Is God a Liberal or a Conservative?

[Zaha Torte]

If God registered to vote in the 2020 US Presidential race, would he have voted for Trump? Biden? Jorgenson? Hawkins? West?

Would God, in an anthropomorphic form, be liberal or conservative?

Please explain you choices.

God already did this and He is currently in the White House.

 

[GardenLady]

Can we stop the polarizing liberal/conservative thing? Not everyone to the left of Breitbart is a liberal and not everyone to the right of Bernie Sanders is a conservative. There is a spectrum.

Jesus said "When I was hungry you fed me, I was thirsty and you gave me drink. I was a stranger and you welcomed me I was sick and you cared for me, I was in prison and you visited me.... whatsoever you do to the least of these, you do to me." In today's political lexicon, that would be left--of-center.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Can we stop the polarizing liberal/conservative thing? Not everyone to the left of Breitbart is a liberal and not everyone to the right of Bernie Sanders is a conservative. There is a spectrum.

Jesus said "When I was hungry you fed me, I was thirsty and you gave me drink. I was a stranger and you welcomed me I was sick and you cared for me, I was in prison and you visited me.... whatsoever you do to the least of these, you do to me." In today's political lexicon, that would be left--of-center.

I disagree and argue that there is extensive evidence that suggests that conservatives donate more time and money to charity than liberals do.

 

[Revoltingest]

If God registered to vote in the 2020 US Presidential race, would he have voted for Trump? Biden? Jorgenson? Hawkins? West?

Would God, in an anthropomorphic form, be liberal or conservative?

Please explain you choices.

God wouldn't vote.
It's an anarchist, ie, a hands off kind of deity.
Every species & critter for itself.
That explains the Earth's state of affairs.

BTW, It's an "it" cuz it makes no sense for a supernatural
being to have genitalia, sex hormones, & a gendered brain.

 

[GardenLady]

I disagree and argue that there is extensive evidence that suggests that conservatives donate more time and money to charity than liberals do.

I'd be glad to see that evidence. My personal experience, and my observation over time, is that it is conservatives who blame the poor, call them too lazy to work, claim they take advantages of others, and object to desperate, vulnerable people coming to the US.

And by "charity" are you including mega-churches and televangelists?

 

[JustGeorge]

I'd be glad to see that evidence. My personal experience, and my observation over time, is that it is conservatives who blame the poor, call them too lazy to work, claim they take advantages of others, and object to desperate, vulnerable people coming to the US.

And by "charity" are you including mega-churches and televangelists?

Locally, I'd say the Catholics(who are mostly conservative in this area) are the most likely to give a 'helping hand' to the general populace(indeed, they've helped me many times, both individually and through organizations). The Protestants are most likely to try to snare your youth up with pushy brochures trying to show of this flashy program or the other, but don't seem to really extend charity to those outside of their 'club'.

We have small Jewish and Muslim populations. They don't do a lot of public work, but there are not many of them. Both communities are friendly, and do try to host periodic public events, with the mosque providing free dinners a few times a month. We have a local atheist group as well, but they don't contribute much other than noise(I'm not trying to down all atheists here, just state the nature of the local group). There is a UU church that prides themselves on being progressive, but doesn't seem to be able to organize to do much other than to hold meetings and talk about how wrong the world is.

Just my observations from a mid sized city in the Midwest. Not any hard or fast rules.

 

[chinu]

If God registered to vote in the 2020 US Presidential race, would he have voted for Trump? Biden? Jorgenson? Hawkins? West?

Would God, in an anthropomorphic form, be liberal or conservative?

Please explain you choices.

Friend, can I answer this question ? if yes ? then made you think that chinu is "All-Knowing" ?

 

[Zaha Torte]

I'd be glad to see that evidence. My personal experience, and my observation over time, is that it is conservatives who blame the poor, call them too lazy to work, claim they take advantages of others, and object to desperate, vulnerable people coming to the US.

And by "charity" are you including mega-churches and televangelists?

They "blame the poor" for what? Are you suggesting that poor people are incapable of being lazy? Taking advantage of others?

A person can recognize that someone is in a bad way and needs help yet also recognize that that person is responsible for the decisions that led them to needing said help.

A person can believe in the rule of law and demand that everyone who comes to the U.S. do so legally and still want to help desperate and vulnerable people.

People being generous with other people's money (liberals) are not charitable.

I don't know anything about mega-churches or televangelists.

 

[metis]

I disagree and argue that there is extensive evidence that suggests that conservatives donate more time and money to charity than liberals do.

But I tend to think that most goes to the churches themselves since fundamentalist churches especially require tithing, whereas the Catholic and mainstream Protestant churches don't.

 

[Zaha Torte]

But I tend to think that most goes to the churches themselves since fundamentalist churches especially require tithing, whereas the Catholic and mainstream Protestant churches don't.

Aren't tithes used to provide charity?

 

[JustGeorge]

Aren't tithes used to provide charity?

At the church I associated with in my childhood, and the UU church I attended in adulthood, tithes tended to be used to upkeep the church(upkeep of grounds, paying pastor/reverends/etc, utility bills, etc). Money for charity was raised separately.

 

[metis]

Aren't tithes used to provide charity?

Depends on how one looks at it. Under Jewish Law, tithing is required with personal charity being a supplement. Since Christians are not under the specifics of that Law, nevertheless Jesus does not at all appear to dismiss it in his Parable of the Widow's Mite.

Tithing back in Jesus' time was mandated as part of the Temple tax that served not only paying for the Temple staff and activities but also aid for widows and the poor. Today in the modern world, taxes paid to civil authorities covers the widows and poor, thus what we may pay to church is charity. In most mainline churches, this distinction is noted, thus tithing is to the church not required.

 

[Zaha Torte]

At the church I associated with in my childhood, and the UU church I attended in adulthood, tithes tended to be used to upkeep the church(upkeep of grounds, paying pastor/reverends/etc, utility bills, etc). Money for charity was raised separately.

Interesting. I've never liked the idea of paying clergy. Not a Biblical practice in my opinion. Unless you are a Levite I suppose.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Depends on how one looks at it. Under Jewish Law, tithing is required with personal charity being a supplement. Since Christians are not under the specifics of that Law, nevertheless Jesus does not at all appear to dismiss it in his Parable of the Widow's Mite.

Tithing back in Jesus' time was mandated as part of the Temple tax that served not only paying for the Temple staff and activities but also aid for widows and the poor. Today in the modern world, taxes paid to civil authorities covers the widows and poor, thus what we may pay to church is charity. In most mainline churches, this distinction is noted, thus tithing is to the church not required.

Interesting. So if conservatives are more willing to pay tithes to whichever church they are members of - doesn't that denote a more charitable nature?

I mean it's more charitable than forcing other people to pay to help the poor through taxes.

 

[metis]

So if conservatives are more willing to pay tithes to whichever church they are members of - doesn't that denote a more charitable nature?

I mean it's more charitable than forcing other people to pay to help the poor through taxes.

Yes, it is charitable, no doubt, but that's certainly not the only way one may be charitable.

For example, if I tithe to my church but don't help others in need outside the church, am I really being charitable? Or if I tithe to my church and most of the money goes to Pastor Joe and his associates, am I really being that charitable overall?

According to both the Jewish and Christian scriptures, being charitable goes beyond just money.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Yes, it is charitable, no doubt, but that's certainly not the only way one may be charitable.

For example, if I tithe to my church but don't help others in need outside the church, am I really being charitable? Or if I tithe to my church and most of the money goes to Pastor Joe and his associates, am I really being that charitable overall?

According to both the Jewish and Christian scriptures, being charitable goes beyond just money.

Sure, but we should use the secular understanding of charity since this began as a discussion about political identity and not religion.

Otherwise I could make an outrageous claim like only Christians can truly be charitable. I don't want that.

I am arguing that conservatives - whether they are religious or not - tend to be more charitable than liberals.

 

[GardenLady]

They "blame the poor" for what? Are you suggesting that poor people are incapable of being lazy? Taking advantage of others?

A person can recognize that someone is in a bad way and needs help yet also recognize that that person is responsible for the decisions that led them to needing said help.

A person can believe in the rule of law and demand that everyone who comes to the U.S. do so legally and still want to help desperate and vulnerable people.

People being generous with other people's money (liberals) are not charitable.

I mean blame poor people for being poor. *Assuming* that their circumstances are actual evidence that they are lazy. Assuming as you do that they are "responsible for the decisions that led them to needing said help" when you know nothing about their decisions or what choices were available to them or what circumstances led them to where they are. But you seem quite comfortable holding the idea that they had choices available and made poor decisions and that their poverty is their "fault."

In an ideal world, I would agree that it would be better if everyone who comes to the US does so legally. We don't live in an ideal world. We live in a world where some people are in circumstances so dangerous/violent, of such grinding poverty, of such lack of choices, of such hopelessness that they will leave behind everything and make a dangerous journey to another country to try to get in under the radar in the hope of some chance of a better life. Most of us will never know what that is like. Yet I hear conservatives who claim that people just come here illegally so they can get free stuff at the expense of American taxpayers. In fact, most people here illegally try to stay under the radar and avoid the "Migras" (immigration staff). And by the way, I hear those who complain about illegal immigration talking about brown people. NONE of them has complained in my hearing about people who are here illegally from Canada or Ireland or Australia. We make rom com movies about the pretty white woman from Canada trying to arrange a fake marriage to avoid deportation ("The Proposal")

Your comment about "people being generous with other people's money (liberals) are not charitable." is just an off-topic political canard. We are talking about personal charity, which is what I posted about. Those I know who you would likely call "liberals" (because they aren't conservatives) donate to Habitat for Humanity, Heifer International, Wounded Warrior, Feeding America, local food pantries... We make meals through our churches for local homeless shelters. Donate clothing to Goodwill or Salvation Army. Collect school supplies for poor kids. Yes, I know conservatives who work at a food pantry; I have also heard them make negative observations about people "who have been coming there quite a while," knowing nothing about those people's lives.

As to politics, many of us believe it is to the benefit of the country as a whole to NOT have people starving or without health care or living in shacks, and therefore the government has a role in ameliorating that. It appears that bothers you. I don't think any of us confuse that with personal charity.

 

[metis]

I am arguing that conservatives - whether they are religious or not - tend to be more charitable than liberals.

And my contention is that "charitable" is not just dealing with money, plus if a church demands that one tithe, is that really "charity"?

Thus, one could play that both ways.

 

[Zaha Torte]

I mean blame poor people for being poor. *Assuming* that their circumstances are actual evidence that they are lazy. Assuming as you do that they are "responsible for the decisions that led them to needing said help" when you know nothing about their decisions or what choices were available to them or what circumstances led them to where they are. But you seem quite comfortable holding the idea that they had choices available and made poor decisions and that their poverty is their "fault."

None of this matters.

I made a claim that conservatives are more charitable than liberals and your argument against my claim is, "Maybe - but they might be making assumptions about those they are helping therefore they aren't "really" being charitable."?

Since neither you nor I can read anyone's minds - why even attempt to use this as an argument?

And even if conservatives believe that the poor people they are helping are at fault - doesn't the fact that they are helping them anyway - despite disapproving of the decisions they made - prove that conservatives are willing to set aside their differences?

It is logic like this that got Obama a Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing.

In an ideal world, I would agree that it would be better if everyone who comes to the US does so legally. We don't live in an ideal world. We live in a world where some people are in circumstances so dangerous/violent, of such grinding poverty, of such lack of choices, of such hopelessness that they will leave behind everything and make a dangerous journey to another country to try to get in under the radar in the hope of some chance of a better life. Most of us will never know what that is like. Yet I hear conservatives who claim that people just come here illegally so they can get free stuff at the expense of American taxpayers. In fact, most people here illegally try to stay under the radar and avoid the "Migras" (immigration staff).

There are legal pathways to entering this country as either a refugee or an asylee.

If someone enters the country illegally and stays in this country they are a drain on the American taxpayer.

These are just facts. You don't have to like them.

And by the way, I hear those who complain about illegal immigration talking about brown people. NONE of them has complained in my hearing about people who are here illegally from Canada or Ireland or Australia. We make rom com movies about the pretty white woman from Canada trying to arrange a fake marriage to avoid deportation ("The Proposal")

If any foreign national from any foreign country marries an American citizen they are eligible to become a Lawful Permanent Resident.

Illegal entry into the U.S. is not a racial issue - but the majority of those who are entering the country illegally are Hispanic.

These are facts.

Your comment about "people being generous with other people's money (liberals) are not charitable." is just an off-topic political canard. We are talking about personal charity, which is what I posted about. Those I know who you would likely call "liberals" (because they aren't conservatives) donate to Habitat for Humanity, Heifer International, Wounded Warrior, Feeding America, local food pantries... We make meals through our churches for local homeless shelters. Donate clothing to Goodwill or Salvation Army. Collect school supplies for poor kids. Yes, I know conservatives who work at a food pantry; I have also heard them make negative observations about people "who have been coming there quite a while," knowing nothing about those people's lives.

Hey - you were the one comparing "left of center" people to Jesus - so you made this pretty political in my opinion.

Assuming that a poor person is to blame for their misfortune is no different than assuming that the poor person is not to blame.

It does not matter if the person giving aide believes either one or the other because they are giving aide regardless of what they believe about the other person.

And again it is liberals - not conservatives - who try to force others to give "charity" to whoever they consider the less fortunate - which no longer makes it charity.

As to politics, many of us believe it is to the benefit of the country as a whole to NOT have people starving or without health care or living in shacks, and therefore the government has a role in ameliorating that. It appears that bothers you. I don't think any of us confuse that with personal charity.

If the government did its actual job of enforcing our laws there would not be as many people on the street.

 

[Zaha Torte]

And my contention is that "charitable" is not just dealing with money, plus if a church demands that one tithe, is that really "charity"?

Thus, one could play that both ways.

I agree. Charity is not just money - but we shouldn't try to make it a solely spiritual thing either. Don't want to leave anyone out.

Are there churches that "demand" the paying of tithes? I know there are those that ask or expect it, but "demand"?

Either way - unless the church is placing a gun to someone's head - I would consider it charity.