The fed assumes they alone have the resources to help people (who of course are helped one at a time anyway). Of course where does their money come from? Us! Which means it is really us that has the money to do this, not the govt.

Love of neighbor is a free gift. When the govt. provides to charities it is from forced taxes. This means that the gift of love, which is the greatest Christian virtue, is lost! A gift of self is transformed into an entitlement to the recipient, which loses the spiritual benefit for both.

And of course this heads us straight towards big government socialism. Our “father” becomes the government. And those in charge of the govt will eventually expect the same respect due to God alone.

The only rightful solution is for govt to get out of the business of social causes altogether and simply let Americans be gift to one another. This is freedom, Christian, and American as our Constitution is actually written.

Two different attitudes are at play here. The government considers all tax money “theirs,” and permission not to pay taxes by tax code implies and actualizes government control (to a greater or lesser degree) over “their” money which they have let “us” keep and use. Why should we expect that government will not want to control the spending of the money? Clearly, without control the potential for serious abuse accrues: ACORN,CIC, NEA, etc. Equally clear is the failure of public/private enterprise in the form of the Community Reinvestment Act, Fannie, and Freddy – the root cause of the finacial crisis in which we find ourself. Anytime government tries “compassion” it screws it up in ways that are initially obscure – unintended consequences.

The intrinsic problem is that our current tax code permits the government to pick winners and losers through the deduction process whether the process targets home ownership, marriage and children, energy conservation, or charitable contributions. Certainly, each of these targets, in theory, should benefit society overall. Equally clear is the efficiency of having the money go directly from the true owner (the individual) to its target – without cycling through government in any way (i.e., public/private enterprise with increased rules).

I think there is a better way. We should strive for a tax code that is spread across all demographics in a uniform way, is simple, does not require reporting of income, and does not provide ANY deductions. The “fair tax” and the “flat tax” are both candidates that could replace our current complex and arcane code that picks winners and losers – and provide a free flow of charity without governmnet interference to promote “social justice.”