why are the religious right?

I think that pretty much sums it up. Most of the people I know that fall into the "religious Right" category are there almost exclusively for this, but, I think they tend to lean to more Conservative thinking anyway and those two issues just sort of cement it.

Not religious by any means but it seems to me forced charity is not charity at all.

Somehow I see a lot of mismatch between social welfare and "cannot take care of themselves". There IS a biblical principal of "if you don't work, you don't eat". The biggest problem I see with the institutionalizing of the system is separating "cannot" from "will not".

^^ This.  

Not religious here, either, but many churches have an expectation of tithing (10% goes to the church). That is not really any different than the government providing social safety nets in that it is still an obligation.

To the OP, I think a lot of it has to do with how Reagan sold himself to the right in 1980. It is ironic that for the claims of wanting to have a country that is guided by biblical principles (not a position I agree with - c.f. any country with sharia/Islam as the starting point for the legal system), they often oppose the very things that Jesus demanded of his followers - such as caring for the poor- being done by the government. And given all the ways that the bible describes to end pregnancy, I am not sure that abortion is an anti-biblical position. 

That's the point I was going to bring up.  I don't mind helping people who can not, but too many people will not...  well, based on MY estimation.

That's the problem.  My estimation of who and who can not take care of themselves probably differs from someone elses.

it is your choice to belong to any given church. It is not your choice whether or not to pay taxes.

Well, technically, you have the choice to pay or not.  Just my not like the repercussions if you don't.

True but that is more to type on the iPad than I wanted to worry about.

Because abortion was not legal.

As a Catholic I always have a difficult time. I am pro-life, anti-death penalty, pro gay rights, and though the system needs work not against welfare and helping our fellow brothers and sisters.  The reality is most people do not do their part to volunteer and donate. If everyone did we would be in much better shape as a country.

I disagree with this in the context of 1960.  The U.S. had strong Protestant influence from the very beginning.  And even in 1960 they were still rumblings about the influence of the Catholic church on U.S. politics, even fears that the pope would be pulling the strings of the white house if Kennedy were elected.

It's only in recent years that Catholics have been treated more as equals with any other Christian.

*edit: I meant the immigration, not the voting.  Catholics certainly voted strongly in support of Kennedy.

Good post and I think I see a common opinion in this thread from religious POV that it's not so much that they are against helping others...it's more that they will help on their own terms.  I'm independent but slightly right of center.  I am against paying taxes to support many of the social programs we have in this country.  However, we donate our money and time money probably more than the average taxpayer.  We donate where we believe it is truely helping people and not being wasted in a poorly run government program.  I find it funny how the media and the D's want to make such a big issue of Romney's tax rate of 14 percent...yet he gives 30 percent to charity.  I would rather see that 30 percent going to charities than our government and getting wasted!

Ummm Technically everyone's heart is slightly left. 

Unless you have Dextrocardia.

You are just on a roll aren't you.

I'll leave aside the hot button issues of abortion, euthanasia,
and marriage, that are essentially non-negotiable.

As Catholics, we're called to provide preferential treatment for the poor.
How does that get accomplished.

Within Catholic thought there are two principles that apply:
the principle of solidarity and the principle of subsidiarity.

Solidarity means that we're all in this together.
That is a basic principle of the left.
And it's a true one; we are indeed all in this together and have a responsibility to one another.

Subsidiarity means that whenever possible, decisions and responsibility
ought to reside at the most local level possible.
Total self reliance is the most extreme form of subsidiarity.
From there it ramps up to family, church, community, city
state, country, the world.
Subsidiarity is a basic principle of the right.
And it's a true one; whenever possible one ought to make decisions and have responsibility
at as local a level as possible.

These two principles come together in Catholic thought regarding
how to provide preferential treatment for the poor.
As long as we agree that the poor ought to and need to be cared for at some level,
then persons of good will may disagree about the best way to achieve that end.