You're just in denial.
Yes, it is.
So what?
A righteous man regards the life of his animal, But the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel. - Proverbs 12:10
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs12:10&version=NKJV
That shows that they are responsible, at least to that extent.
Yes, it does.
But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully,knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine,according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust. - 1 Timothy 1:8-11
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Timothy1:8-11&version=NKJV
Yes, it is.
That you seem unable to respond to other than dismissing it.
That's called an appeal to the stone.
Supra.
Prior to whenever the first welfare check was ever sent out, how many women relied on their husbands to take care of them and their children?
Compare that to how many women today who even have a husband to rely upon.
Yes, that's my point. Your position has resulted in what we see today, single mothers sending their children off to God-less government schools while they go off to work to support themselves and their child, and a divorce rate over 45%, all while the child's father has abandoned them, because she doesn't need him, and he can just go off and do whatever he wants, because she doesn't need him.
No, they don't.
Needs are not rights.
No, it shouldn't be that way, else Paul was wrong when he said "if a man does not work, he shall not eat."
It's a wicked law.
No.
1) It's not self righteous. It's an acknowledgement of reality which includes oneself.
2) Man is, in fact, basically (at the lowest level) evil. History's record shows this, through man's inhumanity towards man.
Saying it doesn't make it so.
One Man WAS perfect. His name was Jesus Christ.
This is called a straw man.
Again, the law is not for the righteous, but for the wicked.
Deterrence is an act of preventing or controlling actions or behavior through fear of punishment or retribution. It is the primary theory of criminology shaping the criminal justice system of the United States and various other countries.
Deterrence can be divided into two separate categories.
General deterrence manifests itself in policy whereby examples are made of deviants. The individual actor is not the focus of the attempt at behavioural change, but rather receives punishment in public view in order to deter other individuals from deviance in the future.
Specific deterrence focuses on the individual deviant and attempts to correct his or her behavior. Punishment is meant to discourage the individual from recitivating(sic).
Both forms of deterrence assume rationality on the part of deviants and criminals, and that crime can ultimately be prevented through altering the cost benefit ratios of such behaviour. |
Deterrence is an act of preventing or controlling actions or behavior through fear of punishment or retribution. It is the primary theory of criminology shaping the criminal justice system of the United States and various other countries. Deterrence can be divided into two separate categories...
psychology.fandom.com
Clearly you don't know what you're talking about.
Then the law isn't for them, is it?
I don't need personal anecdotes to know that man is inherently wicked. I have all of history that shows it.
Good, because I would question your sanity. Those quotes are from Mein Kampf, by Adolf Hitler.
They are some of the most despicable things he ever said.
However, that's where your thinking leads, Arty, because there aren't many steps between "Children have the rights to essentials [provided by the government if the parents don't supply them]" and those above sentiments.
But that's where your thinking leads, because you think parents will fail in their responsibilities, and want to provide a safety net for the children.
The best way to protect children is to encourage parents to be responsible and care for their children. Having the government be responsible for and care for the children does not do that.
Then you don't know what "rights" are.
The government cannot give rights. It can only either protect those rights (through criminal justice), or it can ignore those rights (e.g. Hitler)
Rights are inherent from conception.
If the government could give people rights, then there would be no guarantee that the government would not take those rights away, and if they did, you would have no recourse.
No, they're not, no matter how many times you say it.
False.
Then we probably care more about the child than you do, because we think that the parents should be the ones to provide those things, not the government.
We're not pretending anything.
We DO care, and enough to not be cruel.