Re:JThompsonUhhhh,Life-long LDS member here.You are wrong in all your assumptions.
"Weren't we all taught, at an early age, to help others?Isn't the judging of whether "they" need in or not supposed to be
left to a higher power?"Can I have some money? I mean, it would
really help me out a lot...I would not have to work to support my family if
people just gave me money. What? Suddenly you want to judge whether or not I
really need help? How can you be so judgmental? Is it because I currently have
a job? Well I can become unreliable, or hooked on drugs, or steal and get
fired. Then will you give me money? Oh, I see...now you want to judge the
choices I make? Now what are you saying? Just working hard would be the best
thing for me and the best example to set for my kids? You are probably
right...and there are probably a lot of other people who should be told that
Truthseeker,If you want to learn about the LDS Church, why not
contact the missionaries, or visit a Ward or Branch in SLO? When I visited SLO,
many times for business, I often visited with LDS members there. They are no
different from LDS members world-wide. Christians, world-wide, care
about people, even people outside their own religion. Religious bigots,
world-wide, use every opportunity to speak against God and religion.As far as your statement about "inactive" LDS being turned away, that
may be true; but, those same people are also turned away from government
agencies for scamming the system.Not everyone who holds their hand
out is going to have that hand filled. GOOD HEARTED people are going to get
help from GOOD HEARTED people. Scammers need to re-think how they live their
lives. No church is obligated to "enable" people who ask for help under
false pretenses - anymore than any government agency would offer help to people
who ask for help under false pretenses.
re:LiberalTed" The issue comes up with the high level of
fraudulant"#1. How do you arrive at the conclusion regarding the
level of fraud? percentages? statistics? sources? "One
believes you should just give and sustain those that won't do for
themselves. The other believes in helping people, but, those that can-should get
back on their feet and help themselves as soon as possible."#2.
Democrats do not believe able-bodied and mentally competent people should just
be able to live on the "dole." But Democrats do realize that not all
jobs provide a living wage and even some people who work 40 hrs/wk may need some
type of assistance to meet basic needs. Democrats are also concerned that using
"blunt" instruments to reduce aid to the needy could result in harm to
children and those who have real challenges/needs. I appreciate Mr.
Florez" columns on these issues. How can the current system be improved?
re:MikeRichards"That same help is extended to every person, regardless
of religious affiliation who lives within our Ward boundary"Really? I know of LDS people who were refused assistance because
they were no longer attending church. How are needy non-members helped by local
wards? I've never known an LDS ward/leadership that offered assistance to
non-members (outside of natural disasters).
Weren't we all taught, at an early age, to help others?Isn't the
judging of whether "they" need in or not supposed to be left to a higher
Community organisers. They get it.
I have no issues with helping those that are actually in need. The issue comes
up with the high level of fraudulant people that have zero shame about scamming
the system and stealing from those that are in need and vulnerable. The other
issue is the generational welfare, where kids grow up in this environment and
believe that is the way to get through life.Are we really helping
people when we just give them what they ask for? There are some people that can
handle being on assistance temporarily and when they are back on their feet they
get off of the system. Others are complacent to live off the system and always
have a reason to not work and provide for themselves.That's the
difference I see in the philosophy between dems and repubs. One believes you
should just give and sustain those that won't do for themselves. The other
believes in helping people, but, those that can-should get back on their feet
and help themselves as soon as possible.
Is infrastructure the problem? Do we have poverty in America because of a lack
of roads that allow people to get to work and for products to get to market? Do
we have poverty because of a lack of police and fire protection? Do we have
poverty because people have not had the OPPORTUNITY to receive an education?Those duties are mostly allocated to government. The rest of the duties
we retain to ourselves.Every week in church Priesthood Meeting, the
group leadership checks with each person who is unemployed or underemployed to
see how the job hunt is progressing and to check on the welfare needs of that
person and his family. Other group members are asked to be alert for employment
opportunities. Occasionally, we are asked to spend a few hours helping someone
in the ward boundaries with mundane tasks, tasks that may have become too trying
for him to handle by himself.That same help is extended to every
person, regardless of religious affiliation who lives within our Ward boundary.
No one is left out because of religious affiliation.Government
can't solve the problem. They've tried for 80 years. They're
using the wrong plan.
But, John, that's not the Republican way is it?After all,
aren't 47% of us just leaches?
How does it go? "A society can be judged based on its treatment of its most
vulnerable". Or similar. We do need to have a means of
preventing our help from being drained by some to the point of being unable to
help anyone, however. Those that provide the help can find themselves in a bit
of a quandary in terms of resources available to give.