Promoting Obamacare in South Dakota, Montana and several national interviews last week, Kasich touted the Bible chapter’s depiction of judgment based on individual charity as a sweeping endorsement of government programs for the poor.
This is a common error among those that endorse larger government and the spending associated with it. Kasich, a Republican, campaigned against Obamacare in 2010, saying the law’s Medicaid expansion would “stick states with large and unsustainable costs.” So what changed?
It turns out that Kasich was not true to his rhetoric. He unilaterally implemented the Obamacare Medicaid expansion in 2013.
The Obamacare expansion puts able-bodied, working-age adults with no dependent children on Medicaid at a cost of billions per year in new federal spending. When speaking to conservative Christians Kasich needed moral authority to back his liberal policy.
“Now, I don’t know whether you ever read Matthew 25, but I commend it to you, the end of it, about do you feed the homeless and do you clothe the poor,” Kasich told Montana legislators when asked about Obamacare at a Helena press conference the next day.
Apples to Oranges.
The Matthew passage the governor commended to his hearers was intended to address individual charity. It is too common in the church today that we have given these privileged responsibilities away to the government.
The Lord intended the church to feed and clothe the poor not the government. He intended the church to care for the sick not Obamacare or Medicare. He wanted you and I to show generosity and hospitality to those who asked. Do you ever wonder why people’s hearts grow cold and the church is shrinking? It is because we neglect the word of God and expect the government to do what was required of us.
For more on this story go to Watchdog.org and this story by Jason Hart, just clock below:
Seen the light? Ohio Gov. Kasich says Bible supports Obamacare |
|
| While promoting Obamacare in South Dakota, Montana and several national interviews, Gov. Kasich touted the Bible’s depiction of judgement based on individual charity as a sweeping endorsement of government programs for the poor. | |
|