Oklahoma GOP Post Compared Food-Stamp Recipients to Animals

[Sapper Woody]

Didn't Jesus himself compare people to animals? Not just once, but many times?



He called the Samaritan woman a dog. He called the Pharisees vipers. He refers to the saved as sheep, the unsaved pretenders as goats. He spoke of Jerusalem as baby chicks, and himself as a hen. He is known as the Lion of the tribe of Judah.



So, what's wrong with using animal analogies?

 

[carpro]

Didn't Jesus himself compare people to animals? Not just once, but many times?



He called the Samaritan woman a dog. He called the Pharisees vipers. He refers to the saved as sheep, the unsaved pretenders as goats. He spoke of Jerusalem as baby chicks, and himself as a hen. He is known as the Lion of the tribe of Judah.



So, what's wrong with using animal analogies?

Because it was a Republican named Donald Trump that used the analogy.

Nobody would have cared if Hillary did the same thing.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Lets find out-

:thumbs::wavy:


Let's weed out the abuse, and make sure the TRULY needy get the care and support they need.

 

[carpro]

:thumbs::wavy:


Let's weed out the abuse, and make sure the TRULY needy get the care and support they need.

Can't be done. The government is involved.

 

[OldRegular]

Can't be done. The government is involved.

Just the Feds!

Anyone remember this in Newburgh (city), New York:

In the early 1960s, city manager Joseph McDowell Mitchell and the council attracted nationwide attention and the admiration of political conservatives when they attempted to require welfare recipients to pick up their payments at police headquarters. Mitchell later announced a program aimed largely at blacks on welfare, whom many in the community blamed for its economic problems. The program would have denied welfare payments to all after three months except the aged, the blind and the handicapped. Those affected would have largely been single mothers of young children, the only category in which blacks were predominant. The program also would have denied payments to single mothers who had working relatives living in the city. After opposition by both state and federal officials, the program created a national controversy and never went into effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newburgh_(city),_New_York

Actually the Federal Government threatened to cut off all welfare funding if Newburgh proceeded with the program. And then there is this:

When welfare pays better than work
By Michael TannerAugust 19, 2013 | 4:00am

Here’s an offer for you: $38,004 per year, tax free.No work required.Apply at your local welfare office.

The federal government funds 126 separate programs targeted towards low-income people, 72 of which provide either cash or in-kind benefits to individuals. (The rest fund community-wide programs for low-income neighborhoods, with no direct benefits to individuals.) State and local governments operate more welfare programs.Of course, no individual or family gets benefits from all 72 programs, but many do get aid from a number of them at any point in time.

Today, the Cato institute is releasing a new study looking at the state-by-state value of welfare for a mother with two children. In the Empire State, a family receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Medicaid, food stamps, WIC, public housing, utility assistance and free commodities (like milk and cheese) would have a package of benefits worth $38,004, the seventh-highest in the nation.

While that might not sound overly generous, remember that welfare benefits aren’t taxed, while wages are. So someone in New York would have to earn more than $21 per hour to be better off than they would be on welfare.That’s more than the average statewide entry-level salary for a teacher.

Plus, going to work means added costs such as paying for child care, transportation and clothing.Not to mention that, even if it’s not a money-loser, a person moving from welfare to work will see some form of loss — namely, less time for leisure as opposed to work.

Is it any wonder, then, that, despite the work requirements included in the 1996 welfare reform, only 27.6 percent of adult welfare recipients in New York are working in unsubsidized jobs?(Another 13 percent are involved in the more broadly defined “work participation,” which includes job search, training and other things.)

Welfare is slightly more generous in Connecticut, where benefits are worth $38,761; a person leaving welfare for work would have to earn $21.33 per hour to be better off.And in New Jersey, a worker would have to make $20.89 to beat welfare.

http://nypost.com/2013/08/19/when-welfare-pays-better-than-work/

I still believe Scripture says it best:

1 Timothy 5:8. But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

2 Thessalonians 3:10. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.[/QUOTE]