Poverty = Child Abuse?
According to a new first of it’s kind study recently released by the CDC, apparently 1 in 50 babies are abused or neglected in their first year of life. Of that number about 1/3 are abused/neglected during their first week of life. Reading headlines such as that conjures up pictures of evil parents beating newborn babies. One is appalled by the thought of a couple day old baby being abused in such ways and immediately wishes for the offending parents to be punished.
Then I read what the definition of abuse and neglect actually was – “Federal officials define neglect as a failure to meet a child’s basic needs including housing, clothing, feeding and access to medical care.” Of course I agree that babies (children, adults) need all those things, but such a definition turns systemic poverty in our nation into child abuse. If you are poor and can’t afford those things, you are a child abuser and are punished. But how often is it completely the parent’s fault? Shouldn’t corporate and government systems that allow those systems of injustice to continue (often encouraging them) be held responsible as well? What about we the people – the voters and taxpayers- who say that universal health care is unneeded? Why aren’t we being punished as child abusers as well?
What a country we live in where we maintain systems of poverty and oppression and then punish people for being trapped by that system. I agree with Rev. Wright – God Damn America. We deserve it.
Tags:
julieclawson(at)gmail(dot)com 
I read the same report Julie … and what I found most interesting was that the same rates for neglect were found in Canada as well, where they have universal health care. So that is not a solution to this particular problem.
I’m not saying we don’t need universal health care (not at all!!), just that it’s not necessarily going solve this problem.
I think the time is come for our country and Western culture to embrace the fact that we have classes. We have an impoverished class of people that we find necessary to keep in their place in order to keep our systems running efficiently. It suits our purposes. We must be honest with ourselves and acknowledge this. Horatio Alger aside, we suffer very little movement between classes in our culture. Once we acknowledge that, we can then begin to care for those in the lower classes properly rather than feeding them some crap about pulling themselves up by their bootstraps. Or taking care of themselves. Or whatever other nonsense we think they should be able to do on their own … because clearly the system we have is not working for a large portion of our population. We think it’s working for us … but it’s really costing us a lot of money to keep building prisons, and financing emergency rooms, and welfare, and all the other stopgap measures we’ve thrown into place … they’re no longer working and we keep throwing money down the rathole.
So … maybe … just maybe … it’s time to think about changing the whole damn system. And face the real facts about who we are a culture.
Good point about Canada. Heath care is just part of the bigger problem. I wonder how these statistics will change as more and more of the middle class no longer has coverage as well.
I do think it’s disgusting that it’s easier for an unmarried woman to get aid for having and caring for her children. It encourages women not to get married and I’ve heard of divorces happening just because they couldn’t afford to pay for the birth of a baby together. So much for family values…
For a couple of years my wife worked for a social service agency providing help to poor children and their mothers – keeping track of the kids’ development and nutrition and plugging them in to other programs that could help them. Her take after working in/with the system for a while was that any person in the US who is willing to avail her-or-him-self of the available aid and jump through the required hoops, especially anyone with kids, can have their and their kids’ basic needs met including a government subsidized apartment with cable tv, more than enough government subsidized food, someone to come in and work on your child’s development, nutrition and socialization on a regular basis, etc.
It’s not a great nor an easy life for America’s poor by any stretch (far, far from it in many cases), but she said there is no reason for anyone to be without the basic necessities. Maybe some of that has changed under Bush, I don’t know.
I re-read my post and realized it may sound more glib than I intended. I know there are cases of hardship where people fall through the cracks of the system, and I’d like to see that change. But my wife entered that system a pretty hardcore political liberal on poverty issues and emerged a little chastened after realizing how much aid really was available (much more than she had ever imagined), how few people availed themselves of all the aid that they could, and how many people worked the system dishonestly. After observing the system for a while she felt worst for the kids, less so for (most of) the parents with whom she worked. I know there are some who for one reason or another don’t qualify for whatever programs.
Part of the problem is that each person’s situation is unique and these things are best addressed on a case-by-case basis, by people who know and care about the individuals involved and the details of their particular situation. But you can’t set policy for a nation of 300 million people on a case by case basis, and the federal government isn’t efficient or particularly good at trying to watch out for those who fall through the cracks of the national rules. I’m glad I don’t have to come up with the policy(ies) that would fix it all.
The issue is that without education, time, transportation this is nearly impossible for most people. As we have discovered in our community with the families we have walked through the process – we can barely grasp all the hoops, those who can hardly read or have some other learning issue are overwhelmed at the process. They don’t know what’s out there, no one tells them. and if you are a man without kids (but disabled or slow) – forget it, you are lost.
That’s true. I wonder what kind of policy would be able to guard against massive and widespread fraud, yet eliminate the red tape and hoops? When dealing with the hoops, it does seem like there has to be a better way, doesn’t it?
At the same time there are other folks who won’t take the trouble to jump through the hoop to get their child more help even if you take them by the hand, lead them right to it and hold it up in front of them. These are often the same ones who prop their 1 year old up with pillows all around him in front of the tv (Jerry Springer), stick a baby bottle filled with Coke in his mouth with a wadded-up sock under it to keep it from falling out, and then call their girlfriends over to gossip and drink, filling the baby’s bottle up with more Coke whenever he cries. That described about a quarter to a third of my wife’s case load.
Here are two stories from my personal experience …
First from when I was single and living in a converted row-house in DC in about 1985. It had been converted to about 5 studio apartments. I lived in one and next door to me on the same floor was a woman who was in her late 40’s or early 50’s and her son who about 7 at the time. The woman had had 2 or 3 other children, but they were young adults and living on their own. This little boy, she admitted to me at one time, she’d had so she could continue to collect welfare and aid, etc. She had very few teeth left. From my perspective I don’t think the lights were ever turned on in their apartment … the only light came from the television set. I’d see what the mom bought at the grocery store with her food stamps … it was not healthy. Not at all. The little boy used to come over and visit me all the time. I’d try to give him healthy food. He was so bright and sweet. I met his older siblings once, but they rarely visited. Then one day the mother died of a heart attack and he disappeared. We had terrible roach problems in the building after she died, which always made me shudder to think of what that poor little boy had been living in. I think one of the older siblings took him in. But I’ve always wondered what happened to him. I know his chances in life were very bleak.
Second experience. My husband is retired military. He was in the service when our children were born and quite small. In order to “make it” financially on just his income, we got WIC (Aid for Women Infants and Children). This was aid money to supplement mostly my diet since I was breastfeeding and then the children’s diet til they were five. WIC is very restrictive and you can see their labels on the grocery store shelves. You can only buy certain cereals, carrots, milk, real cheese, tuna, peanutbutter, and a few other things on WIC. But every little bit helped. However, it was absolutely humiliating. I had to go in there periodically (every couple of months) to prove that I still had the kids. Prove that they were thriving. Prove that I was being a good mother. Prove that I was a human being. Prove … prove … prove … prove. I was never so happy as I was the day I got off that program. If we hadn’t been absolutely desperate to feed the kids I never would have done it. I know that there are people who are dishonest, but I don’t know how they do it month after month. It was horrible.
So … I understand why our welfare system was put into place in the 30’s. But we essentially replaced relationship with institution and look what it’s gotten us.
P.S. Julie, I’ve had friends who’ve actually seriously considered divorce for that very reason.
“If you are poor and can’t afford those things, you are a child abuser and are punished.”
No, if you are poor and can’t afford those things using money AND refuse to avail any of multiple non-cash routes to providing those things for your child OR you can afford to provide these things for your child BUT choose to use your resources elsewhere rather than caring for your child, you are neglecting (and perhaps abusing) your child.
The “bottom line” question is Whose responsibility is it ultimately to care for a child? The family? The community? The government? I think your political philosophy is influencing your answer here Julie, as does everyone’s. When you arrive at such dissonance, check your premises… the difference in conclusion will often show up at the philosophical level… which is why that is the level where conversation is most productive.
Incidentally, your post got me thinking enough to produce my own post on breeding dependency
Have you ever considered moving to Canada? Seriously, if you are so repulsed by America that you would like to call curses down on it, then I would suggest no longer putting tax dollars into the system or spending into its economy, and choose a nation that is more in line with your idea of how things should be done. I am not being sarcastic here, though I admit some sarcastic things initially came to my mind. I would honestly like to hear why it is that people who are so repulsed by their own country do not move out of the U.S., as people do from so many other parts of the world.
But for the U.S., here’s an idea. How about let’s stop expecting the government to organize everything from the federal level? Something has GOT to be done. And I don’t even think the states can handle it effectively. Maybe not even the municipalities…the small towns probably could, but the cities sure can’t. I have an example of a very mismanaged city near me and it’s appalling. I simply don’t think large governments have the fortitude or the resources to handle it.
But you know who probably DOES? The churches! How about let’s stop wasting offering dollars on having to have the bigger and better sanctuary, the newest choir robes, and all this, and let’s start REALLY beefing up the aid and outreach programs that the church can provide, to a point where these local organizations can step into the cracks that the government is inherently unable to fill, AND eventually take over the functions that the government does, but often does ineptly. I believe that the church could step in, if a sufficient stockpile of volunteers, money, and material were built up (and not squandered on less important things), and at least take over something like health insurance. Or perhaps another area they could step into would be to provide child care at a nominal rate, perhaps even free, to parents who must work or who need to go to school or receive training that will help them get into better jobs. Maybe some of these things happen in some places, but it is terribly patchy.
Rather than blaming government–an institution that I believe is inherently incapable of doing all of the social welfare items efficiently that people wish it could, I think it’s time for us to get off our fat patooties and work through the religious organizations whose job it REALLY is, to get them done.
Nitika – of course my political opinions are influencing what I think/write as are yours. I do have to ask – is it dependency to seek aid from a system that caused your problems in the first place? I don’t assume that no one ever takes advantage of the system or that everyone is a hard worker. But I get really annoyed when people assume others are poor because just they are lazy or sinful or whatever. There are deeper issues going on here that you seem to be ignoring. These are not easy answer issues and stereotyping the poor doesn’t do much to help.
Minstrel – dude I’m shocked at such a pathetic line. I am a Christian before I am an American or a whatever. My values of loving others come far before my respect of country. If your religion places worship of America above service to God then so be it, but that reeks more of paganism than Christianity. If a person, a country, a business is committing injustice then justice needs to be served. I see the injustices in our society (and in every society) and because I respect my country I want that to stop. If you follow the America is god and can do no wrong then have fun bowing down to your god.
And like I mentioned above. When evil systems are in place and maintained by the government or are answerable to the government – then yes I look to the government to help solve those issues. I don’t see them as solving all the problems or bringing salvation to the land – I just want them to clean up the messes they created, fulfill the promises they have made, and offer the same freedoms and opportunities to all. I’m all for the church working on these issues, but some things are just government issues and so have to be dealt with by the government.
As Nikita points out though, when the evil system makes it possible for you to get 3 square meals a day and an apartment with cable tv plus numerous programs to help make sure your child is getting what he or she needs medically, nutritionally and developmentally, and you take the apartment and cable tv but can’t be bothered to avail yourself of the aid that’s available for your toddler and instead give him Wonderbread and Dr. Pepper and dump him in front of the tv or at Grandma’s while you hang out with your friends and give him only the attention needed to shut him up or play with him when you’re in the mood to play mama or daddy as if he was your doll and not your child, then at some point you need to take responsibility for your own actions instead of blaming the system for not doing more for you.
As my wife found out after a couple of years working in the system on behalf of poor kids there are a lot of poor people who don’t fit the stereotype, but there are also a lot who do. God loves each of them and so should we, and maybe they are where they are because of past injustice, but the kids do often suffer because of the parents’ neglect rather than the system’s unwillingness to provide for them.
I didn’t say your political opinions, I said your philosophy. I think you and others are talking past each other about policy issues because you are beginning with very different presuppositions. That’s why I asked the question about whose ultimate responsibility is it to care for children, parents? community?, society as a whole?, state?, a combination? If we can’t agree on an answer there, or at least have a solid understanding of each other’s positions, then the rest of the conversation is futile (we won’t hear each other and become frustrated).
Wrestling through questions like, is poverty unjust? Is poverty evil? Is it possible to eradicate poverty? Are disparate income levels inherently unjust? or evil? If so, to what degree?
great conversation in the comments
Beg pardon for stumbling into the conversation, but for those of us who are not socialists by training, would somebody here mind laying out some examples of how corporate and government systems perpetrate injustice on the folks?
I’ve never quite grasped this assertion.
thanks
Or how about some elaboration on how we maintain systems of poverty and oppression?
Anyone? I am sure there are others here who might be interested in more fully participating in the dialog, if we can just grasp the underlying assumptions…
thanks!
Julie–I do not believe you understood the reason I asked you what I did. My problem comes in that you support actually damning the nation, and to my mind there is a huge difference between saying, “America has major problems, made terrible errors, and suffered from bad government,” which is what I think your main point really is, and saying “God damn America.” The former deals with the issues and provides a place to start repairs. The latter, when I see it, suggests washing one’s hands of the entire matter and walking off (which to my mind is only appropriate where things have gone so far off the rails that there is no hope of repair left), not to mention the emotional content that undermines any legitimate discussion by repelling people from analyzing the actual issues.
Now what follows, I am not sure you actually believe–my point is to demonstrate where inflammatory language leads (and very often, as I’ve said, it can obscure one’s real intent rather than furthering it). The question is, can the problems here be fixed, or not?
If you do believe the American system to be so thoroughly corrupt that the only thing available is to damn it forever, then it begs the question of why it is morally acceptable to pay tax money into such a system–to finance it, if you will. There comes a point where if something is indeed that broken, if it is that far beyond repair (which is to me the only circumstance where such curses are appropriate), then the right thing is to stop throwing resources down the drain where you have reason to believe they will simply be turned towards unacceptable ends. Money speaks. This is no different than the idea of, say, boycotting Chinese goods due to their human rights abuses: money speaks. And when you pay taxes, there is no way to earmark what it will be spent for…therefore you will end up financing things you find abhorrent by the simple fact of paying, and if the abhorrent things outweigh the good ones, and this cannot be changed sufficiently to tilt the balance in a way that would be acceptable to you, then to me it stands to reason that paying would be wrong and moving to a place where that money goes towards ends you approve of more would be a fitting response.
If the possibility of repair does indeed exist, however, I do not believe “God damn America” is anything like the proper response, and only makes things worse. My view is not that America is a god, not by any means. I do believe that this nation has problems, but I do not find it acceptable to actually call curses upon it, to wish for something bad to happen. That is revenge rather than assistance: it accomplishes nothing but breeding a bitterness in the soul that ruins the wielder in the end, not the intended target. I am not cold towards the problems that this nation has, not by any means.
What I believe is that America is an essentially good thing that can be fixed. And I have a very different vision of how to do that. That I do not agree with the method or all of the priorities you have does not make me a “pathetic” dupe or evil-hearted. Nikita cuts down to the quick of it here. We are starting from very different presuppositions. Your way–at least as I see it–is to draw more INTO the government…mine is to transfer as much away from it as possible, because to my view, the larger it gets, the more problems it creates instead of fixing them.
I find it much more productive to put in work towards a solution, which I believe the government (any administration, not just this one–I am speaking of an inherent weakness in the system) is unable to provide. I tend towards libertarian: I would like to see as much of the government’s social work shifted over to the churches as possible, where it can be administered by those who actually have a stake in the community AND who answer to a higher calling than vote-getting and other things that lead to perpetuating systems that don’t work the way they were intended to. In other words…I believe that the government (I am speaking of several decades here) has made a number of promises that it never had the ability to fulfill as envisioned in the first place. It has badly overreached, and the only thing I see left to us is for us to take as many of those functions back as we feasibly can. Conversely, however, I believe there is Biblical evidence that social welfare was intended to be first the province of Christians towards each other and those around us–only second any other agency.
Some things will obviously have to be left with the government: the public schools, defense, justice system, and major infrastructure (police, fire, roads, tunnels, etc.) stick out as the main examples, though that’s not a completely exhaustive list. Other things could be kept partly with the government but scaled back IF and WHEN the appropriate religious and private support was ready to kick in (not before or we leave people in need without a safety net). If we left our taxation levels constant and boiled the government down to its essentials, it’s pretty staggering to think what sort of funding would be available for those things that government IS typically better at–to my mind, the schools being #1 priority.
Sorry for my delayed responses here, life’s been busy recently. There have been a lot of good questions asked, and I will try to address a few of them!
Nitika – As to who is responsible for the children. Honestly on one level, I have to answer everyone. People (children) deserve to be loved and cared for. As a Christian loving my neighbor means I care about their well being. If my neighbor is hurting or in pain, then it is my responsibility to help them. I can’t ignore a child who is abused or hungry or suffering just because he isn’t my kid. If that means I advocate for him to have better access to health care or decent education then so be it. Such things require government involvement. I think we try too hard to live individualistically in our society instead of communally loving each other and making sure no one is in need.
Karl – I don’t deny that some people “can’t be bothered” to get the help they need. But I have to ask – how many of them know, really know, what help they need? In the poor school where they are drilled into passing tests, are they learning about basic nutrition or preventative health care? How many 12 year old moms read What To expect when You Are Expecting and know exactly what they need to do to take care of their babies, or know exactly what steps to do to get it? These are the systems I am talking about. When years of poverty have breed “live in the moment” and “use your wealth for material possessions now” mentalities, when education is poor, and support structures don’t exist it is hard to just expect things to be different. It is easy to judge people as lazy, uncaring, or say “if they were just like me” then they wouldn’t have problems. But that assumes the same cultural background and values. Systems need to acknowledge such values and work within them to either change them or be able to reach people who hold them.
Barnabas – I am not a socialist by training. Seeing injustice in the world is not socialism. Systems of injustice include building housing projects that don’t meant basic living standards. The poor in our country not having access to healthy food near where they live or when they do finding that empty calorie corn based products (subsidized by the gov so they are cheap) are far less expensive than healthy food. If a mom can afford subsidized pop for her child, but not milk – should she starve her child or give him what she can?
M.A. – Thanks for clarifying your position. I don’t think America is beyond all hope. There are a lot of things my tax dollars go to that I find utterly immoral. I still pay taxes, and will work to change things, but why run away when there is nothing better to run to? Saying “God Damn America” is a way of acknowledging that there are problems. Instead of smugly asking for more and more blessings at the expense of the rest of the world while denying that we have any problems at all, I think we need to acknowledge that we do deserve to be damned. If we read the OT prophets our sins (ignoring the poor, not caring for widows and orphans, cheating laborers of their wages…) are the same ones that prompted curses back then. It takes strong language to wake people up to such realities sometimes.
Julie, some of the language you use like “asking for more and more blessings at the expense of the rest of the world” leads me to believe you presuppose there is a fixed amount of wealth in the world, is that true?
Is your listing of the sins of America (ignoring the poor, not caring for widows and orphans, cheating laborers of their wages) intended to be hyperbole? I can understand being evocative to make a point, but to say the US is guilty of these things in light of hundreds of government and non-profit programs spending millions of dollars to address the needs of the poor, widows, orphans, and other wise needy (not to mention thousands of individuals and communities engaging personally with the needy to help raise them up) seems naive of both the condition of much of the world, and all of history. My best conclusion is that failure to help is not the sin you are accusing America of, but possession of goods. Do you see the affluence of America in light of world poverty to be immoral?
Why do education and health care “require government involvement”?
Who defines “decent education” “basic living standards” and adequate “access to health care”?
I think education and health care require government involvement in a modern economy because not everyone is equipped to provide their own (or their children’s) education and health care themselves, nor is everyone able to afford to pay for private education and health care.
I’d argue that the functions of a government should include educating and providing health care for its poorest citizens. What that should look like, which programs do it best, how to encourage people to move out of poverty if they can rather than encourage them to stay where they are and keep getting what they need given for free, etc. are all reasonably up for debate.
Thanks for the reply. I certanly agree that seeing injustice in the world is not socialism. I’m just trying to get a handle on what inustice you are pointing to.
Seems to me that our federal government has spent many billions of our tax dollars on subsidized housing and food programs for large numbers of people over the decades since the Great Society. To be sure, some percentage of that housing might not meet some people’s basic living standards and that’s a problem – but not a great systemic injustice. Or am I wrong?
Also, I don’t know what might be meant by “not having access to healthy food near where they live”. All the section 8 housing I’ve ever seen has been in urban areas where there is access to healthy food. The food pantries that I am acquainted with receive generous donations of time, food and cash from many corporations, and make this food available to all who are in need so that no one needs to go hungry in this country. That doesn’t sound particularly unjust to me either.
So I am still having trouble accepting as a given that corporations and the federal government are somehow complicit in perpetrating some vague injustice on the poor.
Of course, if you want to argue that providing unending handouts to those among the poor that refuse to work has fostered a multi-generational state of dependence on government – thereby keeping some of these folks “down”, then I might agree with you. But I suspect that’s not what you mean.
I also think the G-D America statement is very offensive. The people of this country have done far more good for the world than any socialst utopia that has ever been created. You really ought to retract that statement.
Nitika – I think Karl answered the education question well. Education requires money. Either it is provided for “free” by the government, you pay for private education, or your educate your own children. Most people in poverty do not have the time or the resources to do the last two. So unless you want to say that poor people should not be educated that means others must help provide education for them. The government provides a structure to help us all contribute to the education of everyone. sure the system is messed up and the richer you are the better your school will be, which means you will have better opportunities, and can make more money later…
And for your info I was not exaggerating my statements. sure america has programs that help, but we have also done a lot of harm. To ignore that is naive. I don’t fault affluence per se, and I could really care less about the amount of wealth in the world (its all made up numbers anyway). I do think there are limited resources in the world and that the US uses more than its fair share of those resources (like water). And I do have issues with any nation or person who gets rich by taking advantage of other people. We built our wealth by stealing land from the Native Americans and Mexicans. We created an economy based on slave labor and sweatshops. We continue to live in abundance only at the expense of others around the world. The farmers who can no longer compete with our subsidized crops who are forced off their land. The children who are held as slaves to grow our chocolate. The communities where children are dying from toxic poisoning and the fields are becoming unfarmable so we can have electronics full of lead, or bug free veggies, or brightly dyed t-shirts. The teenager who is beaten and raped and paid nearly nothing to make our clothes. Our greed sustains those and dozens of other injustices and yes that it wrong. Possession of goods is not a sin, but to cheat, hurt, and oppress so that we can possess those goods (and more and more at cheap prices) is. When we ask for blessing and mean prosperity (more stuff), and oppress others to gain that blessing all the while praising God for it… we are seriously messed up as moral human beings.
Barnabus – the housing projects in chicago were created substandard on purpose to make people not enjoy living there (so they would move out soon???). That is more than a problem, that is planned systemic prejudice against the poor.
Most urban neighborhood do not have local grocery stores. they have convenience stores that sell junk food. If they do have fruit or veggies, they are old and wilted and cost far more than in the suburban grocery stores. Food pantries don’t provide fresh foods (the healthy stuff). Do you ever see the type things that are donated there? High sodium soups. chips. processed cereals. mac and cheese. All high in processed chemicals, sodium, calories, and fat. Most are corn based as well. This isn’t a balanced or healthy diet. study after study has shown that a healthy diet is necessary for brain development in children, help them concentrate in school, and helps prevent behavioral disorders – without access to such a diet they are automatically at a disadvantage.
and I really don’t care that The people of this country have done far more good for the world than any socialst utopia that has ever been created.. That’s not even remotely the point. We have done just as much if not more evil as well. This isn’t about hiding our sins with a few token good works or saying that at least we are better than the Nazi’s or China. It’s admitting that there are problems, that we have done wrong, and attempting to fix those wrongs. But apparently Americans just don’t seem capable of doing that.
Barnabus,
Think Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd…
A few token good works??? Are you kidding me????
If providing nutritious food, housing, health care and education to all, without regard to ability or willingness to pay is a matter of justice, what do compassion and mercy look like?
Julie and others, I challenge you to read Atlas Shrugged all the way through and keep the position that universal health care is a good thing to pursue. Even if you are pained by the politics (as I imagine you will be) it is superbly written and worth a read just for its literary aspects.
“If providing nutritious food, housing, health care and education to all, without regard to ability or willingness to pay is a matter of justice, what do compassion and mercy look like?”
I just have to weigh in and tell Nitika what a great question that is. Seems her posts are the only ones that get to the deeper part of the issue…namely, Julie’s underlying philosophy is driving her opinions.
But what everyone here is missing is that the underlying philosophy is not even the main issue. You can talk all day about “evil” America. I’ll put aside the fact that people of nearly every other country on the planet envy us (whether they admit it or not), because that’s not the point. The point is that America (and Iraq, and Iran, and France, and Italy, and every other country you can name) are filled with sinful creatures who are under the wrath of God. The world is broken, Julie, because of SIN.
Of course there are those who are no longer under wrath, but under mercy, who have embraced the cross of Christ as their only hope. THAT is the solution to all the “injustice” you point to. Better health care, better food programs, etc. are all just band-aids.
Our job as Christians is to proclaim Christ as sufficent for ALL our needs, regardless if we are wealthy or poor, regardless if the “programs” in our country meet our needs. Christ is ENOUGH. As more and more men and women are transformed by Christ, compassion to our fellow man will naturally follow…from the INSIDE OUT.
Better health care is NOT the problem, guys. That people are eternally lost is the issue that needs to constantly be front and center. Everything else is an attempt to change people from the outside in…it will never, ever work.
So stop complaining about America, Juile, and start proclaiming Christ crucified.
Romans 8:17-23 says this:
“…and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him. For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope, that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body.”
This passage says that GOD subjected His creation to futlity…in hope. What is that hope? That hope is Christ. Not a better America, better health care, or better food programs. The world is broken, and will always be until Christ returns. We “groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body” (verse 23). But Christ is sufficient for us, even through all the suffering of this world.
So yes, vote your conscience, be active politically, do what you can to help others, work hard to love your neighbor. But this needs to be the FRUIT of a transformed life, not actions that are seen as the remedy itself. Concentrate on the REAL remedy, which is Christ. Better for someone to starve and know Christ, than to have “healthy food” and be eternally lost.
Damning America does no good for anyone. Proclaiming Christ will.
Okay I’m getting really confused at the insistence of people trying to point out to me that my philosophy influences my opinions. Duh. What else would be? I don’t just form opinions without testing them against all that I believe. Why are people using that then as a weapon? Do you think I’m that stupid?
Stephen – thanks for pointing out the obvious. If you can look at a starving child or the parents of a child mutilated by bombs and tell them “Christ is ENOUGH” and walk away I honestly question if you truly believe in this Christ you proclaim. Platitudes and hope sound good, but following Christ is what we have been called to.
Barnabus – You keep harping on the good things America has done as if that excuses any ill. Do you really believe that or are you one of those who can’t admit America has ever done wrong?
Nitika – I might read Atlas Shrugged someday, but I have to ask why do you see denying people access to health care as a good thing? Does being poor or living in a certain area automatically make a person less worthy of such things? Are the rich honestly more deserving of heath care?
You do ask a good question about justice, mercy and compassion. I think you are operating under the impression that justice merely refers to retributive justice as opposed to restorative justice. Justice is not just about punishment, but it is about righting that which is wrong. The scriptures talk about longing for justice, for justice to roll down on the land and bring healing. The suffering will end, the oppressed shall go free, and God will be pleased with our worship. Participating in the righting of wrongs involves compassion and mercy. One must have compassion on the suffering before one dares to help them. (my husband had a good post on this topic a couple of years ago). So that’s why for me loving others, having compassion on them, and seeking justice matters far more than any economic system, any stereotyping of people, or any dismissing of their needs just because they are different than I.
Steve and Barny,
I’d drop any efforts at rational conversation here. Neo-Julie isn’t responding… come on over with me, the water’s warmer over here.
Doulos
Wes – I’m not even sure what you are implying. Is asking questions not a form of response? Or is it just not the response you want?
No doubt the high rise concept used at Cabrini and Taylor was ill conceived and the facilities mismanaged, but I do not agree that the projects were intentionally created substandard. The slums that the Taylor Homes replaced were terrible, and these apartments were intended to provide affordable housing for tens of thousands of working poor – and succeeded – at least for a time. Call me naive, but I do not believe there was any underlying nefarious intent to discriminate going on here. I think the city planners and federal officials involved were generally well intentioned but didn’t fully understand what they were creating when they approved the high rise model, rather than more manageable (but more costly low rise buildings). Of course by the early 70’s the working poor in these buildings had been largely replaced by unworking single women with multiple children – and the resulting gang situation became a nightmare for everybody.
Despite the many enormous problems with public housing, among them is not that they were built in urban areas without grocery stores. That’s just not true. I grew up in the city, blocks away from subsidized housing, and can assure you that we had plenty of grocery stores. The area around Cabrini had tens of thousands of inhabitants. There were grocery stores. As for the children, I can testify that I attended a Chicago Public High School, and that nutritious school breakfasts as well as lunches were always available to the kids who needed them. Further, because I have spent a few Saturday mornings at the Northern Illinois Food bank, I can agree that we do pack many cases of processed food, but I have also personally packed many hundreds of pounds of fresh beef, chicken, pork and fish. True, the NIFB cannot handle produce, but regardless I stand by my assertion that no one need go hungry in this nation – certainly not as a result of government or corporate malfeasance.
Look, of course it’s not perfect. It can’t be. But in my opinion, to make blanket statements that corporations and the American Government are somehow screwing the poor is just false.
Oh and by as to those token good works. I submit that the good people of this country are by far the most generous in the history of civilization. Forget the trillions of dollars in foreign aid that Americans public and private send overseas each year. Forget the armies of humanitarian aid workers that we send to help with natural disasters around the world. Consider only the tens of millions of people around the world who no longer live in the shadow of totalitarianism thanks to the blood of those spilled at Belleau Wood, Anzio, Normandy, Iwo Jima, Chosin Reservoir, and Hue. And don’t forget about our brothers in arms this day either. Without them, we would not have the freedom to engage in this silly debate, nor would we have the freedom to make cheeky public statements like “G-D America”.
Of course there are still problems. We are sinful people. But for whatever it’s worth, I believe that the world is a far better place because this nation exists. God Bless America, Julie and Reverend Jeremiah Wright. I am very sorry you cannot bring yourselves to say that.
Oh, and Stephen – nice post.
It’s an interesting double standard that is emerging throughout this conversation: poor people shouldn’t be looking for/taking advantage of government handouts, but it’s ok if they look to charitable organizations/people for assistance. And while acts of charity are indeed essential in our Christian call to love our neighbor, charity doesn’t solve the question of justice.
Helping people meet their basic needs when in crisis is an important goal. But it shouldn’t be the ONLY goal. The justice question has to do with what we as a society could be doing to better address the root causes of poverty and the basic flaws in society that perpetuate this poverty. It means grappling with questions about how a person working full-time at a minimum wage job still falls well below the poverty line. It means grappling with rising food costs. It means asking questions about taxes and affordable housing and crime rates.
I don’t argue that many people and many organizations have contributed incredibly generous amounts of time, money, and effort toward charitable causes. I don’t argue that many people have been helped. But I do wonder if we sometimes use charity as an excuse not to do advocacy.
I’m not trying to be difficult, but I know that I myself grapple with the relationship between charity and justice, and wonder if anyone else has any thoughts on the matter.
Thanks, Barnabus. Good words from you, too, by the way. And Julie, it would have been nice if you would have read what I said and actually thought about it before responding. You totally and completely missed my point, as evidenced by your saying:
“If you can look at a starving child or the parents of a child mutilated by bombs and tell them ‘Christ is ENOUGH’ and walk away I honestly question if you truly believe in this Christ you proclaim.”
Huh? Walk away? You certainly are not adding to your credibility with responses like that.
Thanks for the invite, Wes.
B – Thanks for sharing anecdotal stories from your experience. Much research has been done on the poor planning and racist intent of Chicago housing. Such facts are why many of those projects are being torn down now. I’ve heard lectures (back when my economic opinions were closer to yours) on the process of the development and the revelations of deliberately making the units substandard and uncomfortable to encourage people to more out and up. Yes, they were first created for the white working poor. Lawsuits have determined that blacks (often the neediest poor) were originally screened out of living there. But white flight among other factors led to the creation of what became ghettos. Yes many tenets were then single mothers who didn’t work and many cultural factors played into what those projects became. (are mom trying to raise a family not deserving of non-condemned housing, or are only middle class women encouraged to be SAHMs?). There are complex issues involved here. Racism and classism on the part of city planners and zoning officials are historically part of the problem (not the sole issues, but part of the problem).
Food too is a complex issue. The poor quality of food available in urban areas is a well documented issue, I encourage you to look it up. Many kids do have access to one or two “healthy” meals a day through school lunch programs. But there are issues there as well. What is considered “healthy” school food is heavily influenced by lobbyests pushing their crop. So once again most of the food served in schools is corn based – high in calories, low in nutrition. And many children do not want the social stigma attached to the free lunch program. so although it is available, they choose to go hungry rather than be labeled and mocked by their peers. Yes this is illogical, but it demonstrates that the answers are not as simple as they seem.
The Northern Illinois Food Bank does a lot of great stuff. But it doesn’t come anywhere close to meeting demand. I’ve worked for ministries that shell out the $600 to get the truck to deliver food and “frozen on expiration date” donated meat to impoverished neighborhoods. People are always turned away. So beyond ethnic families getting the cast off mac and cheese from middle class white pantries, the system although good isn’t enough. Perhaps at some point we need to stop and think about why there isn’t enough food, why the people can’t afford food, and what can be done to change those things.
And I am not denying that the US has done a lot of good around the world. We do give lots of money and aid. numerically our government gives the most aid money of any developed nation – but at the same time that number represents the lowest percent of the budget of those nations as well (the widows’ mite story comes to mind here). I am not denying those things. I’m just asking for people to admit that we’ve screwed things up as well. That there are people hurting in this world because of US policies and actions. (and I will not for a minute conceed that our troops today are protecting my freedom of speech – that is so laughable I don’t even know where to begin).
So I just wonder what it is you want. For me to pat America on the back and say “well done.”? To accept prejudiced ideas that if people just worked hard and acted like another demographic that they would not be poor? That countries should not be responsible for their actions? That the command to love others doesn’t apply to Americans? That it’s okay for me to ask for blessing for myself without blessing others? That repentance isn’t necessary for empire?
Melissa, I think you hit the nail on the head with the distinction between charity and justice, and that is answer to Nikita’s question about compassion, mercy and justice. Compassion and charity only seeks to address the symptoms of the problems, and is primarily the kind of thing Barnabas is talking about. America is really good at charity. But justice goes a step further and asks about how we can fix the root causes of the problems. It doesn’t just say “how can we meet the immediate needs of the poor?” It also asks, “why are they poor in the first place, and what can we do to change that?” Where it gets uncomfortable, and where most people, especially of the sort that are commenting here, get defensive is when it turns out that we ourselves are part of the problem, and what needs to change is our own habits and systems.
What would you do Mike, to fix the root cause of the problem?
does anyone know how many people in poverty do child abuse programs help?? its a debate question for my debate class
please answer my question and send your answer to my email luvinsanedrivers@gmail.com