Clash of values

Forgive me for intruding. But I think it would be beneficial if I could interject some clarity to the dialogue.

What we see in this argument is an argument about economic issues. But my friends, this only illustrates the erosion of America’s core values and morals.

Scripture tells us that “the love of money is the root of all evil.” This principle is ringing true in this debate. 

Our founding fathers founded this country on the basis of freedom, liberty, and equality. They founded this nation on the premises of Scripture, and on the fundamental value of respecting every human and offering every person an opportunity to prosper without social categorization. They did not found this country with the goal of making everyone rich. As we can all agree, the overriding value that constitutues the core element of America is liberty.

But America has lost a sense of what that term actually means.

Let me tell you straight up: Voting for liberty in this election has nothing to do with which candidate will stuff your wallet. 

Our country’s top problem today is the culture. Our culture has embraced liberalism at an alarming level, and compromised to ideals and principles that made this country that "shining beacon on a hill" as the great President Reagan said. The main voting issue in this election should be the protection of liberty. Not the amplification of financial income.

When we compare Senator McCain and Senator Obama on this premise, we see a clear and fundamental clash of values.

I’ll first address economic concerns, then move on to more important issues.

Barack Obama’s entire economic sentiment is this: Spread the wealth. To him, there is no reason why there should be a single mom who is struggling to keep her house and keep her children clothed. To him, there is no reason for a child to be denied education within his pedigree because of financial difficulty. I agree, this is a problem. But sharing the wealth is not the solution. When we look at Obama’s tax plan, we see that 95% of American working families will get tax cuts on certain federal taxes. We also see that the lower class, who barely pay taxes anyway, are getting tax cuts as well. Should Obama become President, these tax cuts will be adopted into federal policy next year, shortly after a $700 billion economic crisis and a standing $10 trillion national debt.

So if he cuts your taxes, where is he going to get his money to pay his bills?

Answer: The rich.

Under Obama’s tax plan, anyone who makes over $2.87 million dollars a year will pay over $542,000 in income tax alone. Let me repeat: $542,000!!! And that’s not to mention property taxes. Obama would be almost doubling taxes for the wealthy, even though they already pay 89% of our taxes. 

I know what you’re thinking. You’re wondering why this is an issue. You think the rich should pay the majority of our taxes.

That’s true, in a sense. They should pay a higher percentage of taxes. But Obama wants to further exacerbate that 89% to approximately 96%. These figures represent the real problem, which is the ideology behind the “spreading the wealth” ideal. What is his idealogy behind this policy?

The idealogy behind this policy is socialism.

Now, please don’t stop reading here just because I called Barack Obama a socialist. Listen to the reasoning behind the categorization.

Barack Obama’s idealogy behind this tax plan is to take from the rich and give to the poor. It is, in essence, to give the poor what they deserve and supplement for what society hasn’t granted them. This principle directly contradicts our founding father’s view of liberty, government, and prosperity. 

The beautiful thing about America up until recently has been how anyone has make something out of themselves by hard work. Everyone is given a chance, and those who work hard succeed. But of course, there are some exceptions. Like someone who was born to an alcoholic dad and an abusive mother and is living on the street with no money. So, how did the founding fathers foresee giving these types of people opportunity? It was by the rich giving to the poor, neighbors helping neighbors. In other words, moral values would solve the problem. Barack Obama wants the rich to give to the poor. The only contradiction is: In one scenario, the morals solve the problem. In the second scenario, THE GOVERNMENT SOLVES THE PROBLEM.

We all know what happens when the government tries to solve our problems. They end up screwing everything up, because THAT’S NOT WHAT GOVERNMENT WAS DESIGNED TO DO. According to the preamble of our Constitution, our government’s sole role is to protect the security and defense of our citizens. This tax plan, this economic mindset of most Democrats, is outside of those boundaries. This ideology not only breaks our founding principles, it destroys our morals. Let me explain how.

One of my friends has an acquaintance who is on welfare because her husband was an alcoholic who left her and her two children. The welfare system was an idea of the Democratic party, a system that gives Government to power and responsibility to feed and clothe the poor and unfortunate. Do you know how much this woman gets from welfare each week for groceries? $500!!!!! I come from a family of 9 people, and even when we had money and spent relatively big, our weekly food bill was about $250. And this woman on welfare gets $500 A WEEK to feed 3 PEOPLE! My friend’s mother was telling this lady that she should try to get a job so she could get better housing. She laughed and said, “Getting a job is one of the worst things I could do right now. I have about $400 a week after the weekly food shopping, and my living is very comfortable. I can pay the rent, buy stuff for my kids, and do almost anything I want. I’m fine.”

So what has the welfare system done? By showering money on this needy individual, it has destroyed the morals of a person so savagely that she doesn’t even feel the need or moral obligation to work for to support herself and her children. She has another agency that will give everything to her, despite her lack of diligence. Sounds like Paris Hilton to me.

This government system has also created a sentiment among the middle class and rich that helping the poor isn’t needed, because the government does it already through welfare anyway. According to Scripture and our founding fathers, the poor should be aided by individuals with better financial means, not the government.  But the government took that responsibility, and look at what a mess it’s made.

One more point on welfare. That $500 a week that this woman gets to feed 3 people comes from the federal government. Where do they get their money from?

You.

Which is why simply giving a tax break to poor/middle class people and raises taxes on the rich via Obamanomics will do nothing but continually destroy morals, eventually raise your taxes instead of cutting them, and allow government to operate outside of its designated boundaries in the Constitution and our federal policy. 

When we allow government to provide our domestic needs, you’re conceding the liberty provided to you by the Constitution to the federal government. You are giving them power over your finances, your healthcare, and your basic human rights. And that is the basis of both socialism… and communism.

“The constitution says what the federal government can’t do to you, and what the states can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what it should do for you.” - Senator Barack Obama

Well, in case you haven’t read the constitution yet, Barack, it does say what you should do for us. Protect us from foreign threats and appoint judges to the supreme court. That’s about it. It’s not your place to force the rich to give to the poor, even when they should be and aren’t.

Which brings me to my next section. 

“The biggest challenge of the next President of the United States of America will be to change the culture.”-  Senator John McCain

The rich should be giving to the poor, but they aren’t because of destroyed morals. But the solution isn’t to hand our liberties over to the corrupt government and tell them to fix the issue. WE THE PEOPLE need to fix it. Which means, don’t scoff at charities. Donate. Don’t sneer at homeless people going to soup kitchens and look down on them as scum in the toilet pipe. Talk to them. Find a way to help them. Give them money to rent a hotel room for the night. For your friends that are on welfare, don’t leave them in the hands of government support. Give them money. Help them find a job. And don't let them stay on welfare because it's comfortable. And over all, even beyond merely good works, promote the teachings of Scripture to galvanize our culture. It is what our founding fathers derived their principles from; It is what has made America great. It is what changes people’s hearts, morals, and society in general.

“It’s ridiculous. Sometimes, unwanted babies are just left in the utility room to die.”  What is this Illinois hospital worker calling ridiculous? The infanticide bill that Barack Obama approved 4 times.

Infanticide is when parents are allowed to kill their babies if an abortion fails. Abortion is bad enough; it is inhumanely killing a human being. The ways babies are aborted are grotesque. From sticking a pipe up the child’s neck and into it’s head and sucking the brains out to scraping the kid out in pieces, liberalism seems to have numbed the conscience of so many individuals to this demonic practice. But Barack Obama doesn’t even stop there. He voted for a bill giving the mother the right to kill the child if an abortion fails. 

“To determine whether human life begins at conception is, uh, above my paygrade.”

That quote from Obama is even worse than it sounds. No, Barack, it’s not above your paygrade. You’ve made your decision. If you really thought there was even a chance that human life started at conception, you wouldn’t be pro-choice. And if you thought human life started at the point of infancy, then you would not have endorsed and campaigned for the infanticide bill. What’s next? First, it was that human life doesn't start at conception. Then it was that human life doesn't start at the point of infancy. Will you now determine that human life starts when a child learns to walk? Talk? Gets into high school? Graduates college? Come on. The ideology of Barack Obama's policies are simply insane and hideously evil. We can’t afford a President that doesn’t protect the sanctity of human life. We can’t afford a President that disregards the Constitution and abuses his power. We can’t afford big government. We can’t afford socialism. 

Barack Obama doesn’t understand this. He wants government to “use the scalpel”, as he likes to say, to change our circumstances. But as Ronald Reagan said, “Government is never the solution. It’s ALWAYS the problem.”

Vote John McCain 2008.

~Eric Cooper, Region 10 National Christian Forensics and Communcations Associations President