Study: Atheists more driven by compassion

[darareaksmey]

There was a pretty big deal in DC a couple of years ago when Catholic "charities" attempted to manipulate the government into making laws that they preferred. They threatened to stop feeding homeless people if gay marriage became legal. Now try to tell me that they were being charitable out of compassion instead of doing it to gain power and buy the laws that they want. The motivation absolutely does matter. We shouldn't have to choose between letting hungry people starve and denying marriage to couples who are in love. I'm very hesitant to give "credit" to people who help others out of religious obligation. I've done a lot of charity work and by far the explicitly religious groups have been the least pleasant to deal with.

Nope, absolutely their charitable impulse did not stem from compassion. What it did stem from is their reading of the Bible, as unChristlike as that reading is. I think it's 100% bullshit. I wonder, have they in fact stopped feeding people now that gay marriage is legal in DC? I hadn't heard that, but by all means let me know if they've cut out all charity work because of gay marriage.

I never said that Christians always do things out of compassion. I think that's the point of this thread and that study, that compassion more commonly motivates the atheist. What I did say is that if the work is getting done, *to me* it doesn't matter. Something motivates CC to keep feeding people despite gay marriage being legal in DC now. I guess the people who are hungry and are getting fed at CC can absolutely refuse to have anything to do with CC, could go get their meals elsewhere, and maybe that would send a message to CC that "we don't want your stinkin' food, you homophobes." That might be the best message CC could get! But if the people who need what they are giving don't make a choice to go elsewhere (and I'm pretty sure DC has multiple places to feed the needy)--if they aren't bugged by CC's motives, I guess I just don't feel I'm in a position to tell really needy people to support *my* position by eating elsewhere. They are the ones who get the benefit, not me, as much as I loathe homophobia.

[valsa]

I wonder, have they in fact stopped feeding people now that gay marriage is legal in DC? I hadn't heard that, but by all means let me know if they've cut out all charity work because of gay marriage.

Catholic Charities of Boston ended all their adoption services when laws changed so that they couldn't discriminate against gay couples (they were working with foster care children and receiving government funding) Catholic Charities in Illinois had their contracts with the state for foster care services ended for the same reason, and last I heard they're now trying to pass a bill so they can continue to get government funding while discriminating against gay people.

[darareaksmey]

I think it makes perfect sense. As others have said, an atheist will do the right thing because it's the right thing to do, without any expectation of reward from a spiritual being. Also, since the world's main religions have moral teachings that are tied to the faith, a religious person would be less likely to help someone who leads a lifestyle that is in conflict with his/her religious teachings. An atheist wouldn't have that kind of hang-up.

OK, I will agree with you that these things happen--the atheist will just do right while the religious person may look to moral teachings of his religion or a heavenly reward as motivation. And I'm pretty sure you'll agree that sometimes religious people do actually act out of compassion, or because things are just the right thing to do. But I still don't know how that helps quantify what the study is talking about. It seems very subjective to me.

[darareaksmey]

Catholic Charities of Boston ended all their adoption services when laws changed so that they couldn't discriminate against gay couples (they were working with foster care children and receiving government funding) Catholic Charities in Illinois had their contracts with the state for foster care services ended for the same reason, and last I heard they're now trying to pass a bill so they can continue to get government funding while discriminating against gay people.

Right. I was talking more about more basic charity work, like feeding people. They may be willing to stop facilitating placing kids with couples, but are they letting people go hungry? To me there is a difference. And believe me, CC can go suck an egg when it comes to adoption services. When DH and I were looking for a child, they refused to take us because I'm not Catholic. For the same reason a Protestant service refused to take us--because DH is Catholic. Hmmmph.

[bananacat]

Hey, all of this is pretty much sounding like No True Christian. Catholic charities have done tons of horrible things in the name of their religion and you can't claim that they just don't count because you're some authority on what a True Christian really is. Also, nobody here said that all religious charity is un-compassionate, so stop pretending that we're personally insulting you.

[emmiedahl]

Though I can't think of any offhand, I'm sure there are many, many, many historical instances of people being denied charity because they wouldn't "play ball" with a religious entity offering the charity. E.g., "You fall on your knees and profess Christ as your Savior right this minute or I'm going to let your child bleed to death rather than provide medical help." Do you know anything similar that happens nowadays? Religious groups who go over and try to save souls at the same time they give food aid are still giving the food aid, are they not, whether they get real converts or not? I'm not trying to be contentious; I am just thinking aloud. Right this minute I can't think of any examples of missionary-type groups who outright deny the aid. Perhaps you have to sit through a sermon to get it. I guess that still happens often in inner-city lunch kitchens, now that I think of it. You listen to the Bible study or whatever, then they give you lunch; and maybe you don't get lunch if you missed the Bible study. Well, I disapprove in any event of preaching to people with imminent physical needs. But if you do it, and you give the aid anyhow, they still get the aid.

Every Rescue Mission that I have been involved with makes people sit through a worship service and then pray before receiving their free supper.

A free supper that is, in many cases, funded with tax dollars, by the way.

[darareaksmey]

Hey, all of this is pretty much sounding like No True Christian. Catholic charities have done tons of horrible things in the name of their religion and you can't claim that they just don't count because you're some authority on what a True Christian really is. Also, nobody here said that all religious charity is un-compassionate, so stop pretending that we're personally insulting you.

I have no clue what you're talking about, and no interest in trying to find out. It's OK by me if you're not interested in trying to understand my point, but please don't come and accuse me of whatever No True Christian is, because it's obviously something you oppose and think I have some relationship to. No one here is insulting me, except possibly you by being obtuse. I NEVER claimed Catholic Charities are all sweetness and light, so please don't put words in my mouth. Many thanks.

[Sola]

I regularly give to charity. I have payroll deductions to save the children, plus I support the national autistic society and a local charity here which feeds the homeless. Now and again as I am able I donate to other charities, plus I support them in other ways such as buying from charity (thrift) shops and donating to the same (charity shops have the best stuff...). Why do I do it? It's the right thing to do. I've been poor and I didn't particularly like it. My kids have both benefited from the NAS and Children In Need associated schemes for the disabled kids. So I give back.

Over here in the UK we have a reasonable welfare safety net, plus the NHS to take care of our health needs. This is paid for out of our National Insurance which is taken at source if you are employed or by payments if you are self employed. I think it is great and is far cheaper than any private insurance plan in the USA, or here in the UK - hubby has previously been a member of BUPA here - we pay 13% of our income over around £140 per week up to an upper earnings limit. For that we get all our health care, subsidised dental care and our social security and time limited unemployment benefits. It's fucking cheap.

But it isn't enough, as is proven by the amount of charities and food banks here in the UK. Personally I think the 13% is not enough. I think the upper earnings limit shoudl be removed and I would willingly pay another 1% on top of the 13% I pay now. If we did then people would be better provided for.

Bringing it back to charities, there seems to be a completely different attitude in the USA to here. Over here if a charity turned someone down due to beliefs or tried to convert someone in need before giving, there would be a huge outcry. One of the local charities I donate to is called Shiloa, which is obviously religion related. They are a ministry that feed the homeless locally and do some brilliant work. I have no qualms about giving to them becuase they don't proselytise, they simply do the work. If anyone were to ask then and only then they would give the related bible parts, but only if the person were to ask. I give to Shiloa because they are the ones doing the work with the homeless in my town.

Everything seems so religionised (is that a word?) in the USA, with different 'sects' scoring points off each other. Why can't people just do the right thing because it is the right thing? Instead of trying to score points with 'god' or whatever religion they belong to?

/ramble (sorry for that, just on my 3rd bacardi....)

[valsa]

Right. I was talking more about more basic charity work, like feeding people. They may be willing to stop facilitating placing kids with couples, but are they letting people go hungry? To me there is a difference. And believe me, CC can go suck an egg when it comes to adoption services. When DH and I were looking for a child, they refused to take us because I'm not Catholic. For the same reason a Protestant service refused to take us--because DH is Catholic. Hmmmph.

Ask a kid in foster care if there's a difference.

[darareaksmey]

*sigh*

Never mind. Just so I'm clear, I hate CC too, for reasons cited. I'm just speaking in hypotheticals, but that isn't working.