Angels & Demons
discussion
Would you rather live in a world without science...or in a world without religion?
I think I've watched too much David Mitchell... it was his voice I read that in...
Gary wrote: Again you state that it was a comfort, but you don't explain "why" it was a comfort. In past times it may have been a comfort to some, but it was also a very real horror to others. The fear of hell and the demands of god have forced people to suppress their natural feelings or even to carry out acts they find abhorrent because they were terrified of eternal suffering."
It was a comfort in that it allowed people to believe in an afterlife, it gave then a meaning to life and a set of morals to follow.
The thought of no heaven or afterlife to the person raised as an atheist can be just as fearful.
and the demands of god have forced people to suppress their natural feelings or even to carry out acts they find abhorrent because they were terrified of eternal suffering.
You need to elaborate.
like the existence of Russell's teapot
No not at all like that unless Russell claim to be the son of God?
This belief means that either you believe that you worship the correct version of a male single all powerful god that was incarnated in flesh briefly, and arrogantly assume that everyone else has got it wrong (which most religions do to be fair),
Again you are not able to separate religion and god.
Then who designed god?
That is a separate question but, Hawking has suggested that there was never nothing, there was always something, as an answer to what caused the big bang. Following that logic it is not unreasonable to assume that the ‘always something’ is God.
God created the universe and until science can produce a better explanation it is unreasonable to rule god out.
Does not rule it out, but does not provide any evidence or rationale for either.
So the jury is still out on that one.
‘Science’ is hoping to contact alien life and the nearest star to our sun is over 25 million million miles away. If that star, or one even further away, has a planet that can support life, that alien life has to much much more advanced than us, for us to receive any signal. Yet it is easy for us to believe that we could someday make contact or we will grow to be as advanced as these aliens are now, but we can’t get our heads round having a soul…or at least some can’t.
In response to all that has been written on charity, let me offer this observation: Africa is the place that receives the most charity, and is home to the most aid workers, in the world. These contributions and these folk are predominantly from countries such as Norway, Swedan, Holland and Denmark. All predominantly atheist countries. There is precious little aid in Africa from America that does not have strings attached to it, often strings that has little or no long-term benefit to the African people.In my 6 years as working as a photojournalist in the most impoverished part of South Africa, I came across countless European students doing charity work for nothing, free, gratis.
Hazel wrote: "to ape you... sigh... completely missed what I was saying, I wasn;t out to "prove that religion is bad, no matter what", I know that religions do some good things, andthere are good parts of them, but if the religion wasn't there the good people would still do good things."
Hey, there, Hazel. My statement to you was too strong. I was thinking of Gary's email, mentioning community support with a negative spin, thinking of other comments made on this thread, and yours. Unfortunately, I addressed my post to you and only to you. As I closed my computer, I truly thought, "Oh, crap! I addressed that to Hazel. That will seem really off." But, I had no time to go back in and fix it. So, I apologize that it was addressed only to you.
Now, with regard to ...
"You've made a blanket statement that no non-religious folks in your area do charitable works."
I don't think I said that. Did I? When it comes to something very specific, feeding the hungry here, I don't see anyone else doing that. I also said the local CoOp has a food drive off sorts and local schools sometimes have food drives. Right? But, it's the churches that have an organized means to feed the hungry, and it's the churches that do so consistently. That's the truth. You know me to be a straight shooter, so ....
(I've given far too much information about myself to tell all of you where I live. But, I have said I live in New England. Further, I said I grew up near the Ben and Jerry's factory the night we were discussing ice cream. So, I'm thinking that would give a fairly accurate guess.)
I mean, seriously, I'm quite sure I didn't say only religious folk give to charity. That's not even like me. But, truthfully, other than the homeless shelter, the churches are the only ones who have free dinners here and the only ones to do food drives on a consistent basis. Truth.
I also mentioned Green Up Day. It's the churches in this town who do that. Sometimes, as I mentioned, local schools will take part. But, for the most part, the average man or woman who lives here, myself included, isn't picking up trash on the street on Green Up Day. But, I, personally, see it as a good thing and think it's great that the churches commit to that and that the schools sometimes take part.
Regarding helping Haiti and poorer countries, I said,
"Could that be outsourced. Definitely. There are a lot of different organizations who help those in need in poorer countries and in times of natural disasters."
I didn't just fall off the turnip truck. ;) Despite the fact that I wish I hadn't just addressed that email to you, I'm often quite logical. I'm well aware that there are a ton, a TON, of non-religious charities. When it comes to feeding the hungry here, I'm not seeing the non-religious charities take part ... at least with weekly free dinners.
I know that non-religious groups do charitable works here as they do elsewhere. (Not seeing it with the dinners ...) So, as I was trying to point out, local churches and the people within their churches do support their communities in good ways, and that was totally and completely left out of Gary's paragraph on community support.
Regarding non-religious people here ....
Hmmm.... I'm not sure which posts you're thinking of. I think you might be picking up on my specific problems with fitting in ... not feeling that I fit in a Christian church given the drive for conversion and my native ancestry ... not feeling I fit in with not believing ... believing but questioning things like ... is the Bible the divine word of God, etc.....
I'd say New England, at least much of New England, is far less religious than other areas of the United States. I'd say we're much more secular. And, liberal. In fact, I'd say a huge percentage of my students don't go to church and never have. As I've said, I don't and most of my family and friends don't. In December of this year, a non-Christian student came into my room singing a very popular Christmas carol. Not one of the students in the room, who considered themselves to believe in God and who celebrate Christmas, knew the carol.
So, there are a lot of people here who never go to church and likely don't know a lot about church and the tenants of specific religions, etc....
Having said that, a couple years ago, I gave an assignment. They needed to pick something, anything their hearts desired, and research that topic. They needed to get lots of great facts and information, from various sources, about their topic. Then, they needed to take a stand. Pro or con. They needed to write a persuasive essay and present to the class. Some of my colleagues told me that was a pretty dangerous assignment ... told me to reconsider.
Nope.
I had a ton of students who picked school uniforms. I had some who picked gun control and hunting. Chewing gum in school. But! Two students went the "dangerous" route. One ... abortion. She argued from a pro-life perspective. Some of the kids supported her, but some were very much in the pro-life camp. Another ... that God doesn't exist. None of the students supported her, at least outwardly.
We had rules about presenting and being an audience and the whole thing. But, when she started .... I'll never forget that day. She started ... her opening line was something like ... God does not exist. The students went wild. Gasped. Yelped. One student started to yell at her. I stopped it. They asked me to stop her. "She's saying God isn't real!"
At that point, I shut everything down for a bit. We talked about our rules, but, more importantly, we talked about whether or not we wanted to be a community of people with rights ... the right to free speech ... did they feel that was important ... Oh, yes. Would they like it if I told them that they couldn't make an argument for deer hunting? No. Hunting is good. We should have the right to hunt! Then, we talked about the rights of others ... those we don't agree with. In fact, we might vehemently disagree with them, but, do they have the right to an opinion, to a voice?
They had a hard time coming around to it when it came to God. Anything else, they said, but God? I asked them ... should only certain people have a right to their religion ... only Christians, only Jews, only Buddhists ... did we or did we not believe in freedom of religion ... did that or did it not extend to atheists ... did they or did they not have the right not to practice a religion? They came to an agreement. Everyone had the right to share his or her opinion. They might not agree, several said they didn't, but everyone should have a voice.
I asked what they thought should happen at that point. One of the students said they should apologize to the student who was presenting. They did. I asked her if she still wanted to present. I told her she didn't need to if she was uncomfortable, due to what had happened. She said she was fine. She stood there, tall and strong, and presented her argument. She was SO brave.
So, while it's New England and while many don't attend services, if one came out and said s/he did not believe in God, well, there might be a poor reception to that statement. I've seen it.
And, after this happened, my colleagues and half the town heard about what happened, and the former came to me and told me they were right.
Well .... I wasn't sure. I hated that she'd gone through that initial moment of yelling. It only lasted a moment ... less than a minute. But .... At the same time, did they learn a valuable lesson? We can talk about rights and freedoms, but do we really mean it? Do we truly back people's right to an opinion and a voice? Was that a worthwhile lesson? I thought it was .... But, oh, it was a risk.
I don't know what would happen, Hazel, if a group of atheists banded together here and created an organization and started doing charitable works. Honestly, I think there's likely a difference between being "non-religious" ... not attending church or reading the Bible or other holy books, etc... and being truly non-religious, an atheist. I'm sure some would react very poorly. Nastily, even.
I'd like to think, though, if it meant something to them, if it was truly important to them, .... Well, I'd like to think that adult atheists would have the bravery shown by an 8th grader. I'd like to think, if it was something they wanted to do, that they'd create a group and do charitable works, etc.... I'd support them in their right to do so. And, if they were threatened or treated despicably, I'd make a stand with them.
Regarding tracking money .... No. I haven't, in general. Have I looked into all of the churches and where they give their money and what non-religious people give to non-religious charities? No, but heck no.
I can tell you that I still get information from the United Methodist Church here and I still read it. They include their financial information. Most of the money they collect goes toward paying for the pastor and the secretary and the parsonage and the church. Then, there's a percentage that goes to THE United Methodist Church, dues or some such thing. I don't know where that money goes once it's sent. Finally, there are the local things that I was actually talking about. They collect food. All of it goes to the food shelf and the dinners. They cook the dinners once a month. That goes to the needy. They do the special collection for Haitian children. All of that money goes to Haiti. Where does it go once it's sent? I don't know. They make the hygiene kits and send them to places that experience natural disasters. The local efforts and collections go, I think in total, to the local community. They also do special collections when someone is in need for a specific reason. All money gathered goes to that person.
Now, Gary is right and I alluded to it. Churches don't have some magical essence that persuades members to do these good works. What they have is the structure to get it done. They meet regularly. They decide upon what charities to support. They have a vehicle by which to get donations and get volunteers, etc....
I'm not certain, though, without that vehicle ... lacking other organizations in this particular community, that things like the free dinners would happen if the churches went poof. Good people. Yes. Religious and non-religious alike. But, .... Would that good work, would that need, be seen to? I just don't know.
Hey, there, Hazel. My statement to you was too strong. I was thinking of Gary's email, mentioning community support with a negative spin, thinking of other comments made on this thread, and yours. Unfortunately, I addressed my post to you and only to you. As I closed my computer, I truly thought, "Oh, crap! I addressed that to Hazel. That will seem really off." But, I had no time to go back in and fix it. So, I apologize that it was addressed only to you.
Now, with regard to ...
"You've made a blanket statement that no non-religious folks in your area do charitable works."
I don't think I said that. Did I? When it comes to something very specific, feeding the hungry here, I don't see anyone else doing that. I also said the local CoOp has a food drive off sorts and local schools sometimes have food drives. Right? But, it's the churches that have an organized means to feed the hungry, and it's the churches that do so consistently. That's the truth. You know me to be a straight shooter, so ....
(I've given far too much information about myself to tell all of you where I live. But, I have said I live in New England. Further, I said I grew up near the Ben and Jerry's factory the night we were discussing ice cream. So, I'm thinking that would give a fairly accurate guess.)
I mean, seriously, I'm quite sure I didn't say only religious folk give to charity. That's not even like me. But, truthfully, other than the homeless shelter, the churches are the only ones who have free dinners here and the only ones to do food drives on a consistent basis. Truth.
I also mentioned Green Up Day. It's the churches in this town who do that. Sometimes, as I mentioned, local schools will take part. But, for the most part, the average man or woman who lives here, myself included, isn't picking up trash on the street on Green Up Day. But, I, personally, see it as a good thing and think it's great that the churches commit to that and that the schools sometimes take part.
Regarding helping Haiti and poorer countries, I said,
"Could that be outsourced. Definitely. There are a lot of different organizations who help those in need in poorer countries and in times of natural disasters."
I didn't just fall off the turnip truck. ;) Despite the fact that I wish I hadn't just addressed that email to you, I'm often quite logical. I'm well aware that there are a ton, a TON, of non-religious charities. When it comes to feeding the hungry here, I'm not seeing the non-religious charities take part ... at least with weekly free dinners.
I know that non-religious groups do charitable works here as they do elsewhere. (Not seeing it with the dinners ...) So, as I was trying to point out, local churches and the people within their churches do support their communities in good ways, and that was totally and completely left out of Gary's paragraph on community support.
Regarding non-religious people here ....
Hmmm.... I'm not sure which posts you're thinking of. I think you might be picking up on my specific problems with fitting in ... not feeling that I fit in a Christian church given the drive for conversion and my native ancestry ... not feeling I fit in with not believing ... believing but questioning things like ... is the Bible the divine word of God, etc.....
I'd say New England, at least much of New England, is far less religious than other areas of the United States. I'd say we're much more secular. And, liberal. In fact, I'd say a huge percentage of my students don't go to church and never have. As I've said, I don't and most of my family and friends don't. In December of this year, a non-Christian student came into my room singing a very popular Christmas carol. Not one of the students in the room, who considered themselves to believe in God and who celebrate Christmas, knew the carol.
So, there are a lot of people here who never go to church and likely don't know a lot about church and the tenants of specific religions, etc....
Having said that, a couple years ago, I gave an assignment. They needed to pick something, anything their hearts desired, and research that topic. They needed to get lots of great facts and information, from various sources, about their topic. Then, they needed to take a stand. Pro or con. They needed to write a persuasive essay and present to the class. Some of my colleagues told me that was a pretty dangerous assignment ... told me to reconsider.
Nope.
I had a ton of students who picked school uniforms. I had some who picked gun control and hunting. Chewing gum in school. But! Two students went the "dangerous" route. One ... abortion. She argued from a pro-life perspective. Some of the kids supported her, but some were very much in the pro-life camp. Another ... that God doesn't exist. None of the students supported her, at least outwardly.
We had rules about presenting and being an audience and the whole thing. But, when she started .... I'll never forget that day. She started ... her opening line was something like ... God does not exist. The students went wild. Gasped. Yelped. One student started to yell at her. I stopped it. They asked me to stop her. "She's saying God isn't real!"
At that point, I shut everything down for a bit. We talked about our rules, but, more importantly, we talked about whether or not we wanted to be a community of people with rights ... the right to free speech ... did they feel that was important ... Oh, yes. Would they like it if I told them that they couldn't make an argument for deer hunting? No. Hunting is good. We should have the right to hunt! Then, we talked about the rights of others ... those we don't agree with. In fact, we might vehemently disagree with them, but, do they have the right to an opinion, to a voice?
They had a hard time coming around to it when it came to God. Anything else, they said, but God? I asked them ... should only certain people have a right to their religion ... only Christians, only Jews, only Buddhists ... did we or did we not believe in freedom of religion ... did that or did it not extend to atheists ... did they or did they not have the right not to practice a religion? They came to an agreement. Everyone had the right to share his or her opinion. They might not agree, several said they didn't, but everyone should have a voice.
I asked what they thought should happen at that point. One of the students said they should apologize to the student who was presenting. They did. I asked her if she still wanted to present. I told her she didn't need to if she was uncomfortable, due to what had happened. She said she was fine. She stood there, tall and strong, and presented her argument. She was SO brave.
So, while it's New England and while many don't attend services, if one came out and said s/he did not believe in God, well, there might be a poor reception to that statement. I've seen it.
And, after this happened, my colleagues and half the town heard about what happened, and the former came to me and told me they were right.
Well .... I wasn't sure. I hated that she'd gone through that initial moment of yelling. It only lasted a moment ... less than a minute. But .... At the same time, did they learn a valuable lesson? We can talk about rights and freedoms, but do we really mean it? Do we truly back people's right to an opinion and a voice? Was that a worthwhile lesson? I thought it was .... But, oh, it was a risk.
I don't know what would happen, Hazel, if a group of atheists banded together here and created an organization and started doing charitable works. Honestly, I think there's likely a difference between being "non-religious" ... not attending church or reading the Bible or other holy books, etc... and being truly non-religious, an atheist. I'm sure some would react very poorly. Nastily, even.
I'd like to think, though, if it meant something to them, if it was truly important to them, .... Well, I'd like to think that adult atheists would have the bravery shown by an 8th grader. I'd like to think, if it was something they wanted to do, that they'd create a group and do charitable works, etc.... I'd support them in their right to do so. And, if they were threatened or treated despicably, I'd make a stand with them.
Regarding tracking money .... No. I haven't, in general. Have I looked into all of the churches and where they give their money and what non-religious people give to non-religious charities? No, but heck no.
I can tell you that I still get information from the United Methodist Church here and I still read it. They include their financial information. Most of the money they collect goes toward paying for the pastor and the secretary and the parsonage and the church. Then, there's a percentage that goes to THE United Methodist Church, dues or some such thing. I don't know where that money goes once it's sent. Finally, there are the local things that I was actually talking about. They collect food. All of it goes to the food shelf and the dinners. They cook the dinners once a month. That goes to the needy. They do the special collection for Haitian children. All of that money goes to Haiti. Where does it go once it's sent? I don't know. They make the hygiene kits and send them to places that experience natural disasters. The local efforts and collections go, I think in total, to the local community. They also do special collections when someone is in need for a specific reason. All money gathered goes to that person.
Now, Gary is right and I alluded to it. Churches don't have some magical essence that persuades members to do these good works. What they have is the structure to get it done. They meet regularly. They decide upon what charities to support. They have a vehicle by which to get donations and get volunteers, etc....
I'm not certain, though, without that vehicle ... lacking other organizations in this particular community, that things like the free dinners would happen if the churches went poof. Good people. Yes. Religious and non-religious alike. But, .... Would that good work, would that need, be seen to? I just don't know.
Hazel wrote: "what I'm actually wondering about is do you make sure that your money is going where you think its going? "
Forgot this part .... I actually don't support a local church or any church with financial donations. When I went to church, I'd make an offering. But, I haven't been in years.
I give non-perishable food in the box at the store. I've organized food drives at the school. And, I've just taken part in the food drives at the school. When some of our students lost housing due to fire, I gave the families food for a few weeks ... personally handed it to them at the motel they were put up in. I do other things ... don't want to bore people. The gist is ... I do charitable works that, well, there's no question of where the money or the items are going.
Forgot this part .... I actually don't support a local church or any church with financial donations. When I went to church, I'd make an offering. But, I haven't been in years.
I give non-perishable food in the box at the store. I've organized food drives at the school. And, I've just taken part in the food drives at the school. When some of our students lost housing due to fire, I gave the families food for a few weeks ... personally handed it to them at the motel they were put up in. I do other things ... don't want to bore people. The gist is ... I do charitable works that, well, there's no question of where the money or the items are going.
so, you're a person in your community who doesn't go to church, but who does good charitable works? In other words, you're doing it off your own back, because you're a good and generous and caring person. Amazing list of stuff, btw, even without the extra stuff you said you wouldn't bore us with. Much respect :)
Gary wrote: "This still doesn't mean that religion is responsible for charitable conscience"
I am absolutely not making that statement, Gary. I never have and never will. In fact, I've been one of the only non-atheists who has argued the opposite in this thread.
My point .... The everyday church in the every day town and the everyday people who go to that everyday church do support their communities in good ways. That's my point.
And, if the churches disappeared tomorrow, I don't know that things like those free dinners would still take place.
And ... this is what I meant by arguments for the sake of arguments and bias ....
I am absolutely not making that statement, Gary. I never have and never will. In fact, I've been one of the only non-atheists who has argued the opposite in this thread.
My point .... The everyday church in the every day town and the everyday people who go to that everyday church do support their communities in good ways. That's my point.
And, if the churches disappeared tomorrow, I don't know that things like those free dinners would still take place.
And ... this is what I meant by arguments for the sake of arguments and bias ....
Tim wrote: "There is precious little aid in Africa from America that does not have strings attached to it, often strings that has little or no long-term benefit to the African people."
Hey, Tim. What about malaria? It's been in the news, here, that the US has done a TON with regard to malaria. Is that not true? And, more importantly, are there strings attached to that? I'm truly curious, as that's not been reported here ... but might be a reality. I don't know.
Also, I personally know people who have done a lot of work in Africa ... doctors, nurses, midwives, dentists. I'm not sure who they've worked through. But, I believe it was through professional organizations ... not religious. I know they go regularly, pay their own way, and work for a week for free ... giving free medical care. I don't believe strings are attached to that, but I don't know. Does something happen before or after they go? Are the people charged somehow without our knowing it? I'm truly interested.
Hey, Tim. What about malaria? It's been in the news, here, that the US has done a TON with regard to malaria. Is that not true? And, more importantly, are there strings attached to that? I'm truly curious, as that's not been reported here ... but might be a reality. I don't know.
Also, I personally know people who have done a lot of work in Africa ... doctors, nurses, midwives, dentists. I'm not sure who they've worked through. But, I believe it was through professional organizations ... not religious. I know they go regularly, pay their own way, and work for a week for free ... giving free medical care. I don't believe strings are attached to that, but I don't know. Does something happen before or after they go? Are the people charged somehow without our knowing it? I'm truly interested.
Hazel wrote: "so, you're a person in your community who doesn't go to church, but who does good charitable works? In other words, you're doing it off your own back"
True.
Thanks. ;)
True.
Thanks. ;)
So a blanket statement like "it all has strings attached" is not true in all cases. Forgive me. I do things like that now and again. I know that Jimmy Carter's aid organisation has almost entirely elliminated Guinea Worm from Africa. Sounds like a small thing but it was actually a terrible thing, afflicting millions. I do know, however that the 13 billion dollars Bush proposed for fighting AIDS was under the provisio that these initiatives would be church-led and focus on abstinence solutions. Strings. And bailouts for African countries from the IMF and the World Bank come with all kinds of economic conditions, which often involve Africa simply allowing wealthier countries to strip it of its raw materials.I confess I simply do not know enough about the situation. All I know is what I have heard from those in the field who I have met in South Africa, from reports in the liberal media, and from a few books on post-colonial Africa like Martin Metedith's one.
There are some other books though that debate the aid situation. I've seen them referred to but don't recall the names...
Been away for a week, did I miss anything? I'll go back through, but let me know if there's anything I need to know ;)
Shannon wrote: "But, I'm not Catholic, and it's not my business..."Ah but it is, human rights, equality for women, is everyone's business.....we need to make sure we don't fall into moral relativism....."oh, it's their culture, it's not my place to speak'. Wrong. For example, female circumcision in some countries, do we say nothing because it's not our culture, or do we speak out about it being a horrendous, barbaric practice? We speak out....
Tim wrote: "So a blanket statement like "it all has strings attached" is not true in all cases. Forgive me. I do things like that now and again. I know that Jimmy Carter's aid organisation has almost entirely ..."
Tim wrote: "So a blanket statement like "it all has strings attached" is not true in all cases. Forgive me. I do things like that now and again. I know that Jimmy Carter's aid organisation has almost entirely ..."
Very glad to hear about Carter's organization almost eradicating Guinea Worm. I think a lot has been done with malaria, but I'm not sure. I had no idea the AIDS funded initiatives had to be church-led and focus on abstinence. I remember hearing talk on the news here about having more abstinence programs ... here ... and having more church run charity programs. However, I thought that was general talk and thought it dealt with things in the US. I had no idea AIDS funding for Africa had such provisos.
Our news doesn't always give an accurate picture. And, often, they spend more time on celebs, cooking and gadgets. That's why I make it a point to read online papers from other countries. However, when I do, I'm usually reading other stories ... looking for other things. I don't tend to focus on charities. And, truthfully, I don't tend to focus on Africa.
I'm glad you're taking part in this discussion, Tim. It's reminding me that there's a HUGE continent called "Africa" ... and I need to keep Africa in mind. Don't get me wrong. I didn't forget that it exists. It's just .... I tend to focus other things, like Iraq and Afghanistan, China, Russia, and economic issues in Europe. This is prompting me to broaden my focus. And, I think that's a very good thing. So ... thanks.
Tim wrote: "So a blanket statement like "it all has strings attached" is not true in all cases. Forgive me. I do things like that now and again. I know that Jimmy Carter's aid organisation has almost entirely ..."
Very glad to hear about Carter's organization almost eradicating Guinea Worm. I think a lot has been done with malaria, but I'm not sure. I had no idea the AIDS funded initiatives had to be church-led and focus on abstinence. I remember hearing talk on the news here about having more abstinence programs ... here ... and having more church run charity programs. However, I thought that was general talk and thought it dealt with things in the US. I had no idea AIDS funding for Africa had such provisos.
Our news doesn't always give an accurate picture. And, often, they spend more time on celebs, cooking and gadgets. That's why I make it a point to read online papers from other countries. However, when I do, I'm usually reading other stories ... looking for other things. I don't tend to focus on charities. And, truthfully, I don't tend to focus on Africa.
I'm glad you're taking part in this discussion, Tim. It's reminding me that there's a HUGE continent called "Africa" ... and I need to keep Africa in mind. Don't get me wrong. I didn't forget that it exists. It's just .... I tend to focus other things, like Iraq and Afghanistan, China, Russia, and economic issues in Europe. This is prompting me to broaden my focus. And, I think that's a very good thing. So ... thanks.
cs wrote: "I changed the word discovered to 'found' but it seems that nothing less than 'invaded' would have pleased you..."Did it occur to you that might be because 'invaded' is the most accurate description? Same for your new example, the Maoris.
cs wrote: "In Europe history tells us that America was discovered, you did not just suggest another word to complete the sentence as I asked, you made it clear how offended you were, to the extent that many jumped on the bandwaggon and some posts further down, Hitler manager to find his way into the debate. At that moment a line was crossed and I ended my part in the debate"Maybe because the winner writes the history? And as the person who introduced hitler to that discussion, I did point out I was risking Godwin's law, but i felt it relevant that as the believer's go-to-man on the 'evils of atheism', even though he wasn't an atheist, you mug be interested in his opinion on the 'discovery' of America, and how the 'discoverers' dealt with the fact that they weren't the first ones there....
Cerebus wrote: "Shannon wrote: "But, I'm not Catholic, and it's not my business..."Ah but it is, human rights, equality for women, is everyone's business.....we need to make sure we don't fall into moral relativi..."
I do get what you mean, Cerebus. I really do. Personally, I think women and men are equal and women should have equal rights. We have several female pastors in my area. Sometimes people in the community speak out against them, not personally but due to their being women. When I've heard that kind of talk, I've engaged in the conversation ... attempted to challenge their thinking and shared my views.
I'm aware of female circumcision and barbaric might not even cover it.
However ....
Here's my struggle. And, I could be in the wrong. I just don't know. The thing is, having mixed ancestry and being a descendent of people who were deemed "immoral" and heathen by another group of people, I tend to be very leery of this .... Perhaps that's a blind-spot for me. I'm so concerned about rights and not taking away the rights of others, as was done to my ancestors, that I'm not standing up for the rights of certain people.
I just don't know. As I said, it's a struggle, I know it's an issue for me, and I haven't necessarily found a balance between respecting other cultures and believing it's not my business and standing for their rights as a group of people to decide their own course ... and when that might ... might not support the rights of some who are struggling in that culture.
For me, well.... This is an issue that has a lot of gray areas, and I definitely don't have all the answers.
I do get what you mean, Cerebus. I really do. Personally, I think women and men are equal and women should have equal rights. We have several female pastors in my area. Sometimes people in the community speak out against them, not personally but due to their being women. When I've heard that kind of talk, I've engaged in the conversation ... attempted to challenge their thinking and shared my views.
I'm aware of female circumcision and barbaric might not even cover it.
However ....
Here's my struggle. And, I could be in the wrong. I just don't know. The thing is, having mixed ancestry and being a descendent of people who were deemed "immoral" and heathen by another group of people, I tend to be very leery of this .... Perhaps that's a blind-spot for me. I'm so concerned about rights and not taking away the rights of others, as was done to my ancestors, that I'm not standing up for the rights of certain people.
I just don't know. As I said, it's a struggle, I know it's an issue for me, and I haven't necessarily found a balance between respecting other cultures and believing it's not my business and standing for their rights as a group of people to decide their own course ... and when that might ... might not support the rights of some who are struggling in that culture.
For me, well.... This is an issue that has a lot of gray areas, and I definitely don't have all the answers.
Tim wrote: " Forgive my outpourings last night. I was drunk as a lord. Still, no typos though. I'm surprised. ..."Hey, don't apologise, it was a good post :)
cs wrote: "I do tend to see through it..."Much as we see through your Interminable trolling?
Shannon wrote: "I tend to be very leery of this .... "I can understand that, and I have felt the same, but what it comes down to is, I'm not forcing anyone to change their culture or beliefs, but in the same way religion does not have a protected position, neither do cultural practices....if I am the only one speaking up about something, then I may well be wrong, but I still have the right to speak up. If lots of people speak up on a subject like female circumcision made things will change, but nothing will change if we sit back and say "it's not my culture, I can't express an opinion". At the end of the day if a cultural practice is morally acceptable it should stand up to scrutiny, if it cannot stand up to scrutiny it should not be protected as being "someone else's culture" and therefore beyond scrutiny.
Shannon wrote: "Tim wrote: "systematically colonised, somewhat brutally too. There is no other way of saying it. Read Bury My Heart at Wounded..."That's a great book! Thanks for putting it out there. :)
..."
I third the recommendation.....excellent book.....
cs wrote: "Can you prove that not to be the case, then...."Troll.
cs wrote: "Is that not arrogance to assume that every one of the same religion has to follow it 100% the same way. If a person disagrees with some aspects of their religion that does not mean they believe in a different version of that religion at all. ..."But how do you choose which parts to believe? What strikes me as arrogance is you believe in a deity, and what he says in his holy book.....but only some parts of that book. You choose to disregard others, based on what? Your own opinions? Now *that* is arrogance.....I believe in a god, but I'm free to ignore the bits I don't like.....
Maria wrote: "Then they cannot call themselves a member of that particular religion. They can truthfully say they believe SOME of what a particular religion teaches, but unless you go with the whole tamale, you can't say you are a member. Sorry. ..."Do you go the whole tamale Maria?
Shannon wrote: As I said, Hazel, it could be done ... but it's not done. So, unless and until others in the community start feeding the hungry, etc..., the fact that secular groups COULD do it means less than nothing. Children will still go hungry. The elderly will still go hungry. Why? Because could means a hill of beans. Do they, is the question? At this point, in my area, they do not. t..."Some of the biggest charities are secular....oxfam and Médecins Sans Frontières are two that spring immediately to mind....
cs wrote: "It was a comfort in that it allowed people to believe in an afterlife, it gave then a meaning to life and a set of morals to follow. ..."So once again you are saying, moral for a reward?
Right, think I'm caught up :)
Without religion, hands down. I started out as a "heathen", became a born again Christian and now I realize that religion can take the joy out of anything and ruin a person's connection with the universe while putting nothing toward self knowledge or healthy growth in its place. Or to paraphrase John D MacDonald, if the doctrine requires a march to see the sunset, you might as well not see it.
Cerebus wrote: "Some of the biggest charities are secular....oxfam and Médecins Sans Frontières are two that spring immediately to mind.... "
I am aware of that. Here's the thing, though. Those groups don't put on free dinners to feed hungry people in small towns in America. And, there are hungry people here. The people who put on weekly free dinners here, I'll even just keep it to my town, are people who do it through their churches.
So, while there are a TON of secular groups who do amazingly good works, they do not feed the hungry in my town. Period. Could they? When talking Oxfam, etc..., I don't believe that's their focus, feeding people in towns in America. Not so much. Could secular groups in this town do it? Yes. Do they? No.
So .... The fact that this, free dinners in my community, is something that could be outsourced to a secular organization means less than nothing to the hungry people who go to the churches for two free meals a week. The secular groups are not doing it. The churches are doing it. And, the churches and/or church members who do this are making a difference in their lives and are supporting the community.
So, in regard to Gary's paragraph on community support, my point was ... you're missing something. Speaking from personal experience, as I mentioned, local churches and local church goers actually do support the community. They support the community by putting on at least one, if not two, free dinners each and every week.
Remember, Gary was sharing that he's no longer convinced that there are "pros" when it comes to religion. One of his comments dealt with community support. It read ...
"Community support can be sourced by mutual respect and the desire for the community to provide an environment that all the people benefit from. The only role religion would seem to play in this would be as the ultimate threat to enforce the community's values on all. However, that is no more moral and no more community building than living under the gun of a dictator. Further, religion and belief then tends to make schisms between disparate communities that quickly become insurmountable because each sides convictions become inoculated against rational discourse and compromise."
I'm saying, yes, we can talk until the cows come home about the problems within organized religions. However, everyday churches in everyday communities do a lot to support their communities.
Really, truly, do you believe the only thing religion, take it to the practical ... churches in communities, do to support their communities is to serve as a threat? Come on?!
I gave an example of churches supporting their community ... beyond being akin to dictators with guns.
Come on, people .... Bias is showing if we go to this extreme. Seriously.
And, if secular groups want to start putting on free dinners here on a weekly basis, every week ... every month, hey, I'm all for that.
I'll let you know in a week, in a month, in a year, in five ... if they do.
I am aware of that. Here's the thing, though. Those groups don't put on free dinners to feed hungry people in small towns in America. And, there are hungry people here. The people who put on weekly free dinners here, I'll even just keep it to my town, are people who do it through their churches.
So, while there are a TON of secular groups who do amazingly good works, they do not feed the hungry in my town. Period. Could they? When talking Oxfam, etc..., I don't believe that's their focus, feeding people in towns in America. Not so much. Could secular groups in this town do it? Yes. Do they? No.
So .... The fact that this, free dinners in my community, is something that could be outsourced to a secular organization means less than nothing to the hungry people who go to the churches for two free meals a week. The secular groups are not doing it. The churches are doing it. And, the churches and/or church members who do this are making a difference in their lives and are supporting the community.
So, in regard to Gary's paragraph on community support, my point was ... you're missing something. Speaking from personal experience, as I mentioned, local churches and local church goers actually do support the community. They support the community by putting on at least one, if not two, free dinners each and every week.
Remember, Gary was sharing that he's no longer convinced that there are "pros" when it comes to religion. One of his comments dealt with community support. It read ...
"Community support can be sourced by mutual respect and the desire for the community to provide an environment that all the people benefit from. The only role religion would seem to play in this would be as the ultimate threat to enforce the community's values on all. However, that is no more moral and no more community building than living under the gun of a dictator. Further, religion and belief then tends to make schisms between disparate communities that quickly become insurmountable because each sides convictions become inoculated against rational discourse and compromise."
I'm saying, yes, we can talk until the cows come home about the problems within organized religions. However, everyday churches in everyday communities do a lot to support their communities.
Really, truly, do you believe the only thing religion, take it to the practical ... churches in communities, do to support their communities is to serve as a threat? Come on?!
I gave an example of churches supporting their community ... beyond being akin to dictators with guns.
Come on, people .... Bias is showing if we go to this extreme. Seriously.
And, if secular groups want to start putting on free dinners here on a weekly basis, every week ... every month, hey, I'm all for that.
I'll let you know in a week, in a month, in a year, in five ... if they do.
Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "Is that not arrogance to assume that every one of the same religion has to follow it 100% the same way. If a person disagrees with some aspects of their religion that does not mean they ..."That has always been a head scratcher.
'This book is the word of god!'
"What about this part?'
"Oh., nobody pays attention to that bit.'
god must be sitting at his desk thinking 'why'd I bother to write it all down?'
Shannon wrote: "And, if secular groups want to start putting on free dinners here on a weekly basis, every week ... every month, hey, I'm all for that."They do it someone's neighbourhood, if not yours, equally valid.
You are I assume, absolutely positive that secular charities aren't operating in your area?
Is it a statistical thing percentagewise in small town America in which the theistic population outweighs the atheistic?
Shanna wrote: "You are I assume, absolutely positive that secular charities aren't operating in your area?"
By operating, do you mean cooking and offering free dinners each week?
By operating, do you mean cooking and offering free dinners each week?
Shannon wrote: "Shanna wrote: "You are I assume, absolutely positive that secular charities aren't operating in your area?"By operating, do you mean cooking and offering free dinners each week?"
Yes, and clothing and housing, medical treatment ect. You talk about food but perhaps they might see this need is already been taken care of, and are attending other needs.
Okay .... I've seen and heard about free dinners at the churches. But, I didn't know all the in's and out's. So, I just did a little research.
I learned some things. Did I learn that churches aren't supporting this town through putting on free dinners? No.
I learned that there is a free dinner here or the town over five nights a week, every week. I've seen the signs at the Baptist church for their weekly dinner because I sometimes drive by it. I've heard about the dinners at the United Methodist Church. When I went from time to time years ago, they put on the dinners once a month. Now, they do it once a week.
I also learned the churches do this with a community services center of sorts ... thrift store and food bank. I wasn't aware of that. Here's the information on the dinners ... I've taken out specific names and addresses ...
Mondays:
---- Senior Center on --- and --- Episcopal Church on ---
Tuesdays:
---- Church on ---
Wednesdays:
---- Episcopal Church on ---
Thursdays:
---- Church on ---
Fridays:
United Methodist Church ---
Now, who funds this community services center of sorts ...?
Their site states they are not state or federally funded; they say they're funded through generous donors and sales at their thrift stores.
No other free dinners came up.
From what I can gather, secular and religious come together in order to support the poor, through free dinners, of our community. The secular center provides the food, funded by donations, and the area churches and their members host the dinner, make the dinner, serve the people and clean up afterward. One dinner is held at one senior center one day a week. But, the churches take a huge part in making it happen five days a week.
I'm actually very glad to find out that a secular organization can work with churches in order to serve the community. And, I'm thrilled that these dinners happen five nights a week.
Does the fact that a secular organization provides the food for the dinners detract from the service the churches and church members provide for the community? In my mind, no.
If, tomorrow, the churches said they'd never hold another dinner, would the dinners continue? Would secular organizations make and host these dinners as the churches have? Honestly? I don't know.
I do know this. Churches in my town support this community by making and serving and hosting these dinners. They don't just serve as a threat ... a dictator with a gun. They, every single week, serve the hungry here. That's a huge commitment. It's a good thing. And, it goes toward supporting the community and building a supportive community.
I learned some things. Did I learn that churches aren't supporting this town through putting on free dinners? No.
I learned that there is a free dinner here or the town over five nights a week, every week. I've seen the signs at the Baptist church for their weekly dinner because I sometimes drive by it. I've heard about the dinners at the United Methodist Church. When I went from time to time years ago, they put on the dinners once a month. Now, they do it once a week.
I also learned the churches do this with a community services center of sorts ... thrift store and food bank. I wasn't aware of that. Here's the information on the dinners ... I've taken out specific names and addresses ...
Mondays:
---- Senior Center on --- and --- Episcopal Church on ---
Tuesdays:
---- Church on ---
Wednesdays:
---- Episcopal Church on ---
Thursdays:
---- Church on ---
Fridays:
United Methodist Church ---
Now, who funds this community services center of sorts ...?
Their site states they are not state or federally funded; they say they're funded through generous donors and sales at their thrift stores.
No other free dinners came up.
From what I can gather, secular and religious come together in order to support the poor, through free dinners, of our community. The secular center provides the food, funded by donations, and the area churches and their members host the dinner, make the dinner, serve the people and clean up afterward. One dinner is held at one senior center one day a week. But, the churches take a huge part in making it happen five days a week.
I'm actually very glad to find out that a secular organization can work with churches in order to serve the community. And, I'm thrilled that these dinners happen five nights a week.
Does the fact that a secular organization provides the food for the dinners detract from the service the churches and church members provide for the community? In my mind, no.
If, tomorrow, the churches said they'd never hold another dinner, would the dinners continue? Would secular organizations make and host these dinners as the churches have? Honestly? I don't know.
I do know this. Churches in my town support this community by making and serving and hosting these dinners. They don't just serve as a threat ... a dictator with a gun. They, every single week, serve the hungry here. That's a huge commitment. It's a good thing. And, it goes toward supporting the community and building a supportive community.
That sounds like a really good co-operative venture :D
cs wrote: "It was a comfort in that it allowed people to believe in an afterlife, it gave then a meaning to life and a set of morals to follow."Is it a meaning to life if it isn't true? Not all religions can be true therefore the majority of people have a meaning to life that is wrong.
And those morals you mention are not necessarily good morals.
cs wrote: "You need to elaborate."
Homosexuals afraid of hellfire for their feelings, those who have abused their children for fear of them being possessed by demons or actually enjoying sex when they grow up.
cs wrote: "No not at all like that unless Russell claim to be the son of God?"
Erm. No. Russell's teapot is an example. Russell said that there was a teapot floating between Mars and Jupiter that was too small to be seen in the most powerful telescopes. Now if you cannot prove that teapot doesn't exist does that mean you should believe it is there?
cs wrote: "Again you are not able to separate religion and god."
Again you are having trouble with English. Please read replies. Religion is the "belief" in an idea of some kind. Therefore belief in god is religion. Belief in "the Force" is also a religion, without a god. You can have religion without god but not god without religion. (Unless you can independently confirm the existence of god at which point there is no need to believe in him).
cs wrote: "That is a separate question but, Hawking has suggested that there was never nothing, there was always something, as an answer to what caused the big bang. Following that logic it is not unreasonable to assume that the ‘always something’ is God."
You really shouldn't quote Hawking to an Astrophysicist. Hawking's point was at a speech where he proposed that there might not need to be a point of creation and therefore no need for a "creator". It is hard to summarise, but the short version is that time began at the same time as space, so there is no "time" for something to exist to create the universe because without time there is no "before".
And why does your natural assumption that "something" is a "person" other than religious dogma?
cs wrote: "God created the universe and until science can produce a better explanation it is unreasonable to rule god out."
Replace "God" with the word "Magic" (or Saturn, or the High Programmer, or "the Force"). By your logic it is unreasonable to put "god" over any other explanation.
In the meantime science is looking for an answer, not just assuming it was miraculous.
cs wrote: "So the jury is still out on that one."
Exactly. Which is why saying the answer is "god" before you finish the 'trial' is an injustice.
cs wrote: "‘Science’ is hoping to contact alien life"
No. Science isn't. Science isn't a person or a force. People hope to contact alien life, some of those people are scientists.
cs wrote: "we will grow to be as advanced as these aliens are now, but we can’t get our heads round having a soul…or at least some can’t. "
Arrogance again? Yet you avoid answering my points about the soul. Again.
Since the soul is an ancient idea (in fact the Egyptians assumed you had 9 different types of soul). It seems that you cannot "get your head around" that old superstitious ideas involving magic and mysticism may be wrong. If you believe differently then please at least try to answer the points made.
Gary wrote: Is it a meaning to life if it isn't true? Not all religions can be true therefore the majority of people have a meaning to life that is wrong.Yes it can be. And who is to say that it is not true. All you are doing is putting your own percentage rating on the outcome.
Homosexuals afraid of hellfire for their feelings….
How many frightened of hellfire Homosexuals do you know?
Russell's teapot is an example
Yes I get that, but Christians have a starting point be way of Jesus, which to them is proof enough. The teapot is no where close to being a credible example.
Religion is the "belief
You are unable to separate the two.
You really shouldn't quote Hawking to an Astrophysicist
I don’t know any Astrophysicists.
No. Science isn't. Science isn't a person or a force
Now you are being pedantic. When atheists on this forum say they will only believe in a god when science proves that there is a god should they also be corrected for confusing ‘science’ with people?
Arrogance again
Arrogance, if that is what it is, it can be a two sided coin. If there is life after death regardless of whether there is a god or not, the use of the word ‘soul’ or ‘spirit’ is only a way of showing that in some way we carry on. I could have put ‘x’ in place of soul but why confuse the issue.
In regard to this debate about charitable works, I would like to once again quote Trevor, an atheist from Melbourbe, who writes the coolest stuff I've yet found on this site: "Give me a Christian who cares about social justice over an atheist dog-eat-dog economic rationalist any day."
Shanna wrote: "Yes, and clothing and housing, medical treatment ect. You talk about food but perhaps they might see this need is already been taken care of, and are attending other needs...."
Didn't see this until now, Shanna. I answered with regard to the dinners. Before I go into the other, to be clear, my point wasn't that secular groups do nothing to support the community. Not sure why it seems to be going down that road. Maybe the idea of outsourcing. I don't know. I know secular organizations provide support. My point was the fact that local churches support the community, specifically, they support my community through things like free dinners.
So, I've been doing some research in order to answer your question. I knew there was a homeless shelter near here ... a town or so over. It serves this entire area. While I knew about it, everyone here does, I didn't know much about it. Secular or religious? No clue.
Well, I just read their website. Religious, I think. Several years back, it said, clergy and members of the Episcopal churches in the area started talking about opening a shelter. The site continued that they wanted it to be an ecumenical venture and reached out to the other churches in the area, including the Catholic and United Methodist Churches.
Now, I'm a bit confused because, while it says it was started by the churches in the area, it also says it's a "non-profit and private organization" .... If it's a private organization, does that mean the local churches are still the force behind the shelter or not? I don't know. I looked at the staff directory and board of directors listings. Nothing said Pastor This or Father That. The board looks to be made up of business people in the community, for the most part. Are they also members of these churches? I just don't know.
I didn't see anything in their mission statement and vision regarding religion. They talked about welcoming all people and treating them as equals and working with them in order to help them achieve independence.
To my knowledge, this is the only homeless shelter in the area, with the exception of the shelter for abused, well, usually women. I've not looked into whether or not that is secular or religious. However, I'd bet my last dollar on the fact that they're secular, which might be quite a gamble since I didn't know the homeless shelter was religious ... at least at its founding.
Also, to my knowledge, this is one of the only places here to give away free clothing. Some drop off used clothing here. Others drop their clothing off at the community services center of sorts that I mentioned earlier. They run a thrift store, but they sell their clothing and don't give it away. I'm also aware of a Salvation Army near here. Do they give away clothing or sell it? I don't know. Are they secular or religious? I don't know. I think religious. Let me check ...
Well, I just found out it's National Donut Day ... on their site, which is either mind-blowing or mind-numbing. I can't decide. And, I also found that, as I thought, they are religious.
We have a couple other thrift stores where people sell old clothing on consignment; they're privately run as businesses.
Of course, some get money from the government for housing and food ... money procured through taxes. And, we have a WIC program that gives milk, eggs (I think), cheese, and cereal to needy families with babies and small children. Now, I don't know. I think that's sponsored either by the state or .... Let me check. I truly don't know. But, my feeling is ... state. Hold on. Yes, Department of Health.
Regarding medical .... Dr. Dynasaur, no, I didn't spell that wrong, is low cost or free medical insurance for children under 18. That's run by the state ... one of the state's. I'm on the border of two. The other doesn't have that program. I'm not sure if they have a similar program. Just looked. Yes, it's called Healthy Kids.
Also, to my knowledge, our hospitals can't turn people away who go to the ER ... but I suppose that's another story.
There's a place near here, supported by the community, both secular and religious, that houses children and their families ... children who are undergoing medical treatment for long periods of time. The parents can stay there overnight and get hot meals at dinner while their children are being treated. I don't believe there are major religious ties. I just went to their website and couldn't find anything like that. But, they have a lot of fundraisers and such. I'm sure religious and non-religious people support this particular good work.
I don't know if I've missed anything or not. I'm fairly certain I've not missed anything big. Now, this is not for the entire state ... or both states ... or New England ... or the country. This pertains to my town and the surrounding towns.
I know there have to be other things, most likely. For example, I know the Lutheran churches, well, church ladies, make quilts each month. Those go ... I don't know where. I know I see advertisements once and awhile. It's open to anyone who wants to go and help. I went once, not that I really know how to sew quilts. But, I tied them for a few hours. I know they told me that they go to needy people throughout the world. Are there strings attached? I've no idea.
Are there secular organizations who do similar things? Well, maybe not quilts, but .... Probably. There are all of the lodges ... Moose, Elks, etc.... Are those secular or religious? I know they have bars. So, I'm guessing ... well ... maybe I shouldn't guess. They tend to have scholarships for local kids to carry on with their schooling, etc....
Students from a local college, not a religious college, do volunteer work in local schools. So, that's a form of secular volunteerism that happens here.
Oh, you know ... there's a home for "unwed" mothers near here. Hold on. Okay. Just checked their site. They can house six mothers at a time. They offer housing, counseling, education on parenting, and help in attaining a GED. From what I can gather, they're secular, funded through fundraising and grants.
That's what I know.
Again, my point was to say ... local churches and church members do good works and support their communities. Other groups and people do, too. But, I was responding to a post that left out, in my opinion, good that is done by churches in local communities.
Didn't see this until now, Shanna. I answered with regard to the dinners. Before I go into the other, to be clear, my point wasn't that secular groups do nothing to support the community. Not sure why it seems to be going down that road. Maybe the idea of outsourcing. I don't know. I know secular organizations provide support. My point was the fact that local churches support the community, specifically, they support my community through things like free dinners.
So, I've been doing some research in order to answer your question. I knew there was a homeless shelter near here ... a town or so over. It serves this entire area. While I knew about it, everyone here does, I didn't know much about it. Secular or religious? No clue.
Well, I just read their website. Religious, I think. Several years back, it said, clergy and members of the Episcopal churches in the area started talking about opening a shelter. The site continued that they wanted it to be an ecumenical venture and reached out to the other churches in the area, including the Catholic and United Methodist Churches.
Now, I'm a bit confused because, while it says it was started by the churches in the area, it also says it's a "non-profit and private organization" .... If it's a private organization, does that mean the local churches are still the force behind the shelter or not? I don't know. I looked at the staff directory and board of directors listings. Nothing said Pastor This or Father That. The board looks to be made up of business people in the community, for the most part. Are they also members of these churches? I just don't know.
I didn't see anything in their mission statement and vision regarding religion. They talked about welcoming all people and treating them as equals and working with them in order to help them achieve independence.
To my knowledge, this is the only homeless shelter in the area, with the exception of the shelter for abused, well, usually women. I've not looked into whether or not that is secular or religious. However, I'd bet my last dollar on the fact that they're secular, which might be quite a gamble since I didn't know the homeless shelter was religious ... at least at its founding.
Also, to my knowledge, this is one of the only places here to give away free clothing. Some drop off used clothing here. Others drop their clothing off at the community services center of sorts that I mentioned earlier. They run a thrift store, but they sell their clothing and don't give it away. I'm also aware of a Salvation Army near here. Do they give away clothing or sell it? I don't know. Are they secular or religious? I don't know. I think religious. Let me check ...
Well, I just found out it's National Donut Day ... on their site, which is either mind-blowing or mind-numbing. I can't decide. And, I also found that, as I thought, they are religious.
We have a couple other thrift stores where people sell old clothing on consignment; they're privately run as businesses.
Of course, some get money from the government for housing and food ... money procured through taxes. And, we have a WIC program that gives milk, eggs (I think), cheese, and cereal to needy families with babies and small children. Now, I don't know. I think that's sponsored either by the state or .... Let me check. I truly don't know. But, my feeling is ... state. Hold on. Yes, Department of Health.
Regarding medical .... Dr. Dynasaur, no, I didn't spell that wrong, is low cost or free medical insurance for children under 18. That's run by the state ... one of the state's. I'm on the border of two. The other doesn't have that program. I'm not sure if they have a similar program. Just looked. Yes, it's called Healthy Kids.
Also, to my knowledge, our hospitals can't turn people away who go to the ER ... but I suppose that's another story.
There's a place near here, supported by the community, both secular and religious, that houses children and their families ... children who are undergoing medical treatment for long periods of time. The parents can stay there overnight and get hot meals at dinner while their children are being treated. I don't believe there are major religious ties. I just went to their website and couldn't find anything like that. But, they have a lot of fundraisers and such. I'm sure religious and non-religious people support this particular good work.
I don't know if I've missed anything or not. I'm fairly certain I've not missed anything big. Now, this is not for the entire state ... or both states ... or New England ... or the country. This pertains to my town and the surrounding towns.
I know there have to be other things, most likely. For example, I know the Lutheran churches, well, church ladies, make quilts each month. Those go ... I don't know where. I know I see advertisements once and awhile. It's open to anyone who wants to go and help. I went once, not that I really know how to sew quilts. But, I tied them for a few hours. I know they told me that they go to needy people throughout the world. Are there strings attached? I've no idea.
Are there secular organizations who do similar things? Well, maybe not quilts, but .... Probably. There are all of the lodges ... Moose, Elks, etc.... Are those secular or religious? I know they have bars. So, I'm guessing ... well ... maybe I shouldn't guess. They tend to have scholarships for local kids to carry on with their schooling, etc....
Students from a local college, not a religious college, do volunteer work in local schools. So, that's a form of secular volunteerism that happens here.
Oh, you know ... there's a home for "unwed" mothers near here. Hold on. Okay. Just checked their site. They can house six mothers at a time. They offer housing, counseling, education on parenting, and help in attaining a GED. From what I can gather, they're secular, funded through fundraising and grants.
That's what I know.
Again, my point was to say ... local churches and church members do good works and support their communities. Other groups and people do, too. But, I was responding to a post that left out, in my opinion, good that is done by churches in local communities.
Shannon wrote: "Not sure why it seems to be going down that road"Here's why
Shannon wrote: "Here, you're assured a free meal twice a week at one of the churches. I've honestly not seen that offered by anyone else."
Shannon wrote: "As I said, Hazel, it could be done ... but it's not done. So, unless and until others in the community start feeding the hungry, etc..., the fact that secular groups COULD do it means less than nothing. Children will still go hungry. The elderly will still go hungry. Why? Because could means a hill of beans. Do they, is the question? At this point, in my area, they do not."
Shannon wrote: "But, the fact remains that only the local churches do this ... here. No one else. Period.
Thanks Shannon for doing all that research, that was a lot of work. It sounds like a lot of charity both secular and religious is happening in your area. Somehow it's never enough is it...
Shanna wrote: "Shannon wrote: "Not sure why it seems to be going down that road"
Here's why
Shannon wrote: "Here, you're assured a free meal twice a week at one of the churches. I've honestly not seen that off..."
Ah ....
One thing that's not being addressed is the statement that I was addressing.
And ...
My entire statement was,
"Before I go into the other, to be clear, my point wasn't that secular groups do nothing to support the community. Not sure why it seems to be going down that road."
In addition, in the quotes you've taken, I was addressing free dinners in the community. I don't believe I ever said anything to lead anyone to believe I meant ... only churches serve the community. In general. In every way. Did I? I'm sure I didn't.
Yet, for some reason, it's going down that road ... people thinking when I addressed Gary about churches supporting communities and listing a personal example from my community, free dinners, ... people, for some reason, began assuming ... leaping to the conclusion that .... What?
I wasn't talking about free dinners? I was talking about everything? I think I was pretty clear ... other than addressing that email only to Hazel when I was thinking about Gary's paragraph on churches supporting the community by acting as a threat and other posts I've seen here in the past... And, I've been very clear in all posts since. In fact, I've tried to clear it up over and over again. Yet, for some reason, I don't know why ... it seems that I've not been clear enough. So ...
;)
I'll do it one more time. There are a TON of secular organizations who do good works. Period. A TON! I have supported some of these organizations, like the Red Cross. I think they do amazing work.
There are also local churches and members of local churches who do good works. LOTS. Maybe even a ton. In my community, they host free dinners. I don't see secular organizations hosting free dinners. I see churches doing it. This is a good thing. It supports the community.
Now, all of this research was an education for me. I found out a lot of information about my community, including the fact that, while the churches are the ones who make and serve and hold the dinners, I was partly wrong ... in that, there is a secular aspect ... supplying the food, if not the building, electricity, cooks, plates, utensils, servers and cleaners.
I'll also say when I'm wrong. While I see the local churches doing it, no one else, period, I didn't see the whole picture. I wasn't aware of the secular group who supplied the food. ;) In truth, I don't mind that I was wrong or have a problem saying it. I'm actually quite glad that the two, both secular and religious, are working together in this way. I'm proud to be a member of this community. I was before, but I'm even more so now.
Now, is anyone ... other than Hazel and Tim ... willing to say, at least, that local churches and church members do good works that support their local communities?
Here's why
Shannon wrote: "Here, you're assured a free meal twice a week at one of the churches. I've honestly not seen that off..."
Ah ....
One thing that's not being addressed is the statement that I was addressing.
And ...
My entire statement was,
"Before I go into the other, to be clear, my point wasn't that secular groups do nothing to support the community. Not sure why it seems to be going down that road."
In addition, in the quotes you've taken, I was addressing free dinners in the community. I don't believe I ever said anything to lead anyone to believe I meant ... only churches serve the community. In general. In every way. Did I? I'm sure I didn't.
Yet, for some reason, it's going down that road ... people thinking when I addressed Gary about churches supporting communities and listing a personal example from my community, free dinners, ... people, for some reason, began assuming ... leaping to the conclusion that .... What?
I wasn't talking about free dinners? I was talking about everything? I think I was pretty clear ... other than addressing that email only to Hazel when I was thinking about Gary's paragraph on churches supporting the community by acting as a threat and other posts I've seen here in the past... And, I've been very clear in all posts since. In fact, I've tried to clear it up over and over again. Yet, for some reason, I don't know why ... it seems that I've not been clear enough. So ...
;)
I'll do it one more time. There are a TON of secular organizations who do good works. Period. A TON! I have supported some of these organizations, like the Red Cross. I think they do amazing work.
There are also local churches and members of local churches who do good works. LOTS. Maybe even a ton. In my community, they host free dinners. I don't see secular organizations hosting free dinners. I see churches doing it. This is a good thing. It supports the community.
Now, all of this research was an education for me. I found out a lot of information about my community, including the fact that, while the churches are the ones who make and serve and hold the dinners, I was partly wrong ... in that, there is a secular aspect ... supplying the food, if not the building, electricity, cooks, plates, utensils, servers and cleaners.
I'll also say when I'm wrong. While I see the local churches doing it, no one else, period, I didn't see the whole picture. I wasn't aware of the secular group who supplied the food. ;) In truth, I don't mind that I was wrong or have a problem saying it. I'm actually quite glad that the two, both secular and religious, are working together in this way. I'm proud to be a member of this community. I was before, but I'm even more so now.
Now, is anyone ... other than Hazel and Tim ... willing to say, at least, that local churches and church members do good works that support their local communities?
In addition ....
If I were an atheist who constantly had to deal with people, on the street and on this thread, who claim that atheists are immoral and only believers have morals, I'd likely have knee-jerk reactions, too.
We all know I have some knee-jerk reactions myself. In fact, I had one just this week at work. I called my mother and started to tell her and she said, "OH.... What have you gotten yourself into now? Oh, Lord!" Yeah. Guilty.
So, if that's why people assumed I meant secular organizations never ... in anyway ... do charitable works, I truly do get it. If that's it ....
If it's bias .... Well, that's a little different. If it were that, I'd ask a question. My question would be .... Why is it so important to some to believe that no good could come from religion ... that churches don't support their communities? Why is it so important to hold onto that notion? Out of respect, I won't say belief.
Just wanted to take a moment to explain what was going on in my head.
If I were an atheist who constantly had to deal with people, on the street and on this thread, who claim that atheists are immoral and only believers have morals, I'd likely have knee-jerk reactions, too.
We all know I have some knee-jerk reactions myself. In fact, I had one just this week at work. I called my mother and started to tell her and she said, "OH.... What have you gotten yourself into now? Oh, Lord!" Yeah. Guilty.
So, if that's why people assumed I meant secular organizations never ... in anyway ... do charitable works, I truly do get it. If that's it ....
If it's bias .... Well, that's a little different. If it were that, I'd ask a question. My question would be .... Why is it so important to some to believe that no good could come from religion ... that churches don't support their communities? Why is it so important to hold onto that notion? Out of respect, I won't say belief.
Just wanted to take a moment to explain what was going on in my head.
Oh yeah I'm willing to concede that on a grassroots, individual congregation basis people are getting meals that might not have had, and do good stuff. But your original point was that in your area But, the fact remains that only the local churches do this ... here. No one else. Period.
You've discovered thats not true it seems to be a co-operative effort, which you and doubtless others have credited only the churches with. The other bugbear I have it that religion claims a moral high ground and while individual members and congragations do good works, collectively massive wealth is accumulated and spent on mega churches and luxuries for the leading members while their needy congregants and others get one meal a week all while claiming moral superiority
Shanna wrote: "But your original point was that in your area But, the fact remains that only the local churches do this ... here. No one else. Period."
With regard to dinners, Shanna, not everything ....
Regarding hypocrisy and the wealth of many (not all) religions, I'm also disgusted.
With regard to dinners, Shanna, not everything ....
Regarding hypocrisy and the wealth of many (not all) religions, I'm also disgusted.
Thats an amazing amount of digging around you did, Shanna. Very interesting. It reminds me of a really great book I read on your country called Chasing the Red White and Blue, by a David Cohen, a South African now living in London. 
Cohen follows the exact journey of Alexis de Toucqville in his famous journey through America in the early 1800s, I think it was.
He wants to know: does America still hold to the principles de Toucqville outlined that made it a model to the world at the time, namely, the persuit of enlightened self-interest, rather than simply the pursuit of narrow self-interest, in other words, if my fellow Americans are living in poverty, that is bad, and makes me, in a sense, poorer too.
What Cohen finds is fascinating, and he devotes a chunk of the book into looking at how churches, in the light of Bush's doctrine of 'compassionate conservatism', are going about taking on the task of caring for the poor, now that the state no longer wants to do it, and feels churches should.
Cohen finds that the evangelical churches do not have the slightest interest in doing anything of the kind. One mega church he comes across has a long list of 50 things that they have prioritised as their mission on earth. Caring for the poor does not even make the list, and time and again, he gets told that if the poor simply give their hearts to Jesus, their lot in life will magically improve.
The major differences were the Catholics and the Methodists, and Cohen came across many examples of people from these churches working in remote areas with poverty one usually only finds in Africa, and doing wonderful things against huge odds.
It led me to finally and conclusively decide that Fundamentalist Christianity is a terrible evil, run by the most awful people you are likely to meet, out not only to line their own pockets, but also to instill in their flocks terrible hatred of homosexuals, liberals, atheists, blasphemers and the like. Basically a whole massive segment of their fellow Americans are turned into an enemy to be destroyed if they do not convert.
I read several other books on these awful, dreadful belief systems and I now firmly believe this segment of America to be the most dangerous people on earth. I think if they were to ever run America we would embark on a road that would make World War II look like a picnic.
Not me :-) Shannon... and yep it certainly was :-))
Tim wrote: "Thats an amazing amount of digging around you did, Shanna. Very interesting. It reminds me of a really great book I read on your country called Chasing the Red White and Blue, by a David Cohen, a S..."
Sounds like a really interesting book. I hadn't heard of it before. Although, given the fact that I'm in the US, that might not be surprising.
I'm also troubled by the mega churches and know others are concerned. I believe a committee in the House or the Senate is looking into whether or not funds are being misappropriated. Despite saying I don't usually read articles on charity, which is true, I did recently read an article on that. This committee had asked the leaders of various mega churches for their financial records, etc.... If I recall correctly, Joyce Meyer and someone else voluntarily turned over their information. No one else did. The reporter was wondering what the chair of the committee would do ... could he/would he force the issue. Of course, I'm also deeply troubled by the hatred that is taught by some of the evangelical preachers. Unfortunately, in my opinion, they would say they're preaching the right message ... given the fact that the Bible says .... Think homosexuality.
I'm not sure I agree that they're the most evil people on the planet, though. I've also done a lot of reading on sex slaves and sex tourism. I tend to believe those involved in that are among the most evil people who walk among us. Those you buy or kidnap the children and adults and run the sex operations and the American and European businessmen, usually businessmen from what I've read, who go and pay for the use of their bodies.
There is evil there. No doubt. Just not sure that I'd go so far as to say they're the most evil. Having said that, though, evil is evil and, in my mind and heart, one should take a stand against it.
Sounds like a really interesting book. I hadn't heard of it before. Although, given the fact that I'm in the US, that might not be surprising.
I'm also troubled by the mega churches and know others are concerned. I believe a committee in the House or the Senate is looking into whether or not funds are being misappropriated. Despite saying I don't usually read articles on charity, which is true, I did recently read an article on that. This committee had asked the leaders of various mega churches for their financial records, etc.... If I recall correctly, Joyce Meyer and someone else voluntarily turned over their information. No one else did. The reporter was wondering what the chair of the committee would do ... could he/would he force the issue. Of course, I'm also deeply troubled by the hatred that is taught by some of the evangelical preachers. Unfortunately, in my opinion, they would say they're preaching the right message ... given the fact that the Bible says .... Think homosexuality.
I'm not sure I agree that they're the most evil people on the planet, though. I've also done a lot of reading on sex slaves and sex tourism. I tend to believe those involved in that are among the most evil people who walk among us. Those you buy or kidnap the children and adults and run the sex operations and the American and European businessmen, usually businessmen from what I've read, who go and pay for the use of their bodies.
There is evil there. No doubt. Just not sure that I'd go so far as to say they're the most evil. Having said that, though, evil is evil and, in my mind and heart, one should take a stand against it.
Shannon wrote: "Tim wrote: "Thats an amazing amount of digging around you did, Shanna. Very interesting. It reminds me of a really great book I read on your country called Chasing the Red White and Blue, by a Davi..."My thing is not that religion is evil, but that because 'god told them it's okay', religious folk will savage you over faster than any group on the planet and feel justified in doing it.
Hmmm As much as I believe Religion is essential, A world without science would take us into the dark ages.. so I'm giving my vote to Science!
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
The Devil's Collection: A Cynic's Dictionary (other topics)
Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (other topics)
God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of the Bible (other topics)
The New Money System: When Your Money Fails (other topics)
More...
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
More...
Books mentioned in this topic
Vector Calculus (other topics)The Devil's Collection: A Cynic's Dictionary (other topics)
Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (other topics)
God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of the Bible (other topics)
The New Money System: When Your Money Fails (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Ray Kurzweil (other topics)Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
More...
And, while these are good people who are committed to this particular cause, I don't know that, if we woke tomorrow and all the churches went poof, they would do this work. I just don't know that."
Well obviously for the first part if a charity already exists addressing a problem then it is entirely possible that because that problem is being addressed that other altruistic will address different problems.
I also find that religious people tend to have a lot of faith in religion, but not trust in people - even religious people. I think there is good evidence that good people would still be doing good things without religion. The primary evidence being that those people ignore the parts of religion that would make them do bad things, even as you point out the urge to preach while doing good works.
Shannon wrote: "Atheists have asked believers before ... is there nothing that you'll agree with me on? Oh, those believers, closed-minded folk....
Personally I have never asked for people to agree with me blindly, all I ask is that people explain their rationale for their opinion and to consider the counterpoint if presented.
Shannon wrote: "Here's the deal. While there are problems with religion and while atheists have some valid arguments, this isn't one of them."
The point being made here is that charity is being claimed as an advantage of religion, no one is saying that religious charity doesn't happen, what is being disputed is whether it would not exist or be much less present without religion. I do not think there is evidence to support that assumption.
(I also think it is somewhat demeaning to charitable folks, especially religious ones)
Shannon wrote: "This .... This seems to be an example of ... religion is bad ... it's bad and I'll prove it at all costs. There are good things that come from, notice, please, I stressed ... not religion ... but the everyday people in everyday churches.
Agreed! The people.
It is not a case of proving that 'religion is bad' it is a questioning of whether religion offers anything that cannot be gained from other sources, for example the inherent altruism of good people and the creation of communities.
Shannon wrote: "Bias is showing through on this one, and bias doesn't do anything to support one's argument, not truly ... especially when one has other valid arguments. "
So far the bias shown is the assumption that religious people are charitable, therefore religion encourages charity. From a non-bias viewpoint all we really know is that some people attracted to religion are also attracted to charity, but this could be a factor of the person rather than the influence of the religion, especially as religion also attracts some people who are definitely not charitable to others.
In other news I have just had my hands on one of the Bibles that home secretary Gove had engraved with his title and sent out to schools. If Gove had his way it would have cost 370,000 pounds of taxpayer cash to push the beliefs of one faith on children. Fortunately the PM realised this would just further confirm the tory's elitist image. Instead Gove had to wait for a charitable donation from a tory donor to pay for them. So that is 370,000 pounds (near half a million dollars) that could have went to the poor, ill or needy.
Another irony here, the Bible is the King James 1611 version so the language and spelling at least matches the poor spelling of the average student :-)
Good rant about it all here from David Mitchell.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfr...