Separating the Bible from God's Commands

I am officially going crazy! I was in Bible Study tonight, and afterwards, someone decided to read off something they saw online. Some sort of "divorce agreement" regarding divorcing the politically left. In it, the person wrote something to the effect of, "you can keep the homeless, and the hippies and illegal aliens..." "we'll keep walmart.." "we'll keep the Bibles, you can have NBC..."

I forgot to be open-minded like I normally am (or try to be), and left the room. I couldn't take it! What?!!!! you want to pawn homeless people off on us, and think you are keeping the Bible? Jesus admonished those who looked down on the poor. What happened to the Beattitudes? What happened to the Widow's mite? What happened to the Good Samaritan? What happened to God's command to be kind to the aliens among you, for you were once aliens in Egypt? What happened to everything that Christ preaches?!!!! You have already pushed away the Bible!

But DO NOT! imply that it is an unChristian thing to value helping others above personal wealth!

OTHER THOUGHTS ("B-ROLL"):
1) So I guess we're also keeping the developmentally disabled, and kids who are traumatized by abuse. But what happens when a wealthy republican beats his children? Or how do you handle a 25 year old who grew up in your society, but starts to show signs of schizophrenia? Do you send them over to us now because you don't have the social structure to handle it? In mass, we have the ability to make a difference, but when you say, (paraphrase) "you keep the problems," that makes the ratios of problems (issues, not people) go up, and no one is helped. If there is no public assistance, you ignore the problem, and the result is: you'll have more people wandering around, peeing on your sidewalks because you don't provide any assistance. I don't believe that handouts are anything more than a bandaid on a broken leg, but I do believe in a hand up.

2) I don't know about taking too high a percentage of taxes from anyone without their consent. Personally, I consent to taxes if it will help our fellow human beings... and as long as my own needs are met... and as long as you aren't giving them more (with my money) than I can afford for myself. Because I consent, I naturally expect others to as well.

3) Yes, you can keep Walmart, which has a goal of 30% of marketshare worldwide, and only stops at that to prevent problems with monopoly laws (but your society will abolish that law, and then it will change it's goals to a higher percentage). Walmart, the company that avoids full-time positions and medical coverage. And Walmart, the company that fires people who try to start unions, which whether you like unions or not, is illegal [and the Bible does say to obey the laws of your land (except when it goes against God, like in Daniel)].... But may I ask, which of your people will chose to work there?

4) Yes I know that not all politically "right" people are indifferent to helping others, but this writer apparently is, if he/she can make these comments.

5) Now that I found your blog online: So you're an American law student. And I'm an American MBA student. We both apparently value education, but you think yours is enough to back your value-system over ours. From my perspective, half of what you want to keep... you're right; we are so different that there won't be much of a legal battle. I cannot imagine wanting it. But do you really suppose that we don't want police? What school teaches that?

6) But all-in-all, if you didn't bring God into it, I would have chalked it up to politics, and left it alone. You, however, imply that we would not want the Bible! How dare you make such an asinine assumption about an entire political spectrum of people!

7) Okay, I still don't feel better. I need to climb to the top of Razor's Edge (my favorite hiking spot), and scream!

Capitalist vs Social Capitalist

We say that we are a capitalistic society. This is not completely true. I once had a teacher who explained that a capitalistic society would have no welfare, no medicare, and no financial aid for college. I'll add, there would be no free lunch program, no animal shelters, no psychologists for people with low income, no group homes for the developmentally disabled. And Walmart would be allowed to take over the country. Basically, all those things that help our society survive would not be there. Our country is Social Capitalistic. We have services that aid people who need it. We also encourage big business, but with a limit. And we allow people to climb an economic ladder (ideally).
Some people, as well as an online survey that I took, say that I am a socialist. Given a choice between capitalist and socialist, I'd agree. But I do like the concept of social capitalism. If I ran the country, which I never will, I would be much more on the social side of the term, than we are. Who was the president who instituted a guaranteed work program, and improved the national parks system? That sounds like good leadership. But I wouldn't say that there has to be absolute economic equality. Some people do work harder than others. But some people get the poor side of everything no matter how hard they try. So everyone should have their basic needs met: socially, economically, emotionally, physically, and spiritually. But from there, that's when capitalism should be allowed to become part of the mix.
-My Opinion Only
update: keep in mind that this was pre-Obama... I doubt I'd be more social than what he's doing.

Thoughts on the Apartheid

A woman came here from South Africa to work for a summer. I was her supervisor. Within 3 weeks, she was one of my best friends. She is the one who got me interested in politics.
She told me about Apartheid, and how her family worked against it, but I didn't understand all that it was until a couple weeks ago, when I read a book titled, Kaffir Boy, by Mark Mathabane.
The Apartheid, in my opinion, bordered on genocide. The goal of the white minority at the time, was to force black people into the bottom rung of their hierarchy. They took control of the education system, teaching them how to submit through severe punishment, more than they taught anything else. They created Pass laws, that required every black person to carry a document that described employment status, where they could live, etc. No one could leave the reservations they were assigned to, except if they worked outside of these areas. They were paid so little, that most lived in absolute squalor. High numbers of young boys - 5, 6, and 7 year olds, prostituted themselves for food. The health clinic turned away children with TB, fainting spells, malnutrition, etc, multiple days in a row because the line was too long. A person was required to have his or her pass in order (which cost money to update) in order to get a job legally, but had to have a job in order to obtain a pass, and could be arrested for being unemployed. Raids by the government occurred night or day to ensure that everyone over 16 had their passes in order. Often, families were broken up because men had to move to obtain jobs, but their wives and children were not given permission to join them.
So many people died of starvation. The raids were severe; young children were beaten by police when they didn't tell where their parents were. It was not a crime to kill a black person, so the police could and did do so easily. It seems to me that it was as if the government wanted them dead- at least the ones who were not absolutely subordinate, but tried to organize it in a way in which they could blame the deaths on the victims. It wasn't the same as the Holocaust, in which the army came door to door taking every Jew to enslave or kill. Instead, they were more subtle.