To bail, or not to bail

The first bailout came and went with very little controversy (minus a few Republican representatives getting all flustered a speech) but this second is getting more attention. People are actually starting to think about how this may not be the most ethical act the state could do.

I started thinking about it the other day and even though I do think that this problem is much bigger than what I could understand, being as it is a huge problem and I am a mere blogger, I did come up with a few points I think are worthy of some speculation.

No one can deny the fact that a collapse of the companies requesting a bailout would be detrimental to the nation's economy. If GM were to go under (which it all but has), a major mover in our economy would be gone. This is not the best solution for the nation.

However the rules of free-market capitalism are clear: manager of a corporation is not only the one who is in charge of managing the assets of a corporation, but also the one responsible for shouldering the risks involved in investment. If a company fails, the owners of that company fails as well.

We are struck with a paradox. If these companies fail, our economy will be in worse shape than it finds itself in currently. On the other hand, if we allow these mega-rich executives to come out unscathed despite having a corporation fail in the market we undermine our entire economic system.

I offer a third option: bailout the corporations but do not allow these executives get rich off of the process. This is already being promised by Washington and hopefully will be followed through with. I go a step further and ask that maybe we should allow the owners of these companies to feel the hurt of the corporations failing.

I know that we as America will never seize funds, and that is not what I'm asking for. I am however asking that these executives bear more of the burden in salvaging their corporations than the American taxpayer.

Ice cream and manure.

The other day, I went home to Lake Wales, Florida. I spent time with my parents and slept in my good ole bed. It felt great to be back home in the small town where family and friends are always welcoming.

When it came to Sunday morning, I decided, of course, to go to the church I had grown up in. A nice Baptist church that had nurtured me into the believer I am today. We sang the same songs we sang when I grew up, we had the same worship plan we had when I grew up, but no bother: they do ministry and there is no way to deny that.

Thee same bulletin we've had since my days in youth group caught my attention. There was a very simple advertisement for Amendment 2. The Amendment would define legal marriage as the union between a man and a woman. This legislation would seek to put the beliefs the Bible teaches into the ledgers of our states laws.

I have my own opinions on the legislation, but to be honest, I don't think they matter very much. This experience drew a lot of questions to my mind, and my heart is still wrestling with them.

• If we, the church are called to bring the lost to their rightful home, should we try to do that with the church or with the state?

I think we can see the picture of Christ here on Earth and see exactly how He is asking us to act. When Christ came to Earth, his message could have been spread so very quickly if He aligned himself with the Roman occupiers. If Christ came to Rome, healed Caesar of some ailment, Christianity would have spread instantly as the world's religion.

But God chose to use twelve simple men to spread His Word. His Kingdom was not of this world, so He decided to use his bride to bring his Kingdom to this world.

Should we the church change God's strategy to use the state to bring His Kingdom to Earth? I think Christ knew what He was doing and it is high time that His bride stops messing with His plan.


(The title of this blog comes from a quote by Tony Campolo. He says that when we mix the church and state, it is like mixing ice cream and manure. It may not affect the manure, but it certainly affects the taste of the ice cream.)