Study this scenario: The first
house on your street is owned by a single mom whose
husband left her and their two preschoolers to move
into his parent’s basement so he could save money to
attend Occupy protests with his girlfriend. The
single mom works the swing shift at Wal-Mart and is
barely paying her mortgage and feeding her kids. Her
deck is adorned with a hodgepodge of second-hand
toys and a wooden utility spool serving as a table.
The second house is home to DINKs (Double Income No
Kids). They are a professional couple who are cash
flush and own the best of everything. They not only
have patio furniture, it is all a South Pacific
bamboo theme and the cushions match both the
umbrella and barbeque cover.
Answer me this: With the economic disparity between
these neighbors, would you feel charitable
removing—forcibly—one lounge chair and cushion from
the DINK couple and giving it to the single mom? (I
used patio furniture rather than tax money because
people view it as more personal and thus more
thought provoking.) Hidden in the question is the
key phrase, feel charitable. This is the single
greatest cause of our 14+ trillion dollar debt
because quirky politicians feel charitable when they
take property from one class of people and
redistribute it to another even when it must be done
down the barrel of a gun. I’ve watched this syndrome
for three legislative sessions and this is exactly
how government enslaves its subjects under massive
programs. (I’ve seen it happen time and time again.)
Big government advocates just don’t understand true
charity.
My Random House dictionary defines charity as
“donations or generous actions to the poor”, so even
Webster has adopted a Marxist slant and we must
consult older references to understand the concept.
The Bible is a good start. Charity is the giving
(another key word) of the first fruits of your
bounty to someone in need. Notice the word taking
exists nowhere because it’s not charity when you
take and then give away the first fruits of others.
This is the paradox King David explained in 1
Chronicles 21:24 when refusing to offer a sacrifice
which “costs me nothing.” One could assume
furthering King David’s logic, the greater your
personal sacrifice, the greater your gift, until
eventually surrendering your life in exchange for
another becomes the greatest gift of all. Such was
the recent monumental gift of an Oklahoma mother to
her daughter and the impetus for this column.
Last March, 41-year-old Stacie Crimm received the
news she both had cancer and was pregnant. Fearing
the deleterious affect of chemotherapy on her unborn
child, Stacie chose her daughter’s life over her own
and refused treatment. Doctors delivered little
Dottie Mae by cesarean section when Stacie’s brain
stem tumor rendered her unconscious in mid-August.
Three weeks later Stacie temporarily regained
consciousness, cradled Dottie in her arms and gazed
into her eyes for the first and last time. Three
days later, Stacie died. Imagine condensing an
entire lifetime of emotion between a mother and her
daughter into the few minutes Stacie and Dottie
shared on Thursday, September 8th. If you have a
lump in your throat, you probably understand why
Stacie made the ultimate sacrifice. At one month of
age, a healthy Dottie Mae left the hospital with her
Uncle Ray and her four new siblings.
Many of our problems today stem from the advocates
of Marxism confusing all they redistribute by force
as true charity while simultaneously diminishing the
value of human life. Stacie and Dottie Mae’s story
put a powerful face on both points. To get things
right in America, we must get right with God and to
do anything else is roping the wind.
|