17th January 2004, 9:28 PM
But it'd work just as well if people were just responsible about it! We'd help ourselves and them themselves. Look, generosity is all well and good, and I support homeless shelters and such fully when they are done by people who truly want to give to those in need. However, it shouldn't be forced or it's not true generosity. Generosity comes from the heart, not from orders to give or else. And, as I said, aside from help from those willing to do it, those who have not saved for retirement their whole life have EARNED what they get. Should someone help them, then they are being a very generous person, but they don't deserve help. I don't say that callously, I mean that NO ONE deserves a free handout. That's why it's free. The only time someone actually deserves something is when they earn it. The whole idea of Christmas is that no one deserves the gifts you give, but you give them anyway because you love them. It's more than what they earned, because that doesn't matter. Now, how much meaning behind gift giving would there be if people were ORDERED by law to give gifts on Christmas, and a specific dollar amount was required as well as what people you are to give to. That would take away all the meaning behind it. Same here. Generosity is meaningless if someone is forced rather than chooses to help someone themselves without coersion (sp?).
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)