3 ms·
But then that disadvantages groups which might perform the same role outside of a religious context. Thus in practice it only serves to have Government favour a
by sjwright 7y ago
But then that disadvantages groups which might perform the same role outside of a religious context. Thus in practice it only serves to have Government favour a specific genre of cohesion.
(Not to mention that your so-called “cohesion” also includes Scientology, Westboro Baptists and prosperity theology.)
- zozbot234 7y agoGovernment does not perform "the same role" of building up social capital at a truly grassroots level, unfortunately. Not even close. And the jury is still out wrt. non-religious social organizations, though some do appear to help quite a bit along those same lines, viz. labor unions and perhaps similar "interest-focused" mass groups.
- ak217 7y ago"The jury is still out"? On what, the Rotary club? Your underlying assumption that churches are unique as providers of social capital in modern society is... peculiar. The fact that churches are tax-exempt is a consequence of the dominant position of the Catholic church in the middle ages, and the compromises made in the subsequent struggle to remove the church bureaucracy from the government. I expect that as religiousness across the US population declines, churches will gradually be required to behave more like other non-profits. But that will probably take many decades.