News & Politics

Rant

Blessed Are The Poor

Posted 33 months ago|27 comments|700 views
VIDEOS
Written by
JAK Gladney
Saint Albans, WV
Perhaps the biggest casualty of John Edwards’ fall from political grace was the loss of his “two Americas” rhetorical device—an argument of haves versus have-nots. The comparison was further dramatized when a recent health fair in Inglewood, California was overwhelmed by thousands of Los Angelinos looking for emergency dental and vision care, blood pressure checks, mammograms, and immunizations. Remote Area Medical, the Tennessee-based group that organized the event, has organized similar health fairs in rural Virginia and New Orleans, post-Hurricane Katrina.

Evangelical conservatives have not been shy about entering the political fray in the last few election cycles. So why the relative quiet on health care reform—a topic captivating most Americans?

More socially progressive religious organizations—like Sojourners, Faith in Public Life, Alliance for the Common Good, and the PICO National Network—have joined the “40 Days for Health Reform” coalition, buying ad time on national cable news outlets in an effort to resurrect an idea that has fallen out of favor—a health care crisis is fundamentally a crisis of faith. Rev. John Hay, speaking for the coalition, has said “This is no way for the most blessed country in the world to treat its most vulnerable citizens.”

The Catholic Medical Association, representative of more conservative religious organizations, has channeled the RNC’s point-by-point criticisms of the current proposals: concerns over subsidizing abortion, competition tilted in the government’s favor, “heavy-handed federal control” and the “death panel” evocative “regulating medical treatments based not only on clinical, but also ‘economic’ criteria.”

The abortion issue has been addressed. One version of the House reform bill, by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, would allow health plans to cover abortions, provided they were paid for entirely with private funds (the Capps Amendment).

But concern over unfair competition, real or imagined, is an odd plank, especially for groups that enjoyed preferential treatment under the Bush Administration’s Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, all the while flouting employment non-discrimination laws that their secular competitors had to honor. But speaking to a more disturbing trend: when did free market apologetics become a cornerstone of mainstream religious belief?

When you think of some of this country’s most sweeping social legislation, it is hard to imagine what shape those debates might have taken had our religious leaders sat on the sidelines.

That any American can look at thousands of their fellow citizens, waiting in the sweltering southern California sun for basic health care, and see a system that works is an indictment. That our religious leaders can watch it and say nothing makes us question who has done the calling. A religious push in favor of social policy that is less worldly and more humane seems in order, and consistent with the best traditions of our religious communities.
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
33 months ago: How bout them Vols?
33 months ago: You don't take a shotgun to a spitball contest.
You do not destroy the entire health care system to help the poor. There are better ways to do it without the government involved.
33 months ago: As usual, JAK, you raise a thoughtful and well-written post!

Living in So. Calif, I saw massive coverage of the Inglewood health fair. It was disturbing to learn that many volunteer medical workers were turned away, being unlicensed in the State! At the time, I wondered why churches weren't bringing food, water, hats and other comforts to those who waited TWO DAYS for something as simple as a dental appointment or a mammogram.

What could be the possible cause of conservative churches, who were unapologetically vocal in their support of the last president without fear of losing their tax-free status, now being reluctant to live by the teachings of Jesus? Could it be that this "objectionable" health care reform is being enacted by a President who has stated his goal to free government of intrusive religious influence?

It was interesting that I didn't see ONE Cardinal Mahoney, Jesse Jackson, Ted Swaggert, Billy Graham, Jr, etc, passing out water bottles and wiping sweaty brows.
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
33 months ago: A wonderful post and great points except for Red's. Who else is going to do something about the 49 million uninsured if not we the government? This is a moral issue and those that are intentionally spreading lies and misinformation to kill any reform, are indirectly responsible for the deaths of 20,000 people a year who die because of a lack of health care. How can we, a nation that claims to be 85% Christian, justify this? This is seven times the number of unnecessary lives lost than from 9/11. Where is the outrage?
"What you do to the least of these, you do unto me"
33 months ago: Republicans and Christians don't cede power easily...even in a fair election!
33 months ago: You libs seem to live in a different world or you are not being honest with yourselves.

Christians have been "quiet on health care reform"? Huh? Who do you think the protesters have been? Elves from the North Pole?

Is this a nation of laws or tyranny?

I respectfully suggest you are missing the point completely. Christians did not cause the problem in California. The liberals have been in control of California for 20 or 30 years, and look where it has gotten you. Thousands of people have to line up and wait for days for basic health care.

Zoolady:
How do you know what a Christian is thinking?

Altruist:
Goobledegoop.
JAK Gladney
JAK Gladney
Saint Albans, WV
33 months ago: You're speaking of individual Christians, red. Where's Focus on the Family? Where's the Catholic League? Where's Rick Warren, or Franklin Graham? Where are all of the big, endlessly moralizing Christian think tanks and policy groups that mobilize against everything from same sex unions to abortion? We know that, for many of these under served Americans, religious charities are a first point-of-contact--they see and deal with these problems every day. These groups now have the opportunity, as they did in the civil rights movement, to get behind sweeping social change--something that would substantially change the quality of life in their communities.

In the recent moral calculus, poverty has lost too much ground. We hear calls from the pulpit to stop granting Communion to pro-choice pols, stern sermons on the Christian voter's responsibilities in the voting booth. I want to know where they stand, for them to go on the record on this issue, for better or worse. They're not shy about mixing religion and politics, so let's hear it.

You miss the point on the health fair--this isn't isolated to southern California. You find the exact same run on basic health care services in rural Virginia, Tennessee, West Virginia; in New Orleans.

zoolady & Altruist: thank you for the kind words and thoughtful comments. You too, red--though I disagree.
33 months ago: Redstate, you're leaping to conclusions. Notice I said nothing about "knowing" Christian thinking?

I actually wrote "What could be the possible cause of conservative churches, who were unapologetically vocal in their support of the last president without fear of losing their tax-free status, now being reluctant to live by the teachings of Jesus? Could it be that this "objectionable" health care reform is being enacted by a President who has stated his goal to free government of intrusive religious influence?

Those are QUESTIONS..not ASSUMPTIONS.

Nor did I say anything about Christians CAUSING the California problem. Since I live here, I know a tiny bit more about what caused these problems than YOU do. It's not my habit to simplistically assign every problem to the opposite party--some people can actually see PAST politics because they realize life is NOT just "black and white," but is actually multiple shades of grey.

Finally, if you're claiming that the ill-mannered SCREAMERS who've been disrupting the democratic process in community meetings are all Christians (rather than elves,) you can have them, since they're hardly anyone of whom I'd be proud.
33 months ago: Just so I understand. The present medicare / medicaid government which is bankrupt and costs more than private insurance while reimbursing doctors on average 26% less than private insurance now want to get even more involved in public insurance. Am I missing something here?

If the government wants to start a new company fine. Henry Waxman has sent a letter to private insurance companies demanding that the release proprietary informantion.

AP: "Waxman and Stupak also sought documents relating to premiums paid by policy holders, claims payments, sales expenses, administrative expenses and profits, broken down by categories such as employer-provided coverage; individual coverage, Medicare and Medicaid.

The requests were issued at a time when Obama's health care proposal is under intense attack from Republicans and other critics, including the health insurance industry. Much of the opposition focuses on proposals for the government to sell insurance in competition with private carriers."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iLixRic5jxtFgPfWqhTgy3d7L9EwD9A63KAO1

I would say to Waxman and his cronies. Screw you. Learn the hard way. That is what you do best.
Billyberoo
Billyberoo
Cedar Park, TX
33 months ago: Every body has got this Health Care issue wrong. It is not about health care, but about the government controlling another aspect of our lives.

And when that government chooses to encroach on our liberty:
"it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
33 months ago: Yep Billy. That is a good point. I only suggest this as a point. Republicans in the House and Senate need to "hold the line". (Call/email/fax/communicate in some form)

ALL Republicans need to hold the "NO" vote ALL THE WAY the end to force the Democrat Conservative "Blue Dogs" to make a stand once and for all. All Republicans need to vote "no" and force the Democrat Conservative "Blue Dogs" to make that final yea/nay decision.

Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
33 months ago: The existing problems of Medicare could easily be addressed with the existing health care legislation. The reason it is costing more than Medicare takes in, is the high cost of Medical Care. We need the Health Care Reform to bring those hospital and medical costs down, to lessen the reliance on over medication, and by increasing preventative care. Those problems have little to do with the administration of the program which is 5 or 6 times cheaper than the private insurance plans.
33 months ago: Government is the problem with Medicare. If there was no medicare, there would be no (a much smaller) problem.

I also chose liberty, freedom and the best health care system in the world, ever over government control of our lives.

You dudes are dreaming if you think Health Care Reform will lower medical costs. The only scenario that can happen is giving grandma a pain pill instead of a pace maker.

We're not connecting here people.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
33 months ago: I'm not sure how to interpret that. Do you equate Christians with republicans? Does this mean there are no democrat Christians?
Or are there big religion elections that I don't know about? My mind is bogged down with the possibilities.

How many lawsuits have the republicans filed, contesting the outcome of an election? How many times have you heard of republicans riding around for days with boxes of ballots in the trunk of their car?

By the way, the teachings of Jesus are against allowing an earthly power taking care of your day-to-day needs. He said "give unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's".

To equate socialism with the teachings of Christ is an absolute fallacy. To give with a cheerful heart is not the same as a government demanding that you give. Nowhere did Jesus command us to take form the rich and give to the poor. What you are proposing is tantamount to what you despise in your perception of Christians, namely, forcing your ideals upon the rest of the world.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
33 months ago: The above comment was to zooladay, in response to her comment

"Republicans and Christians don't cede power easily...even in a fair election! "
33 months ago: OTB...Republicans and Christians don't cede power easily, even in a fair election. Obama won fairly but we still see absolute NONSENSE thrown up everywhere possible about the citizenship issue. If you believe these people, he's a demon from hell, a Muslim. Everything he proposes is immediately put down. Admit it--Republicans aren't exactly patriotic in the sense of working together for the next four years--are they?

Secondly, Christians once had wayyyy too much power in our society--Christmas-themed displays on publicly-funded property, prayers in publicly-funded schools, etc. These things are now realized to be against the principles of separation of church and state but you still hear anguished cries of "persecution for our beliefs," blah, blah, blah.

You might not agree with this--BUT IT IS A VALID POINT AND I GET TO EXPRESS IT. I HAVE NO INTEREST IN ARGUING WITH YOU, I AM EXPRESSING A POINT. Do you understand that?

And in case that remark about someone "despising" Christians was directed to me, you're totally off the beam. My opinion has nothing to do with me forcing my ideals upon the rest of the world--no more than YOU do when you express an opinion.

Try to understand that.
33 months ago: ("But wait--there's MORE.")


Don't talk to me about Jesus--I'm very familiar with his teachings. Jesus was about mercy, charity, love and forgiveness. He chastized Pharisees for their public displays of prayer and piety, he kicked the commercial people out of the temple and he talked about loving one another. He never criticized anyone for their race, gender or sexual orientation. As far as I know, he'd've been right in the middle of that "health fair," handing out water, hats and wiping brows...hardly "rendering unto Caesar." It's an example many Christians choose to ignore.

Reading his post with an open mind tells me that JAK's point is the same thing. In fact, one of his main points is related to wondering WHY religious groups are even involved in the debate against competition in health care. And I agree with him--it's hardly their business to be involved in commercial activity (in the temple, so to speak.) Their business should be ministering to the faithful, shouldn't it?

You jumped right in here without stopping to understand JAK's point. Instead, YOU decided someone (I'm not sure who you targeted up there) was equating Christianity with "socialism" (which seems to be a nasty word in your vocabulary, since you use it as an insult.)

Stop assuming you know what's in other people's heads and hearts--you don't know and you can't know and never will know until you learn to really read and listen.
33 months ago: Well said Zoolady.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
33 months ago: Zoolady, no need to yell.
I think perhaps you are the one that missed the point of JAK's post. He was attempting to make the more conservative religious organizations look bad for not jumping into the healthcare fray, after being so vocal on other issues, such as abortion.

"Evangelical conservatives have not been shy about entering the political fray in the last few election cycles. So why the relative quiet on health care reform—a topic captivating most Americans?"

"That our religious leaders can watch it and say nothing makes us question who has done the calling."

Now as to the patriotism of working together. It seems like the democrat idea of working together is "This is how it is, and if you don't like it, you are unpatriotic."
That is what I meant by forcing your ideals on others.

As to you telling me not to talk to you about a subject, if you don't want criticism, don't post your thoughts on a public forum.
33 months ago: OTB...you don't know the difference between discussion of a topic and personal attacks. I'd forgotten that about you. Now I remember. Goodbye.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
33 months ago: I didn't mean to attack you personally. I'm sorry if I gave you that impression. If I were to attack you personally, I would have said something along the lines of:
"You were wondering why churches weren't out there passing out water and wiping brows? How many bottles of water did you pass out, and how many brows did you personally wipe?"
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
33 months ago: ‘(5) RELIGIOUS CONSCIENCE EXEMPTION.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to any individual (and any qualifying child residing with such individual) for any period if such individual has in effect an exemption which certifies that such individual is a member of a recognized religious sect or division thereof described in section 1402(g)(1) and an adherent of established tenets or teachings
of such sect or division as described in such section.

How's that for your separation of church and state?
JAK Gladney
JAK Gladney
Saint Albans, WV
33 months ago: There you go: abortion as piety litmus test. And it speaks to the broader question: when did abortion--and not, say, poverty or social justice--get bucked to the top of the moral hierarchy?

I'll use Catholicism, since that's my frame of reference. I used to encounter this in the Catholic church, before my departure, on a regular basis: sign my abortion petition, stand on a pro-life picket. Ask said petitioner if they or anyone in their shrinking Catholic family uses birth control, and you get "That's none of your business." Cafeteria Catholics, picking and choosing which mortal sins they obey, and which they disregard.

The Catholic church is stuck in the 15th century, and has been since the death of John XXIII: no significant role for women; a refusal to deal with AIDS in the developing world in a manner that's not completely chauvinistic; Catholics who see entering the clergy as a way to "deal" with homosexuality. And they're hemorrhaging parishioners--even once reliably Catholic Latinos--to the more charismatic Protestant denominations.

The message from American Catholics is clear: this sexual fixation is frippery, and only possible in an institution that's still dominated by old men. Stop lecturing American Catholics on their narrow responsibilities in the voting booth, and take a page from the Jesuits: get out there, away from your posh roost, and stand in the streets, where the starving and the suffering, the living and the dying is done. Anything else, and you're just like every other free market cultist, preaching the gospel of the status quo.
33 months ago: The purpose of all Christian ministry is the glory of God and NOT the aggrandizement of religious leaders or organizations.

Great leaders are not only believing people who obey the Lord and courageously move ahead, but they challenge others to go with them.

“A great many people have got a false idea about the church. They have got an idea that the church is a place to rest in…to get into a nicely cushioned pew, and contribute to the charities, listen to the minister, and do their share to keep the church out of bankruptcy, is all they want. The idea of work for them—actual work in the church—never even enters their minds.”
D.L. Moody

A church that does not impact its community is a waste of real estate.

Make it a blessed day.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.