Here ya go - the Pope wants mmgw to fix the global economy and help the poor
-
Yep.
MMGW is a political/economic movement. That's why they don't care that
CO2 goes up, but global warming hasn't for 17 years.
The libs won't even comment on it when you bring it up on a political discussion board.
Redistribution of wealth. Francis is a leftwing liberal. It's what liberals do.
Any lie or half-truth that gets them what they want........is a "scientific truth".
But it is NOT a LAW. It's a theory with some science to back it up. A self-serving,
political/economic ulterior motive theory.
Because we keep showing that not all science supports it, but libs don't want
to admit it.
Liberal ulterior motives rule them.
http://news.yahoo.com/pope-urges-revolution-save-earth-fix-perverse-economy-100612403.html
-
Ahh I think I heard the same bit but keep in mind everyone that the ability to be happy with the spirit and the gifts of the Lord should be enough that you will be at peace. The goal is, or should be, to willingly give up the trappings of the flesh, the world, the material things we love and be happy in the spirit. I can't. I don't know if any of us can, but isn't that the goal? And Christianity isn't the only religion to teach that. Just something to think about.
WSS
-
If "Murica" really is a Christian nation, then we should be giving to charity and donating much more of our worth to the poor and needy. However, Christianity has made most Christians believe that 10% is all you need to give and God is happy with that.
A Christian based government would be very socialistic in concept. I hate to ruin it for people, but it would be. Early Christians gave what they had to other Christians so they could live and have what they needed to survive. But I don't think it would support the lazy and those that can't live within social laws and means either, like the US does now. -
Of course by that same token if the poor were Christian as well they would be satisfied with enough to eat and not angry because they weren't given cable television cell phones automobiles etc etc etc the peace of the Lord would be all they really need right?
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
Of course by that same token if the poor were Christian as well they would be satisfied with enough to eat and not angry because they weren't given cable television cell phones automobiles etc etc etc the peace of the Lord would be all they really need right?
WSS
Of course by that same token if the poor were Christian as well they would be satisfied with enough to eat and not angry because they weren't given cable television cell phones automobiles etc etc etc the peace of the Lord would be all they really need right?
WSS
Depends on which side of town you're on.
-
If "Murica" really is a Christian nation, then we should be giving to charity and donating much more of our worth to the poor and needy. However, Christianity has made most Christians believe that 10% is all you need to give and God is happy with that.
A Christian based government would be very socialistic in concept. I hate to ruin it for people, but it would be. Early Christians gave what they had to other Christians so they could live and have what they needed to survive. But I don't think it would support the lazy and those that can't live within social laws and means either, like the US does now.If "Murica" really is a Christian nation, then we should be giving to charity and donating much more of our worth to the poor and needy.
That's what the government is for remember....to take from one and give to another. If not for the huge tax burden, I believe Americans would give more, a lot more. I would.
Considering the taxes we pay, this Christian nation is still the most giving and charitable nation on the planet.
A Christian based government would be very socialistic in concept. I hate to ruin it for people, but it would be. Early Christians gave what they had to other Christians so they could live and have what they needed to survive. But I don't think it would support the lazy and those that can't live within social laws and means either, like the US does now.
So would an atheist based government, which this one is.
-
Of course by that same token if the poor were Christian as well they would be satisfied with enough to eat and not angry because they weren't given cable television cell phones automobiles etc etc etc the peace of the Lord would be all they really need right?
WSS
Depends on which side of town you're on.
Depends on which side of town you're on.
no it wouldnt. If everyone followed the Christian doctrine everyone would be happy with their faith and avoid laziness and greed. either side of town.
WSS
-
The early church did have a form of wealth redistribution and communism. The churches that had enough to share did so with other churches who did not have enough. That system could work in the early church but it does not work in the world. Not in a world of selfish people. Communism has been a horrible failure wherever it has been tried. In Russia it made a few million the rulers over hundreds of millions. Capitalism has proved to produce the highest standard of living.
-
The early church did have a form of wealth redistribution and communism. The churches that had enough to share did so with other churches who did not have enough. That system could work in the early church but it does not work in the world. Not in a world of selfish people. Communism has been a horrible failure wherever it has been tried. In Russia it made a few million the rulers over hundreds of millions. Capitalism has proved to produce the highest standard of living.
. Capitalism has proved to produce the highest standard of living.
it's also proven to be the most destructive and unsustainable. A combination of both is necessary to rationally run a society. There are some things the free market will always do better and others where some collectivist action is more appropriate. Our current food situation is a perfect example of how unfettered capitalism runs our most precious resource into the ground. Same with water. Gross mismanagement of water is what's currently turning California into a desert.
-
Of course by that same token if the poor were Christian as well they would be satisfied with enough to eat and not angry because they weren't given cable television cell phones automobiles etc etc etc the peace of the Lord would be all they really need right?
WSS
Of course by that same token if the poor were Christian as well they would be satisfied with enough to eat and not angry because they weren't given cable television cell phones automobiles etc etc etc the peace of the Lord would be all they really need right?
WSS
I make deliveries over on the eastside of Cleveland and, some of the Churches have free cell phone stands in the parking lot
-
If I want one guy just one guy to be a liberal it's the pope. Because honestly the church needs some social liberalism.
-
-
They hypocrisy of elite liberals (especially the Hollywood ones) is one of the things that bother me in this debate. The Barbara Streisand's of the world want everyone else (the little people) to ditch their air conditioners and do without while she has an air conditioned barn with all her Hollywood memorabilia as well as a huge air conditioned mansion that she keeps nice and cool. She wants the rest of us to use clotheslines to dry our clothes but I doubt if there are any clotheslines to be found on her property. These elites fly around in their private jets and drive in their limos and tell everyone else how to live.
Another thing that makes no sense is if we ditch our coal industry and raise energy prices on people here in this country how is that affecting anything as long as China and India are constantly building more coal powered plants? This would have to be done world wide to make a difference otherwise we are putting burdens on the people in this country and possibly wrecking our own economy for no good reason.
-
Meanwhile, China and India will be saying 'if the US, with all its money, aren't finding a way to make this economically viable, why should we even bother looking?' and there'll be a lovely standoff where neither side moves and the rest of the world suffers.
Bear in mind also, America is the second highest emitter of carbon behind china (with India third), but streets ahead of them in terms of carbon per capita. Of the more highly populated countries - excluding netherlands antilles, qatar and the like - Americans and Australians have the highest carbon footprint, about five times higher than China, and ten times higher than India.
So yes, it's important for those emerging super-powers to find alternative ways of powering their economy, let's not forget that we all have a responsibility here.
-
They hypocrisy of elite liberals (especially the Hollywood ones) is one of the things that bother me in this debate. The Barbara Streisand's of the world want everyone else (the little people) to ditch their air conditioners and do without while she has an air conditioned barn with all her Hollywood memorabilia as well as a huge air conditioned mansion that she keeps nice and cool. She wants the rest of us to use clotheslines to dry our clothes but I doubt if there are any clotheslines to be found on her property. These elites fly around in their private jets and drive in their limos and tell everyone else how to live.
Another thing that makes no sense is if we ditch our coal industry and raise energy prices on people here in this country how is that affecting anything as long as China and India are constantly building more coal powered plants? This would have to be done world wide to make a difference otherwise we are putting burdens on the people in this country and possibly wrecking our own economy for no good reason.
Another thing that makes no sense is if we ditch our coal industry and raise energy prices on people here in this country how is that affecting anything as long as China and India are constantly building more coal powered plants? This would have to be done world wide to make a difference otherwise we are putting burdens on the people in this country and possibly wrecking our own economy for no good reason.
I know that Obama is being made out to be the bad guy on coal but what is killing coal in this country is the price of natural gas and the fact that the coal is running out. In WV alone, my office knows for a fact that we have five years left at the most of quality coal. That is only with production cut down. There is much more coal but it is very low quality and would not be worth the effort to mine. Other states are facing the same issues but are not being vocal about it.
As it stands, many of the coal companies are now moving towards natural gas to make more money but blaming it on the EPA. I just got done assisting a large energy company with setting up gas pads near Belmont, OH. This same company used to be primarily coal focused. They see the writing on the wall but don't want to be the bad guy so they blame regulations. Gas pads are cost intensive in the beginning but can be ran on far less labor after setup. You don't have to pay people to saw off a mountain top or keep burrowing into the ground. Once tapped, it is a self sustaining operation.
-
Nuclear Power
-
Nuclear Power
No thanks. Solar & hydroelectric.
-
Nuclear Power
No thanks. Solar & hydroelectric.
No thanks. Solar & hydroelectric.
Too large of a footprint. Not enough energy produced.
-
Too large of a footprint. Not enough energy produced.
Safer, no waste material that as yet can't really be dealt with safely.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login