Issues, News and Views
WORK IS LOVE
2018/05/22 - It is the season of weddings, and at Christian weddings a reading of the Biblical passage 1 Corinthians 13 is common, if not actually required. It is the "Love Chapter". An interesting, seemingly tangential, thought appears late in the chapter, "when I became an adult I put away childish things".
When I became an adult I put away childish things. Tangential, perhaps, to the idea of love, but a thought not at all out of place at a wedding. A wedding is perhaps the most significant aspect of the transformation to from childhood to adulthood, from immaturity to maturity, from dependence to independence.
The thought is also expressed in another Biblical passage, in the Jewish text of Genesis 2:24, "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh".
The idea is pretty simple: as you grow in maturity, you gain self-sufficiency and you become independent. Dependency is childish, it is the opposite of maturity. Your ability to move out from your parents and maintain a household, your self-sufficiency, earns you the honor, the moral legitimacy, to marry and to have children and to be the sustainer of dependents.
Our society confers many privileges upon individuals as they mature into adults – the right to vote, to purchase and consume alcohol and tobacco, to marry, to serve in the military, to drive on public roads, and so forth.
But what about those of sound mind and body who do not demonstrate maturity? What about those who do not, or will not support themselves? What if simply using age as a reference point does not adequately or sufficiently demonstrate whether a person has earned the privileges of adulthood?
Mature adults support themselves, they do not impose their lack of maturity on others. Dependency is a sign of immaturity. Immature people make poor life choices. People who make poor life choices tend to become dependent upon government.
The concept of dependency and maturity has many public policy implications. Consider disasters, both natural and man-made. A volcanic eruption in Hawaii, or an earthquake in California, a hurricane in Florida, tornadoes in Nebraska, an ice-storm in Illinois, or a power-grid attack and failure in New York. Every area of our country is susceptible to one disaster or another, and we are all susceptible to an EMP attack.
All of these scenarios place demands upon individuals and governments, and it is crucial for citizens to ensure they are able to sustain themselves for days if not weeks while the various levels of government can marshal their resources appropriate to the nature, locations and extent of the situation.
Mature adults preposition resources and prepare for the unexpected. They are ready and able to at least look after themselves, if not help others, in the event of a calamity. They are part of the solution, not part of the problem.
And then there are the crybabies who demand attention and resources from the government for their selfish personal needs. To take care of things for them, that they should have taken care of themselves. As if first responders, utilities, various logisticians, and government officials don't already have enough to worry about.
So it begs the question – should people who are dependent upon government handouts have the right to vote? Do people not capable of making good life choices have any business deciding something as important as deciding public policy? Should an army of welfare recipients have the franchise to vote themselves ever more handouts?
If a person can't even make good choices about going to school and getting a job and looking after themselves, do they have any business making choices for society? They make a mess of their own lives, and now we should allow them to make a mess of the country as well?
A large block of handout-dependent voters would has the ability to drive an agenda for higher taxes and increased benefits, thus discouraging more individuals from continuing in the workforce and instead enticing them to join the ranks of the handout-dependent block, granting that block even more voting power in continuous iterations of election cycles.
Do you think this is absurd? Well, it is today's Democrat party, and you are correct, it is absurd. Look at what they say, their policies, their campaigns, their votes, their record, their rhetoric. The Democrat party has degenerated into a handout machine. It is a political block that seeks to gain and retain power by attracting the votes of the welfare class.
For the Democrat party to hold and expand its power it needs to maintain and expand the welfare class. It's that simple. The Democrat party is opposed to the interests of the working class and the middle class. It wants average normal Americans to lose their jobs, apply for government assistance, and vote for the party that will "defend" the assistance programs that the newly impoverished become dependent upon. And the Democrats will cynically call this "caring".
The Democrats seek to infantilize and "dis-adult" Americans because they care for us. They want us to be snowflakes, a physically and emotionally weak people unable to defend ourselves. They want to separate Americans from their jobs, and separate Americans from their guns. They want the people to be dependent upon government for everything - food, shelter, clothing, security, everything. And Democrats expect Americans to be thankful for handouts, and to vote for the party that enables dependency.
It would be nice if the Republican Party was diametrically opposed to the Democrat Party, but it doesn't seem that way. As often as not the Republicans want to be "bipartisan" and "cross the aisle" and "work with the other party". But what if the other party's policies are pure puke and should be aggressively opposed and destroyed at every opportunity? Seriously, when was the last time a Democrat had a good policy idea?
The problem is that many in the Republican Party, a faction at times referred to as the "Establishment", seem more interested in playing a divide-the-spoils game with Democrats where factions and players and interests within both parties get to keep their shares of power. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. The swamp creatures, regardless of political stripe, work together to maintain their ecosystem. That's what "bipartisan" means in DC-speak.
So, who looks after the interests of real, everyday Americans who just want to work for a living and keep what they earn, who believe in maturity and sufficiency? Well, for all his flaws, it is Donald Trump. And that's why both Republicans and Democrats hate him. Because he actually does fight for the interests of working men and women. Strangely. In a strange way.
Working – preparing for a job, getting a job, and doing your job – is one of the most virtuous things you can do with your life. The Jewish and Christian scriptures clearly describe God's creative efforts as "work" – yes Almighty God actually does "work", and He assigns work to Adam and Eve even before the fall, demonstrating thereby that work is holy, good and pure. Time and again we are told in the Bible to do our job and do it well, to "work at it as working for the Lord" (Colossians 3:23).
If working to sustain yourself is one of the most virtuous things you can do with your life, then it stands to reason that living a life of dependency on others is just about the most nefarious thing you can do with your life. Work is something God expects from us. Which is another reason why increasingly people of faith are repulsed by the Democrats.
The party that embraces government dependency, while hindering job creation and disincentivizing work, is not a party for people of faith. People of faith believing in working hard and depending upon God; the Democrats instead encourage us to stop working and depend upon the government - that is, stealing from your neighbors and killing them by taxing them to death.
Loving people work. They do not use government to confiscate the fruits of the labors of others. Working to earn a living is just about the most virtuous thing a person can do with their life. Loving people work to sustain themselves, and support their families, and contribute to their communities. Dependency is childishness, and it is not love. So I Corinthians 13 tells us that if we want to demonstrate love in a practical way, we throw off the childishness of dependency, and embrace work, independence, and maturity. That is love.
|© Copyright 2018 Challenge The Premise. All rights reserved.|