4 ms·

This is a great idea. If I were rich, I'd leave my fortune to the three biggest religious leaders in my city (I am an atheist). The condition is that every deci

by akudha 6y ago

This is a great idea. If I were rich, I'd leave my fortune to the three biggest religious leaders in my city (I am an atheist). The condition is that every decision to spend that money would have to be unanimous and public. Now, that would be hilarious to watch!

jariel 6y ago
That's not 'atheist' - that's 'deeply cynical' and obviously completely misunderstanding religion. For example, Catholic, Protestant an Jewish leadership of any city, given those terms, would have little problem finding a project to spend that money on. Either one of numerous charities or here [1] to start. I think the title of the article, is not informative either. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interfaith_Center_of_New_York https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interfaith_Center_of_New_York
- darkerside 6y ago
  Let's try not to downvote true statements we don't like
nxmnxm99 6y ago
What? I'm confused
- aezakmi 6y ago
  Dumb fedoralord attempt at humor, disregard.
sumedh 6y ago
They divide the money in 3 piles and agree that they can spend their pile as they want. Not sure why that would be hilarious?
- sameerds 6y ago
  "every decision to spend that money" sounds pretty specific to me. The decision to split the pile isn't sufficient to escape that requirement.
  - Kinrany 6y ago
    They can still just split and launder the money, the mechanics are not interesting
joshxyz 6y ago
Thats just cruel lol
- xavierlint 6y ago
  It's a gift, one can always reject it.
smnrchrds 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_Quo_(Jerusalem_and_Bethlehem)#'Immovable_ladder' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_Quo_(Jerusalem_and_Beth...
RickJWagner 6y ago
I think there's a lot of intersection, even among religions. (Feeding the poor, for example. Or helping widows and orphans.) I imagine the 3 would quickly reach agreement, but they'd also agree to keep your views (atheist) out of the announcements. Can't advertise good deeds of that nature, of course!

by akudha 6y ago

jariel 6y ago

That's not 'atheist' - that's 'deeply cynical' and obviously completely misunderstanding religion. For example, Catholic, Protestant an Jewish leadership of any city, given those terms, would have little problem finding a project to spend that money on. Either one of numerous charities or here [1] to start. I think the title of the article, is not informative either. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interfaith_Center_of_New_York https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interfaith_Center_of_New_York

darkerside 6y ago
Let's try not to downvote true statements we don't like

nxmnxm99 6y ago

What? I'm confused

aezakmi 6y ago
Dumb fedoralord attempt at humor, disregard.

sumedh 6y ago

They divide the money in 3 piles and agree that they can spend their pile as they want. Not sure why that would be hilarious?

sameerds 6y ago
"every decision to spend that money" sounds pretty specific to me. The decision to split the pile isn't sufficient to escape that requirement.
- Kinrany 6y ago
  They can still just split and launder the money, the mechanics are not interesting

joshxyz 6y ago

Thats just cruel lol

xavierlint 6y ago
It's a gift, one can always reject it.

smnrchrds 6y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_Quo_(Jerusalem_and_Bethlehem)#'Immovable_ladder' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_Quo_(Jerusalem_and_Beth...

RickJWagner 6y ago

I think there's a lot of intersection, even among religions. (Feeding the poor, for example. Or helping widows and orphans.) I imagine the 3 would quickly reach agreement, but they'd also agree to keep your views (atheist) out of the announcements. Can't advertise good deeds of that nature, of course!