Husbands die. Even kind, polite, handsome, sexy, devout, devoted, beautiful, hard-working, and financially savvy husbands die. No amount of love or belief in G-d will keep the heartache of a dead husband and father from your door. Your baby could be 2 days, 2 weeks, or not quite 2 years old and have her Tate die.
You only know you are looking at the world through a fog once it lifts.
Post by penguingrrl on Apr 29, 2016 6:27:54 GMT -5
I can't imagine having such a me versus the rest of the world mindset. If we all build each other up we all succeed. And saying that I recover quickly from childbirth so nobody should be entitled to medical leave is bullshit. I recovered very quickly too, but I have plenty of loved ones who did not. and all parents should have the right to time to bond with their child, regardless of the parents gender.
Husbands die. Even kind, polite, handsome, sexy, devout, devoted, beautiful, hard-working, and financially savvy husbands die. No amount of love or belief in G-d will keep the heartache of a dead husband and father from your door. Your baby could be 2 days, 2 weeks, or not quite 2 years old and have her Tate die.
You only know you are looking at the world through a fog once it lifts.
Here's my main issue with AW's assertions (I elect to choose just one).
"Women need to be kind to themselves." Which only works in your specific situation. For a woman who, let's say, loses her husband but still must support her newborn, other children, and herself financially, she can want to be as kind to herself as possible. But if her employer won't accommodate enough time to physically recover from childbirth, what do you propose then?
Seriously, for someone so bent on touting a WWJD outlook, you're treating your fellow mothers pretty shitty. How do you think Jesus sees your outlook that "my taxes shouldn't be used to make others' hardships a bit easier?" Your whole myopic focus on your world and your world alone is hardly conducive to sharing Jesus' teachings of loving one another.
I'll wait for your reply.
Well, I wouldn't want you waiting. Lol
See, here's the difference between people like you/others in this thread and people like me. You all want to replace God's Kingdom with man's government, whereas I believe government/taxes are a poor substitute for the Kingdom of God. Whereas y'all feel people should be forced to give what a government mandates as merciful and loving, I feel that people should give freely as God compels them to within the system (the Church with a capital C) that God created. According to people like you, one can only be kind and loving if they support taxation. I think community is the answer.
But whatever, I am just a hick, so what do I know. I'm going to go back to my farm now and snuggle my newborn, then get in some good homeschool lessons for my children about what the Bible says about the government's role to prepare them for the world. Feel sorry for my husband that works so hard because he prefers having me here teaching them that.
AW, what about non-Christians? Should the Church care for them as well, or are they just out of luck?
I believe we should all care for anyone in need of help whose path we cross. But all help should be rooted within the Church and be given of free will.
AW, what about non-Christians? Should the Church care for them as well, or are they just out of luck?
I believe we should all care for anyone in need of help whose path we cross. But all help should be rooted within the Church and be given of free will.
But you still haven't answered my question about how people who don't have a church would receive help, or people whose church can't afford to help them, or people whose church says "sorry, you're a single mother/work in a profession we don't approve of/have made poor choices therefore we won't help you" - what happens to those people?
Do you see why people like us think it makes more sense to have the government - which, really, is *us* as a nation - provide these services so that every citizen is eligible and able to access them?
Here's my main issue with AW's assertions (I elect to choose just one).
"Women need to be kind to themselves." Which only works in your specific situation. For a woman who, let's say, loses her husband but still must support her newborn, other children, and herself financially, she can want to be as kind to herself as possible. But if her employer won't accommodate enough time to physically recover from childbirth, what do you propose then?
Seriously, for someone so bent on touting a WWJD outlook, you're treating your fellow mothers pretty shitty. How do you think Jesus sees your outlook that "my taxes shouldn't be used to make others' hardships a bit easier?" Your whole myopic focus on your world and your world alone is hardly conducive to sharing Jesus' teachings of loving one another.
I'll wait for your reply.
Well, I wouldn't want you waiting. Lol
See, here's the difference between people like you/others in this thread and people like me. You all want to replace God's Kingdom with man's government, whereas I believe government/taxes are a poor substitute for the Kingdom of God. Whereas y'all feel people should be forced to give what a government mandates as merciful and loving, I feel that people should give freely as God compels them to within the system (the Church with a capital C) that God created. According to people like you, one can only be kind and loving if they support taxation. I think community is the answer.
Lol, ok. See, AW, your response above comes from you sweeping into threads every so often to evangelize about your specific faith choices. If you cared at all about not being tone deaf and missing virtually ALL context, you'd know your response is directed to a lifelong church-going Libertarian Lutheran who prefers smaller government.
What I'm getting at is that you slip into threads for infrequent opportunities to... do what, exactly? Remind us of your better lifestyle? Admonish us for ours? Be the board's representation of Jesus?
I assume you pray for others who have hardship, right? If so, great. I think prayer has power. But have you considered that God may answer those prayers by allowing government to use tax dollars to help those in need?
AW, what about non-Christians? Should the Church care for them as well, or are they just out of luck?
I believe we should all care for anyone in need of help whose path we cross. But all help should be rooted within the Church and be given of free will.
So people who help each other without knowingly getting involved in church or having a relationship with God... how do you feel about that?
AW, what about non-Christians? Should the Church care for them as well, or are they just out of luck?
I believe we should all care for anyone in need of help whose path we cross. But all help should be rooted within the Church and be given of free will.
What about my friend who went to 5 different churches including the church she and her husband attend weekly and could find no one to help? it would be wonderful if the Church acted as the social safety net for all people but the reality is it doesn't and there are too many people being left to suffer because of it.
The church I used to attend had an absolute fit because some children from down the street came in to eat on Wednesday nights without paying. Never mind that these kids were in a very impoverished neighborhood and there was some chance that the church meal was the best dinner they got all week. The church didn't care about that. They cared about OMG THEY ARE EATING FOR FREE! GET THEM OUT.
In fact, these kids (black kids) weren't even wanted in Sunday services. My DH actually heard members of that congregation say that the people around that church aren't what they want in membership.
There's a reason this is our old church.
So, don't preach about churches wanting to help those that need it. Many churches are cliquey country clubs with members that care only about themselves and what the church can do for them. Not what the church can do for the community.
Post by CheeringCharm on Apr 29, 2016 9:07:09 GMT -5
I don't understand why religious people can't see it as both: God's kingdom compelling you to give what you can to strangers AND a national community that creates a strong social safety net through taxation. Being charitably minded, as they stay they are, you'd think they'd be on board for both.
Is it the national part? Would they be cool if it was more local and funded strictly at the state level?
I'm not trying to be snarky, I'm really curious about this.
I don't understand why religious people can't see it as both: God's kingdom compelling you to give what you can to strangers AND a national community that creates a strong social safety net through taxation. Being charitably minded, as they stay they are, you'd think they'd be on board for both.
Is it the national part? Would they be cool if it was more local and funded strictly at the state level?
I'm not trying to be snarky, I'm really curious about this.
Trust me, many of us do see it that way.
Here's the problem: the human factor enters in where we (generally) pray for God's will but then we assume or predict how that will play out. We forget we don't see the big picture and divine intervention may be happening in ways that go against our political or personal views.
I don't understand why religious people can't see it as both: God's kingdom compelling you to give what you can to strangers AND a national community that creates a strong social safety net through taxation. Being charitably minded, as they stay they are, you'd think they'd be on board for both.
Is it the national part? Would they be cool if it was more local and funded strictly at the state level?
I'm not trying to be snarky, I'm really curious about this.
I do. Also, my church has like four paid staff members. Our priest is great at nurturing spiritual development and helping people through spiritually and emotionally difficult times. Our music director is great at, well, directing music. Our administrator is great at communicating with others in the parish, supporting the priest and the music director, and publishing the newsletter. And our bookkeeper is good at making sure our bills get paid on time. The vast majority of our programming is run by volunteers, including many women who have full-time jobs.
But we don't have an expert in child nutrition, public health, education, or any other number of areas of public concern on staff. We don't have people who are trained to most effectively reach vulnerable populations. But the city, county, state, and federal governments do.
Post by somersault72 on Apr 29, 2016 9:32:56 GMT -5
There's so much here to piss me off, but what is making my blood pressure rise the most is being told (albeit by AW) that my 14 hour labor during which I pushed for 3 hours and had a forceps delivery is not a major medical event. My recovery was awful. It was a good 5 weeks before I wasn't in agony. But thank you for telling me so much about myself.
I don't understand why religious people can't see it as both: God's kingdom compelling you to give what you can to strangers AND a national community that creates a strong social safety net through taxation. Being charitably minded, as they stay they are, you'd think they'd be on board for both.
Is it the national part? Would they be cool if it was more local and funded strictly at the state level?
I'm not trying to be snarky, I'm really curious about this.
I do. Also, my church has like four paid staff members. Our priest is great at nurturing spiritual development and helping people through spiritually and emotionally difficult times. Our music director is great at, well, directing music. Our administrator is great at communicating with others in the parish, supporting the priest and the music director, and publishing the newsletter. And our bookkeeper is good at making sure our bills get paid on time. The vast majority of our programming is run by volunteers, including many women who have full-time jobs.
But we don't have an expert in child nutrition, public health, education, or any other number of areas of public concern on staff. We don't have people who are trained to most effectively reach vulnerable populations. But the city, county, state, and federal governments do.
This is a great point. AW is so big on child welfare and being able to give her kids her one-on-one attention, etc. You'd think she'd be one of the first to see the value in the further reach of state and national governments in this area vs. local churches.
See, here's the difference between people like you/others in this thread and people like me. You all want to replace God's Kingdom with man's government, whereas I believe government/taxes are a poor substitute for the Kingdom of God. Whereas y'all feel people should be forced to give what a government mandates as merciful and loving, I feel that people should give freely as God compels them to within the system (the Church with a capital C) that God created. According to people like you, one can only be kind and loving if they support taxation. I think community is the answer.
But whatever, I am just a hick, so what do I know. I'm going to go back to my farm now and snuggle my newborn, then get in some good homeschool lessons for my children about what the Bible says about the government's role to prepare them for the world. Feel sorry for my husband that works so hard because he prefers having me here teaching them that.
AW, what do you think the role of government SHOULD be? Mark 12, Romans 13, and 1 Peter 2 all establish a Biblical authority for government, and also call us to honor and submit to those who serve us so long as doing so wouldn't cause one to sin. If you disagree that the government should have any part in social services, I'm curious about what function you'd like it to serve, ideally.
Post by pinkdutchtulips on Apr 29, 2016 10:02:49 GMT -5
PK w nearly 40 years of experience with it. Churches and the ministries they support can be an EXCELLENT resources but they are far from the end all be all in helping all of those who need assistance. Most clergy (and lay staff too) aren't equipped to handle a lot of situations which is why they are more than willing to refer to the proper GOV'T agency
There were a handful of times before my parents split when my mom's teacher connections came in handy while navigating school stuff but basic needs stuff (cash, food, shelter, clothes) the church did what they could but again, LOTS of referrals to county social services and local food banks/pantries.
• I went to a Christian college. I became an Atheist.
• I had a placental abruption and a forcep delivery. Called our daycare at 8 weeks instead of 12 to ask if they could get him in so I could go back to work.
• Make a good amount of money. And buy lots of THINGS with it.
Post by underwaterrhymes on Apr 29, 2016 10:08:26 GMT -5
Others have said what I would say more eloquently than I could.
But the hemorrhoids alone make giving birth a major medical event even before you address vaginal stitches, blood loss, hormone drops, breast engorgement, bladder issues, and potentially more serious complications.
Here's my main issue with AW's assertions (I elect to choose just one).
"Women need to be kind to themselves." Which only works in your specific situation. For a woman who, let's say, loses her husband but still must support her newborn, other children, and herself financially, she can want to be as kind to herself as possible. But if her employer won't accommodate enough time to physically recover from childbirth, what do you propose then?
Seriously, for someone so bent on touting a WWJD outlook, you're treating your fellow mothers pretty shitty. How do you think Jesus sees your outlook that "my taxes shouldn't be used to make others' hardships a bit easier?" Your whole myopic focus on your world and your world alone is hardly conducive to sharing Jesus' teachings of loving one another.
I'll wait for your reply.
Well, I wouldn't want you waiting. Lol
See, here's the difference between people like you/others in this thread and people like me. You all want to replace God's Kingdom with man's government, whereas I believe government/taxes are a poor substitute for the Kingdom of God. Whereas y'all feel people should be forced to give what a government mandates as merciful and loving, I feel that people should give freely as God compels them to within the system (the Church with a capital C) that God created. According to people like you, one can only be kind and loving if they support taxation. I think community is the answer.
But whatever, I am just a hick, so what do I know. I'm going to go back to my farm now and snuggle my newborn, then get in some good homeschool lessons for my children about what the Bible says about the government's role to prepare them for the world. Feel sorry for my husband that works so hard because he prefers having me here teaching them that.
and THIS attitude is what drives people AWAY from Christianity bc they lump us all together w your brand of it never mind the fact that your brand is a small sliver of it ignoring all of the denominations that embrace all people from ALL walks of life (not just the walk of life you adhere to).
Post by heliocentric on Apr 29, 2016 10:23:12 GMT -5
Is there anything stopping churches and other NGOs from helping parents, the poor, and others in need? It seems they can do that now yet we still have so many people who are lacking resources and support, so clearly that's not enough and we also need government. If the solution was as simple as churches filling in the gaps then why aren't all the gaps filled?
"This prick is asking for someone here to bring him to task Somebody give me some dirt on this vacuous mass so we can at last unmask him I'll pull the trigger on it, someone load the gun and cock it While we were all watching, he got Washington in his pocket."
Post by laurenpetro on Apr 29, 2016 10:51:48 GMT -5
you would think that people who go out of their way to uphold the "sanctity of life" would celebrate the birth of a child a little more and at least recognize it as a major medical event.
Remember the time we all agreed as a group not to feed the troll? That was a good day.
I know. I usually refrain from engaging. But dammit all, I get sick sick sick and tired of AW trying to represent all Christians with her tripe. If she thinks government is a poor substitute for the Kingdom of God, she's a poor substitute for it as well IMO.
My job (for which I accept a regular paycheck) consists of providing medical care for other women's babies, some of whom are ill. I also provide support for mothers who are struggling. So, I work, but I am still caring for children, as God intended, right? I am so confused as to my "place"!