Atheists and charity.

joseph brand

This argument has arisen a couple of times in this forum and over in the 'other' forum:

"We [christians) give more to charity than you Atheists and there are christian-run charities scattered across the globe".

Christians do give to charity. I don't know what percentage. Certainly, here in Ireland we (all of us) are a very charitable nation. The Trocaire boxes seemed to me, as a child, to be kinda supplied by the church. But wasn't the church IN those recipient nations, spreading the 'good news' (bad news), indoctrinating locals into their beliefs?

The idea that Atheists somehow forego the idea of throwing a couple of coins in a bucket or donating DUE to being Atheist is ludicrous, but not unexpected, going by the theists' past record. I like to help those who ask for/ need help. Any humanist can understand this.

I'm wondering if it's a lot better to try to break down the religious dogma which causes hunger, through wars and conflict? (Sudan) Notice I'm avoiding hunger through drought or natural disasters.

Money gets pumped into war-torn countries and who knows where it goes? Sometimes it's spent on guns and luxury items for those in charge. But the religious segregation, hatred and violence lingers.

In short, donating money to the poor but not addressing the motives of the culprits (believing in the supernatural, ie gods and witches) would be useless. And, there's no evidence to prove that Atheists are less charitable. No reason for it. Secular charities exist without a religious 'mission'.

I always sponsor the kids who knock at the door with their cards. Then I nip back inside and check to see if the baby in the oven is done.


^^^
(just look what beer does to me)

EGAR

The notion that non-believers give less to charity is somewhat ridiculous. However, I and many of my friends, ask questions before we give and don't give blindly to anyone with a good story and heartbreaking pics.

Church run charities are out for me, for obvious reasons. I prefer grassroot charities run solely by volunteers and no CEO's with six figure annually salaries. I also do not give to organisations using chuggers. I think a lot of non-believers are more conscious of whom they support and research where the money ends up and how it is used as we do not need the urge to ingratiate ourselves with a *higher power* through *good deeds*. My opinion anyway.

Oranage2

Very interesting question OP.

Let me start off by saying that the "dont give to charity because it just funds war lords" doesnt hold much water with me - sure every time you buy electronics or a phone you are more than likely help funding some conflict in Africa.

But are the Religious more likely to give to charity. I would have thought not but I googled it at it seems to be the case, a lot of stats to prove Christians donate more albeit from Religious books but still. I know I give to charity maybe an acquired trait because my parents do - and perhaps also prove to the higher being of what a good person I am, I guess atheists dont have to prove anything and are a lot more cynical and therefore more selfish when it comes to these things.

I sponsor a little girl. I even went over and visited her years ago with my family, the money pays for school than afterwards they pray than have a meal. I'm sure there'll be some moral outrage that poor vulnerable kids are 'forced' to pray before they're fed but a little prayer has never hurt anyone.

No offense to anyone, but I dont get why people give to animal charities, the fact that some people value dog food over a child's life is quite astonishing to me but its their money and can do whatever they want with it.

jank

joseph brand wrote: »

This argument has arisen a couple of times in this forum and over in the 'other' forum:

"We [christians) give more to charity than you Atheists and there are christian-run charities scattered across the globe".

Christians do give to charity. I don't know what percentage. Certainly, here in Ireland we (all of us) are a very charitable nation. The Trocaire boxes seemed to me, as a child, to be kinda supplied by the church. But wasn't the church IN those recipient nations, spreading the 'good news' (bad news), indoctrinating locals into their beliefs?

The idea that Atheists somehow forego the idea of throwing a couple of coins in a bucket or donating DUE to being Atheist is ludicrous, but not unexpected, going by the theists' past record. I like to help those who ask for/ need help. Any humanist can understand this.

I'm wondering if it's a lot better to try to break down the religious dogma which causes hunger, through wars and conflict? (Sudan) Notice I'm avoiding hunger through drought or natural disasters.

Money gets pumped into war-torn countries and who knows where it goes? Sometimes it's spent on guns and luxury items for those in charge. But the religious segregation, hatred and violence lingers.

In short, donating money to the poor but not addressing the motives of the culprits (believing in the supernatural, ie gods and witches) would be useless. And, there's no evidence to prove that Atheists are less charitable. No reason for it. Secular charities exist without a religious 'mission'.

I always sponsor the kids who knock at the door with their cards. Then I nip back inside and check to see if the baby in the oven is done.


^^^
(just look what beer does to me)

And what of conflicts and disasters in the world that have nothing to do with religion? How would you propose to address those problems?

qrrgprgua

EGAR wrote: »

The notion that non-believers give less to charity is somewhat ridiculous. However, I and many of my friends, ask questions before we give and don't give blindly to anyone with a good story and heartbreaking pics.

How long does it take to answer those questions?

MrPudding

qrrgprgua wrote: »

How long does it take to answer those questions?

That, on the face of it, is a fairly stupid question. What amazing point do you hope to make from the answer?

MrP

Oranage2

Oranage2 wrote: »

I know I give to charity... perhaps also prove to the higher being of what a good person I am.

What?!

MagicMarker

bluewolf wrote: »

What?!

He gives to charity so a spot in heaven is reserved for him, like most christians. Except for the christians arrogant enough think their spot is reserved regardless.

And atheists are the selfish ones.. :rolleyes:

MrPudding

MagicMarker wrote: »

He gives to charity so a spot in heaven is reserved for him, like most christians. Except for the christians arrogant enough think their spot is reserved regardless.

And atheists are the selfish ones.. :rolleyes:

It is the ultimate carrot and stick. And whilst most seem to deny it, it is nice to see someone own up to the real reason why the religious are good.

MrP

Oranage2

MrPudding wrote: »

It is the ultimate carrot and stick. And whilst most seem to deny it, it is nice to see someone own up to the real reason why the religious are good.

MrP

Ha well that comment was little tongue in cheek - But I think I'd give to charity regardless of my spiritual beliefs. But do the Religious give more?

Again I would have thought not but it's easy to see that the new age Atheist from what I call the 'I-generation' usually aged between 16-32 are more concerned about the latest APP and the new Vivian Westwood dress and care less about poverty and world affairs. They easily buy into not giving to charity because of what some facebook statues says.

Churches and the religious on the other hand are thought that its right to give to less off and although people might not agree with their converting ways, atleast church charities are putting food in hungry bellies and knowledge into empty heads. But I guess Atheists rather a dead baby than a god fearing one.


EDIT: DIsclaimer - Not all atheists dont give and not all Christians give.

that's absolutely right. all the atheists in this forum love their VW dresses and dead babies.
I'm glad that mystery is solved.

jank

bluewolf wrote: »

that's absolutely right. all the atheists in this forum love their VW dresses and dead babies.
I'm glad that mystery is solved.

Just like anyone who is religious is a bible thumping crazy diseased minded insecure irrational person preaching fire and brimstone.

Now that we have the stereotypes out of the way maybe we can actually discuss...

Sonics2k

jank wrote: »

Just like anyone who is religious is a bible thumping crazy diseased minded insecure irrational person preaching fire and brimstone.

Now that we have the stereotypes out of the way maybe we can actually discuss...

Well, maybe not Bible thumping...

Oranage2

jank wrote: »

Just like anyone who is religious is a bible thumping crazy diseased minded insecure irrational person preaching fire and brimstone.

Now that we have the stereotypes out of the way maybe we can actually discuss...

I'm afraid this forum isnt for debate - It's for circle jerking, Ad hominem arguments and why God wasnt there for me!

Let me guess - the next few posts will be a Jackie Chan WTF gif and some comment on why God isnt doing anything about the poor people or why God made poor people.

I'm afraid this forum is predictably boring.

dlofnep

Oranage2 wrote: »

No offense to anyone, but I dont get why people give to animal charities, the fact that some people value dog food over a child's life is quite astonishing to me but its their money and can do whatever they want with it.

Perhaps because it's ok to care about both humans and animals? Oh, how dare people care about animals! How inhumane of them!!

amacachi

Oranage2 wrote: »

Again I would have thought not but it's easy to see that the new age Atheist from what I call the 'I-generation' usually aged between 16-32 are more concerned about the latest APP and the new Vivian Westwood dress and care less about poverty and world affairs. They easily buy into not giving to charity because of what some facebook statues says.

Wow.

Oranage2

Oranage2 wrote: »

I'm afraid this forum isnt for debate - It's for circle jerking, Ad hominem arguments and why God wasnt there for me!

Let me guess - the next few posts will be a Jackie Chan WTF gif and some comment on why God isnt doing anything about the poor people or why God made poor people.

I'm afraid this forum is predictably boring.

i'm not the one who donates to charity to buy brownie points instead of because it's a good thing to do to help people

trying to deflect attention with "well you all suck!!!" isn't going to change that

MisterEpicurus

To the OP that said he doesn't understand why people give to animal charities. Well, sorry to be the bearer of bad news but the last time I looked humans were animals too, or maybe you don't believe in evolution. So Trocaire is an animal charity too.

Sarky

Heh, remember the last time this came up and it turned out that one atheist ended up doing more for charity than all the religious people who'd posted in the thread combined?

I've been running or helping to run multiple charity events for the last 8 years that have raised tens of thousands of euros for various causes. My beard alone has raised more than a typical religious person's entire body. Like most of the people I've worked with, it's not a big deal. It's just the right f*cking thing to do. We don't care about recognition or kudos. So don't wander in here trying to feel superior about handing over a few quid to Concern every couple of weeks because a tv ad or a priest made you feel guilty about it.

Fortyniner

Well if it helps address the OP, when we deliver to a charity shop, we'll go past the Trocaire shop in Cork to the Oxfam shop next door. We use the same ethos, of not supporting evangelism, in making financial donations.

I wonder if the international statistics are skewed by including donations to churches, as charities? I can see tithes etc having a significant impact on the figures. Seeing the incessant demand for cash on TV religious channels does beg the question.

18AD

Hilarious thread/still drunk.

Giving to charity isn't an argument for or against anything but giving to charity.

dlofnep

Oranage2 wrote: »

But I think I'd give to charity regardless of my spiritual beliefs.

So you don't need to be religious to be charitable. Great, now you're getting it.

Oranage2 wrote: »

Churches and the religious on the other hand are thought that its right to give to less off and although people might not agree with their converting ways, atleast church charities are putting food in hungry bellies and knowledge into empty heads.

The type of knowledge that allows aids to propagate through Christian Africa?

Oranage2 wrote: »

But I guess Atheists rather a dead baby than a god fearing one.

No, atheists would prefer that if someone is doing a charitable act - that it is altruistic and not dogmatic. To suggest that Atheists would aspire to see any child die, is stupendously moronic.

looksee

Oranage2 wrote: »

Ha well that comment was little tongue in cheek - But I think I'd give to charity regardless of my spiritual beliefs. But do the Religious give more?

Again I would have thought not but it's easy to see that the new age Atheist from what I call the 'I-generation' usually aged between 16-32 are more concerned about the latest APP and the new Vivian Westwood dress and care less about poverty and world affairs. They easily buy into not giving to charity because of what some facebook statues says.

Churches and the religious on the other hand are thought that its right to give to less off and although people might not agree with their converting ways, atleast church charities are putting food in hungry bellies and knowledge into empty heads. But I guess Atheists rather a dead baby than a god fearing one.


EDIT: DIsclaimer - Not all atheists dont give and not all Christians give.

Those people are no more athiests than they are theists. You have to have rubbed (at least) two brain cells together to come to a conclusion that makes you athiest. In fact, judging by the tendency to want a (fancy) church wedding in many of the beautiful people, they appear to be suggesting they have some religious preferences.

For most people religion is the default stance, its the easiest to go with.

MagicMarker

Oranage2 wrote: »

I'm afraid this forum isnt for debate - It's for circle jerking, Ad hominem arguments and why God wasnt there for me!

Let me guess - the next few posts will be a Jackie Chan WTF gif and some comment on why God isnt doing anything about the poor people or why God made poor people.

I'm afraid this forum is predictably boring.

And yet here you are.

I'm saving the Jackie Chan gifs for your posts on evolution.

krudler

bluewolf wrote: »

that's absolutely right. all the atheists in this forum love their VW dresses and dead babies.
I'm glad that mystery is solved.

dead babies, ew, live ones are much tastier

Galvasean

Oranage2 wrote: »

I know I give to charity maybe an acquired trait because my parents do - and perhaps also prove to the higher being of what a good person I am, I guess atheists dont have to prove anything and are a lot more cynical and therefore more selfish when it comes to these things.

So you give to charity to curry the favor of the master of the universe, but it's the atheists who are selfish?

Maybe atheists do give plenty to charity, but don't feel the need to crow on about it as much as many religious people?

MisterEpicurus

Catholicism actually exacerbates poverty because it teaches these people not to use condoms, which has obvious and dangerous consequences. So if I was a Catholic, I think I'd feel guilty and pay money to charity. Thus, Catholic charities may indeed contribute more to combating poverty, but Catholicism does an awful lot more to worsen the situation. If these religious people really did care about the poor, they would promote the use of condoms and not the abstinence of them. The OP above said that why care for animals and place them above a human. Well, why would someone place the values of the Pope above poverty stricken peoples in Africa?

Oranage2

bluewolf wrote: »

i'm not the one who donates to charity to buy brownie points instead of because it's a good thing to do to help people

trying to deflect attention with "well you all suck!!!" isn't going to change that

Ha, good parody

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

To the OP that said he doesn't understand why people give to animal charities. Well, sorry to be the bearer of bad news but the last time I looked humans were animals too, or maybe you don't believe in evolution. So Trocaire is an animal charity too.

Does you mammy know you're on the computer?

Galvasean wrote: »

So you give to charity to curry the favor of the master of the universe, but it's the atheists who are selfish?

Maybe atheists do give plenty to charity, but don't feel the need to crow on about it as much as many religious people?

I said that comment was tongue in cheek - I'd assume the religious are as likely to give than the non-religious and like Sarky i give because I think it's the right thing to do.

Perhaps because it's ok to care about both humans and animals? Oh, how dare people care about animals! How inhumane of them!!

As I said people can do what they want with their own money - I never said it was wrong, just that I find it astonishing.

MisterEpicurus

Oranage2 wrote: »

Does you mammy know you're on the computer?

I don't know, yours does though.

I said that comment was tongue in cheek

So was mine :rolleyes:

dlofnep

Oranage2 wrote: »

Does you mammy know you're on the computer?

What was you you were saying about ad hominem remarks?

Oranage2 wrote: »

I said that comment was tongue in cheek - I'd assume the religious are as likely to give than the non-religious and like Sarky i give because I think it's the right thing to do.

So if you do it because it's the right thing to do, then where does religion come into the equation? Nowhere. So you're not donating to charity because you are religious.

Oranage2 wrote: »

As I said people can do what they want with their own money - I never said it was wrong, just that I find it astonishing.

Why do you find people who are interested in the welfare of animals "astonishing"? What's so astonishing about it? The fact that a human could have compassion for another animal isn't that astonishing at all. I'm quite puzzled by your reaction to be honest.

Delirium

recedite

joseph brand wrote: »

The Trocaire boxes seemed to me, as a child, to be kinda supplied by the church. But wasn't the church IN those recipient nations, spreading the 'good news' (bad news), indoctrinating locals into their beliefs?

You can imagine the power it gives to the local church reps, being able to hand out the money to build churches, schools etc.. all good works (well, apart from the actual churches ) but when it comes to deciding who gets the new water pump supplied, or where to build the new school, those who are closest to the church reps get the most.
So what happens when the supply of Irish missionaries dries up, and the funding along with them? Its a bit like the pacific island cargo cults that sprang up after the US Air Force went home.

A strange type of African evangelical christianity has sprung up whereby the pastors unashamedly tell the people that whatever money they put into their church will be repaid by god, in cash, many times over. I have spoken to a few Nigerians living over here, and this is what they actually believe.

EGAR

Oranage2 wrote: »

No offense to anyone, but I dont get why people give to animal charities, the fact that some people value dog food over a child's life is quite astonishing to me but its their money and can do whatever they want with it.

Giving to animal charities and thus helping people is not mutually exclusive. Many people are now no longer in the position to care for their animals as they lost their jobs and in some cases their housing. Calls from owner surrenders to EGAR for example are up to never before seen levels (EGAR is in its 16th year of operation). For these people who have often been dealt a rough hand it is vital to know their animals will be well looked after here until we can find a new home for them. For many it is an agonising decision to part with an animal they have shared their life with.

We also open our doors to local schools and what we teach the children is compassion for ALL sentient beings.

We also work with social workers and enable children who come from broken homes etc to come here and spend time with dogs, cats and horses. It builds self esteem, confidence and is often a lifeline for those kids.

So no, it is NOT mutually exclusive at all.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

A strange type of African evangelical christianity has sprung up whereby the pastors unashamedly tell the people that whatever money they put into their church will be repaid by god, in cash, many times over. I have spoken to a few Nigerians living over here, and this is what they actually believe.

That's called the Prosperity Gospel and it's a fairly recent import from the USA into Nigeria and other west African countries.

Well, twenty centuries ago, Jesus was advertized to people who died young as a means of staying alive forever. Nowadays, Jesus is sold to dirt-poor people as a means of getting rich.

Go figure.

Oranage2

EGAR wrote: »

Giving to animal charities and thus helping people is not mutually exclusive. Many people are now no longer in the position to care for their animals as they lost their jobs and in some cases their housing. Calls from owner surrenders to EGAR for example are up to never before seen levels (EGAR is in its 16th year of operation). For these people who have often been dealt a rough hand it is vital to know their animals will be well looked after here until we can find a new home for them. For many it is an agonising decision to part with an animal they have shared their life with.

We also open our doors to local schools and what we teach the children is compassion for ALL sentient beings.

We also work with social workers and enable children who come from broken homes etc to come here and spend time with dogs, cats and horses. It builds self esteem, confidence and is often a lifeline for those kids.

So no, it is NOT mutually exclusive at all.

Well egar I've no doubt of the good work you do and i even liked one of your Facebook pages and see all the great work you do with animals.

Just me personally i couldn't support an animal charity financially on a purely moral basis. Again if somebody wants to support animal its their own choice and money and if somebody wants to support both an animal and homeless/poverty charity then again I've no problem with it just its not for me and i find it odd that people hold animals lives in such high regard.

dlofnep

Oranage2 wrote: »

Well egar I've no doubt of the good work you do and i even liked one of your Facebook pages and see all the great work you do with animals.

Just me personally i couldn't support an animal charity financially on a purely moral basis. Again if somebody wants to support animal its their own choice and money and if somebody wants to support both an animal and homeless/poverty charity then again I've no problem with it just its not for me and i find it odd that people hold animals lives in such high regard.

I find it odd that you wouldn't hold the life of an animal in high regard. Doesn't say much for your morals to be honest.

EGAR

Oranage2 wrote: »

Well egar I've no doubt of the good work you do and i even liked one of your Facebook pages and see all the great work you do with animals.

Just me personally i couldn't support an animal charity financially on a purely moral basis. Again if somebody wants to support animal its their own choice and money and if somebody wants to support both an animal and homeless/poverty charity then again I've no problem with it just its not for me and i find it odd that people hold animals lives in such high regard.

I did not post my comment in order to change your mind, I posted to explain that helping animals goes hand in hand with helping humans. It is called compassion which is not inclusive to humans only.

However, I hold the lives of animals in high regard. As already mentioned by someone else, it does not say much for you to disregard life like that.

Oranage2

I think I've been picked up wrong - i don't hate animals, i actually have tropical fish for nearly 5 years that i love and they love me, also I've the family dog in my mothers. I have compassion for animals just id rather a human benefit from my money than an animal. If that makes me a monster in your opinion then your opinion is stupid.

Id considered donating to your charity egar if you read bible verses to the animals but i guess you're hell bent on not giving your animals the basic animal rights to hear the Word of god.

amacachi

dlofnep wrote: »

I find it odd that you wouldn't hold the life of an animal in high regard. Doesn't say much for your morals to be honest.

Are you a vegetarian? I'm not and to be honest it's something I do find hard to reconcile.


This whole discussion just reminds me of how great everything would be without religion.

dlofnep

Oranage2 wrote: »

I think I've been picked up wrong - i don't hate animals, i actually have tropical fish for nearly 5 years that i love and they love me

Well aren't you just marvelous! You have fish. That settles it, you've surely convinced us all of your unadulterated love for animals.

Oranage2 wrote: »

, also I've the family dog in my mothers.

Just when I thought you couldn't get anymore amazing, you out-do yourself! Your mam has a family dog! Jaysus - Someone sign this guy up for animal welfare activist of the year.. He has my vote.

Oranage2 wrote: »

If that makes me a monster in your opinion then your opinion is stupid.

How could someone who has fish for 5 years be a monster? Your record is impeccable! Let's go save dolphins together.

Oranage2 wrote: »

Id considered donating to your charity egar if you read bible verses to the animals but i guess you're hell bent on not giving your animals the basic animal rights to hear the Word of god.

bogwalrus

Oranage2 wrote: »

I think I've been picked up wrong - i don't hate animals, i actually have tropical fish for nearly 5 years that i love and they love me, also I've the family dog in my mothers. I have compassion for animals just id rather a human benefit from my money than an animal. If that makes me a monster in your opinion then your opinion is stupid.

Id considered donating to your charity egar if you read bible verses to the animals but i guess you're hell bent on not giving your animals the basic animal rights to hear the Word of god.

To the mods. I haven't been on this forum for a while but can you get banned for telling someone they are an idiot? Just before I go and say it that is.

MagicMarker

bogwalrus wrote: »

To the mods. I haven't been on this forum for a while but can you get banned for telling someone they are an idiot? Just before I go and say it that is.

Yes, but unfortunately you can't be banned for being an idiot.

Oranage2

I hope those comments aren't aimed at me, im a well respected poster whose opinion is held in high regard.

Well i see any rational discussion was thrown out the window when petty posters have to use insults and cry to mods. I just hope the real world isn't too hard on yous because there are idiots out there but there isn't any moderators to go crying to.

marty1985

Personally, I think it's a bit cynical to say that whenever religious people give to charity it's because it's purely in some sort of reward-punishment scheme with a mythical parental figure. This attitude exhibits a lack of understanding of religious morality, and I suspect most posters who make this argument are aware things are more complex than that.

As far as I can see, good things are done in the name of religion, and it would be childish to not acknowledge these things. If we can blame religion for all evils, can we not acknowledge something good done in the name of religion, or does it always have to be some nonsensical "meme-religion-virus-latching-itself-on-making-you-think-it's-religion-but-virus-meme-delusion-only-helping-itself-let's-kill-it"?

Religion motivates some people to do good things. Sociological studies argue that religion is, unsurprisingly, correlated with moral behavior. Rodney Stark, William Sims Bainbridge have published studies showing that religious people give more to charity than their non-religious peers (although I think this is just a US based study). Sociologist Arthur Brooks has done research on charitable giving also, and found that religious people are a lot more likely than secularists to give money to charity. I don't think it's consistent with empirical findings that people will act just as morally without religion as they do with religion.

Can we be good without God? YES.

We can eliminate religion completely and have a vibrant moral culture but only subject to certain qualifications.

We need a collective, determined effort to teach ethics to kids formally, to a degree that doesn't exist presently. We also have to acknowledge that our ethical culture was formed over centuries of religious moral education as an antecedent, however much that irks a lot of atheists.

In other words, religion can only be eliminated under rarified and highly qualified conditions. Whether we like it or not, for most people, under most circumstances, religion is the primary model for morality. People need a code, an articulation of the moral sense, which has historically always been done through religion. Most of us in this discussion forum do not represent most of humanity. I bet most of us have lives of familial stability, higher education, financial security, etc. It might be oh-so-simple for us to conceive of a moral life without religion and try to convince others of this seemingly simple idea, but it would, realistically, result in a moral vacuum for billions, depressing as you may find it.

Atheism doesn't make people do bad things. There will be wonderful examples of generous and life-affirming atheists out there, such as some have already demonstrated in this thread. But atheism per se just lacks a moral dimension. Religion is uniquely suited to provide the psychological and social context for promoting the belief in a transhuman moral authority, which civilizations have always needed, which is, perhaps, why we are where we are today. To say confidently and without hesitation that we can eliminate religion and have a vibrant moral culture should at least warrant an example of such a culture that has gone before in such a way.

That's my 2c.

Barr125

Oranage2 wrote: »

I hope those comments aren't aimed at me, im a well respected poster whose opinion is held in high regard.

Really? On what forum?

Oranage2 wrote: »

Well i see any rational discussion was thrown out the window when petty posters have to use insults and cry to mods. I just hope the real world isn't too hard on yous because there are idiots out there but there isn't any moderators to go crying to.

All rational discussion pretty much flew out the window when you said that you would donate to an animal charity only if they preached the Word of Jebus to animals. And as for petty posters and insults? I'll just leave these here..

Oranage2 wrote: »

.. If that makes me a monster in your opinion then your opinion is stupid.

Oranage2 wrote: »

Ha, good parody

Does you mammy know you're on the computer?

Now on topic, I volunteer my time to local charities and groups like the Scouting Ireland (I know they have some ties with the Church, but I just kinda ignore that stuff and don't bring my atheism up with them).

Yes, maybe Christians do give more to charity than Atheists. But you have to also remember that there are more Christians than Atheists anyway, that some Atheists will aid with independent/secular charities and that the church has had years to develop networks to funnel the money where it needs to go.

I think that charity can't really be measured by a group standards anyway, it's down to the reasons of the individual. I know I help people and I do it because 1) it helps them (duh :P) and 2) because it makes me feel good. Is that selfish? Sure! But I'm honest about it and why shouldn't someone feel good about helping their fellow man/woman/child?

FrostyJack

Oranage2 wrote: »

I hope those comments aren't aimed at me, im a well respected poster whose opinion is held in high regard.

Classic.

This recent Kony rubbish is a prime example of "religious" charity. It would seem a lot (not all or even most, though it could be) people of god only perform acts of charity as a way of benefiting themselves (get a place in heaven, pushing their agenda, spread the word of jebus etc) while it is the opposite for the majority of non-believers, Bill Gates being a perfect example.

Ellis Dee

Giving to others who are in need has to do with compassion, empathy, a sense of reciprocity perhaps, and derives from behaviour that is much, much older than any religion and can still be observed in other animals, especially primates.:rolleyes:

It has nothing to do with religion. Indeed, religion may even be a hindrance to charity in some cases, because those infected with it tend to regard themselves as being in a special position to judge others and base their decisions whether or not to help and how much on how, in their view, the needy person meets their arbitrary standards of behaviour.:)

MrPudding

dlofnep wrote: »

I find it odd that you wouldn't hold the life of an animal in high regard. Doesn't say much for your morals to be honest.

I have to say, I agree, to an extent, with Orange2. Given a choice between supporting an animal (non-human animal for the pedants amongst us) or a human charity the human charity wins hands down.

Do I support animal cruelty? No. I don't. I believe that we should treat animals humanely and I despise cruelty wherever it is directed. I understand why people support animal (non-human) charities and whilst it is not for me I am happy for them to do it.

I tend not to agree with a lot of what orange2 says, but to extrapolate that he is lacking in morals simply because he prefers his charitable monies to go to human charities seems like a little bit of a stretch.

MrP

bogwalrus

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Giving to others who are in need has to do with compassion, empathy, a sense of reciprocity perhaps, and derives from behaviour that is much, much older than any religion and can still be observed in other animals, especially primates.:rolleyes:

It has nothing to do with religion. Indeed, religion may even be a hindrance to charity in some cases, because those infected with it tend to regard themselves as being in a special position to judge others and base their decisions whether or not to help and how much on how, in their view, the needy person meets their arbitrary standards of behaviour.:)

You are spot on. The argument is quite simple. Real giving is altruistic. This means its impossible for a Christian and people who follow other beliefs to ever properly give without reward due to the nature of what they believe their purpose is in life.

There are always loads of collections done by the locals in my village. The majority collecting are usually in there 70s. I wonder as a Christian gets closer to their death bed do they get more charitable. I think so and this could be to just clock up more brownie points.

Gordon

I'd like to see stats on charity givings based on religious views, I'd also like to see stats of how many religious people consider giving money to their religion (priest, church etc) as being considered 'charity'.

dlofnep

Oranage2 wrote: »

im a well respected poster whose opinion is held in high regard.

Well haven't we got our work cut out for us? Oranage2, well respected forum poster AND defender of tropical fish. I don't know how we'll overcome these odds.

Oranage2 wrote: »

Well i see any rational discussion was thrown out the window when petty posters have to use insults and cry to mods.

Rational discussion? What, you mean - one where you call people idiots if they don't agree with you? Or where you group atheists together as some sort of apathetic group of zombies, with their head glues to their ipads - far removed from the pulse of society that oversees charitable affairs.

And this is the foundation you create, seeking a rational discussion and then whinge when the flow of conversation doesn't go your way? Well holy fúck-buckets! Aren't you a naive little fellow?

PS: Don't forget to feed your fish.