When Christian Voters With Little Money Decide They Want Your Money, We Will Get This.

Email Print

I am writing a detailed critique of one of Jim Wallis’s fans. She is a professor of law. She wants the rich to pay for the welfare stare. She thinks 70% of their income is about right. She calls herself a moderate.

I am serious. She really thinks 70% is reasonable. But so did Kennedy. He lowered the top bracket from 91% to 70%. This was heralded as a low-tax reform.

Recently, I posted an article commenting on another of these Wallis fans.

The woman finally got around to reading it, although I told her it would be posted the next day. She is incensed.

Mr. North:

Tonight I finally got back to your website to read what you wrote:

You see this badge, boy? You see this gun? Get out your wallet. Jesus sent me. I am here to get you to help the poor. I am paid $80,000 a year to do this. Do I tithe? That’s none of your business. What I do is to make sure that you tithe. Not to the church. To the state. And when I say “tithe,” I mean it figuratively. I don’t mean 10 percent. I mean closer to 30 percent.

Now then, you go get your wallet. The Bible says you owe this to the poor, by way of the state. What’s that? You say you never read this in Scripture? You’ve been reading the wrong Scripture. I mean the real Scripture: the Internal Revenue Code. That’s what Jesus wants you to read very carefully – – you and your accountant.

Mr. North, this is what you do: you re-phrase what someone says to be what you WANT the person to say, so that you may insult and criticize in order to make your point. The above paragraph is what you make my position out to be, but it is not even CLOSE to what I said. You don’t even know me; if you did, you wouldn’t say that the above narrow-minded statements define what I believe in. I don’t make $80,000 a year. I make less than $30,000 a year as a musician and I am proud of what I do. I don’t go around trying to get people to give money to things, except for volunteer singing for community fundraisers, which usually are not related to the church at all and therefore Jesus is not mentioned. Your words are insulting and it is no wonder that I had never heard of you before. You and your work are likely to sink into oblivion because you don’t care much for truth, and you sure don’t seem to care much about the majority of people of the world.

It’s very fortunate for you that Jim Wallis doesn’t debate you publicly. His position is strong and based on compassion, while yours is weak and based on greed, backed up by your own hypocritical interpretation of the Bible. Sure you have studied his positions for years, most likely with your mind already made up about everything in the Universe. Wallis’ positions, well-stated, would likely make your own beliefs look pretty shoddy.

You have a very high opinion of yourself and your interpretation of Scripture. I don’t intend to ever go back to your website again – it is singularly uninspiring. Sharing what we have with the poor is not a political stance, although it can be. It is simply the right thing to do – whether Biblical or not – and I intend to continue to do it. But I wouldn’t expect you to care anything about that, because it might mess up your shiny shoes.

Oh, sorry – I made a snap judgment. I have never even seen your shoes; maybe they are not shiny after all.

Here is a musician who earns little money. Fine; it’s her life. But she wants you and me to pay for her choices. This is the heart of the welfare state. Those who make bad choices financially want subsidies from those who made good choices, and who reaped their reward from paying customers.

This woman thinks that I am in some way threatened by her refusal to remain a free rider on my site. These people really do overestimate their value to producers who are seeking a profit by meeting the demand of paying customers. They are free riders in life, and they think the rest of the voters owe them comfortable lives. We don’t.

Read the rest of the article

Email Print