FOLLOW BERNIE SANDERS' LEAD

In countless speeches over the past seven years, Democrats have rightly slammed "the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy" as reckless, unnecessary, and unjust. Yet Senator Bernie Sanders has provided Senate Democrats with ample opportunity to put their money where their mouth is and his colleagues have failed to seize that opportunity.
...

RLCC: They don't want to radically change to correct the problem. They don't work for the poor. They work for the rich. They work for the system established by and for the rich. If they were to work for the poor, as Jesus did, they'd be crucified, as Jesus was. They don't want that. They want their high-paying jobs. They want their power and control. They want the exercise of their egos.

Oh sure, they'll claim they are for this or that for the poor, but when it comes time to really make the choice, they turn their backs.

Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation magazine, points in her post to an article in the Washington Post entitled, "When Handouts Keep Coming, the Food Line Never Ends," Mark Winne is the former director of Connecticut's Hartford Food System and the author of the forthcoming "Closing the Food Gap: Resetting the Table in the Land of Plenty." That article sort of points to the same issue I do in the Church's appeal, The Christian Commons Projectâ„¢. Winne is right that the food-bank system as it is, is just perpetuating the problem. What he identifies as the problem and solution are far from what the Church is rightly advocating.

Mark says poverty is the problem. Well, while were getting beyond falsely imagining that the perpetuation of the current system is the solution, let's get at the real root cause, shall we.

The absolute fact of the matter is that the reason for hunger is greed. Selfish people are why there are hungry people. Also, Mark Winne and apparently Katrina vanden Heuvel, since she linked to his article, falsely believe that higher taxes on the rich will allow for the welfare state to feed the lambs and sheep of God — all God's children. Wrong! Yes, more people would be fed, even all the people might be fed, but what and for how long?

They must be fed unselfishness into their hearts, or the welfare system, even with huge taxes on the richest, will fall.

The human race isn't going to make it on coercion. That path is dead. It was dead at conception. The Winne/vanden Heuvel approach is just another in the series of fatally flawed attempts to keep an irreconcilable house together.

Jesus shows that his way is right. Never coerce anyone. Always allow the souls to sort themselves by what they will believe and do. Eternity is, well, forever. This life is short. Relative to eternity, how short is it? Live through this life having finally chosen the anti-coercive path concerning all things. Tell the truth and do it (the deeds to match) to the best of your ability. Don't try to force others to agree. Don't punish them for not agreeing. Don't raise taxes and send in the police to extract them from the rich. That's just falling to the same evil means used by those very rich ones who are so obviously self-centered and hell bent.

No, trying to end poverty within the impoverishing system is futile. Read The Christian Commons Projectâ„¢. Read the other pages on this site (not just the posts and comments, but the pages in the left margin). Think hard about what the Christian Commons Projectâ„¢ is about and how it gets at the root cause and is inline with the physical and spiritual solution provided by Jesus Christ. Then HELP! Don't leave me to attempt to convince the world without your direct help.

Originally by Katrina vanden Heuvel from The Nation: Editor's Cut on March 11, 2008, 3:21pm

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.