Everybody has the capacity to help others in need. We always feel better when it is our choice to do so. We get fed a lot of propaganda that tells us the poor are stealing from us so that they become despised burdons. Children cannot find work and feed themselves. When I was a kid I was the oldest of 8 and I went hunting just about every day after school. I could buy a box of 22 shells for 50 cents then. We ate a lot of rabbits and quail.I was 4'11" and 102 lbs went I went into the service. The one thing that amazed me most was all the food and all the milk that was available. I am now 5'10" and weigh 240. ---

There are times when everyone may need a hand up, a hand out, or support. I do not know anyone who will turn their backs on anyone, be it child, man, woman, or beast when they are in need. Having said that, there also comes a point when good intentions of simply providing temporary help becomes a way of life, expected, or even demanded. And there comes a time to stop promoting women who give birth to litters of children with the expectations that society is responsible for those babies and by extension the man who simply supplied sperm and the woman who took no precautions or preplanning in the event of pregnancy. Expecting to abort the baby is not an acceptable form of birth control. Living on charity affords no future.

Hand outs/up or support have to be temporary, but there are some who would rather relax with their X-box or engaging in other distractions than finding a job and keeping said job. If assistance becomes the past, present, and future expectation, the "provider" has to stop and consider whether they are solving the problem or are saps and enablers. Whether welfare strips people of p***e and self-respect. That raises interesting problems; how many years should the public be responsible for providing for adults or children, should the assistance be for our own citizens or be inclusive of the world, should there be a maximum on the number of life long dependent children and what to do about over reproduction in a family, if we are to expect some individuals to always live on charity, should we consider opening spay and neuter clinics to control that over population....and that opens a new can of worms.

I have no idea of what Jesus would do, he lived in another time under different circumstances. As far as I can determine, he never worked and lived off of charity. However, there is no place where it is implied that he was promiscuous or produced children with the expectation that they too should live on welfare. Same goes for his cousin, John the Baptizer, his brother John, or any of his disciples.

Actually, Matthew 13 also reports the same story: 53 "When Jesus had finished these parables, he moved on from there. 54 Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. “Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?” they asked. 55 “Isn’t this the tektōn’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? 56 Aren’t all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?” 57 And they took offense at him." Tektōn does not t***slate to "carpenter" but a more diverse laborer that includes stone work and carpenter. Notice, the verses are identical except the inclusion of the word "son". Which version is correct? If you study the "New" testament, there is no indication that he used his training to make or repair anything.

Yes, I have read those verses before, and still maintain that he did not work at a job, although he was probably trained as a tektōn.

Now that you tried to embarrass me, do you wish to discuss the other parts of the "New" testament that differ?