Right when I finish a debate (here and mostly here in the comments) with an Objectivist (a brand of capitalist) who said there are no soup lines the the U.S., which I told him was completely false, Democracy Now has this on its website:
Meanwhile, here in this country food pantries are reporting major food shortages. Aina Duggan says the Food Bank for New York City has seen a sharp drop in food donations over the past year.
Aina Duggan: "We have less food in our warehouse. We're practically seeing empty shelves every week in the warehouse, when we used to be brimming over and able to turn food around really quickly. What that means is that there's less food in food pantries and soup kitchens around the city, and you literally have people standing in line for hours at a time waiting for food, only to be turned away because the food runs out."
Now I know the Objectivist didn't mean there were no soup lines in the U.S. because there isn't enough soup.
Do you suppose he'll have what it takes to come back here to say, "I had no idea. I stand corrected."?
It isn't a problem because we can't make enough soup in the U.S. It's a problem because capitalism is based upon selfishness, and why should the selfish at heart give soup to the homeless and hungry, many of whom are just little kids who feel the pain of hunger much more severely than do adults.
Let them eat cake. Do you remember that ignorant line?
We need to let the poor back onto the land to grow food for each other. The rich aren't going to just give over enough land for free. The government isn't going to do it either, not until the government is the whole people acting as real Christians where there is zero coercion. Therefore, people must give enough to translate mammon (pent-up, unproductive psychological value) into farm land and the things needed by the poor and Christians to grow food for all.
If you don't agree, tell me why? Tell me a better way. No one ever does. Most people come here and just advocate for selfishness. Where are the people who are for the giving and sharing Jesus taught and the way the first generation of Christians lived — with all things held in common, from each as he had and to each as he and she had real need?
Nothing is going to happen without people chipping in regularly even if it's a tiny bit. Nothing is going to happen without people joining in to plan and organize and divide the labor amongst themselves by consensus through the unifying movement of the Holy Spirit of truth acting within each heart.
Jesus told us to bring forth together as one. Where are you all, fellow real Christians?
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)