Put Your Religion Where Your Mouth (And Wallet) Is

Filed in National by on June 16, 2009

As an agnostic, I find the Right’s view of Christianity self-serving and convenient.  So let’s play What Would Jesus Do? For specifics, let’s pretend that Jesus sets up shop in Delaware.

1.  Where would Jesus live?

2.  What school would Jesus teach at?

3.  Would Jesus support welfare (You know, caring for the poor)?

4.  Would Jesus support National Health Care?

5.  Would Jesus support tax cuts?

6.  Would Jesus support torture, or the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq?

7.  Would Jesus support the goal of acquiring wealth?

8.  I guess that he wouldn’t support abortion, but think he might say something like, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone…”

And while I don’t consider myself religious, Jesus was a pretty cool dude whose approach was anything but capitalistic, condemning or condescending.  Feel free to add your own What Would Jesus Do.

h/t to Donviti for inspiration!

Tags:

About the Author ()

A stay-at-home mom with an obsession for National politics.

Comments (24)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. G Rex says:

    What would Jesus drive? Hint: you can’t fit 12 disciples in a Toyota Prius.

  2. pandora says:

    Nice try, G Rex, but I’m leaning towards public transportation… which holds 13 just fine! 🙂

  3. Delaware Dem says:

    GRex.. they traveled in caravans in the old days.

  4. Would Jesus support gay marriage?

  5. Your questions are already answered, you only have to read one book.

    As for the inclination to impose political underpinnings to Jesus Christ you miss the point. Jesus was apolitical.

    Take a look at what the Holy Trinity means and you will know.

    Mike Protack

  6. nemski says:

    As for the inclination to impose political underpinnings to Jesus Christ you miss the point. Jesus was apolitical.

    LOL. Good one. I imagine that you’re being funny here since there are many Republicans that think the GOP is the Party of Jesus.

  7. Once again, Protack fails reading comprehension.

  8. anonone says:

    Jesus of the Gospels and Acts was very very much condemning and condescending. Did you ever read it?

    He wasn’t much of a capitalist only because apparently he never worked for a living. He did like to drink at parties, though.

  9. Geezer says:

    “Jesus of the Gospels and Acts was very very much condemning and condescending. Did you ever read it?”

    Yes, he was very condemning, mainly of religious hypocrites. And the final word of your sentence should be plural.

  10. Geezer says:

    “As for the inclination to impose political underpinnings to Jesus Christ you miss the point. Jesus was apolitical.”

    No, actually, you miss the point. The church is a political institution, and has tailored much of its rhetoric since the time of Constantine to reflect that reality. The implications for political action of Jesus’ preaching are pretty easy to suss out, which is how we ended up with liberation theology.

  11. Perry says:

    Would Jesus support gay marriage?

  12. a. price says:

    he would consult his jew-owners on every decision

  13. Anonomous says:

    He would live in Sussex County and attend a school in the Indian River School District.

  14. liberalgeek says:

    His health clinic would be simple.

    Walk in
    touch the robe
    walk out

    Bill comes in the mail the next week because it turns out that alternative medicine isn’t covered by your insurance policy.

  15. liberalgeek says:

    Oh, and he would run a liquor store, selling wine in Evian bottles.

  16. Mark H says:

    1. Where would Jesus live?
    Dewey because he could make a lot of money in the winery business

    2. What school would Jesus teach at?
    Wherever he felt he was needed

    3. Would Jesus support welfare (You know, caring for the poor)?
    I honestly think he’d be annoyed that the government needed to get into it, but yes

    4. Would Jesus support National Health Care?
    Yes

    5. Would Jesus support tax cuts?
    Maybe not…”Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s

    6. Would Jesus support torture, or the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq?
    No, but he wouldn’t have supported any war

    7. Would Jesus support the goal of acquiring wealth?
    Depends on the purpose.

    8. I guess that he wouldn’t support abortion, but think he might say something like, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone…”

    I’d agree.

  17. Jesus was apolitical, very simple. He would not be D or R.

    Your weak attempt to link him with a political agenda is a total failure.

    Mike Protack

  18. pandora says:

    Hey, Mikey, it’s not the Dems who use Jesus for political purposes. Look in a mirror.

  19. G Rex says:

    Sam Kinnison: “So nobody thought to bring a freakin’ sandwich? What am I, Jesus the Miracle Caterer? “

  20. cassandra_m says:

    Given Mr. Shallow Bench’s interactions with folks here, I’d say its been a long time since his last encounter with Jesus or his teachings.

  21. Mark H says:

    “Jesus was apolitical, very simple. He would not be D or R”

    Your first sentence is incorrect. Given the political turmoil of his time, even his non-violent nature was political
    He’d be a L 🙂

  22. 1) Probably a neighborhood much like mine.

    2) In the school where I teach.

    3) No — indeed, he and his earliest followers made it clear that care for the poor is laudable when it is done through individual acts of charity in response to the prompting of the Spirit, not through the mandate of big government. Remember, he noted that the poor would always be with us.

    4) No — see answer number 3.

    5) Yes — to allow works of charity as outlined in 3 & 4.

    6) Torture, no (but then the US has not engaged in torture. Iraq and Afghanistan? Perhaps, because he did not always call for turning the other cheek (besides, Islam is one giant blasphemy against Jesus Christ, in that it denies his divinity).

    7) Yes — for purposes found in #3 & 4. And remember, there were any number of rich counted among his early followers, so it is impossible to claim that he rejected the idea of his followers having personal wealth.

    8 ) Your answer may be correct — followed immediately by the Virgin Mary lobbing the first rock in the direction of the abortionist in question. 😉

  23. David says:

    To a degree I agree with Mike. Not that the LORD was a political. He spoke out against corruption of all sides including the Roman stooge Herod, the religious political parties that governed the Sanhedrin, and cheating tax collectors. In today’s world, I don’t think that he would be down the line for any of the parties.
    I think all of the 6 significant parities have a portion of the truth. R’s and D’s, Constitution Party, Libertarian Party, Independent-Reform, and Green Party. It is a matter of which ones have more of it. That is the debate isn’t it.

    8. It is better to have a millstone around one’s neck and be cast into the sea than offend one of these little ones. It is without question that he would oppose abortion.

    7. The LORD had no problem with people acquiring wealth, but he did have a problem with wealth acquiring people. Templeton is good. Madoff is bad.

    6. He supported the military. Whether or not you want to know about specific actions, you will need to ask Him.

    5. High taxes oppress people and are the number one cause of poverty in the world. He told the tax collectors not to take anymore taxes than assigned. That alone was a big tax cut. The government should take the taxes necessary to run it not more to empower itself.

    4. National Health Care. No, he would just heal the people. He would be for a smarter plan than either of the parties have which would not ration and would not leave people behind.

    3. I don’t know, the modern welfare system did not exist. I think he was more about results– a negative income tax which encouraged work and provided a safety floor should be in the mix of options. He would favor helping the poor. He definitely favored charity. In the Old Testament, the poor were helped with the voluntary income tax. Part of the tithe went to help the poor as well as mandates that you don’t glean the field or punish a hungry poor person for grabbing a fig or something. I don’t know if he would favor it being totally left up to chance.

    1 and 2 are not relevant.

  24. David says:

    Your war question is interesting because you act as if you can put The LORD in a box. He thought out of the box and was able to bring people around when you would think otherwise. Who else could have a publican and a zealot on the same team (The Zealot wanted to overthrow the Roman overlords and the publican collected taxes for them.) It is unknowable.

    I have no doubt that He would see the war to liberate the Afghans and defeat Al Qaeda as justified.