Denny,

So the Christian perspective is indifference?

“In short, he(Jesus) ‘would never have’ supported universal healthcare.”

“If we grant J. P. Moreland’s view of separation, then we would probably have to say that Jesus ‘never would have’ opposed Universal Healthcare either.”

You know, there is something that just doesn’t seem right when we are talking about Jesus in the past tense.

We do know He is alive, right?

On Moreland’s terms, it would seem that Christian duty would not require it, but neither would it preclude it.

Thanks,
Denny

according these definitions, I would expect JP to also suggest that Jesus would not approve of govt. funded public schools, social security, or welfare. wow.

why can’t part of a christian’s duty toward the poor include voting for provision of basic needs by the govt?

On top of that, look at all of the people who don’t give to charity at all (including one of my buddies who is the most republican person of all time). Look at all of the people who steal money and then are praised anyway (see Denny’s non-damning remarks on Ken Lay). The list goes on and on. We as a country aren’t in any position to depend on charity to combat ridiculously high drug prices. We as a country aren’t in any position to depend on the ridiculously high price of medical care. Instead, when medical debt is the single biggest cause of bankruptcies, what does the ruling party do? Enact legislation which makes it far harder to declare bankruptcy.

J.P. Moreland is probably right. However, just because it’s not what Jesus would have done doesn’t make it the wrong thing to do.

If we grant J. P. Moreland’s view of separation, then we would probably have to say that Jesus never would have opposed Universal Healthcare either.

Denny

Eutopically (if that’s a word), the Church would provide free healthcare to all who are sick and needy. So in a sense that would be micro-universal healthcare.

The main this is that we should take care of the sick and needy.