If religion is the opiate of the Poor, then why are Republicans so centered on this? The saying speaks to just one face of Religion, the perpetuation of Hope. The Poor has an abundance of this. But is this what the GOP is standing on? This confuses me.

Awhile ago a friend and author of mine wrote a book titled, “The Penalty of Hoping”. The point of this novel isn’t relevant here, just the title. Before it was published we had a longer than usual discussion about the title, whether it should instead be “The Penalty for Hoping”. The difference of a preposition can change the point of the story, he said. And it does suggest what Religion can perpetuate.

Hope is a passive yet strong event. It must be translated to action to be of any use. Yet the Poor possess an overabundance of this. There is a management mantra that an organization is only as strong as its weakest link. If the Dems or Republicans want to change this country for the better, in a sustained way, then the Poor have to be educated and motivated as a priority. And I don’t think there is an argument between the two parties that this is the key. Yet the primary difference between them is how this is done. The Devil is in the details. And depending on what you believe to be the better method, should help you decide on who should lead this country in the coming 4-8 years.

But know this, sustained giving to the Poor, without them giving back, is the Penalty for Hoping.