PEC, you don't think liberals tax deduct donations to their churches? That's biased.
And the idea that religion "skims" 80-90% is also ridiculous. A church in my neighborhood provides inexpensive child care to the poor, has a food pantry, has a clothing pantry, and many other ministries to the poor. And in my church, we pay the bills, yes, but we also provide social services. Your assertion is ridiculous.
LadyLee and Burn, things aren't as easy down here in the US for the truly poor. The system is set up to keep you poor and punish you for doing better. For instance, I have a mentally handicapped cousin. He gets $900 a month in assistance. That's too much for him to get food stamps. An apartment in our neighborhood would easily be $650 a month, unfurnished, and he'd have to pay utilities, buy food, and buy everything else in life that he needs. How can he meet all of his monthly needs after rent on only $250 a month? Plus, we have no public transportation and he certainly can't drive. He would have to pay for a cab to go to the grocery store or the drug store. His medicine is mostly paid for but not all of the way. He's mentally ill and mentally retarded. What is he supposed to do? Before my uncle died, he made me promise I would take care of my cousin. What would happen to my cousin if I had said "no"?
Down here, because he can bathe himself, use the washer and dryer, do minor housework, etc., he's considered too highly functioning to live in a group home or an institution. He can sign his name but he can't read or write and he doesn't understand 9/10ths of what is said to him. If he were on his own, he would probably be in an apartment for a month or two, end up with his utilities shut off and eventually be evicted and on the street. If I hadn't taken him in, I have no doubt that he would be a homeless street person. He's psychotic and doesn't take his meds without a lot of encouragement.
I do not believe that Americans resent paying taxes to help people like my cousin who, through no fault of his own, is unable to ever provide for himself. However, I do think that there are a lot of people who want to be supported by the government because they are lazy and it is wrong. I used to have a neighbor who received welfare, etc., and had two children. She lived with the father of the children but told social services that she didn't know who the father of the children was, so he did not have to pay child support. She was on the lease and her boyfriend was just a "guest" so his income didn't count and her rent was fully subsidized. She received a large discount on her utilities because she was so poor. She became upset when social services told her that, under the old law, being alone and poor and having a child under age three was reason enough to get welfare because she had to tend the child but that the law was changing and now she would no longer be eligible after her youngest child was one year old. She was furious and ranting, "How am I going to work with a one year-old child?" I told her that, when I had my son, I had to put him in daycare when he was six weeks old and I went back to work. I told her that I couldn't understand why the government would support her for three years because she had a child when I as a working woman could only get six weeks maternity leave. She was shocked and stunned at the idea that people might actually have to find childcare and work.
This woman eventually lost her welfare when her child got older. Know what she did? She married their father and he started supporting them. They lost the rent subsidy so they bought a house and moved out of the apartment. Amazing. These are the kinds of people that most Americans resent supporting, not the mentally ill or disabled.
And in my town, the homeless shelters are supported by the area churches. My church is one of them. We support the shelter and also the food pantry.
St. Ann
