• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Healthcare question for Christians

WWJD?

  • Total voters
    34
disneydude said:
He talked a lot more about caring for the sick and led more of example doing such than he even came close to talking about abortion.
You might want to read up on his life sometime.
Click to expand...
Claiming that Jesus had a position on either abortion or state-sponsored healthcare is a circumstantial argument at best.

And kindly take your condescending attitude towards my Biblical knowledge somewhere else. Thanks.
 
creation said:
Thank you. An interesting point.

However, while its true Jesus did not want to be King, or create a kingdom on earth. However, it would be wrong to think that Jesus had little to do with politics. His message was to applied to all of life, which has considerable political ramifications.
Click to expand...

His message had nothing to do with politics or trying to politicizes his life. His message was about salvation and how to live your personal life.

So how you get "political ramifications" from loving God above all things and love others as you love yourself is beyond me.

creation said:
Moreover he example of his life is itself a call to involvement in the social arena. For charity? Certainly. For more than just charity? Certainly, because Jesus was concerned with righetousness, which in Hebrew culture was not just about one's own relationship with God, but between people - all people. His pronounced blessing on those who hunger and thirst to see righteousness dominate the affairs of mankind is a perfect example of his concern for righteousness, not just in the here after but today and now.
Click to expand...

Still has nothing to do with a political agenda or UHC, nothing at all.


creation said:
Consider Jesus' parable of the Good Samaritan, it not only addresses culture race and creed but indicts religious leaders who are unwilling to anything about these problems - thus the answer to the OP is made clear.
Click to expand...

This little tidbit says it Better than I could...

"Thus cast appropriately, the parable regains its message to modern listeners: namely, that an individual of a social group they disapprove of can exhibit moral behaviour that is superior to individuals of the groups they approve; it also means that not sharing the same faith is no excuse to behave poorly, as there is a universal moral law. Many Christians have used it as an example of Christianity's opposition to racial, ethnic and sectarian prejudice."

"On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to say to Jesus. "Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?". "What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?" asked Jesus. The man answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind' and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'" "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."

In the end the whole parable was nothing but showing that all men are your neighbor. Again nothing to do with UHC or anything political. :roll:
 
Harshaw said:
There is nothing political about the Good Samaritan story.

You know, it's interesting . . . liberals throw a hissy-fit whenever they think conservatives are claiming God for their side. But they're clamped on pretty tight here.
Click to expand...

Oh I quite disagree, its a very political parable. Moreover, as Martin Luther King Jnr said ;

"On the one hand, we are called to play the Good Samaritan on life's roadside, but that will be only an initial act. One day we must come to see that the whole Jericho Road must be transformed so that men and women will not be constantly beaten and robbed as they make their journey on life's highway. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring."

True compassion is more than charity, which is what Jesus's life exemplifies.

Re conservatives & liberals, as said liberals draw their morals from their historical and religious background, i.e. their morality is christ inspired, not their organisational outlook since after all Christ's only organisational outlook was communist as we can see from how the disciples conducted themselves.
 
Blackdog said:
His message had nothing to do with politics or trying to politicizes his life. His message was about salvation and how to live your personal life.

So how you get "political ramifications" from loving God above all things and love others as you love yourself is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Simple! From the simple fact that the personal is political.


Still has nothing to do with a political agenda or UHC, nothing at all.
Click to expand...

Righteousness, between men, not just between man and God, is truly political.



This little tidbit says it Better than I could...

"Thus cast appropriately, the parable regains its message to modern listeners: namely, that an individual of a social group they disapprove of can exhibit moral behaviour that is superior to individuals of the groups they approve; it also means that not sharing the same faith is no excuse to behave poorly, as there is a universal moral law. Many Christians have used it as an example of Christianity's opposition to racial, ethnic and sectarian prejudice."

"On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to say to Jesus. "Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?". "What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?" asked Jesus. The man answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind' and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'" "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."

In the end the whole parable was nothing but showing that all men are your neighbor. Again nothing to do with UHC or anything political. :roll:
Click to expand...

Its a very convenient get out to say that all he wanted to communicate was love your neighbour. However, Jesus did more than simply preach neighbourliness, he referred to King Herod as a Fox, he chases the money changers from the Temple and spoke out against the religious leaders of his day for their exclusions, their lack of care for the downtrodden - all intensely political acts.

Moreover the disciples of Jesus, the ones who tell his story, they themselves did not refrain from speaking against the evils of their day. When Jesus said render unto Ceasar etc. they did not take it as a commandment to leave aside politics but to speak out as importantly to be courageous enough not to worship Ceasar as God, but only God himself.
 
creation said:
Oh I quite disagree, its a very political parable. Moreover, as Martin Luther King Jnr said ;

"On the one hand, we are called to play the Good Samaritan on life's roadside, but that will be only an initial act. One day we must come to see that the whole Jericho Road must be transformed so that men and women will not be constantly beaten and robbed as they make their journey on life's highway. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring."

True compassion is more than charity, which is what Jesus's life exemplifies.

Re conservatives & liberals, as said liberals draw their morals from their historical and religious background, i.e. their morality is christ inspired, not their organisational outlook since after all Christ's only organisational outlook was communist as we can see from how the disciples conducted themselves.
Click to expand...

Good grief. Martin Luther King, Jr., was not Jesus.
 
Harshaw said:
Good grief. Martin Luther King, Jr., was not Jesus.
Click to expand...

I dont recall saying he was. I was just illustrating my point using an authoritative speaker on the subject.

Thanks for your contribution anyway. :)
 
creation said:
Simple! From the simple fact that the personal is political.
Click to expand...

Not in this case, although it can be.

creation said:
Righteousness, between men, not just between man and God, is truly political.
Click to expand...

It is unfortunate there is none righteous, no not one.

Seriously your grasping at straws here and basically claiming everything is political.

creation said:
Its a very convenient get out to say that all he wanted to communicate was love your neighbour. However, Jesus did more than simply preach neighbourliness, he referred to King Herod as a Fox, he chases the money changers from the Temple and spoke out against the religious leaders of his day for their exclusions, their lack of care for the downtrodden - all intensely political acts.
Click to expand...

No not political. Simple acts of righteousness are not necessarily political actions. Then again you have already shown you think everything is political or has political ramifications.

creation said:
Moreover the disciples of Jesus, the ones who tell his story, they themselves did not refrain from speaking against the evils of their day. When Jesus said render unto Ceasar etc. they did not take it as a commandment to leave aside politics but to speak out as importantly to be courageous enough not to worship Ceasar as God, but only God himself.
Click to expand...

Then why didn't they speak out against slavery? That was in all honesty the greatest evil of the day?

The Disciples also never went against Roman law, ever. You can say they did but it does not make it true. They did however get killed over what they believed. I guess that makes them political as well? :doh
 
Last edited:
disneydude said:
There is no doubt in my mind that if Jesus were alive today that he would be strongly advocating for Universal health care.
Click to expand...
The arguments against this position are overwhelming.
 
disneydude said:
Its not about taking up a political cause...its about doing the right thing involving your fellow mankind.
Click to expand...
There's no support for the idea that He would have His followers force others to adhere to His teachings.
Thus, your argument fails
 
creation said:
Re conservatives & liberals, as said liberals draw their morals from their historical and religious background, i.e. their morality is christ inspired...
Click to expand...
Why then is it that liberals are the first to scream when a conservative even hints that their position on a political issue might be inspired by their Crhistian faith?
 
Last edited:
creation said:
I dont recall saying he was. I was just illustrating my point using an authoritative speaker on the subject.

Thanks for your contribution anyway. :)
Click to expand...

Then it's a false Appeal to Authority, which is a fallacy. By his own words, he's going outside Scripture and adding his own spin to it.
 
creation said:
Oh I quite disagree, its a very political parable. Moreover, as Martin Luther King Jnr said ;

"On the one hand, we are called to play the Good Samaritan on life's roadside, but that will be only an initial act. One day we must come to see that the whole Jericho Road must be transformed so that men and women will not be constantly beaten and robbed as they make their journey on life's highway. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring."

True compassion is more than charity, which is what Jesus's life exemplifies.
Click to expand...
It STILL has nothing to do with the followers Christ forcing the tenets of His teaching onto others.
 
Blackdog said:
Then why didn't they speak out against slavery? That was in all honesty the greatest evil of the day?
Click to expand...

Nor the unjustly imprisoned, though you are supposed to personally comfort them.
 
Harshaw said:
Nor the unjustly imprisoned, though you are supposed to personally comfort them.
Click to expand...

It is hard to believe people try to make Jesus left or right a political issue.

It is like watching the Pharisees all over again.

Not that I was there to see it, lol.
 
Last edited:
disneydude said:
He talked a lot more about caring for the sick and led more of example doing such....
Click to expand...
Yes... all examples of which involved people doing so out of their own free will, and none of which involved forcing others to adhere to His teachings.
 
Blackdog said:
Not in this case, although it can be.
Click to expand...

No this case too, you may well be for some other type of healthcare, but if you are against helping all of your fellow men then you had best be for some other way of making sure all men are given support or you'll be falling foul of christ.
There is no way out of one's responsibilities to man and in the end liberals are unconcerned about charity or public options, as long as one can guarantee cover for everyone.

It is unfortunate there is none righteous, no not one.

Seriously your grasping at straws here and basically claiming everything is political.
Click to expand...

Its irrelevant that none are righteous, for its the striving that counts. Grasping at straws no. I draw on a long tradition.



No not political. Simple acts of righteousness are not necessarily political actions. Then again you have already shown you think everything is political or has political ramifications.
Click to expand...

Every kind act reflects the kindness that governs daily life. Every political actor is a human actor, from the highest to the lowest. Every law will affect you at some point in your life as our personal lives are rules by political forces and vice versa, especially these days. The personal has always been a political phenomenon right back to when we moved in nomadic tribes. The separation is cute, convenient, but in the end in vain.



Then why didn't they speak out against slavery? That was in all honesty the greatest evil of the day?
Click to expand...

Simply because it wasnt the great evil of the day. Slavery occurred for many reasons, including the restitution of debt.

The Disciples also never went against Roman law, ever. You can say they did but it does not make it true. They did however get killed over what they believed. I guess that makes them political as well? :doh
Click to expand...

Why on earth not?
 
Harshaw said:
Then it's a false Appeal to Authority, which is a fallacy. By his own words, he's going outside Scripture and adding his own spin to it.
Click to expand...

Ill take him as a fair authority on Christianity as many others would. He would no doubt explain that rather than adding his own spin he is revealing the meaning.
 
Goobieman said:
Why then is it that liberals are the first to scream when a conservative even hints that their position on a political issue might be inspired by their Crhistian faith?
Click to expand...

Because conservative pronouncements are so much less refined, so much more strident that the Liberal half of America fears the conservative interpretation will be forced and before long more than simply the morality of christianity, christ will be forced down everyone's throats.
 
creation said:
Because conservative pronouncements are so much less refined so much more strident that the Liberal half of America fears the conservative interpretation will be forced and before long more than simply the morality of christianity, christ will be forced down everyone's throats.
Click to expand...
If you believe that it is OK for force your version of Christian morality onto others, you must then agree that it is OK for others to do the same.

Else, you're just a hypocritical partisan bigot.
 
Goobieman said:
If you believe that it is OK for force your version of Christian morality onto others, you must then agree that it is OK for others to do the same.

Else, you're just a hypocritical partisan bigot.
Click to expand...

All our law already stems from this tradition. Most liberals agree with the law.
 
disneydude said:
This is a question for Christians:

WWJD?

Would Jesus support a UHC plan or would he feel that healthcare should be portioned out based on an individuals ability to pay?
Click to expand...

Jesus did not advocate socialism. There is a difference between charity and the government stealing your money to give to someone else. Jesus would most likely advocate that doctors out of their own free will heal the sick and injured for free or at least free for those who can not afford medical care. So this notion that Jesus is a socialist is absurd.
 
creation said:
All our law already stems from this tradition. Most liberals agree with the law.
Click to expand...
Aside form the fact that this is wrong, it doesn't address what I said.

If you believe that it is OK for force your version of Christian morality onto others, you must then agree that it is OK for others to do the same.

And so, when someone argues that we should do something you don't like because of their version of Christian morality -- like, say, ban abortion and/or same-sex marriages -- you do not have any standing to disagree.

Else, you're just a hypocritical partisan bigot.
 
jamesrage said:
Jesus did not advocate socialism. There is a difference between charity and the government stealing your money to give to someone else. Jesus would most likely advocate that doctors out of their own free will heal the sick and injured for free or at least free for those who can not afford medical care. So this notion that Jesus is a socialist is absurd.
Click to expand...

Just because you want to throw the label "socialism" on UHC doesn't make it so. Your rationale would make Education, Public works (roads, bridges, highways), Police/Fire services, etc....all socialist programs.

Then again....you probably honestly view them as such, correct?
 
creation said:
Ill take him as a fair authority on Christianity as many others would. He would no doubt explain that rather than adding his own spin he is revealing the meaning.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that he would say that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom