Comments Which Conservatives Block From Their Blogs For November 7, 2018

Nov 4

To Joe Carter and his blogpost that cites a Joseph Loconte article on Luther’s 95 theses and what that did to promote religious liberty and a free conscience. This appeared in the Acton blog.

There are problems with Loconte's article on Luther and conscience. Besides the fact that appeals to our conscience do have a limit, we should note what else Luther supported. He sided with wealth and power by supporting a brutal suppression of the Peasant's Revolt as well as he, later on in life, expressed strong anti-Semitism sentiments and suggested harsh treatment of the Jews in Germany with the purpose of seeing them gone through attrition.

From these two facts, we see that even Luther put limits on the conscience: the consciences of some with whom he disagreed. The limits we should note about the conscience here is that we can't excuse our oppression of others on our consciences. This excusing of visiting injustice others occurred during Jim Crow when some Christians used the Scriptures to defend segregation and white supremacy. Here one could say that they included an appeal to consciences as a defense of their abuse of others. At least that is how they saw it and the same could be said of those who owned slaves or supported slavery that preceded Jim Crow.

How some Christians used their religious beliefs to defend the oppression of Blacks is an important point to bring up here because a similar defense is being made for Christians being able to discriminate against the the LGBT community. Though there are significant differences between the past marginalization of Blacks in during slavery and Jim Crow and how many religiously conservative Christians want to discriminate against the LGBT community today, the basic theme of not sharing society with a targeted group as equals is what both kinds of discrimination have in common.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nov 5

To Caroline Roberts and her blogpost that references an article by Samuel Gregg that speaks of what is good and bad about our economy. In listing what is bad, Loconte lists several entitlement programs as causing current and future harm to our economy. Roberts’s article appeared in the Acton blog

In actuality, the article cited (see  https://stream.org/economy-booming-but-theres-trouble/ ) is rather disingenuous with its claims about the economy and especially about entitlement programs.
Is the economy improving? Yes, but it has been for a while especially during much of Obama's Presidency. In other words, part of the success of the economy has to do with the momentum created by what went on during the Obama Administration.
But is the economy improving for everyone? No. Wealth disparity continues to grow and with that there is a growing disparity in political power so that the wealthiest gain more and more political power. Wages for many jobs have not increased significantly for decades when accounting for inflation. Basically, we have an economy that revolves around the whims of major shareholders rather than one that accounts for the needs for everyone.

The grouping of entitlement programs as being blamed for 70% of the Federal budget is deliberately deceptive. Both Social Security and Medicare are self-funded and thus cannot negatively contribute to the National Deficit or Debt. In fact, the Federal Government has borrowed more money from the Social Security Trust fund to finance its spending than any other lender including China. Realize that that fund is financed by individual payers for their collective future for when they retire and much of that spending goes to corporations. Thus we are seeing a transfer of funds from the middle and lower economic classes to the higher ones. Also, to include Social Security and Medicare with programs that are not self-funding in this 70% of Federal spending is deliberately dishonest. In addition, one of the reasons why we have some current spending problems with Medicare is because of Federal laws that prohibit Medicare from negotiating lower drug costs with Pharmaceutical companies.

To merely call self-funded programs like Social Security and Medicare entitlement programs is false labeling. To call the non-self funded programs entitlement programs without including other labels is highly selective. Along with Social Security and Medicare, these programs are survival programs for many in this nation.

From an overall perspective, the most apparent reason for calling for cuts in these entitlement programs is that those with wealth want to pay less and less in taxes while enjoying the benefits from living in and/or doing business in our nation at the current and previous tax rates. Basically we have an ongoing Ayn Rand Coup of the government. But let's suppose we cut those "entitlement programs," what happens? This has been occurring in Greece and even the IMF has come to the conclusion that national austerity policies lead to economic harm. From other perspectives, these cuts lead to a society and culture that value things over people. Such according to Martin Luther King Jr maintain what he called the 'triplets of evil': racism, materialism, and militarism.

ONIM For April 20, 2015

Christian News

• Conservative Anglicans Poised For 'Leap Forward,' Deny Schism -- Christian Today (UK)
• Pakistan: Gunmen Open Fire At Catholic School In Lahore -- Christian Today (UK)
• Bishop Of London Warns Of Global 'Peril' Caused By Environment, Poverty And Conflict -- Christian Today (UK)
• Not The Christian Zionism You're Thinking Of -- Christianity Today
• Finding My Place In The Gospel Coalition -- Christianity Today
• One Last Thing: The Christian Porn Secret -- Christianity Today
• 'Like A Good Neighbor' Jesus Is There -- The Christian Post
• A Millenial's March For Marriage -- The Christian Post
• No. Carolina House Approves Bill To Put Billy Graham Statue In US Capitol -- The Christian Post
• What Is Freedom Of Religion -- Veterans For Peace
• New Episcopal Church Calls For Divestment From Israeli Occupation -- Mondoweiss

World News

• Ted Cruz  Launches Senate Fight To Auction Off America's Public Lands -- Climate Progress
• Investors Chip In As Renewables Rise Toward Record Level -- Truthdig
• United States Forest Service Investigates Expired Nestle Water Permit -- ABC7 News
• First Florida, Now Wisconsin, Ban The Words 'Climate Change' -- BuzzFlash
• Scientists Have Found A 10 Million Gallon 'Bath Mat' Of Oil On The Floor Of The Gulf Of Mexico -- Business Insider
• Police Investigating 'Homicide' Of 10-Year-Old Minnesota Boy -- Yahoo News
• Correction: Killings By Police--Oklahoma Story -- Yahoo News
• A Nation's Shame: Trillions In New Wealth, Millions Of Children In Poverty -- BuzzFlash
• Nearly 50 Aid Agencies Charge International Community Failing People Of Gaza -- Common Dreams
• Judge Permits Uranium Mining Near Grand Canyon -- Mining Awareness Plus
• What Sanctions? The Russian Economy Is Growing Again -- Newsweek
• Video: Arizona Officer Rams Police Cruiser Into Suspect -- Yahoo News
• Obama Pleads With Jewish Groups To Back Iran Deal -- The Hill
• Assembly Republicans Reject Anti-Discrimination Resolution -- WKOW
• Student Groups Clash Over Politics Of Israel And Palestine -- The Wesleyan Argus
• You Are Paying Billions Because McDonald's And Walmart Won't -- Gawker.com
• Ben Carson To Launch Presidential Bid On May 4 -- MSNBC
• Iraq: ISIS Escapes  Describe Systematic Rape -- Human Rights Watch
• Report Shows US Invasion, Occupation Of Iraq Left 1 Million Dead -- Truthout
• Former Philadelphia Police Officer: 'I Planted Drugs Too Many Times To Count' -- Daily Kos
• Former Prosecutor Says Cops Planting Guns On People They Shoot Is 'Standard Operating Procedure' -- Counter Current News
• 'Thousands' Of Israeli Arab Homes Threatened With Demolition -- Yahoo News
• Frequently Asked Questions About Upcoming Marriage Equality Case At The U.S. Supreme Court -- Human Rights Campaign
• Warren Blasts Government For Ignoring 'Blatant Criminal Activity' On Wall Street -- Common Dreams
• Police Report Sharp Increase In Religious And Race Crimes In London -- Christian Today (UK)

Pick(s) Of The Litter

• Goldman Sachs CEO: Entitlements Must Be Contained -- CBS Evening News
• Noam Chomsky: America Hates Its Poor -- Salon
• In Landmark Case, Dutch Citizens Sue Their Government Over Failure To Act On Climate Change -- Climate Progress
• 27,000 Oil And Gas Wells Abandoned In Gulf Of Mexico Ignored By Government, Industry -- The Times Picayune
• After Walmart And Fast Food, Labor Activists Target Big Banks -- Aljazeera
• Railroading Racism: Warren Buffet Vs Northwest Indians -- Intercontinental Cry
• Ethiopians 'Tortured, Oppressed And Silenced' Into Surrendering Land To Foreign Investors -- Truthdig 

Is Our National Debt The Disease Or A Symptom?

The Shutdown is over and so is defaulting on loans along with a huge economic uncertainty. But an ominous future has only been procrastinated while today is forever for too many Americans. So what should we make of all of this?

Conservatives, who believe in personal responsibility, rightly believe that paying back a debt is a moral obligation. So failure to pay back what is borrowed should be avoided at almost all costs.  However, the debate between Republicans  and Democrats does not consist in figuring out how to pay back the debt. Instead, Republicans and Democrats continue to spar over how to make the debt grow.

During Obama's Presidency, Republicans rightfully complain about the growing debt. Though the complaints are valid, they lack context. Such Republican complaints were absent when Bush was President and we can identify one of greatest contributors to the growing debt as being the combination of tax cuts for the wealthy and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. And though we might have grounds for arguing that the war against Afghanistan was justified, overthrowing the Taliban with the help of known terrorists groups, such as those that belonged to the Northern Alliance, only furthered the misery of the people there and delegitimized our war rationale.

In addition, a large part of the debt during Obama's Administration came from bailouts for banks and financial institutions. The event that sparked the bailouts occurred during the Bush Administration.

Despite their public contrition for their spending sins during Bush's Administration, the Republican targeting of "entitlement" spending and the shielding of both defense spending and tax cuts serve as strong indicators that deficits and debt are not their main concerns. Nor do they regard fiscal responsibility as being an important moral standard.

On the Democrats' side, we have the defense of "entitlements" spending and a push for tax increases on the rich. But why? These Democrats show little, if any, concern about either the increase of military interventions or defense spending.  In addition, they have said next to nothing about homeland security budgets  as well as the growth of the prison industrial complex. 

And as much as the Democrats might rightfully blame the need for the bailouts on the Republicans, the conditions that allowed the collapse of the economy, for the most part, remain the same and the Democrats have refused to criminally prosecute officials from the financial institutions for their fraudulent, regarding the housing bubble, the rating of mortgages, and the foreclosure on homes, and criminal, regarding money laundering, activities. Thus, just as spending on the Vietnam War during the days of Martin Luther King Jr. hurt programs of "social uplift," so both corporate welfare and the maintenance of a corrupt system sabotage the Democrats' efforts to maintain entitlement spending. 

What we have in the end are the two ruling political parties who claim they want to be fiscally responsible but who contradict these claims by their practices. Both parties want to spend too much. One party includes "entitlement" spending while the other does not. One party thinks that it can make up the difference by increasing taxes on the rich while the other wants to put the brunt of the tax load to be placed on those who are not major campaign contributors. The latter party sees only one debt: the financial debt. It does not acknowledge the moral debt that "entitlement" spending addresses. At the same time, the party that acknowledges the need for "entitlement" spending also shares the spending practices of the other party and thus "entitlement" spending will be both shortchanged and endangered by government overspending in other areas.

Before closing, we have to address what "entitlement" spending means. According to the magazine, The Economist, entitlements include Medicaid, Social Security, and Medicare. We learned during the Shutdown that Food Stamps are also entitlements. What we should note about Social Security and much of Medicare, however, is that they are self-funded and do not increase the deficits and the national debt. In fact, Social Security holds the most federal debt for the government and so we would have to ask whether those who wish to cut or eliminate Social Security how they are planning to honor that part of our debt. 

But more important than that is the significance of these "entitlement" programs. That is because "entitlement" spending is there to help stabilize the economic status of those who are vulnerable. By calling such spending entitlements, we are relegating such spending from being a moral requirement to being a feel-good luxury--a luxury we cannot responsibly afford in tough economic times. Thus by hurting entitlement spending by either targeting  or sabotaging it, we are explicitly stating that the vulnerable in our society are disposable as are the morals that would drive us to care for them. 

But there is a twist here. The Middle Class is being taught to regard the poor in the same way as the Rich regard the Middle Class. So the more the Middle Class adopts the mentality that says, "entitlements are a luxury," the more the Rich reneges on spending their tax dollars on infrastructure that mostly benefits the Middle Class. If one doubts this, then look at the state of much of our infrastructure today. This is why more and more of the tax burden used to support government functions is falling on the middle class. And what is lost on Conservative Christians here is how they hurt others by requesting cuts in entitlements for the vulnerable is how they are being harmed by the Upper Class. That is because we need full participation via the payment of taxes by the Upper Class to finance our society. 

Our dilemma is this, our current system cannot support both our debt and moral obligations. And yet, the only solutions being offered to us are different ways to tweak the current system. This system is designed to reward those who perform the best at acting in their own self-interest. So it follows that the system puts fewer and fewer ethical constraints on how one does this. In addition, since all earthly resources are finite, there is a point where the more wealth one makes for oneself, the less there is for others to scrounge for. So as wealth disparity increases, more and more are without and whatever refuge they could find from the government is being cut by our two political parties. The one party wants to eliminate entitlements while the other seeks to sabotage them.

Our debt isn't the problem, it is just one of many symptoms that point to a failed economic system. And so we will not begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel until we recognize and acknowledge what is wrong with the current system so we can create a new one that, at least, avoids the grave errors on which the current system is built.