"The bread which you do not use..."

"The bread which you do not use is the bread of the hungry. The garment hanging in your wardrobe is the garment of him who is naked. The shoes that you do not wear are the shoes of the one who is barefoot. The money you keep locked away is the money of the poor. The acts of charity you do not perform are so many injustices you commit." -St. Basil the Great

You know, every once in a while I have this thought: St. Francis of Assisi, St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Clare of Assisi, and many other saints (and I'm sure not only saints; not even only Christians - Ghandi as one example) spent large periods of their time as vagabonds. They felt called (by God) to go out with just the clothes on their backs, to beg for their food and shelter. They relied solely on the charity of others. That was considered honorable.

Now, we often place judgment on those who rely on the charity of others. We condemn as lazy those who receive payments from social welfare programs. We are taught to save money (or to go into significant debt, depending on who teaches us/whom we listen to). We are taught to invest, to have money saved for a rainy day.

It just makes me wonder: Which way of thinking is right? And this quote from St. Basil makes me think that in many ways, a total surrender is the only way to go. But at the same time, "common sense" and our worldly wisdom make so much sense. Maybe in a way it's because we don't like to rely on others. I don't know if it's pride or guilt/thinking we don't deserve anything unless we earn it. I know I'm there almost all the time.

Which age's world view is correct? Is there a balance? (I'm one who generally promotes balance as the best way to look at things - the middle way.) I don't know.

Damn Politics

I hope this doesn't sound partisan, but I am sick and tired of Republicans/conservatives spreading blatant lies about what the health care bills contain.

If it were Democrats/liberals, I would feel the same way. In fact, I do on some issues.

Sarah Palin is the latest: Politifact reports that she says seniors would have to go in front of Obama's bureaucratic panel which would decide whether or not to euthanize them. http://bit.ly/3bvr7i

Glenn Beck has also been on the list, and there is an email circulating that has all these accusations (and cites page numbers), many of which were concluded to be "Pants on fire!" "False," or "Barely true" (by Politifact). Granted, some were true. But that doesn't excuse the statements that weren't true.

These types of shenanigans do not advance the debate. I don't expect all sides to agree because not all sides have the same political philosophy. But to propagate blatant lies is shameful.

As a concerned citizen, I want to have the opportunity to make my decision as to my opinion on this issue or any other based on the facts. There's no other way for me to make the best decision. And, quite frankly, all of those spreading the falsehoods (even unintentionally, since there are so many easy fact-check sites such as politifact or snopes) should be ashamed of themselves. You're taking the partisan 'easy way' out. The easy way isn't always the best way. So either don't share your opinion or try to have an educated (with facts) opinion.

(Note: I'm not asking you to know everything, just to not base your arguments on falsehoods. I'm not even asking you to agree with me. Just don't tell me that health reform will force taxpayers to pay for abortions or to force seniors to end their lives.)