Universal Health Care in the US

"It is nessesary for the government to fund some programs, but taxes are already high for people and UHC would make taxes more expensive to taxpayers." So instead we make churches pay for this? Let me tell you why the bulk of your argument: donations, fails. This point is about how churches will get donations from patrons, but it isn't as straight forward as you make it seem. According to Meet the Need.com--> http://meettheneed.org... (a reliable source, and a non-profit, check the "about us" page if you don't believe me):Why Do Churches Turn Away Families At the Door? "Fewer people in need approach churches for help today because they don;t think churches are willing to help. However, studies show that people generally believe churches should be among the first to help. That dichotomy creates the prevailing poor perception of churches and Christians by society. Every family in need that churches turn away at the door drives home the idea that they're more about judgment than compassion then deeper and deeper into the American psyche. Every time a pastor speaks out on cultural, social, or moral issue when that church hasn't demonstrated a commensurate degree of mercy to the needy - the ditch widens." Simplified: Fewer people go to churches for help because they are afraid that churches will turn them away. Timothy Delaney February 24, 2016 at 12:28 pm (review of their church in South Carolina): My family and I moved to South Carolina a couple of years ago, began attending a mega church that is located in the city, and even began paying tithes and offerings. Things have been not so great lately, I have been out of work for sometime and we are on the verge of being evicted. We gave a sacrificial offering and attached a note explaining some of the things that were going on, and expressed how we have no one here. That was over a month ago and not one person from that church has reached out to us. Thousands of members, hundreds of staff, ministry on television weekly and not one phone call. This proves that above anything, it is unfeasible because it people won't go for help, and people are already unsatisfied with their church. What makes you think that they will go to a POW for help? The great thing about UHC is that it allows all people to have support, even if they don't have the ability to get it from a church. Because you will probably come with some response about how people will come for UHC from POW, I'm gonna give some more examples. Soapboxie: https://soapboxie.com... --> (This article is written from a former homeless/poor person)--> People won't get help for themselves because, "By the time a person is on the street, his or her life is usually already careening out of control." In short: lots of poor people that can't afford health care, don't want to get it for themselves because if they do, they feel like a religious POW will be supporting them when they may not support that religion. It becomes lack of control to have churches pay for the UHC b/c people will be losing control. Now we need to move onto this disastrous money situation because it makes very little sense. You did some math about churches as a whole, but I'm going to focus on each church individually. (https://www.cheatsheet.com...) How much does each person from a church donate per year? Christians: $817 Muslims: $1,300 Jews: $1,440 "Jesus said help the poor." That is what they're doing, but it certainly isn't enough to pay for this huge amount of money. As you can see if you have working eyes and a brain that exceeds 5th grade math, this would total more than $914,000(again, this is from YOUR estimate). So ultimately, it is impossible for these churches to pay for it because your entire case revolves around donations, and yet they aren't enough to pay for the $1M price tag PER YEAR, PER CHURCH. And then I am ultimately really confused about why the US GDP is coming into the picture. You are overcomplicating this debate. So lets simplify this to just one church. Cut out everything else. So lets say that this church has 75 members. They are a christian church, so they all donate $817 to their church. This totals: $61,275. How does this cover the cost of the price tag? Answer: it doesn't. And then you brought up a tithe. And I don't know what definition you are using. Do you mean like a tax like what they did in the past, where 10% of your paycheck would go to the church or clergy(if that is your definition, they you are contradicting yourself because you said that involuntary tax was bad and which was also your reasoning for the governments, "immoral taxing.") If this isn't what you mean, and you mean to pay the church upfront, and it isn't required, in which case people wouldn't donate that much and we would be back where we started. Nothing you have said makes sense and thus there is no reason that you should win this debate. I await your response! (I'm not going to be rude like you because I am at least respectful when debating) It will be fun to see the outcome of this debate! Bye