am sure he will respond after he gets back from helping out at the local shelter and soup kitchen.
Or maybe he just wants everyone else to take care of the problem while he sits in the AC lcasting insults towards those with different views.
Like 108, fred and others, he may be best if ignored altogether.
Someone has the screenname, "Admitted Heathen?" That would be awesome!
Good luck using scripture to "buck up" right wing policies and actions.
You feed your children, I'll feed mine.
Over blown drama queens.
We were told the sequestration would cause old.peoe to die and babies to starve as well.
There are many innour country that are hungry. Many use snap. There are also far to many in our country who are lazy. Many use snap. For those of us that are paying...we want the lazy toget their butts to work. We want to be able to decide what charitable works we donate to and help. We want the government to stop stealing from the hard working to support the lazy lifestyle of many.
We do not begrudge the downtrodden and desperate. We do want to see those who need a hand up pushed back down. We do want to see those looking for a hand out over and over again cut off.
As for starving babies....wasn't this the board were we discussed snap being only like 4.60 a day? And when it was brouvht up that there was also wic and other things for families with children and infants it was largely ignored. Because if so...then I doubt cutting snap by five percent and keeping wic and the other safety nets for children inplace is going to cause anyone to starve.
As for the bibke thumping. Both sides need to climb off their horse. Jesus would be embarrassed by the blantant use of his holy words and works for nothing more than political gai ...which is what many here are using it for.
It would kick out 3.8 million people, reducing it down from 47 million in 2013 down to 43 million in 2014. In other words, it would merely bring it back to 2012 levels.
For some perspective...
In 2000, there were only 17 million people on the program.
In other words, the "draconian" cuts would still leave the program with 153% more than Clinton had on the program.
Oh, and in case you were wondering; when Clinton was running the show, the recipients on SNAP received $72.62 per person per month, versus the $133.85 they get now. So, not only are there 153% more people on the program now, they are also getting paid nearly double.
As a Christian, I choose to personally do what I can to help out my neighbors, friends, community, etc. I don't think that being a Christian implies that my government needs to do the same.
You would be indicating someone other than me, if you are indicating.
And it's important for you to make sure the government doesn't help the poor.
So tired of fake Christians, fake patriots, and fake Americans.
Ignorance really is bliss!
Though it is entertaining see a liberal imply we need to establish Christianity as the governments religion (Unless you think it is more efficient for a Christian to send money to Washington and through beauracratic channels vs directly to their church putting food in people's hands)...
I think it is safe to assume you would associate Christians with the W tax cuts. Which gave every single family with a kid $500 per child. You can't make up the stuff an emotional liberal will imply and say...
Despicable is a secular entity making people dependent on it rather than helping and building them up!
Is it possible that people in this country have more than enough opportunity to find some way to feed themselves, even despite a relatively small cut to these programs? Some in this thread don't even consider the possibility that this could be true, so much for open-mindedness, right? Even if you don't think it's possible, you have to realize that there are many people who do - and simply disagreeing with you on that doesn't make someone "despicable."