There isn't any such thing as government charity. That would imply the government had something of its own to give which it doesn't.tallmike wrote: I'm certainly not saying that government charity is the best answer, but its part of the answer. If you were having a conversation about this with Jesus do you think you would be able to convince him that he should be against paying an extra 3-5% income tax next year?
Using this religious argument is misguided at best. Jesus taught us to take care of one another and to be charitable. He didn't teach us that we should give our money, which otherwise could be used for charitable giving, to a government with a questionable record using those funds to dole out in a manner that is questionable at best. I should be able to be charitable of my own right and determine the best place to utilize those funds for the betterment of my community. For what money I have left to give after the government takes their slice, I spend a great deal of time making sure the majority of the funds make it to the person in need. Funds funnelled through the government are lucky to have much meat on the bone by the time they get to the person in need and often are doled out to people who have no interest in helping themselves or are not in need at all.
It's not the governments responsibility to take care of people. Its our responsibility to take care of ourselves and our neighbours. Don't get me wrong. I'm not completely against some limited programs to help people out (unemployment and limited short term welfare, etc) but the government has way overstepped their bounds in this regard and shackled a large segment of the population to the government trough for life.