Not at all. I think you are taking my argument way too far (why am I not surprised...). I am merely saying that a law should not prevent us from aiding a person in desperate need. This country does NOT have "scarce resources". This nation has enough resources to feed the entire world by itself... The problem is vastly unequal distribution. Consider how the middle class in this country is shrinking. I do not hold any law as sacred if it interferes with my duty as a Christian. Nor do I rationalize that because a man is an illegal alien, I shouldn't help him. That is exactly that attitude Jesus condemns in the story of the Good Samaritan. My loyalty is to God and His Laws, not the man-made laws of this Country. If they coincide, I obey. If not, then I follow Christ. And you?
Plus, illegals don't have the expenses that other poor Americans have because social services are provided for free (stolen).
Stolen? They are freely given. There are numerous charities and governmental programs that give to people in need. They don't "steal" social services from anyone. It doesn't make a difference to charities WHO comes to them, as long as they are in need. If you feel resources are too few, that is because we live in a country that has little care for the community.
American corporations give away billions of dollars to worthy causes every year and that is bad BECAUSE ...? This is free market capitalism, and you don't think this is compatible with Christianity?
You have an uncanny way of putting words into other people's mouths. Slow down! I never said that companies giving money to charities is bad... I am saying that they are not in the business of giving money to the poor. Isn't it rather obvious that at the corporate level, there is a huge unequal distribution of wealth? I am sure that the CEO of a faltering company is really worth that 20 million dollar golden parachute...As to "giving away billions", perhaps you should read a company's financial report someday and see how much IS charitable contributions...it is minute.
We were talking about your assertion that man has enough common sense to decide which laws to obey and which to ignore. I pointed out that under your theology, most people have little or no common sense (as you said because they do not have faith)...
I don't think one must have faith to have common sense. Even before my conversion, I had enough "sense" to know that murdering an unborn infant was morally wrong, that sending Jews to prison for being Jews was wrong, and so forth. The Bible clearly tells us that God has written a Law unto people's hearts - even on pagans. Thus, it isn't absolutely necessary to be a Christian to have common sense on the morality of a law, as you are saying.
No, when I said "hurt" I meant physically or financially. Americans have the right to protest, even if it hurts someone else's feelings
As long as it has nothing to do with feeding a starving illegal alien, because then I would be helping a person steal from a poor American...
You are defending harboring illegals
I am? I said I understand the good Cardinal's view, but I also said I didn't condone it. My concern is against laws that charge me with a misdemeanor for helping someone who is hungry or thirsty. What would Jesus do? Would he obey such a law?
Feeding is fine, harboring or obstructing justice is criminal.
By feeding and giving drink, apparently, I am aiding and abetting a "crinimal".
Your "Law of Love" protects some small percentage of illegals who WILL go on to murder and otherwise hurt Americans. ALL of those you protect take food off the table from all Americans. Where does God teach us to individually TAKE from our neighbor to help the poor?
That is terrible rationalization. Because "15%" of illegals are criminals, that excuses you from not doing ANYTHING to help a neighbor (as defined by Christ, not the American government) in need? Potentially, ANYONE who holds out a hand is a criminal (as defined by God's Law) in this country, so your argument is worthless and an poor attempt to justify yourself.
To be perfectly and brutally honest, I am beginning to question your idea of comfortable Christianity. Is this the result of your self-proclaimed salvation? Is this your faith in action?
ALL of those you protect take food off the table from all Americans. Where does God teach us to individually TAKE from our neighbor to help the poor?
It teaches us to take food off OUR table and give to the poor. Or were you not aware of that teaching, either?
First of all, the German government is different because it COMPELLED the murder of innocents. For comparative purposes, this would be like Daniel's situation, a compulsion to disobey God. In this case American law doesn't do that, it offers to allow people to break God's law. Nobody requires our women to get abortions. Big difference.
I think you need to read up on the rise of the Third Reich, because you don't know what you are talking about. The attitude towards the Jews preceded the rise of the Nazi Party and Adolph Hitler utilized this. Jews were placed in concentration camps BEFORE World War 2. They were treated as second class citizens by the general population BEFORE World War 2. And we are talking about a first-world Christian nation! Considering your attitude towards the sacredness of law and illegal aliens as second class folk, I see similarities between your excuses and the German people's excuses for not helping a neighbor in need. "It's the law. I can't help a person hungry. He is an (illegal/Jew)"... This is NOT the Christianity of the Bible. "There is no Greek or Jew, man or woman, slave or freeman",... illegal alien or legal citizen...
I seriously doubt that Christ would cast out an illegal alien, since He had no problems going to ALL members of society, Samaritans, pagans, Pharisees, tax collectors, etc...
According to you, God approves of illegals having a better quality of life, AND that is worth the trade of some Americans dying (a statistical certainty since the clergy cannot possibly promise that none of their fugitives will murder in the future).
When did I say I favor harboring illegals, especially who were criminals? And of course, your logic is quite silly, because it leads to the rationalization that one should not give to ANY charity, because some of that money might find its way into the hands of an AMERICAN criminal... That is why the Bible doesn't tell us to judge a person's exterior and we are to give freely, regardless if the person is a sinner or a taxcollector.
Now, using this as a base, do you approve of people shooting abortion doctors as a protest?
I already told you "no". It is never "OK" to commit a crime against the Ten Commandments, nor does the end justify the means. The rest of your argument depends on a "yes", so I won't bother with it.
I must admit, your "comfortable Christianity" is cause for concern. Is this a common thing in Protestantism? Are there Protestants who are willing to obey God before man?
Regards
The problem is that your idea of "aiding" hurts other people, specifically law abiding Americans. You still haven't explained the scriptural basis for hurting the disfavored (Americans) in order to help the favored (illegals).
This country does NOT have "scarce resources". This nation has enough resources to feed the entire world by itself...
ALL resources are scarce. Any resource that is not scarce would be valueless, and thus free. Since some food is relatively cheap, that only means it is less scarce than other things, but since it still has value it is scarce. "Scarcity" is a basic concept in Economics.
I do not hold any law as sacred if it interferes with my duty as a Christian. Nor do I rationalize that because a man is an illegal alien, I shouldn't help him.
How is it your Christian duty to support those who are taking away from me and my neighbors to give to a favored people? You keep using this cloak of "help" as if it doesn't hurt anyone else. In this case, it does. Dollars are a scarce resource.
My loyalty is to God and His Laws, not the man-made laws of this Country. If they coincide, I obey. If not, then I follow Christ. And you?
Since you favor illegal immigration and the harboring of them by clergy, you obviously see a conflict between God's law and man's law of a sovereign border. You have yet to explain to me how God supports your position. You are free to go to Mexico and help all the poor people you want. You are free to send all the money you want down to Mexico for the same reason. You (or your clergy) are not free to harbor criminals and hurt Americans because you have a pet project. The Samaritan story does not apply at all to what we are discussing.
[Social services are] stolen? They are freely given. There are numerous charities and governmental programs that give to people in need. They don't "steal" social services from anyone. It doesn't make a difference to charities WHO comes to them, as long as they are in need. If you feel resources are too few, that is because we live in a country that has little care for the community.
As Harley indicated earlier, you are advocating communism. It has been tried before. It doesn't work. Interestingly, when the Puritans first came over they tried communism for a brief time. When they discovered that no one had any incentive to work, and the society was under-producing, they dropped it.
But getting back to your comment, yes, social services are being stolen by the illegals. I'm not talking about free charity, I'm talking about stolen from the taxpayers. Are you not aware that hospital emergency rooms are being closed all the time in your part of the country because no one is paying? Those charities are not paying, the illegals are not paying, and there isn't enough money in state budgets to pay. Now more and more Americans will not get the health care they need SOLELY because of illegals.
You have an uncanny way of putting words into other people's mouths. Slow down! I never said that companies giving money to charities is bad... I am saying that they are not in the business of giving money to the poor.
Well then why are you mentioning it? I am presuming you are trying to make a point of some sort. :) I "thought" you were trying to say that they don't give enough for your liking and I was saying that they give billions.
Isn't it rather obvious that at the corporate level, there is a huge unequal distribution of wealth?
Yes, do you think it should be equal? That is communism. I am not calling you a "Communist" with all the associated negative connotations. :) I am just saying that your words happen to coincide with a communist style of government (minus the violence).
FK: "No, when I said "hurt" I meant physically or financially. Americans have the right to protest, even if it hurts someone else's feelings."
As long as it has nothing to do with feeding a starving illegal alien, because then I would be helping a person steal from a poor American...
No, when you buy food yourself and give it away, you aren't hurting Americans. If anything, you are helping them. Every American's wage that was derived from the preparation of that food for sale was supported by your purchase. Buying food to give to the poor is good for America. It is when one reaches onto the plate of his neighbor and takes away food, like the Cardinal is doing, to give to the poor, that it becomes wrong.
I said I understand the good Cardinal's view, but I also said I didn't condone it. My concern is against laws that charge me with a misdemeanor for helping someone who is hungry or thirsty. What would Jesus do? Would he obey such a law?
You don't condone it??? THIS is what we have been talking about. :) Alright, without me putting words into your mouth, WHY do you not condone what the Cardinal is doing?
In addition, I really do not think you should be at all concerned about that California law. The FIRST time any agency attempts to enforce it will make national headlines. If some idiot prosecutor actually tries it, it will be his funeral. :) If anyone gets in trouble, it will not be for feeding a hungry person, it will be for the other things he does to help an illegal evade the authorities. You and I and Harley and Jesus would all give food to a starving person right in front of us, regardless of the California law.
To be perfectly and brutally honest, I am beginning to question your idea of comfortable Christianity. Is this the result of your self-proclaimed salvation? Is this your faith in action?
I don't know what comfortable Christianity is, so I don't know my idea about it either. :) I do not think Christianity is playing Robin Hood and individually taking from some to give to others, such as what the Cardinal is doing.
It teaches us to take food off OUR table and give to the poor. Or were you not aware of that teaching, either?
I said that was good in my first post on this subject. We are talking about what the Cardinal, and others, are doing. The Cardinal is not only taking food from his own table, but also from all other Americans. You have been defending him, and I disagree. I have used some form of the word "harbor" 100 times, and been clear in what I'm talking about. This is not about giving a glass of water.
I seriously doubt that Christ would cast out an illegal alien, since He had no problems going to ALL members of society, Samaritans, pagans, Pharisees, tax collectors, etc...
That is debatable, as Christ would have the advantage of knowing the person's heart. He certainly would/did send away false seekers. I am sure that He would not support the Robin Hood justice that the Cardinal is practicing.
When did I say I favor harboring illegals, especially who were criminals?
The Cardinal favors harboring any illegal without having any idea if they are criminals, so some must be. You have been defending him throughout this conversation so I assumed you had like views. In this post you are singing a different tune.