Conservatives who disagree with social programs should not work in community action.

[survivorinohio]

Do you think?

[mikiemom]

Agree, I also think Senators who don't believe in Science should be on any congressional science committee

[garnet83]

I believe this to be accurate. Conservatives, generally, are all of these. However, we don't care for able-bodied people who have made a lifestyle out of government benefits, nor for holding back those who are successful, or creating division among the American people by portraying successful people as villains for having made good decisions and investments. Those who are well off, hopefully, will reach out and help those who genuinely need help getting on their feet or overcoming unfortunate circumstances. However, we do not feel that it is just or Constitutional for the government to mandate that the successful take financial responsibility for others. While I agree with the above quote, I feel that it leaves much unsaid.

[katy_kay08]

I guess it depends on what you mean by "community action"  overall I disagree with the statement. If the end goal is to get community involvement in a cause they conservatives have just as much right to work towards that goal as liberals.  

[survivorinohio]

Quoting katy_kay08:

I guess it depends on what you mean by "community action"  overall I disagree with the statement. If the end goal is to get community involvement in a cause they conservatives have just as much right to work towards that goal as liberals.  

In our area the Community action agency has a food outreach, a clothing outreach and also takes care of several government programs including utility assistance or HEAP as it is called here.

[survivorinohio]

Quoting garnet83:

I believe this to be accurate. Conservatives, generally, are all of these. However, we don't care for able-bodied people who have made a lifestyle out of government benefits, nor for holding back those who are successful, or creating division among the American people by portraying successful people as villains for having made good decisions and investments. Those who are well off, hopefully, will reach out and help those who genuinely need help getting on their feet or overcoming unfortunate circumstances. However, we do not feel that it is just or Constitutional for the government to mandate that the successful take financial responsibility for others. While I agree with the above quote, I feel that it leaves much unsaid.

I can respect your viewpoint and the way it is pesented, thank you.

[radioheid]

 Why not?

There's a difference between open-ended welfare programs and programs that require responsibility.

I've long said that if a miracle happens and I come into a couple hundred-million, I'd love to open a program that offers job training, transportation and on-site housing to young people between 21 and 40 who are interested in a permanent solution to poverty. However, those people would be thoroughly screened to determine who would be a good investment, and who is likely to fail. Those who have been severely disadvantaged but show potential would receive the opportunity to obtain a high school diploma and driver's license (if necessary), certification training or an associate's degree from an accredited institution, very low-cost housing, daycare services and preventative medical care while they are in the program, and transportation to and from school and appointments in exchange for janitorial, maintenance/groundskeeping or secretarial work for the foundation while they are enrolled in the program.

Of course, I'm not considered a "true" conservative because I'm a Libertarian.

 

[garnet83]

Quoting survivorinohio:

Quoting garnet83:

I believe this to be accurate. Conservatives, generally, are all of these. However, we don't care for able-bodied people who have made a lifestyle out of government benefits, nor for holding back those who are successful, or creating division among the American people by portraying successful people as villains for having made good decisions and investments. Those who are well off, hopefully, will reach out and help those who genuinely need help getting on their feet or overcoming unfortunate circumstances. However, we do not feel that it is just or Constitutional for the government to mandate that the successful take financial responsibility for others. While I agree with the above quote, I feel that it leaves much unsaid.

I can respect your viewpoint and the way it is pesented, thank you.

My pleasure

[furbabymum]

 I think you can be a perfectly competent employee while not necessarily agreeing with things.

For instance: we just got a federal child sexual assault case. 20 victims starting as young as 3. There is no way in hell I think this guy is awesome. In fact, I rather hope he dies in prison. I'm still going to do my job and I'll do it just as well for him as I do it for all our other clients. I'm looking through discovery and I'm writing down possible defenses for this. I really hope he's killed in prison though.

[pamelax3]

I would have such a hard time doing any kind of work for someone like that.

Quoting furbabymum:

 I think you can be a perfectly competent employee while not necessarily agreeing with things.

For instance: we just got a federal child sexual assault case. 20 victims starting as young as 3. There is no way in hell I think this guy is awesome. In fact, I rather hope he dies in prison. I'm still going to do my job and I'll do it just as well for him as I do it for all our other clients. I'm looking through discovery and I'm writing down possible defenses for this. I really hope he's killed in prison though.

[pamelax3]

Are you referencing community action as food banks and programs like that?