• There is very little in Bush's behavior that backs up his claims, Bush already falls short of being Christian with regard to his desire to wage war has already been established. What about his attitude toward the poor, for instance? "Poor in spirit" does not describe George Bush in any way, shape, or form. "Rich in spirit" is more like it. Who got the benefit of his tax cuts? While Republicans talk about the "average" refund, the fact is that the people who paid the most got the bulk of it. And, as Bush said, why not? Those who paid the most deserve the most back, right? I don't think so. A "poor in spirit" attitude would recognize that those who benefit the most from a society also have a responsibility to see that the poor also reap some reasonable benefit from that society. After all, who does the work that makes the rich wealthy? But when the country runs into budget problems, who suffers? The rich? Obviously not. It is the programs the benefit the less fortunate that are always cut first because the collective voice of the poor is drowned out by the rich, screaming that their pockets are being picked.
  • Apart from his frequent references to God, I see far more than contradicts what I consider to be the love, spirt and essence of Christianity than supports it. He failed miserably with regards to the people who needed help after Katrina for instance; he is responsible for thousands of deaths both American and Non in war; he is ultimately responsible for torture. He is responsible by failing to act against many other anti-christian things - like the death pentalty (although according to Jesus How Great Thou Art that is consistent with the bible) for example.
  • Like many Republican Christians, he insists that folks do as he says, not as he does.

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy