Liberal 'Do-Good' Policies Fall Short on Doing Good
At the very core of Liberalism is the idea that good deeds can only be achieved by legislating them. Strong arguments can be made that these "do-gooder" policies achieve the opposite and actually serve to hurt those they intend to help.
We see this today with politicians in Washington who believe that a big government is the cure-all for everything that ails this nation. They believe government, by way of forced charity, should do for us what we should be doing for ourselves and each other. They disguise it under their own half-baked version of spirituality they call "social justice," implying Jesus was a socialist who taught his disciples how to sponge off of other people rather than fish.
The helping hands of individuals, not the sticky tentacles of government, are the vessels God intended to be his hands and feet to a hurting world. Truth is, things work out better for everyone when we do our best to help ourselves and help each other. Sure, a lot of liberal policies sound good on the surface but the bigger government gets the lazier and more selfish we become. Homeless veterans and starving children become government programs rather than our responsibility.
Get Our Latest News for FREE
I can't help but wonder if that is why so many people at the Democrat Party's national convention booed God last year. After all, acknowledgment of a Higher Power leads to accountability and the idea that maybe we exist for some other reason than self-service.
To clarify, for years now, liberals have sought to expunge all references to God and Judeo-Christian values from American daily life except when they conveniently cherry-pick and contort scripture to promote socialism by way of Social Justice.
From grade school on, our kids' minds are filled with historical un-facts brought to them by Humanist teachers and professors who say their movement (which is really a religion of self-adoration) is "a progressive philosophy of life that, without supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity."
So, pray tell, how do liberals come up with a definition for "ethical" without acknowledgement of a Higher Power? They can't, and the moral deficit they've created has done nothing to "aspire to the greater good" they claim they desire. It's sad, ironic and completely maddening that the same people who scream about mass shootings at schools won't tolerate that same school displaying the words "Thou Shalt Not Kill" in plain view.
Liberalism isn't just bad social policy; it's bad economics. Consider a recent study of 100 countries completed by Dutch researcher Dick Slikker. The study, "Correlations between Christian Population Changes and in Sovereign Ratings in Countries for the Period Between 2000 to 2012," found that in every case studied, God is good for the economy.
While Slikker acknowledged his research leaves room for debate, he concluded: "It cannot be denied that, in every case where there was an increased Christian population, an improved Fitch (long-term credit rating) rating corresponded."
Table 8 of the study offers a sampling of results showing the increase or decrease in the number of Christians in a given country and its Fitch rating for the corresponding 5 or 10-year period. For example, Belgium had a 3-percent decrease in its Christian population and a 4-percent decrease in its Fitch rating; China had a 2-percent increase in its Christian population and a 6-percent improvement in its Fitch rating. Iceland's 5-percent decrease in Christians reflected a 17-percent decrease in its Fitch rating; and yes, even the US, after a 2 percent drop in Christian population, suffered a 1-percent drop in its Fitch rating.
Of course, none of this matters to liberals who are good at legislating do-good policies that fall terribly short on doing good.
