Monday, 26 September 2011

Mr. Colbert: The Champion-Hero Of Truthism

The Genius-left's never ending pursuit of truth has a nifty wedge they are trying to drive: the Christian 'right' against a 'left-leaning' Jesus. For centuries the concept of 'free will' has baffled both skeptics and can a loving God permit evil? The 'good' of free will is greater then the elimination of free will and the subsequent ending of evil.  (This entry accepts as basic that a loving God deems free will greater then no free will, without terrible and horrific as evil is.)
Free will is a privilege, something I am thankful for and believe God has given me: not government.  Therefore, certain rights and freedom's I believe are given from God, not man. I am free to think, raise a family and worship God. I am free to own property and keep the fruit of my labor.

These freedoms which I have been endowed with I do not take lightly, especially when I see left leaning politics, (in the name of Jesus) try to communicate to me how I should give more to a government in the name of 'compassion'.  This quote by uber-left Mr. Colbert illustrates such a point (given the 'Christian rights' resistance to more government spending).  America is the most generous nation on the planet. This is fairly well documented.  The personal giving above and beyond being over-taxed shows the 'Christian Generosity' Mr. Colbert seems to be ignoring in his tee-hee, ha, ha, not funny comment.
  • Fortysix percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three bedroom house with oneandahalf baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
  • Seventysix percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
  • Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than twothirds have more than two rooms per person.
  • The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
  • Nearly threequarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars.
  • Ninetyseven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
  • Seventyeight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
  • Seventythree percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

I agree that real religion is meeting others needs in deed.  My blog is entitled "compassion in action" not "compassion on hold" or "compassion for later...but not now".
I agree we need to demonstrate our values of loving others by how we act.
However, I do not want this truth (demonstration our actions of love to meet others genuine need) to conflict with other truths.  Truth does not contradict can't.

Here are some principles that lead me to my current thinking, and how they balance towards being a 'more conservative guy' then a loving-liberal.

I believe in personal responsibility, not collectivist's collecting my money and redistributing it for me.  There are consequences to choices. If mommy says, "don't spend your allowance on candy" and Jimmy does just that...does Sally owe half the interest from her bank account to Jimmy, because Sally has and Jimmy does not?  If mental or physical limitations prevent people from fairing under this principle, then we have a different case, and such 'analogies' do not apply, nor defeat my point.  Meeting needs with the mentally and physically able comes in different forms, but the key is that it should be done through relationship and a generous heart.

I believe The Bible teaches us to love our neighbor.  In a key parable, Jesus taught the neighbor is one who we come into contact with, who's need we both see and can meet, and took personal responsibility in meeting and following up with.  Each element of what I said is clearly shown as basic within the parable.  Therefore, I desire to give, but where 1. I come into direct contact with someone having a need 2. who's need I can meet.  and 3. God loves a cheerful giver!  So, I enjoy giving!  But that's the key. I enjoy giving...not: I enjoy giving my money to the government where they give out to those they see fit.  That is not compassion...that is extraction and forced leveling of the playing field: a principle opposed in scripture.   Compassion is when we see a need and meet it out of our generous heart and ability.  Our choice ought to govern where the money goes.  This way, there is an undercurrent of both relationship and accountability that carries on with the giving. This is something that blesses people and is seriously lacking with government programs.  Liberals are right: we need to step up and love people.  Forced giving does not do much.  Look at 'equality created through forced giving' left policy...and see how each country is fairing.  Not so witty when taken in context Mr. Colbert...but you are the Champion-Hero Of Truthism, I know you will think of something else!

The idea that Jesus wants you to give more money to the government to meet the needs of the people is ridiculous.
I am learning to be faithful, take responsibility, make better choices, honor authority, serve with excellence, improve communication, getting over the hurts of the past knowing they do not determine my future, learning to relate better and a host of other things.  We are called to learn and grow in the context of building relationships and being generous. Pouring the money into government coffers has the opposite affects building relationships have.  Government giving breeds entitlement! I am owed! That is my right to get something for free! Um, no says the real world.  The real world call's that coveting.  And don't make me show you another picture of Greece riots demanding more more more for nothing, nothing, nothing! We are not entitled to a list of government disbursed free living items because we are people of compassion meeting needs.  What a killer  of personal responsibility and true compassion!  Have those people with 'needs' connect with loved ones, charities and organizations: build relationships, serve, learn and grow...sooner then later, more individuals will be further inspired to 'get in on the action' and there would be less government, more personal responsibility and more needs met: truly that makes more sense, and dollars. 


  1. Though I agree with many points in your post, I am curious to know how you feel that statement by Colbert suggests government mandated giving?

    Though this is one quote, perhaps extracted from a larger body of work, I didn't catch him addressing government.

    Wasn't he addressing the myth of a Christian American nation and the orthodoxy vs orthopraxy of what Jesus taught regarding giving to the poor, and what actually occurs?

  2. Excellent point S.T: pls consider;
    Americans are the most generous people in the world, measured by charitable giving as a percent of GDP. Americans give twice as much (1.67% of GDP) as the next most charitable country, the U.K. at 0.73%, according to this study by the Charities Aid Foundation (chart above is taken from the study). Americans give almost 12 times as much as the French and almost 8 times as much as the Germans. In fact, Americans give more as a percent of GDP than France, Germany, Turkey, New Zealand, Singapore and the Netherlands COMBINED!

    I am partly working on: 1. he is smart. 2. info like this is rampent across the web. 3. He can't be resonablly be refering to the private sector, because his comments would make no every measurable world standard, Jesus working in the hearts makes the US the most generous! 4.there is major 'huf' with Obama trying to pass laws and the 'left' poking fun at hypocracy of Christians seeing 'pain' and not allowing the government to act...he has been part of that team poking fun. So it is an inductive connection...not a deductive question. If he were referring to people, it would be like making fun of 'point totals' of Michael Jordan or Wayne Gretzky...kinda stupid as they are the best; just as the us is is the best in that they are the most generous personally. Just because they could do more, does not mean they do not accomplish much.


Think of how you can make your point and be respectful.
Try to keep cursing to a minimum; with thanks.

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain