Entitled?

 Entitled to charity? That's a question I ask myself when I watch the evening news about the homeless, the illegal border crossers and the criminals that are apprehended. Each of those groups are now demanding charity as an entitlement. I can't see it any other way when listening to the stories. The latest example is a "homeless encampment" under an overpass in Baltimore. This area has been used for many years as a place for the Sunday morning farmer's market. Last week there was a conflict about that between the homeless people and the vendors. The city made a compromise with the homeless people, and they would provide a shelter for these folks. As of yesterday, the homeless people were still refusing to leave the area. The reason cited being, they didn't want to give up their freedom by living in a shelter. In short, they should be able to do as they please and the city should accommodate them. They are entitled to that charity on their terms, not on the ones providing that charity.

 Yes, I know it isn't everyone, not all homeless people are like that, many are forced into the situation. I suspect those are the ones that agreed to the compromise the city offered and went to the shelter provided but they don't make for a great news story. The news has to be sensational or controversial to be a "good" story. Those are the things that draw the people's interest. It's obvious it got my attention; I'm writing about it. It isn't just the homeless, it is these so called migrants entering the country illegally now being represented by United States attorneys' demanding charity for these people out of the public treasury! Just who is paying their fees? And don't get me started on "prisoners rights." They have the right to three meals, a cot and basic sanitary needs. That's what their rights are! Prisons are for punishment, not a path to prosperity! 

 I have to wonder about all of that. The ones in this country that are supporting this entitled charity narrative insisting the public treasury should support anyone and everyone upon demand are the same ones always raving about majority rule. It's a Democracy and the majority always rules! Well then, why has the majority become compliant with the wants of the minority? 

 There is no denying that. Less than 6% of the population claim to be LGBTQ+ or whatever yet the majority has to embrace that as the norm? No, it is not the norm, the majority is the normal condition. About 13% of the population say they are black. Yet the narrative is blacks should get half of everything! No, they should have, as a minimum, 13% representation, that is equal and fair. The most generous of estimates say 80% of blacks in America today are direct descendants of enslaved peoples, yet 100% of blacks should be paid reparations by those that never supported slavery, never held slaves themselves, in fact 360,000 white northerners died in the civil war in an effort to free those slaves! And I should pay for that? I don't think so. It isn't reparations that are being demanded, it is charity! Entitled to charity for the deeds or misdeeds of others long before my birth. Entitled to charity because I broke the law? Entitled to charity because I demand it?

 Charity is never an entitlement! I'm tired of hearing that it is. It's like this narrative of getting what I deserve. I deserve this or that for as many reasons as one can imagine. You do not get to decide what you deserve! You get to decide what is offered! Yeah, that's the difference between charity and entitlement. Charity is freely given or offered, not coerced, mandated or litigated. You can either accept that charity or not. Entitlement is earned. 

 Government does not exist to distribute charity. The purpose of government is to govern the actions of the citizens in a society. The reason for that is simple enough to understand. There are those that will take advantage of others, there are those that will play unfairly. The purpose of government is to regulate, control, direct and govern the actions of those people. The premise of government is self-rule, that is the construct. It's obvious that agreements have to be made among men in order to provide for the common good, for the benefit of the majority. Government is that agreement. Our government, a republic, was the first government instituted that recognized this construct. That is why religion was kept separate from the government. 

 You cannot legislate charity, only the individual offering that charity can do that. Even in the church itself there is no set charitable requirement. Yes, the Catholic church may require 10% or whatever, tithes are a thing throughout every religion as a means to support the "church." The pastor or priest has to get paid, the buildings maintained, and outreach to gain more followers. The government calls those tithes, taxes! Yeah, the same deal but without any promises of salvation or reward. I've paid my taxes, my tithes to government. The government has no right to give that money away to anyone! That isn't their job! You are not entitled to charity. You, not government are free to offer charity to anyone you want, you are not free to offer charity using my money. Only a Democrat can do that.