Oh, this is good. I couldn't resist.

"I can't change anything," Messiah says - refuses to come back to "reinstate" it.


If they have enough money to bailout the auto industry, why can’t they put it on the national debt? If the automakers get it, unless they get rid of the labor unions, they will be back in the same condition in six months time.

In the 20th chapter of Matthew, Jesus outlawed the labor unions and he hasn’t been back to reinstate it. Jesus said in Luke 3:14 “Be content with your wages.” Phil 4:11 “In whatsoever state you are in be content.” Hebrews 13:5 “Be content with what you have.” In Tim 6:8 “With food and raiment be content.” Titus 1:7 “Be no striker. Do not lie. Do not steal. Do not murder.”

Which of these commands can you do and God will overlook? None of them.

The labor union is greedy and they will strike if that is what it takes to get their employers in trouble again.

It is impossible to be a Christian and a union member. The two have altogether different attitudes. If anyone disagrees with me on this, get your Bible down and wipe the dust off and argue with Jesus about it. “I can’t change anything,” he said.

Christians cannot be union members (http://www.tennessean.com/article/20090107/OPINION02/90106054/1008/OPINION01)

Matthew 20:1

For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his vineyard.

Titus 1:7, by the way:

For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;

Luke 3:14

And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages.

Philippians 4:11

Not that I speak in respect of want: for I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.

Hebrews 13:5

Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.

There is no "Timothy 6:8."

Jesus never said “I can’t change anything.”

How those in power control/subvert messages is an interesting topic. I've been trying to think of other fictional characters (ymmv) that belonged to unions, and I can't come up with much. I believe at one point Fred Flintstone and his peers formed a union at the Quarry, but I don't recall how that came out.

I've been trying to think of other fictional characters (ymmv) that belonged to unions, and I can't come up with much.
http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/9218/ibjdpcntmg8.jpg

homer simpson's union.

TBF said:

I've been trying to think of other fictional characters (ymmv) that belonged to unions, and I can't come up with much.

Got to thinking about about Fred, couldn't remember the union bit, but I recall that he belonged to a lodge, "The Brotherhood of Water buffalos", or some such. It got me to wondering, how do(did) these fraternal organizations, be they Shriners, Knights of Columbus, Woodsmen of the World, Eagles, relate to unionism? It seems they came on the scene, at least in their popular form, about the same time. Were they set up as alternatives to unions? To borrow from Vonnegut's terminology in Cat's Cradle, do they constitute granfaloons, false social constructs, as compared to the natural grouping of labor united against capital? Were these lodges, at least some of them, instituted purposefully to sap the strength of labor?

Got to thinking about about Fred, couldn't remember the union bit, but I recall that he belonged to a lodge, "The Brotherhood of Water buffalos", or some such. It got me to wondering, how do(did) these fraternal organizations, be they Shriners, Knights of Columbus, Woodsmen of the World, Eagles, relate to unionism? It seems they came on the scene, at least in their popular form, about the same time. Were they set up as alternatives to unions? To borrow from Vonnegut's terminology in Cat's Cradle, do they constitute granfaloons, false social constructs, as compared to the natural grouping of labor united against capital? Were these lodges, at least some of them, instituted purposefully to sap the strength of labor?


I do know that some of the ethnic fraternal organizations were at one time hotbeds of socialism. Others are very conservative.

To borrow from Vonnegut's terminology in Cat's Cradle, do they constitute granfaloons, false social constructs, as compared to the natural grouping of labor united against capital? Were these lodges, at least some of them, instituted purposefully to sap the strength of labor?

When I was searching I also saw far more in the way of fictional "lodges" than unions. Not sure if they were purposely set up as deterrants or rather just evolved because people gather to socialize (and they sure can't talk freely at work).