This would be a lot easier if people could follow the simplest train of thought.
First comment:
..."compassion” and “empathy” are not defined as an all-powerful state distributing other people’s money to chosen recipients in return for political power.
Second comment, right underneath, tying a big, red ribbon on the statement:
I have failed to find the chapter and verse in the Bible where Christ shows up at a rich man’s door with a Roman soldier on either side of him, and demands that the rich man give his money to the Romans so that they can distribute it to the poor and sick.
Response: Complete non-sequitur.
I've noticed for some time how common this debate tactic is.
"We propose mining the Moon for cheese and giving it away to the needy."
"But the Moon is not actually made of cheese. Here's an analysis of samples brought back, and descriptions from the men who were there."
"Well, smartass, you may not realize that the Moon doesn't actually shine by its own light but reflects the light of the sun. Here's three scientific papers on it. Hah! I don't know how you got to be this ignorant."