Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Render unto God and care for the poor

By Donna Volmerding
“For the poor you have with you always, but you do not always have Me.” Jesus Christ
In a September 30 Journal Gazette (Fort Wayne, Ind.) letter to the editor, Pastor Rick Pettys wrote that “… if we are authentic Christians, we are always on the side of the poor, the marginalized, the least, the last and the lost.”
Authentic Christians do not dispute the fact that they are to be caring servants, but discussions about how best to care for the poor is when the water gets muddy.
Today in America, there are 47 million people on food stamps. I am certain that many of them do not want to be on public assistance; they want a job. There are some, however, who feel entitled to take from the public trough.
In his book “How Should Christians Vote?,” the Rev. Dr. Tony Evans, founder and president of The Urban Alternative and senior pastor of Oak Cliff Bible Fellowship, Dallas, Texas, writes: “Government assistance for able-bodied citizens should be temporary and not designed to produce long-term dependency and an entitlement mentality. There should be accountability tied to the assistance so that the person receiving the assistance has to perform some sort of work or volunteerism that is connected to what they receive.”
It is not biblical that Christians and/or the government are to provide an unending supply of food, goods, money, etc., for those who refuse to help themselves, for those who are takers only.
“If a man does not work, you do not offer him a welfare check to pay him for his irresponsibility. You don’t look to the government to pay for laziness while taxing others to cover the bill,” Evans says.
Charity is personal giving from the heart. It is an act of love to God and one’s fellow man. It is enlightening, enriching and elevating for the one receiving the gift as well as the one who gives it. However, when a bloated, powerful government usurps money from those who work to dole out to those who do not, it is not philanthropy; it is theft.
Evans paraphrases St. Paul in Romans 13: “The one overarching job of civil government … can be defined as … ‘under God, the government is to promote the conditions for the well-being of the citizenry for good, while protecting the citizenry against the proliferation of evil.’”
Government should “create an environment for compassion to flourish,” Evans says. Otherwise, “the state becomes an all-encompassing promoter of federal economic dependency (that leads) to illegitimate and irresponsible personal and corporate welfare.”
Yet limited government does not mean a government that lacks compassion. Instead, “civil government should provide a safety net specifically and intentionally designed to produce self-sufficiency and not long-term dependency,” Evans says.
Unfortunately, the welfare state in America is a mile wide and an inch deep. Those who are truly disabled, mentally or physically, and cannot provide for themselves must have a long-term safety net. Yet when able-bodied people are not providing for themselves or their families, they take precious public funds away from the truly needy. This is a monstrous scandal and fraud perpetrated on taxpayers through deception. Supporting bureaucratic waste that squanders billions of dollars — our hard-earned money — has nothing to do with kindness, caring or compassion; it has everything to do with the federal government amassing enormous sums of money, and power and control.
Authentic Christians must understand that giving from the heart is a personal act. It is rendering unto God what is God’s. Rendering unto Caesar is not charity; it’s called taxes.
Blog: ptft.blogspot.com.

Thursday, April 19, 2012

Never worked? The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world

This article was published in the April 19, 2012, issue of The News-Sentinel
By Donna Volmerding
“(She) never worked a day in her life.” Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen about Ann Romney, wife of presumptive presidential nominee Mitt Romney This remark by Ms. Rosen has sparked a firestorm of controversy; it certainly touched a nerve with me. In the ‘70s, when I gave birth to my first child and became a stay-at-home mom, I discovered quickly how utterly exhausting a new baby is, and I developed a profound new respect for stay-at-home moms who worked very hard.
We breast-fed, gardened, sewed, cooked, cleaned, shopped, washed our own diapers (paper diapers were too expensive), scrimped and fell into bed each night in sheer exhaustion. Never worked?
The budget went in free fall, too. I remember vividly the time when my husband and I wanted to buy a cup of coffee at a fast-food restaurant, and we didn’t have enough money, even combining our change.
I envied women with nice clothes who took great vacations. I wore sweats and stained shirts; my big day out was packing peanut-butter sandwiches and taking the kids to the park. Never worked?
Many of my college-graduate “sisters” took a different path. Although many became mothers, too, several felt the cultural pressure of the times, as well as the economy, and headed to the office or the classroom.
The “working” moms I knew also worked very hard, and I respected their choice, and they respected mine. Yet, the siren song of the women’s movement, and its smug arrogance, was condescending and insulting. The left insinuated that (educated) women who stayed at home were wasting their talents, selling out the sisterhood by depending on a man to support them. It was often said that we “never worked.”
Besides, everyone knew that mothers’ minds turned to mush. How could they not? What kind of intellectual stimulation is it to wipe sticky faces and clean dirty bottoms?
When my children were in grade school, and I headed to the office, I was amazed when, on my first day, another woman brought coffee to me! I also realized that staying at home with small children was far more strenuous than my office job.
We stay-at-home moms endured the disdainful snobbery of NOW and others who respected no other path but their own. Our efforts, our concerns and our abilities were disparaged, often with high disgust. This was, and I think still is, the mindset of the left. This isn’t just a war against women; it’s a war against women who dare to go against their cultural dictates. Many on the left truly believe that stay-at-home moms and homemakers “never worked.”
This dispute will not end until all women (and men) understand and respect the contribution of mothers who work at home and outside of the home. Homemaker moms have as much insight into the economy, national security, good government and the culture wars as “working” moms. They have earned a place in the public forum to make their voices heard.
As the saying goes, “The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.”