[charlie22]

I like the idea of free lunches. What does it cost? $1.50 to feed a kid? Very worth it. If we have problems funding it, why don't we cut some of the Decisions makers salaries, free health insurance benefits, etc... to fund it

SOOOOOOOOOOOO many times, I have known of kids, just like Wildcat mentioned that, ON PAPER, their parent/guardian has money, but the kid never sees a penny. Those are very sad situations. Kids that their "family" doesn't care enough to give them lunch money, get them proper school clothes (aka not dirty, 1960's hand-me-downs), etc....

I honestly could care less about the class conflict, it will always be there. Even some schools that have went to uniforms, kids will buy uniforms with a certain logo on the shirt, wear an expensive piece of jewelry, have an expensive purse, etc... It doesn't matter what is done, unfortunately, there will always be the have and have not.

I told my wife and in-laws the other day. We were talking about the budget stuff and I told them that as long as I can survive, I don't care what I have to pay in taxes, and I honestly mean it. (I say none of this to gloat, just to make the point that I will give whatever it takes to help the less fortunate) I made the challenge to my churches to be faithful with their tithing (Giving 10%, etc...)I told them that a good leader, leads by example, so I am giving 20% off the top (I didn't tell about the 20%, as far as anyone other than the treasurer knows, all I do it tithe).

Also, as a Pastor, I am considered by the IRS as a self-employer, so I do have to pay taxes on my income AND the parsonage I live in (for some reason the value of the home provided to me is considered income, and they tax it as well.) HOWEVER, I have never once complained about the taxes, I just pray when I fill the check out that it will help those less fortunate.

Unlike some, however, I understand that rich people do either work hard or have studied hard to get to where they are. I would never try to demand, or make a law that forced money out of their pocket. I hope we would have faith enough to give generously to organizations like the local church, A.R.C., Feed the children, etc...

I have to agree with the bolded; and I likewise agree with Hoot's position on this matter. At what point does taking from the wealthy to take care of the poor end? Does the concept of free will mean that the good Lord should not want us to be forced by the govt to help the poor, but rather do so on own own iniative and by our own free choice? At what point does the taking actually become such a disincentive to working hard that people say "the heck with working hard to get ahead because the govt is going to take a large share of what I worked hard and risked to earn to give to those not willing to work hard or take the risks that I'm willing to take"? At what point does the safety net of entitlements become so plush that people don't bother to work; rather they live off the govt and let other poor smucks work their tail ends off to pay for it? Is this country at a point that a majority of folks have lost the value of self reliance and responsibility? My father and his father would have never accepted a $ in govt handouts as a result of the shame they would have felt. Is that prevalent sentiment around today? Do we risk becoming the next Greece or Spain where the people have become so addicted to entitlements to the point where they riot when faced with a reduction of entitlements with the knowledge that if entitlements aren't cut back severely their entire economy and govt will collapse? Are we that far gone?

LWC, in your capacity as a Pastor, I have a question for you. I believe that the growth of the govt safety net has had an adverse and negative effect on the strength of the family and the church. Just a generation ago, people had to have a strong family bond because in times of need it was the family members that took care of one of their own when times were tough. It wasn't the govt. Because that person was living off his/her family members, he or she looked hard to become self sufficient as fast as he or she could. Likewise, people belonged to and were active in their churches. Churches often were a safety net for help in addition to families. But as the govt has become the safety net, the need for a close and tight family has diminished as has the need to be actively involved in the church. Furthermore, that safety net is some faceless govt program that users have no problem milking for as long as they can. Much like all the employee protection laws passed by the state legislature and Congress has gutted the need for strong unions (and thus driven union membership in this country downward), I believe the govt safety net has hurt the need for strong families and strong church relationships. Have you ever thought about that issue? In your experience as a Pastor, is my theory all wet or do you see some truth in it?