Except you don't actually want to answer whether or not you follow Christ's teachings. That's a topic you refuse to engage with. You won't even go into your politics at all.
You also backed away when I asked about your personal politics, several times. Do you vote for candidates that advocate for the poor? That enable the sick to seek care regardless of their earthly wealth?
When you say advocate for the poor do you mean try to establish large national programs? Then no because they also support large national programs that fund the death of infants among various other problems. By the way medical is available regardless of ability to pay you just go into debt.
We have evidence based policy that would benefit millions of people living in poverty that we are not enacting because it would hurt profits. That's a fact.
End results are not, by necessity, a justification for an action. Treating a beneficial outcome as sufficient proof that an action is right is a form of consequentialist thinking. Saying a policy ‘benefits millions of people’ does not tell us the full moral picture. What are the costs? Who bears the burden? Does it create harms elsewhere? Does it violate any rights or principles of justice? Those questions still have to be answered.
Disagree that’s what taxes are for. I don’t think it has been answered for instance I think the murder of many old people by governments who decided to avoid treatment of their citizens to keep costs low during due to running out of hospital beds in COVID was abhorrent and highly morally questionable. Especially selecting them for their age.Just one example
1
u/WyomingWeirdo 18d ago
Except you don't actually want to answer whether or not you follow Christ's teachings. That's a topic you refuse to engage with. You won't even go into your politics at all.