Hoe sosialisties mag/moet ‘n Christen wees?

Op ‘n blog-inskrywing oor sosialistiese mediese sorg vra ‘n mede-blogger my: Is dit nie ‘n Christelike plig [om by te dra tot ‘n regeringsbeheerde mediese fonds vir almal in die land] nie?
Wintery Knight sê weer:

When you give the government your money, you give up the right to choose. If you keep your money, you keep your right to choose. If you think that the government should take your money and then provide you with services like health care, education, welfare, therapy, etc., then you just gave up your right to choose. You gave up your liberty for security.
I think that Christians give their money away thinking that the government will act in their own best interests. That is, that a secular government will act in the interests of Christians. Maybe Christians think that their interests lie in “helping the poor”, and that a big government is needed to do that. But when government gets that money, they will use it in ways that cannot possible be as good as you would use it yourself…. Don’t give your money to the government because they tell you some sob story about taxing the rich and helping the poor! What they really want to do is to take your money and pay off their political donors, like abortion providers, trial lawyers and unions. They cannot possible spend the money as well as you could have spent it yourself.
Christians need to be fiscal conservatives. They need to learn economics. They need to think with their heads when voting.

 Ongeag met wie jy saamstem, dit is werklik ‘n moeite-werd vraag!
Ja, die Christen moet bereid wees om te gee. En daardie voorskrif is nie net op die “ryk” gelowige gemik, terwyl die armer gelowige maar net hoef te vat nie. (“Gee, al het jy net twee kledingstukke” is ‘n Bybelse opdrag.)

Maar moet die Christen bereid wees om baie/ meer/ alles vir sy regering te gee, sodat die regering kan besluit hoe om dit “regverdig” uit te deel? Is die regering die bekwaamste en liefdevolste mense om liefdadigheid uit te voer? Moet die gelowige gee as ‘n wet (wetlik bepaalde belasting), of moet hy God vra hoeveel en waar om te gee? En sosialistiese regerings het nog altyd gelei tot arm lande, dit werk net nie in die praktyk nie.
Mense wat die regering vir liefdadigheid wil verantwoordelik maak, gee gewoonlik minder vir liefdadigheid uit eie wil as mense wat nie die regering wil verantwoordelik maak daarvoor nie. Wat meer is, diegene wat nie hulle plig daaroor aan die regering daarvoor wi afsmeer nie ondersteun meestal ‘n stelsel (kapitalisme) wat maak vir minder armoede, en dat selfs die armes in die land ryker is. Maar dis nog nie genoeg rede om alle regeringsubsidies aan liefdadigheid teen te staan nie- of is dit?

Wat my by ‘n vraag te staan bring: Watter liefdadigheid kan die Christen voor stem dat die belastingbeler dit moet dra, onder die regering se toesig? En wat moet liefs nie onder die regering se beheer wees nie?

On the freedom to disagree from your government

On AOL news Ken Layne asks: Should socialised medicare protesters be denied socialized medical care? Now Ken probably speaks of America, but I would answer “yes.” They should both be denied socialised medical care and denied the obligation to pay for it. If, for example, 5% of taxpayer money goes towards socialized healthcare, protesters who agree never to use it should get a 5% reduction in their taxes.

It’s only fair, wouldn’t you say?