4 ms·
In my travels around the U.S., I encountered many institutions helping the disadvantaged, and almost all of them were religious, mostly Christian or spiritual.
by forgotmypw17 6y ago
In my travels around the U.S., I encountered many institutions helping the disadvantaged, and almost all of them were religious, mostly Christian or spiritual. I don't know any other organization or entity feeding, clothing, listening, aiding those who need it, day in and day out, giving time and effort and resources without expecting anything in return. No photo ops or social media posts.
With Christianity supposedly in decline, especially in tech, how will we replace it?
- arcticbull 6y agoSome would argue it's the role of the state to look after the disadvantaged. This model works very well in much of the OECD. Conflating religion and welfare is not a winning combo imo. Further, the state can do so in a way that doesn't impose, foist or solicit religion on the poor.
- forgotmypw17 6y agoI've never seen religion foisted or solicited in any way you suggest. I HAVE seen the state fail to help after burning through millions in many places.
- arcticbull 6y agoIf I wanted to provide help to the poor without involving my religion, I would do so by donating to charities that aren't religious, or I would do so away from church. Religious institutions help the poor in part as a recruiting drive. That doesn't mean the poor don't benefit, of course, but it is opportunistic IMO. > I HAVE seen the state fail to help after burning through millions in many places. Sure, but that's a red herring. It's fair to say both have a checkered past.
- brbsix 6y agoSikh temples unconditionally offer free meals to all without concern for a recipient's religion or economic status. Religion and charity are voluntary. You can choose to donate to charities that will most effectively utilize your donations. You don't have that choice with a state, and the outcomes are not always good. Even in Democracies, the state social services are often such inefficient massively entrenched institutions that they are resistant to change. Religions also serve as bulwarks against increasing state power. Depending on your perspective this could be a good thing or a bad thing, but I'm more concerned about the great harm an unrestrained state can inflict on the world than what good it may be able to do.
- forgotmypw17 6y ago>If I wanted to provide help to the poor without involving my religion, I would do so by donating to charities that aren't religious, That's what I'm referring to, you'd donate to professionals, but would you do any of it yourself?
- arcticbull 6y agoThat's a great call out, actually. I haven't, but I should.
- albatruss 6y agoBy just helping people?
- forgotmypw17 6y agoWho is going to do it?
- 0_gravitas 6y agoWho wont?
- mola 6y agoThe US made the welfare state a dogmatic evil. In other places it's percieved as necessary, and it does replace the role of religious institutions of taking care of the underprivileged. So, learn from europe and other social democratic states. Stop believe in the dogma of the invisible hand, and that what makes money is inherently good.