We have a moral imperative to help our fellow man. However, the term help is often subjective as to what constitutes that help. The mother who smothers were child is helping her child in her mind. But one person's help might be seen as a problem to another. If you think tattoos are the bomb, then helping others might require you paying for a tattoo. This expense may not be considered very important to someone who does like tattoos. There is a saying if you feed someone a fish they will be hungry tomorrow but if you teach them to fish they can feed themselves forever. Helping may result in conflicting philosophy if one wants to give things and the other time. The bible says do onto others, as you would like them to do onto you. This accommodates individual subjectivity of giving, but says nothing about imposing any subjective standard on everyone. If the mother wishes to smother, she can give in this way but she can't force dad to do the same thing, if he thinks this is not good in the long run. He will give in his own way. Do onto others, has to do with charity and not forcing one subjective law. The Democrats like to give things which is a valid way to give. But instead of paying for these things with their own money, they like to impose upon others to pay, even those who don't agree with this way. Do onto others would require if they think this is good, it is up to them to pay for their own subjective choice of giving. Wouldn't that be nice if giving required putting the money where the mouth was? If you impose your subjectivity onto others, then you are saying I want others to impose their subjectivities onto me (do to others as you want them to do to you). That means the Republicans need to impose more on the Democrats since this is the example they set and this is what they want to happen. The poor remain poor since this is what the demcorats want when they do onto others. This helps control their base.