Social Justice?

[pancreasman]

That's not what I believe. I just don't trust our government to do things equitably. They can't pass a bill without attaching all kinds of "gimme" to it.



Certainly!



Neither do I.



Absolutely.

Well, gosh darn it we agree then!

There IS a well founded principle of Social Justice embedded in the Bible, not just encouraged but commanded.

Sometimes at least, government legislation is an appropriate vehicle for expressing our collective will for social justice.

[Cow Poke]

Well, gosh darn it we agree then!

It happens!

There IS a well founded principle of Social Justice embedded in the Bible, not just encouraged but commanded.

Sure!

Sometimes at least, government legislation is an appropriate vehicle for expressing our collective will for social justice.

Sometimes, yes.

[Jedidiah]

The preceding context of Amos 5:10-15 couldn't be more obvious.

I think you have a different concept of social justice than is being discussed here. The justice in Amos is not doing the wicked sort of things mentioned or implied. Has nothing to do with redistribution of wealth. The entire Bible demands that we do the right thing. See my signature for example.

[Jedidiah]

I think all SJW's need to recognize yet . .

SJW's?

[Zymologist]

SJW's?

Social Justice Warriors. If you've never encountered them, be grateful. They're quite zealous.

[Jedidiah]

There IS a well founded principle of Social Justice embedded in the Bible, not just encouraged but commanded.

But now we are back to KG's social justice and not Seer's. All people of good will believe in the things you mentioned in your post above. However it is not that sort of thing that the government mostly takes care of. Pretty much all of the things you mentioned are applicable as condemnation of our modern society. There are all sorts of words written in laws about it, but it mostly still goes on. The villains still throw the poor mother and children out of her house when she can not pay. And so forth.

[lilpixieofterror]

What is social justice? I often hear the phrase but can find no definitive definition. It seems to be a catch all term that can encompass just about anything.

In the modern sense? It is a justification to take things from one person, who earned it, and hand it to another person who didn't earn it.

[pancreasman]

In the modern sense? It is a justification to take things from one person, who earned it, and hand it to another person who didn't earn it.

That's not its modern sense at all. Sure, it's a characterisation of the way SOME people might view it, but just because Magellan thinks electromagnets are illegal, it does not mean they are, nor should it be taken as a new 'definition' of electromagnetism.

After all, Christian charity could be pejoratively said to be 'giving my hard earned money to stupid orphans who didn't earn it'. It's not of course, and such mischaracterisations serve nobody.

[Truthseeker]

Sometimes, yes.

If I challenged that, that may cause a thread derail. I don't know anybody would be interested, though. Certainly DE would not.

[lilpixieofterror]

I think there are two reasons to this. First, there is a pretty clear trend by conservatives to portray social justice in terms of "they're trying to take things from me" (undoubtedly because that's how they see it). Second, a lot of the current discussions about social justice are topics that require extra funding to realize. Someone who wants all people to have the same level of medical care regardless of socioeconomic status still needs to figure out where the money is going to come from, and that usually means taxing the people that have money. Similarly, raising the minimum wage to a level where every person can have a livable wage translates into higher costs for everyone. Paying scholarships or whatever to aid in education equality still relies on money. The people with the greatest needs are by and large those that don't have the money to pay for what they need in the first place. We only have two options for that: ignore them or take money from people that have it.

These actions, ironically, tend to cause massive raises in overall cost, but don't seem to bring much in terms of actual improvement when it comes to actually working them, in practice. Likewise, raises in minimum wage do not give people a 'livable wage' at all. Rather, it just sets the cost of living higher because the few jobs that actually pay min wage are low skill jobs that only 5% of the work force actually gets paid. They end up worse off because sure, they have more money, but the money they have ends up being worth about the same as what they had before. A much better way is to work your way from a min wage job to a non min wage job. The final problem about education isn't going to be solved either. Find a way to pay for it, if you want education. I joined the military because I didn't want to be burdened with student loans and wanted career experience to go on top of it. There are also employers that offer paid training too that you can get into, on the ground floor, and work you way though those training programs. I don't see any of these issues as 'social justice' as I see them as poor justification to take from one person and give it to another. Work your way though the ranks, like everybody else has did in the past. Others did it, so what is the excuse?

[lilpixieofterror]

That's not its modern sense at all. Sure, it's a characterisation of the way SOME people might view it, but just because Magellan thinks electromagnets are illegal, it does not mean they are, nor should it be taken as a new 'definition' of electromagnetism.

And that has what to do with a word I said?

After all, Christian charity could be pejoratively said to be 'giving my hard earned money to stupid orphans who didn't earn it'. It's not of course, and such mischaracterisations serve nobody.

Charity is to be given out of your own free will and not compelled to be given it, by force. Can you actually show where Christ demanded that money be taken from one person and handed to another person? I can't find such a justification because I seem to find the idea bout a 'cheerful giver' and forced wealth distribution doesn't seem to make any part of the program. I could make a guess of why... can you?

[Jedidiah]

That's not its modern sense at all. Sure, it's a characterisation of the way SOME people might view it, but just because Magellan thinks electromagnets are illegal, it does not mean they are, nor should it be taken as a new 'definition' of electromagnetism.

That is arguably one common usage of the term, so it is not just weirdos who so use it.

After all, Christian charity could be pejoratively said to be 'giving my hard earned money to stupid orphans who didn't earn it'. It's not of course, and such mischaracterisations serve nobody.

It is acceptable for me to give my hard earned money to people who did not earn it. I get to choose who I give it to. When the government does it not only do I not get to choose who gets it, but government slime balls scoop out a significant portion to support their oranizations (of course not of them would stoop to pocketing it directly).

[Adrift]

Part of the reason we are encouraged to assist the poor is that it's good for US to do it. Being forced to do it against our will doesn't have the same blessing, and can easily be abused.

Forced or not, I don't think it really matters that much to the actual poor.

In ancient Israel one of the primary ways to care for the poor was gleaning. Land owners were to allow the poor to glean their fields for food by not harvesting its edges. Every time I see the "no one should be forced to care for the poor, it should be left to the church" argument, I can't help imagine some surreal Life of Brian type conversation between Jesus and the civil authorities that goes something like, "no no no, don't worry about caring for the poor anymore, my followers will take care of it", to which the poor respond, "but there's not enough of you. we'll starve to death!"

[Sam]

How does the issue of Jubilee, a re-distributive system commanded by God in the Bible to be implemented through the state of Israel, fit with those who are arguing that the term does not involve economic redistribution of wealth?

—Sam

[pancreasman]

How does the issue of Jubilee, a re-distributive system commanded by God in the Bible to be implemented through the state of Israel, fit with those who are arguing that the term does not involve economic redistribution of wealth?

—Sam

Yes, a very good thought.