90% of the people I volunteer with are heavily religious (mainly Christian, but some Muslims as well actually). Though I disagree entirely with their beliefs, it is admirable that their devotion to their religion is key factor in helping them donate their time and energy.
In Islam, they call charity zakat, and it is the fourth of the five pillars of Islam. They donate 2.5% of their savings and business revenue, and 5-10% of their harvest to help the poor.
Charity can be found in most religions, including the non-Christian religions.
And hard as it might be for some to swallow, agnostics and atheists have been known to help the poor from time to time?!?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]koffea wrote:
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Are you assuming people wouldn’t form other humanitarian organizations? “The Church” isnt an entity upon itself - its a large organization with many philanthropic members. Were it disbanded, those members would still want to help others.[/quote]
your right, people could form other humanitarian organizations. we could call it the Center for Science in the Public Interest . . .
seriously though, the best bang for your buck is generally through churches. a friend on mine that used to work for united way said only 10 cents on the dollar reached a person in need. that is a horrible statistic. [/quote]
That figure of 10% is spot on. In addition to that United Way is famous for helping fund feminist causes and planned parent hood. Certainly others may disagree, but that’s not where I want my hard earned dollars going.
I give to various causes but I make sure that they are local and I know where the money is going. For example, someone in need of a kidney transplant, or other major surgery. And of course I give to my Church every Sunday.
It’s interesting how some people actually believe that other organizations would step up if there were no Church. They have that same false impression about good morals being taken up by others if there were no Church. Both are absolutely false! The Church whether you love it or hate it is the difference between some eating properly or going without. And the same can be said for its moral guidance. If someday there is no Church and no Christianity, that will be the end of civilization as we know it. [/quote]
i have also heard that organizatins like Susan B Koman for the Cure are pretty bad as well. I guess koman averages low 20’s% for actual money from each dollar going towards a cure for breast cancer. These organizations which started out for a charitable cause often become charities in of themselves. With such enormous inefficiencies I wonder how they survive.
[quote]forlife wrote:
In Islam, they call charity zakat, and it is the fourth of the five pillars of Islam. They donate 2.5% of their savings and business revenue, and 5-10% of their harvest to help the poor.
Charity can be found in most religions, including the non-Christian religions.
And hard as it might be for some to swallow, agnostics and atheists have been known to help the poor from time to time?!?[/quote]
I’m sure that they do. But I am talking about giving as being part of the fabric of society. That “giving” is being held together in the US by the many Christian denominations.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Charity would by and large find another route.
[/quote]
Yep. Though, relatively little in the realm of voluntary. Mostly it would be through taxation and redistribution.[/quote]
Wait, are you saying that people who contribute to churches don’t do so voluntarily? So socialism and wealth redistribution are okay as long as churches do it?
I contribute to many charitable organizations. Funny how that works.
What demographic reality? You mean the part about Social Security not being there? I’ve taken care of that. I already plan on working well past age 70 AND I’m saving for my own retirement. That’s how it’s supposed to work, right?
And this is a problem because… Again, I thought this was how it was supposed to work, at least in a free and capitalist economy.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Link: What if the Church Went Galt?| National Catholic Register
[quote]This isnâ??t even close to a complete list of the charitable endeavors of the Catholic Church. Thereâ??s so much more. So, do you still think the world would be a better place without the Catholic Church?
Next time someone asks you to imagine a world without the Catholic Church just say you have. And itâ??s scary.[/quote]
I have heard it said on here before that the world would be better place without the Catholic Church. Well, I don’t find it too appealing to take away such things from the poor, sick, elderly, hungry, and the homeless.[/quote]
Yeah, we’ll just ignore that child molestation thing. Hey, the Church did.
And let’s not mention the women who stayed in abusive relationships because they were told that they would go to hell if they got divorced.
I have imagined a world without superstition and fairy tales and I like it. As others have said, there are many secular charitable organizations. I contribute to charities and try to help others where I can, no church needed. If the only reason a person helps the less fortunate is because they fear punishment from an invisible sky wizard, then that person is emotional immature and we have bigger issues.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Charity would by and large find another route.
[/quote]
Yep. Though, relatively little in the realm of voluntary. Mostly it would be through taxation and redistribution.[/quote]
Wait, are you saying that people who contribute to churches don’t do so voluntarily? So socialism and wealth redistribution are okay as long as churches do it?
I contribute to many charitable organizations. Funny how that works.
What demographic reality? You mean the part about Social Security not being there? I’ve taken care of that. I already plan on working well past age 70 AND I’m saving for my own retirement. That’s how it’s supposed to work, right?
And this is a problem because… Again, I thought this was how it was supposed to work, at least in a free and capitalist economy.[/quote]
I’ll be honest, I suspect you’re drunk.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Charity would by and large find another route.
[/quote]
Yep. Though, relatively little in the realm of voluntary. Mostly it would be through taxation and redistribution.[/quote]
Wait, are you saying that people who contribute to churches don’t do so voluntarily? So socialism and wealth redistribution are okay as long as churches do it?
I contribute to many charitable organizations. Funny how that works.
What demographic reality? You mean the part about Social Security not being there? I’ve taken care of that. I already plan on working well past age 70 AND I’m saving for my own retirement. That’s how it’s supposed to work, right?
And this is a problem because… Again, I thought this was how it was supposed to work, at least in a free and capitalist economy.[/quote]
I’ll be honest, I suspect you’re drunk.[/quote]
That’s because my way of thinking is difficult for you to understand. You live in a black and white binary world. We either have churches taking care of people or the government. Get rid of churches and we MUST establish some form of socialism. This is simply not true. I’m not sure why you think that non-religious people would not contribute to charitable causes and help others.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
You live in a black and white binary world. We either have churches taking care of people or the government. [/quote]
Yep, that’s basically it.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Are you assuming people wouldn’t form other humanitarian organizations? “The Church” isnt an entity upon itself - its a large organization with many philanthropic members. Were it disbanded, those members would still want to help others.[/quote]
It is very well possible that they would create other humanitarian organizations if the Church disappeared (I know they would, because I created a local charity back in the day), but would they be the same? Would they be as big? Look at the other organizations, how much money do they keep for admin purposes?
I maybe wrong, but let’s look at the facts. There is still people that are jobless, hungry, homeless, without education, &c. where are the ‘other’ humanitarian organizations for these people that the Catholic Church hasn’t covered?[/quote]
Hm. Good points.
However, pointing out certain aspects of the Catholic Church (such as it being an effective humanitarian organization) does not mean that the specific teachings of the Catholic Church are true, or that Catholics are “better” than non-Catholics.[/quote]
Of course not, just said it comes with the teaching. And, someone has to better. But, again not saying that we are.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Brother Chris, you make a good point. And for all that I bash the fundamental tenets of Christianity (and religion in general) on these forums, it must be noted that much benevolence in the world is contingent upon the existence of organized religion.[/quote]
Thank you. I decided to post a non-threatening topic in light of recent tragedies and the need to cool the burners.
[quote]forlife wrote:
In Islam, they call charity zakat, and it is the fourth of the five pillars of Islam. They donate 2.5% of their savings and business revenue, and 5-10% of their harvest to help the poor.
Charity can be found in most religions, including the non-Christian religions.
And hard as it might be for some to swallow, agnostics and atheists have been known to help the poor from time to time?!?[/quote]
I have no doubt.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
Yeah, we’ll just ignore that child molestation thing. Hey, the Church did.[/quote]
Yes, there has been a minority in the Church which has severely hurt innocent people and as John Paul II said, it is a “betrayal” to the Church, to the priesthood, and to those innocents. If you would, please, line up and make your civil suit against the Church like everyone else. We’ll be here all day to take our whippings until you’re satisfied.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
You live in a black and white binary world.[/quote]
Glad you’re finally realizing this about us.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
You live in a black and white binary world.[/quote]
Glad you’re finally realizing this about us.[/quote]
I kind of suspected that for a while. I thought like this once, as well. Life was very simple. Then I got older and started gaining experience. Suddenly, things were not so clear. I hope you both can continue to live in your binary worlds because such worlds really are simple and comforting places.
And this is why we’ll never agree. If you’re convinced that non-believers are immoral, bad, selfish, and will never do anything to help others, I won’t convince you otherwise. I’ve always said that I feel I’ve lived my life better than most religious people, but that means nothing.
For the record, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet both plan on giving away most of their wealth when they die. Both are agnostics.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
I hope you both can continue to live in your binary worlds because such worlds really are simple and comforting places.
[/quote]
In fact it is the other way around.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
I hope you both can continue to live in your binary worlds because such worlds really are simple and comforting places.
[/quote]
In fact it is the other way around. [/quote]
How so? I live in an uncertain world - you guys don’t.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
I hope you both can continue to live in your binary worlds because such worlds really are simple and comforting places.
[/quote]
In fact it is the other way around. [/quote]
How so? I live in an uncertain world - you guys don’t.[/quote]
Social and economic liberalism coexisting. My how the left has used you.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
I hope you both can continue to live in your binary worlds because such worlds really are simple and comforting places.
[/quote]
In fact it is the other way around. [/quote]
How so? I live in an uncertain world - you guys don’t.[/quote]
Social and economic liberalism coexisting. My how the left has used you.
[/quote]
It’s called personal responsibility. Laws that regulate behavior don’t encourage personal responsibility and simply lead to more government - that is, of course, if you want to enforce such laws. In the process, innocent people get harassed and inconvenienced.
Here’s an example. Let’s say you want to pass a law making homosexuality illegal - not just homosexual acts, but being a homosexual. Not saying you would favor this - this is just an example. Great, you have a law on the books. How are you going to enforce it? Are you willing to raise taxes to fund a special “gay police?” And what’s probable cause to arrest persons for this? If two guys are living together in an apartment, is that probable cause for an arrest and/or questioning? Perhaps they’re just roommates. How would they prove that? Should they? And are you willing to pay more in taxes to fund extra judges to try such “gay” cases?
Things that seem good in theory just don’t work in practice.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
You live in a black and white binary world.[/quote]
Glad you’re finally realizing this about us.[/quote]
I kind of suspected that for a while. I thought like this once, as well. Life was very simple. Then I got older and started gaining experience. Suddenly, things were not so clear. I hope you both can continue to live in your binary worlds because such worlds really are simple and comforting places.
And this is why we’ll never agree. If you’re convinced that non-believers are immoral, bad, selfish, and will never do anything to help others, I won’t convince you otherwise.[/quote]
When have I ever said non-believers are immoral, bad, selfish, and will never help others? Matters if they listen to their conscience or not and if they do it properly or not.
Not sure what this is supposed to mean.
[quote]
For the record, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet both plan on giving away most of their wealth when they die. Both are agnostics.[/quote]
Yes, and as much as I like Warren Buffet (I have had lunch with the man about three times in my life) they are giving money to a charity that helps women have abortions.