OLYMPIC SOCIALISM

I get all cranked up about the Olympics.  They only come around every four years.  Big world-wide deal.  Great athletes on the World stage.  Some sports I never watch otherwise (team handball is so cool).  You'll never catch me watching Women's Gymnastics on a Saturday afternoon, but, by golly, I'm not missing them in the Olympics.

I saw the thrills.  I saw the spills.  The ecstasy and the tragedy  Pretty cool.  The US girls are amazing.  Three of our competitors' scores are in the top 4 out of everyone in what they call the "overall competition".  It's, apparently, a really big deal to be the "overall champion".  They take the top 24 scores.  Well, apparently, they don't.  No matter how high your scores are, they only allow 2 from any one country.  The Olympic committee's explanation was, "we want to spread the wealth around".  WOW, that sounds like President Obama talking to Joe the Plumber.

So, here's the new Olympic spirit...Work and train and sweat and sacrifice as much as you want, but if you're the 3rd best athlete on your team, you may get bumped to make room for the 25th best score because we want to "spread the wealth around".  The redistribution of wealth.  Karl Marx would be proud.  He's even making it big at the Olympics now.

Oh, the Bible on the subject?  "If a man doesn't work, he doesn't eat".  God's economic structure: Work hard...Enjoy the blessings of your labor...Return 10% (not more for the rich and less for the poor, just 10%.  Some people's 10% will be a lot more than others, but everyone stands equal in the expectation before God)...share with others in need (not because you're mandated to by the government, but because of a heart of compassion and in response to God's blessings).

Or, I guess we could just give everyone medals because they participated.  Don't want to mess with their fragile self-esteems.   Because, we all know, "Everyone's a WINNER!"  Maybe that's coming in 4 years.

Comments

  1. Isn't the concept of a *percentage* contrary to your whole thesis? It means that those who have more will be expected to give more, based on the fact that they have more to give, presumably, after having worked for their money like everyone else. But then I guess that would be another form of "spreading the wealth around." I mean, if everyone was required to give the same flat amount, then those who really couldn't afford it just didn't work hard enough, I guess. I am reminded of another passage: "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required."

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SHOULD JOHN KELLY APOLOGIZE?

Who's Your Coach?

BUNNIES, BOUNCING & BAIT