High at the Top        

            Recently, a radio program sought the definition of ‘welfare’ since it means many different things in our culture.  So, what are we supposed to be doing to ‘promote the general welfare’ referenced in our Constitution?  What constraints should government welfare recipients meet?

            Suppose ‘promoting the general welfare’ means ensuring everyone’s access to ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.’  Amid differing views about guns, abortions, and who is entitled to health care and other help from taxpayers, many moral, ethical, and religious questions arise.  These issues are sometimes bitterly divisive, and unethical agitators seek to exacerbate hatred and fear.  Even most angry people agree that acting out of hate or fear does not produce optimum results.

  Around here, the simplest empirical definition of government welfare presents as: what 95% of Americans have been told poor people don’t deserve, and what 5% of Americans enjoy as the legislated market favoritism, worth billions, that they bought at pennies on the dollar for themselves and their businesses.  Calls for smaller government portray plans that harm some and benefit others.  Our lives, and liberty to pursue happiness are often the victims in these plans.

And if you drug-tested super salaried executives, managing tax-favored, profit-logged corporations, you might decide that drug testing for welfare recipients hits a little too close to the top.  Meanwhile downstairs, people could use a little Christian help.  Which should take precedence, greed or need? 

Is it time for you to rethink your feelings about government welfare?