Centinel
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2011
- Messages
- 2,984
- Reaction score
- 1,366
- Location
- Penn's Woods
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I think the difference is that when one votes, one is not voting on one's own behavior. One votes in order to coerce others. Thus one is voting to take away another's freedom, after which his aid to the poor is not voluntary, but occurs with tax money extracted from him against his will. That's the big difference I see.I have a question on this subject. A lot of conservatives will hear the "go out and feed the poor" commands from Jesus and talk about it being voluntary, as opposed to done with government. What is the moral difference between writing a check yourself and voting in favor of instituting a program to deal with the problem? You're still making the choice to make it happen. Your voluntariness is tested at the ballot and the voting booth. The point of the command wasn't ensuring that you have the choice whether to help or not. It's telling you to get off your butt and do it. So, isn't this whole voluntariness discussion about fighting for the right not to help people? Do what Jesus would have done. Vote to help the poor, even at some expense to yourself.