Ask yourself these moral questions
By Anthony Marquez, Bear
"Is it morally right to bankrupt the government with irrational tax cuts, to be left without money to fund programs to help the littlest among us? Is it right to give millions of dollars to the haves and pennies to the have-nots, as it was the case with the tax cuts?"
It's the millionares who pay millions of dollars. Those with the pennies, they pay nothing. In fact, they tend to get something. It is impossible to give a tax cut to those who are not paying any taxes. Given the ratios and what is rational, it is rational to cut taxes. But this guy does not have a rationale for rationality. That's his main problem.
The moral reason for tax cuts is that they let parents generate wealth. Some people are greedy. Yet, most Americans, even the greedy ones, manage their money better than the government does, including charitable giving and so on.
"Is it right to make war with a country that is a midget compared to ours in size and military might, for the purpose of securing its natural resources?"
That's a lie. That's a secondary reason. In dealing with secondary reasons it would be just as easy to make the case for the moral good, of good reasons and purposes. But the main reason was terrorism, even Leftists note that any twenty men can bring a nation to a halt. If mistakes are made in fighting wars based on this new premise the reason for the type of war stands. You can disagree with the mistakes or the way it is fought but the real reason for the "war on terror" is evident. It is the modern fact of twenty men using terrorism.
"Is it right and Christian to leave more than 40 million citizens to fend for themselves against killer diseases for lack of affordable health care?"
Go ahead and compare American healthcare to socialist healthcare, like Canada, etc. Where are these numbers coming from, one might ask? Well, this guy has already lied once. You did not notice the 40 million citizens wandering around the streets with killer diseases?
Yeah, I did not see them either.
"Is it right to be pro-life while supporting the death penalty....."
Both of those positions are pro-life. They both protect and value human life quite highly. This guy seems rather degenerate and so his ethics are perverse. He wants to protect the lives of those who kill life. He has been pro-death. Socialist medicine is pro-death. The position he takes here is pro-death too.
Hmmm, it is not a good track record so far.
"...and doing nothing to prevent hunger and war, which cause the deaths of thousands of children and innocent bystanders?"
Taking on the Islamists does a lot to prevent the death of thousands. A failure there is pro-death, starvation, terrorism, people getting their hands or heads chopped off, etc. If you have the opportunity to get at this sort of problem, take it. For it is festering away. So I agree with Bush's forcefulness on it.
"It appears we have lost our moral compass. Tragically, based on the results of this election, we have a long way to go before we find it."
He never had a moral compass to lose. That is because he is a pro-death moral degenerate.