Still looking for an answer

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Among the many many questions I have which no one will directly answer is: Why should I be forced to support someone who won't support himself?

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1258

Instead of answers, I get evasions and changed subjects. A few people even like to bring up my particular brand of faith as a reason I should do the above.

Cantservatives generally say I should not have to support people who won't do for themselves. However, when actions meet words, there is a serious disconnect. I bring this up and I get hit with evasions and subject changes and statements like "Well, everyone else does it."

Lemming much?

Liarberals won't answer me directly. Rather they point to people whom they say could not make it without this involuntary contribution on my part.

When I ask for the rules to be fair, they get mad. The fair rules are: If I'm forced to pay for government programs I object to, then I should be able to force them to pay for government programs they object to.

Those who point to my Christian faith say Jesus told us we should support the poor. Indeed, He did, but He also never forced anyone to do anything. He merely said choose.

Why should I be forced to spend my money on people who will not take care of themselves?

I have no problem in helping people who need a hand up, not a hand out. Bad times can happen to anyone. Lean on me because it won't be long until I need someone to lean on.

But if you prefer to wallow in the bad times and not try to get out of the swamp, I say you should stay there.

Why should I be forced to give to people who only want a handout?

I'm listening, but I do not expect to get an answer.