• Smaller Small Medium Big Bigger
  • Default Helvetica Segoe Georgia Times

I was listening to some who would be affected by the UK decision to lower benefits to young families, some of whom are single-parent. A statement made time and again is that the mother could no longer "give the kids what they want"!! SO WHAT??

As I have said before, we suffered actual poverty* for over 17 years and our kids never had what they wanted – they only had what they needed. And they only got that because we, the parents, did without. That went for food, clothes, shoes... you name it. We TOLD them we were unable to give them this or that. So, they grew up with an appreciation of money and what you can and can't do. And, during those years we did not have a single penny in state benefits. When I was in work I earned a pittance, an amount so low that I constantly had to work night shifts on top of my day shifts. We either did without, or we struggled big time... not for ourselves but for the children and to pay rent. As the parents we had holes in our shoes and ate next to nothing so that the boys were fed. We could not afford a loaf of bread on many days, and when we did we resorted to 'crisp sandwiches'.

Cooked meals were a luxury and rare. I could give a full list of what it REALLY means to live in poverty, but those who have done the same thing will understand. (* Though not now in actual poverty, the effects of poverty are still with us, coupled to the debt landed on us by hateful homosexuals in 2005, which will never be repaid in my lifetime, unless God intervenes... never be fooled by outward appearances).

It is our view, then, that it is wrong for government to give out large benefits (sometimes hundreds of pounds) just because someone is on a low wage or unemployed. In our day every application was 'means tested'... and this is how it ought to be today! Especially for those selfish, greedy, unemployed mothers who have 14 children by different fathers, and expect the state (our taxes) to support them... in the case mentioned, over £40,000 a year in benefits!!! For being sexually immoral!! I find this offensive when, with my wife and my pensions combined we have one quarter of that amount a year!! But sexual depravity or promiscuity earns points!!

I therefore have no sympathy for most on benefits like this. We had to make-do, so why can't everyone else?

Living opposite us in a rented house is a small family, father and mother unemployed. Their rent is paid for them, but from the street you can see a massive 60 inch colour TV!! They receive huge amounts of benefit, so have just bought a clapped-out car as well.

The Labour party would, of course, demand that EVERYONE must get these benefits. As far as I am concerned if one is working, then cut your cloth accordingly. If unemployed, the same!! And if the cloth is missing, then that's tough. Jesus never commanded us to go out and give everything to the unemployed/those in poverty!

It is about time Christians stopped clucking in sympathy and got real. God either provides for poor believers, or He does not. We can't complain either way.

Of course, another issue raises its head here – the billions paid for EU membership... this amount would easily pay for benefits and many other things. That's another reason why we must get out of the EU.