Tuesday, July 8, 2014

Really?


Carl Paladino's photo.

29 comments:

Duckys here said...

I suppose you prefer people using much more expensive emergency room service.

I don't know why conservatives don't think good.

Joe said...

Ducky: " suppose you prefer people using much more expensive emergency room service."

Nope. Think of this: If U.S. govt had spent all of the money they spent on passing, implementing, adjusting and building the web site on people who really needed and could not get insurance, there would be no one uncovered.

Lisa said...

The Emergency rooms will be more flooded because there will be a shortage of doctors

Shaw Kenawe said...

Politiface ruling:

"The chain email says that Obamacare provides insurance "to all non-U.S. residents, even if they are here illegally."

It’s actually citing a 2009 proposal that didn’t pass, but that doesn’t really matter.

The email’s wrong either way.

The Affordable Care Act does nothing to provide health insurance to anyone living in the United States illegally. It does offer some assistance to legal non-U.S. citizens, which by the way is different than a non-U.S. resident as the email claims. (A non-U.S. resident could be living in Mexico, France or even Mars).

We rate this claim Pants on Fire!"

Shaw Kenawe said...

NO, OBAMACARE DOES NOT COVER MILLIONS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
Tens of thousands can receive emergency care, but that's been in place since 1986



What would the people here who profess to be good Christians have this country do should a child of undocumented parents get sick or have a life threatening accident? Leave the child to die?

Jesus said whatever you do for the least of mine, you do for me.

He didn't qualify that statement and said nothing about citizenship required to give help to sick and injured children or even adults.

Do you follow your Savior's teachings or not? If you say the teachings of Christ do no apply in this case, please tell us why.

Thanks.



Lisa said...

There she goes ,What would Jesus do?

Joe said...


SK: Feeding poor people and tending to their needs is not Biblically mandated for government to do. Besides, in your class oriented mind, poor, sick or injured people are the "least of these." That, of course, is not remotely related to what Jesus was talking about.

Lisa: She doesn't understand that feeding poor people and tending to their needs is not Biblically mandated for government to do. Besides, in her class oriented mind, poor, sick or injured people are the "least of these." That, of course, is not remotely related to what Jesus was talking about.

Lisa said...

thanks Joe and who is it who are helping those people at the border? None other than the Catholic Church,voluntarily

Shaw Kenawe said...

Joe: "Feeding poor people and tending to their needs is not Biblically mandated for government to do."

WE are the government. Our taxes support what it does in our name. And it is you and your brethren who constantly remind the rest of us that this government was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. So if you believe that, the government must follow those principles and minister to the poor.


Joe: "Besides, in your class oriented mind, poor, sick or injured people are the "least of these."

No. Not in MY "class oriented mind." Those are Jesus' words, and you can bet your Bible that when he spoke of the "least of these," he wasn't speaking of the wealthy, healthy, property owners of his time, "the least of these" were actually the "sick, injured, and poor." If you have a problem with categorization, take it up with Jesus, not me.

Joe: "That, of course, is not remotely related to what Jesus was talking about."


That's EXACTLY what Jesus talked about all through the N.T.: Loving the Lord God with your whole mind and strength, and loving one's neighbor as oneself, according to Jesus, those are the two greatest commandments.

It's amusing to see self-identified followers of Christ try to parse His words in order to justify selfishness.

Joe said...

SK: "Loving the Lord God with your whole mind and strength, and loving one's neighbor as oneself."

That's true, but irrelevant to my point. The government SHOULD be US, but it isn't by a long shot. Loving one's neighbor as oneself does not relate to the subject at hand.

In Matthew 25:40 Jesus said,"In as much as you have done it to the least of these brothers of mine you did it to me."

That has absolutely nothing to do with children. Nothing.

Every Scripture MUST be interpreted in light of the word used, the verse it is in, the chapter it is in, the book it is in, the Testament it is in, the covenant it relates to and to the Bible as a whole. Any other interpretation gets it wrong.

The reference is in the context of separating the sheep from the goats...the saved and the unsaved. The saved are His brothers. They are the ones referred to.

After you get your theology degree in Bible, come and tell me all about it.

It's amusing to see self-identified experts, who know not of which they speak, lecture Christians on what they believe.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Neither I nor anyone else needs an "expert" to figure out what Jesus meant when he simply stated "In as much as you have done it to the least of these brothers of mine you did it to me."

People who are uncomfortable with what those words mean will do all they can to parse them and avoid the very simple, very righteous meaning.

It is a Christian's duty to do all she/he can to help "the least" of Jesus's brothers. Children are the most innocent and vulnerable of Jesus's brethren and are absolutely the very ones true Christians should rescue and care for regardless of citizenship.

An inconvenient truth.


Joe said...

SK: Christians should help those in need, children or otherwise.

To use Matthew 25:40 as referring to children is just plain ignorant. It cannot be so twisted. Not even by liberals.

Unknown said...

How about Matthew 19:14 - "But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven."

I guess if he were in Texas today he would say "Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me, as long as they have filled out the proper paperwork, payed the applicable fees and waited their turn in line. Otherwise, let them go back from whence they came where they shall be starved, raped, robbed and killed."

Xavier Onassis said...

Yeah, that ^ was me.

Shaw Kenawe said...

JOE: "To use Matthew 25:40 as referring to children is just plain ignorant. It cannot be so twisted. Not even by liberals."

"In as much as you have done it to the least of these brothers of mine you did it to me."

Young children have no power. They cannot defend themselves, have no means to support, themselves, to feed themselves, to clothe themselves and are suffer under the depravations of gangbangers, criminals, and exploiters of all kinds. If that doesn't describe "the least" of human kind, then that phrase has no meaning.

Joe, you're parsing what Jesus told his followers. It's plain and simple and humane. When not just adults, but vulnerable, helpless children need to run away to avoid being killed or maimed because of lawlessness in their countries by murderous thugs, what would you have this Judeo-Christian country do? Send them back to their deaths?

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - Do you believe this country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles?

Can you describe any circumstances under which Jesus would instruct his followers to let a child go hungry? To allow a child to be subjected to violence? To allow a child to be sexually assaulted (other than within the Catholic church)?

You are the biblical scholar. Under what circumstances would Jesus turn a suffering child away because of her legal status with a government of man?

Joe said...

SK: "...you're parsing what Jesus told his followers."

Actually, I'm not...you are trying to use a quote to say what it does not say. I don't disagree that all children should be cared for. But NOT by the government.

XO: "Can you describe any circumstances under which Jesus would instruct his followers to let a child go hungry?"

No. Every child should be cared for, according to the Bible. But NOT by the government.

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - What possible difference does it make whether it is the government or the church or an individual or a group of individuals?

You've admitted that the children need to be cared for. What does it matter who is doing the caring?

Do you think the hungry child is going to pull away and ask "This isn't government food, is it? What about that bed? Is that a government bed? I wouldn't want to sleep in a government bed."

You are OK with the government rounding these kids up and sending them back to Central America because their papers aren't in order, but you are against the government showing them any compassion.

You are OK with the government being the bad guy, you just don't want to see the government being the good guy.

Joe said...

XO: "You've admitted that the children need to be cared for."

Guilty as charged.

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - I'll ask again. What possible difference does it make who provides the care for the hungry, the needy, the suffering?

Joe said...

XO: " What possible difference does it make...?

Are you related to Hillary?

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - Nope. Just trying to get an answer to a question.

Joe said...

XO: Everything the government does is heartless, arbitrary and capricious. There is no way that the government can care for children long term in any meaningful (key word: meaningful) way.

It makes a HUGE difference.

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - "Everything the government does is heartless, arbitrary and capricious".

Nonsense.

Go to the border and ask any of the refuugees from Central America if they think our government is being "heartless, arbiitrary and capricious" when we provided food to eat, clean water to drink, basic hygeine facilities and a safe place to sleep.

Also, not to put to fine a point on it, but you may be familiar with a phrase that goes "We The People"?

The Government is US! You and me. We are the government, by the people, for the people, through our elected officials. What they do, they do on our behalf with our blessings.

Right now, the government agencies who are providing food and shelter to the refugees are doing a far better job of representing the average American and living our American Values than the idiototic, Tea Party chuckleheads who are blocking buses at the border and yelling "GO BACK TO MEXICO!" at people from Central America.

Joe said...

XO: "The Government is US! You and me. We are the government, by the people, for the people, through our elected officials."

Used to be. No more.

Joe said...

Unknown: "How about Matthew 19:14 - "But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven."

Aha! You got the right one.

"...as long as they have filled out the proper paperwork, payed the applicable fees and waited their turn in line."

Nope. He would turn to His followers and tell them to care for the children.

Trust me. The government does NOT follow Jesus. They used to, but no more.

Joe said...

Unknown: Having said that, there is absolutely nothing in the Bible that would suggest or require a nation to allow children from another nation to enter it, bringing diseases, economic hardship and future Democrat votes with them.

How many of them will your adopt?

Dave Miller said...

Joe, you said the government used to follow Jesus... can you tell me when that was?

Joe said...

DM: "Joe, you said the government used to follow Jesus... can you tell me when that was?"

The country was deliberately founded on Judeo/Christian principles found in Scripture. Although the framers did not "follow Christ" perfectly, they at least attempted to emulate His basic principles.

Now, the government does everything in its power to see to it that if it is connected to Christ it is not implemented.

If you think taking care of illegal immigrants, children and/or adults, is the government following Christian principles, you are mistaken. It is government seeking votes, nothing more.