i've been wondering, with all these talk about healthcare reform, with all the vibe about the uninsured, access to good healthcare for all, etc. . . there is a deafening silence from the men of god in the evangelical right.

these are people who wont waste a second to condemn gays and lesbians(understandably) , condenm democratic presidential candidates, claim holiness etc . . . but why are they not showing concern for those poor and underprivileged members of the society who cant afford healthcare.

where are the rick warrens, the paisleys, the hagees etc . . where are these guys? many wont waste a minute to show themselves helping some poor africans in some war torn 3rd world country but are astonishingly silent in this heated debate that concerns poor americans and indeed even middle class americans who think they have healthcare coverage. . . .

can someone educate me on what i dont know. with all humility . . i'm ready to be educated on the evangelical perspective of the healthcare debate

_________Dafur

Because at the heart of the health care debate is RACE!

The health care reform is being viewed by the evangelicals as Obama's plan to take money from hardworking white people and give to lazy black people in the form of health care.

The evangelical pastors are afraid of coming out in support of health care for fear of what their congregation might do or think of them.

Your questions are apt! And this is one of the main reasons I distrust Republicans and so-called evangelical Christians. They will cry and scream about the evils of abortion and how God hates gays, however, they:

1. Support unrestricted purchase of any kind of firearm, even those that categorized as "assault rifles"
2. They love the death penalty and even work against using DNA to exonerate death row inmates
3. Totally support bombings that kill innocent men, women and children
4. Fight against giving welfare to that woman who is poor, refused to do an abortion and raising her child all by herself
5. Have no sympathy for illegal immigrants and willing to deport them, forgetting that they are all destructive immigrants
6. Are very happy that over 40 million Americans are uninsured and millions more are under-insured

There is nothing Christian about the Religious Right in America!

i'm so baffled by how those guys combine God and guns . . . . i just wonder

RichyBlacK:

Because at the heart of the health care debate is RACE!

The health care reform is being viewed by the evangelicals as Obama's plan to take money from hardworking white people and give to lazy black people in the form of health care.

Yes o. . . . . you said it all.

RichyBlacK:

Because at the heart of the health care debate is RACE!

The health care reform is being viewed by the evangelicals as Obama's plan to take money from hardworking white people and give to lazy black people in the form of health care.

You said it all.

As regards the "christian right" . . . i'm sorry but the most racist americans are sitting in your church pews. Dont be taken in by their false smiles, try marrying their daughter and you will see the real them.

The emergence of Obama is the beginning of new world order and the age old reptilean crackers will stop at nothing to see it fail but the more they fight,the more they fail because the normal order of things is good over evil not evil over good,as it has been for so long.

What is bad in elevating the needy?It seems to be only in america that it's lawfully wrong to address the needs of the poor in the name of capitalism.

Health care industry is so draconic to the point that they intentionally create and spread viruses in order to make vaccines to keep the money rolling and the people in check.

Absolute capitalism is threat to human unity,solidarity,equality and general existence.

davidylan:

You said it all.

As regards the "christian right" . . . i'm sorry but the most racist americans are sitting in your church pews. Dont be taken in by their false smiles, try marrying their daughter and you will see the real them.

Who send you message? you're going to look for Britney and Megan when you have plenty of Bisi's and Kudirat's waiting for you in Lagos

Ibime:

Yes o. . . . . you said it all.

The very weak American press dare not mention this!

davidylan:

You said it all.

As regards the "christian right" . . . i'm sorry but the most racist americans are sitting in your church pews. Dont be taken in by their false smiles, try marrying their daughter and you will see the real them. 

You got it!

Marry their daughter? You're better off trying to cross the Atlantic by boat!

i think i have evidence that perhaps those guys are not operating under the power of God. because when those guys endorsed old john (at least parsley didnt withdraw his endorsement, and lots of others endorsed old john even from the pulpit) and old john lost the election . . . does it not show that those guys were not operating under the influence of God?

b/c if God was the one who sent them to endorse old john, old john would definitely have won, b/c God is a Winner . .all the time.

one day we will know

@pres-elect,

i think i have evidence that perhaps those guys are not operating under the power of God. because when those guys endorsed old john (at least parsley didnt withdraw his endorsement, and lots of others endorsed old john even from the pulpit) and old john lost the election . . . does it not show that those guys were not operating under the influence of God?

b/c if God was the one who sent them to endorse old john, old john would definitely have won, b/c God is a Winner . .all the time.

one day we will know

Honestly, this is the most ridiculous statement I have ever heard/read! I can't believe it was written by you, pres-elect!

@pres-elect,

Okay let me tackle what appears to be your fundamental concern in starting this thread. I'll respond to your initial post.

i've been wondering, with all these talk about healthcare reform, with all the vibe about the uninsured, access to good healthcare for all, etc. . . there is a deafening silence from the men of god in the evangelical right.

Come to think of it, you are right. The so-called MOGs have been silent. Perhaps, they believe that elections have consequences, and its time to face the consequences of the last election.

these are people who wont waste a second to condemn gays and lesbians(understandably) , condenm democratic presidential candidates, claim holiness etc . . . but why are they not showing concern for those poor and underprivileged members of the society who cant afford healthcare.

I tire when people go from judging actions/fruits to judging people's motives. Only God has such exclusive preserve. You need to back-off from such. How many of the works they do for the underpriviledge do you ever hear about? Because you have a passion for providing free healthcare, you expect everyone else shold make that their priority? Come to think of it, Jesus wasn't out giving out Herod issued insurance cards, He was Himself healing the faith-full sicks.

where are the rick warrens, the paisleys, the hagees etc . . where are these guys? many wont waste a minute to show themselves helping some poor africans in some war torn 3rd world country but are astonishingly silent in this heated debate that concerns poor americans and indeed even middle class americans who think they have healthcare coverage. . . .

Again, you are delving into the realm of motives. What each man does is per what he is led to do. You are not their Master and are not in the position to declare what they should focus on.

can someone educate me on what i dont know. with all humility . . i'm ready to be educated on the evangelical perspective of the healthcare debate

My perspective according to the scriptures? It's none of the Govt's bsuiness to provide healthcare for its citizens! The Bible clearly states that the role of the Govt is to administer justice and do it by brute force if necessary. Jesus didn't dump the cik at Hrod's palace nor did any of the Disciples do same. Peter showed us what the priciple is when he approached the lame man at the temple gate. "Such as I have, give I thee." Each man should help his neighbour with what he has and out of his own volition. It is such willing sacirfices that God finds acceptable.

_________Dafur

Whatever.

@RichyBlack,

1. Support unrestricted purchase of any kind of firearm, even those that categorized as "assault rifles"

What is wrong with that?

2. They love the death penalty and even work against using DNA to exonerate death row inmates

The death penalty is appropriate under certain circumstances. The Bible declares an eye for an eye, meaning the punishment must fit the crime. If you deserve to be killed for your crime, then you should get what's coming to you.

3. Totally support bombings that kill innocent men, women and children

That's not true. Do you support all the innocent lives that have been killed by the US since Obama became President?

4. Fight against giving welfare to that woman who is poor, refused to do an abortion and raising her child all by herself

Again that is not true. We help people as much as we can. We don't believe in institutionalising poverty which is what most govt do for political advantage.

5. Have no sympathy for illegal immigrants and willing to deport them, forgetting that they are all destructive immigrants

That simply is not true as well. You are sounding very much like Chris Matthews.

6. Are very happy that over 40 million Americans are uninsured and millions more are under-insured

Happy about it? So you see them rejoicing in Church that 40 million people can't help themselves with the current govt regulation? Common.

Tayo-D:

@pres-elect,
Honestly, this is the most ridiculous statement I have ever heard/read!

obviously you dont read your own posts

I can't believe it was written by you, pres-elect!

believe it

@Tayo-D

Tayo-D:

What is wrong with that?

How does owning an assault rifle fit into the teachings of Christ?

The death penalty is appropriate under certain circumstances.  The Bible declares an eye for an eye, meaning the punishment must fit the crime.  If you deserve to be killed for your crime, then you should get what's coming to you.

Yep, going to the darkest reaches of the scripture to unearth ready-made excuses to kill people! You didn't answer why your "Religious Right" folks consistently work against the use of DNA and other exculpatory evidence to free death row inmates.

That's not true. Do you support all the innocent lives that have been killed by the US since Obama became President?

Who were those waving the American flag and encouraging the mass murderer to go and invade Iraq on lies? Please answer.

Again that is not true. We help people as much as we can. We don't believe in institutionalising poverty which is what most govt do for political advantage.

Tell me where the line is drawn between helping "people as much as we can" and what you call "institutionalizing poverty"? Aren't you guys the one screaming "welfare queen" _{(code for black woman with many baby daddies and even more babies with no job and depending on the government)} in the 1980s?

That simply is not true as well. You are sounding very much like Chris Matthews.

The Minute Men are 100% Republican; no liberal will join those thugs - you know that, don't you? Also, the Republicans are the ones that killed the last president's attempt to reform immigration, weren't they?

Happy about it?  So you see them rejoicing in Church that 40 million people can't help themselves with the current govt regulation?  Common.

Then tell me why the Republicans want to maintain the status quo as regards health care reform? Even you, Tayo-D, have said on this forum in the past that "health care must not be made available to everyone". Recall?

Republicans are more interested in protecting the medical industrial complex than in guaranteeing that all Americans get health care. How many Republicans are pushing for reform? Tell me. Reform means changing the current system, and that translates to more people being covered, not less. However, covering more people goes against the "values" of the Republicans, hence they are willing to do anything to allow the status quo!

They bring up the flimsy and hypocritical argument that health care reform (i.e., covering more Americans - recall this is against the fundamental principles of Republicans) will push the economy into more deficit, but these same Republicans will gladly fund any war for five times the cost of health care reform!

Why are the Republicans more interested in increasing America's capacity to kill (deadly arsenal of every weapon of mass destruction ever created by man) but are never interested in increasing America's capacity to save more lives?

May be the real question is, why RichyBlack is asking questions he already knows the answers to?

RichyBlacK:

May be the real question is, why RichyBlack is asking questions he already knows the answers to?

Probably because he thinks republicans might finally start thinking . . . but when the likes of Katy Abrams are the poster faces for the anti-reform republican party . . . there is very little hope of that happening.

May the Lord help us.

if only obama will wake up from his overriding delusion to understand that these republicans are ready to die than vote for his policies, things will start taking a better shape in congress. . . . . .

Honestly, I think the religious right or 'fundamentalist bible belt' get it wrong alot of the time. Even if they are not left wing on moral issues, I think they ought to support the healthcare reform. If they were vocal about the war on terror championed by the right wing, it would be hypocritical to keep mute on healthcare.

As an aside, I am of the opinion that 'commercialized' and 'elite' christianity that is being practiced in Nigeria is modelled after the American version of pentecostalism. The cabal of millionaire pastors have the likes of Kenneth Copeland, Creflo Dollar, T.D Jakes, Benny Hinn etc as their role models. SOme even go as far as immitating them.

I'll really hoping to see how the religious right will respond to this.

pres-elect:

if only obama will wake up from his overriding delusion to understand that these republicans are ready to die than vote for his policies, things will start taking a better shape in congress. . . . . .

Why is this being made into yet another REPUBLICANS vs DEMOCRATS debate. Aren't the Democrats currently the majority in both the house and senate? If the democrats were as united as you seem to propose, why is the bill still hanging? Last I checked, some democrats also do not like all what is in the contract and are fighting over it.

I will be surprised if a bill passes by the end of the year. Obama should not have given a deadline,

US is a very useless country

the kind of arguments I have heard on this healthcare issue proves thus.

I honestly did not know hitler was so kind to have a healthcare policy.

@ pres -elect

You are doing exactly what you are accusing evanglical pastors of. That is JUDGING OTHERS

By the way you are wrong about some things you said about them:-

1)They don't condemn Democrat presidential candidates only their policies as regards gay marriage and abortion

2)Their churches give a lot of support and assistance to the poor, the homeless, and the dispossessed.

One last point, Republican opposition to health care reform is based on economic ideology and not race as some posters mistakenly believe.

Fredique:

Honestly, I think the religious right or 'fundamentalist bible belt' get it wrong alot of the time. Even if they are not left wing on moral issues, I think they ought to support the healthcare reform. If they were vocal about the war on terror championed by the right wing, it would be hypocritical to keep mute on healthcare.

As an aside, I am of the opinion that 'commercialized' and 'elite' christianity that is being practiced in Nigeria is modelled after the American version of pentecostalism. The cabal of millionaire pastors have the likes of Kenneth Copeland, Creflo Dollar, T.D Jakes, Benny Hinn etc as their role models. SOme even go as far as immitating them.

I'll really hoping to see how the religious right will respond to this.

Please check your facts next time. Majority of the churches you listed above already have numerous FREE HEALTH programs running for person in poor communities and those who cannot afford. I can attest to that fact as I happen to have benefitted from one of those programs me for over a year. I got better care for free under those programs than I am getting now for pay. Stop trying to blame the religious right for this as if there are not enough votes on the other side to pass this, if they so wanted.

If you have a program with Nigerian churches, then judge them, not try to BLINDLY lop all churches together in one basket and think you score points by doing so. Now, about the Healthcare issue, individuals have their reasons for standing against this and on the major part, people are greatly concerned about how we foot the bill on this. No one is saying it is IMMORAL to try to take care of everyone. No one is saying that Universal HealthCare in itself is an abomination. The main problems here is that people are weary of having government handle yet another aspect of American life. They have seen the same government run Medicaid, Housing and even the welfare programs, and are hesitant that Government can do a good job with Healthcare for all. Another thing is with the huge bills and responsibilities we already have now, can we handle the cost of Universal Healthcare AT THIS POINT?

Kobojunkie:


Please check your facts next time. Majority of the churches you listed above already have numerous FREE HEALTH programs running for person in poor communities and those who cannot afford. I can attest to that fact as I happen to have benefitted from one of those programs me for over a year. I got better care for free under those programs than I am getting now for pay. Stop trying to blame the religious right for this as if there are not enough votes on the other side to pass this, if they so wanted.

If you have a program with Nigerian churches, then judge them, not try to BLINDLY lop all churches together in one basket and think you score points by doing so. Now, about the Healthcare issue, individuals have their reasons for standing against this and on the major part, people are greatly concerned about how we foot the bill on this. No one is saying it is IMMORAL to try to take care of everyone. No one is saying that Universal HealthCare in itself is an abomination. The main problems here is that people are weary of having government handle yet another aspect of American life. They have seen the same government run Medicaid, Housing and even the welfare programs, and are hesitant that Government can do a good job with Healthcare for all. Another thing is with the huge bills and responsibilities we already have now, can we handle the cost of Universal Healthcare AT THIS POINT?

Ok. I did not know about the free healthcare provided by churches. That is cool.

I would not blame the religious right for healthcare, but their refusal to speak out when they were vocal about the Iraq war seems unfair to me. providing free healthcare to people in poor communities suggests to me that they shouldn't have a problem with the government extending this programme so that it has a wider reach (irrespective of the fact that the government in question is a left wing government)

About Nigerian churches, in the final analysis, they will take responsibility for their abuses. But it does not take so much to discover that many of the practices that have been abused by nigerian pentecostal preachers have been learnt from US evangelicals, especially the commercialisation of the gospel.

The thing here is that the arguments for or against healthcare stem from political/economic ideologies. I'm sure you know this already. The right believes that the government should take their hands off the economy and let market forces determine things. The left on the other hand believes that government involvement can be for good and can benefit many people. In the final analysis, the question is who benefits in either paradigms. If right leaning policies are followed, the elites and economic heavy weights (e.g insurance companies) are the ones that benefit. On the other hand, left-leaning policies tends to include people who would ordinarily be excluded. the religious right (which is the issue in this thread), I believe should be concerned about the fatherless, widows, the poor, downthroden etc and seek to expand their help. They should be happy that there is a government that is willing to do this.

The cost of the programme, I agree is an issue. This I understand is also the concern of many fiscally conservative democrats. Obama has already explained how he intends to take care of about two-thirds of the cost by correcting the inefficiencies in the system. He will still have to sort out the remaining one-third. Cost is a real issue here and Obama's argument about funding it can be debated. Having said that, I think that if the debate has revolved around cost, maybe we would have seen a more constructive debate that would yield trade offs and compromises. Instead what we have seen is the politicising of the whole thing. The thing is, Obama rode on healthcare in his campaign. The republicans know that it is his achille's heel of some sort. Someone even voiced the underlying motive of 'breaking Obama' and the healthcare reform failure being 'his waterloo'. Then there is the issue of the death panel lies (something that republicans themselves introduced in the bills).

Talking about the role of the religious right. If they are supposed to speak the truth, then I think they have a role to voice out what is true about the healthcare reform debate. Yes, it is costly, but so also is the war in Iraq and the subsidies paid to the Insurance companies. and sometimes, you have to spend heavily in the short term to make savings in the long term. I've not heard a reasonable refutal of the claim that healthcare reform will save money in the long run.

If the cost is the issue, why wont republicans stick to the cost debate? Most of the right-leaning media responses have been more or less scare tactics rather than real issues that are actually in the bill -which does not make sense to me.

@Fredrique

You have been told that, to your surprise,  evangelical churches run free health programs for people living in poor neighbourhoods and people on low income. So that should deal with the issue of whether or not they are concerned
about the health-care needs of poor people.

As I alluded to earlier, determining which method of financing America's health care delivery system is the most efficient, economic and effective depends on one's ideological leanings. I don't see it as primarily a moral or ethical issue and so it is not surprising that pastors have not made outspoken pronouncements on the issue either way.

What you are attempting to do, rather disingenously if I may say, is to put in the same boat:-

1) Evangelical pastors who support the policies of the Republican party as regards issues like personal
   responsibility, abortion, gay marriage and school prayer; and

2) Fiscal conservatives who support the policies of the Republican party as regards  low taxes, low government 
    spending and policies which support the growth and development of  private sector businesses.

tensor777:

@Fredrique

You have been told that, to your surprise,  evangelical churches run free health programs for people living in poor neighbourhoods and people on low income. So that should deal with the issue of whether or not they are concerned
about the health-care needs of poor people.

Whilst it was something I didn't know, I wouldn't say I was surprised. They should be concerned. What surprises me rather is why they wont support it to be extended on a larger scale in the same way they were outspoken about the war. That seems hypocritical to me.

tensor777:

As I alluded to earlier, determining which method of financing America's health care delivery system is the most efficient, economic and effective depends on one's ideological leanings. I don't see it as primarily a moral or ethical issue and so it is not suprising that pastors have not made outspoken pronouncements on the issue either way.

Generally, what is moral and ethical is becomiing increasingly relative, but if placing profit making before saving lives by insurance companies (to the extent of withdrawing cover for pre-existing conditions) is not a moral issue, then maybe nothing else is a moral issue.

tensor777:


What you are attempting to do, rather disengenously if I may say, is to put in the same boat:-

1) Evangelical pastors who support the policies of the Republican party as regards issues like personal
   responsibility, abortion, gay marriage and school prayer; and

2) Fiscal conservatives who support the policies of the Republican party as regards low taxes, low government 
    spending and policies which support the growth and development of  private sector businesses.

It is a known fact that the Republican party consist of Fiscal conservatives and the Religious right (evangelicals) -they are already in the same boat. The evangelicals are in because of their stance on the issues you rightly highlighted. The Evangelicals have also canvassed for support for the Republicans based on their interest, which is OK -politics is all about interest, right? My point is, shouldn't health care be their interest? I can predict your answer since you dont consider health care primarily as a moral issue. But if health care is a moral issue (which I think it is), and the religious right are interested in moral issues (as their provision of healthcare to members of poor communities show), I dont see why they should not make their stand known. Were they not vocal about Iraq war?

This is what I think: They wont speak out because it is the democratic party policy. They are also putting 'rather disengenously' in the same boat:

1- Cultural liberals -who support gay marriage, abortion etc

2- Social Liberals -who support equality under the law and relief provided by the government from suffering (this is where the supporters of healthcare fall under)

Fredique:

Whilst it was something I didn't know, I wouldn't say I was surprised. They should be concerned. What surprises me rather is why they wont support it to be extended on a larger scale in the same way they were outspoken about the war. That seems hypocritical to me.

Seems hypocritical to you? So you want the church to take your side on this debate huh? Essentially, put aside the concerns of their parishioners and those in the community on how fair this deal will be in the end, just so as to please you and get you to stop thinking them hypocrites? May I suggest you actually go out there to listen to the concerns of the people here.


Churches are mostly not against Healthcare for the poor, neither are they against welfare programs that actually help those who need it. Most people are not. The same people who donate money to fund the church’s Free HealthCare and Free help for the poor programs, are the same ones debating this National HealthCare deal. Why try to turn this into another useless US vs. THEM debate where they are always the EVIL ones in it all for having an opposing view, never mind that the same THEY happen to help the very poor that you seem to be for, in so many other ways.

Fredique:

Generally, what is moral and ethical is becomiing increasingly relative, but if placing profit making before saving lives by insurance companies (to the extent of withdrawing cover for pre-existing conditions) is not a moral issue, then maybe nothing else is a moral issue.

That, my friend, is a ridiculous way of looking at this issue. If all you are about is cutting the profit margin of the insurance companies, then I say we are definitely heading the wrong way. Morally, there is nothing wrong with helping the DESERVING poor. There is certainly nothing wrong with making profits while you do it either.

Fredique:

It is a known fact that the Republican party consist of Fiscal conservatives and the Religious right (evangelicals) -they are already in the same boat. The evangelicals are in because of their stance on the issues you rightly highlighted. The Evangelicals have also canvassed for support for the Republicans based on their interest, which is OK -politics is all about interest, right? My point is, shouldn't health care be their interest?

Again, the so called religious right are already providing FREE HealthCare Services and Free food services to the poor in communities across the nation. Providing for the poor is not, I repeat, is not the problem here. Republicans ( including the Gay republicans) are not anti-helping the poor. Can we please dispense with this stupid need to make false and ridiculous assertions just so we can claim some brownie points against the other side? Ugh!!

Fredique:

I can predict your answer since you dont consider health care primarily as a moral issue. But if health care is a moral issue (which I think it is), and the religious right are interested in moral issues (as their provision of healthcare to members of poor communities show), I dont see why they should not make their stand known. Were they not vocal about Iraq war?

This is what I think: They wont speak out because it is the democratic party policy. They are also putting 'rather disengenously' in the same boat:

1- Cultural liberals -who support gay marriage, abortion etc

2- Social Liberals -who support equality under the law and relief provided by the government from suffering (this is where the supporters of healthcare fall under)

Stance known on an issue that is not religious in any light? What do you want the Religious right to tell you in this case? That God DEMANDS everyone have access to Doctors? Are you kidding me? Sure, God says to help the poor and that is primarily one of the reasons why they have those free clinic programs. I mean what verse in the bible would you like for them to quote in this case? Moses and the serpents on the stick verses?? Roflmao!!! We are speaking of a religion that believes in God healing the sick. Roflmao!!


National HealthCare is an issue for individual Americans to decide on, not the church or the ku Klux Klan to decide for anyone. Even democrats and ultra liberals are divided on the issue.