4 ms·

See, only a few years ago I discovered that practically any agency which distributes "Food Boxes" around here is simply funded by the USDA to do it. Even the Ca

See, only a few years ago I discovered that practically any agency which distributes "Food Boxes" around here is simply funded by the USDA to do it. Even the Catholic charity which I favor is operating exactly the same as the municipal agency and exactly the same as mental health clinics which give out food. They may source the food differently and they may rely on volunteers or staff to handle the boxes and Dole them out, but every recipient signs the same acknowledgement form with the USDA's letterhead: that the recipient meets the eligibility requirements, namely a low income at a certain % of the Federal Poverty Level. Otherwise you don't qualify for Emergency Food. I believe it was President George HW Bush who advanced the federal policy of "faith-based charity" initiatives in order to fill gaps in entitlements and State-administered welfare programs. In order to support the disestablishment of religion and a plurality of faiths in our nation, the USA is levying taxes to make available our funds to every single church, mosque, temple and synagogue which offers charity or outreach to the poor and marginalized. I am willing to bet that the majority could never sustain charitable works on member donations alone, and certainly not at scale to meet the demands of 2025. Also there are plenty of secular, non-religious organizations which are nevertheless spurred to action and effect change according to their unique political, cultural, or ethnic ideologies. Mental [Behavioral] Health is fundamentally a spiritual/religious practice, and today there are battalions of "priests" in white coats, wearing stethoscopes and wielding medical licenses, in order to leverage Medical Insurance funds for the care of souls and PreCrime operations. Unfortunately, while the government can send all kinds of money into their coffers, the government cannot provide the volunteers or trained staff who are necessary to actually sustain operations, keep unemployment low, and foster organizational growth. Everyone, especially health care and churches, everyone is desperate for more good workers, and tolerates incompetent or lazy ones as much as possible. Is this a bad idea or superior to the old ways? The jury's still out. But I'm actually witnessing the flourishing and state funding of New Religious Movements who gain followers and make disciples the old-fashioned way, the way Christians have always done it. In Germany they pay Church tax and Americans are doing the same on a scale that's grander and more expansive than you may conceive.

pessimizer 2y ago
> I believe it was President George HW Bush who advanced the federal policy of "faith-based charity" initiatives in order to fill gaps in entitlements and State-administered welfare programs. I'm pretty sure that later Obama had to take it to court to defend it, because it obviously weakens the boundaries between church and state in the service of letting private entities provide services that the government is at a better scale to provide. Most people would be upset if the money were going to Scientologists, because it's not one of the right religions. Or if you sent the money to me, I'd both be able to distribute food and make myself a billionaire; it's obviously a subsidy. > the government cannot provide the volunteers or trained staff who are necessary to actually sustain operations, keep unemployment low, and foster organizational growth. Of course they can.
- AStonesThrow 2y ago
  > the government is at a better scale to provide But it's not. Never has been. They're firing federal workers because of the deficit, national debt, Deep State issues, crumbling empire typical issues, man. The only ‘volunteers’ the government provides are military forces! I have never once met anyone at church who says that Uncle Sam conscripted them into a ministry! Good God, can you imagine a bishop conscripting priests and colluding with the military to make them chaplains? The State has always relied on Subsidiarity to provide charity or welfare. The federal level is a last resort, an emergency safety net when Subsidiarity and every other non-profit and religion fails to fill the gap. The New Deal and all the social service programs here in USA and UK as well have arisen in a secular context just to ensure that churches wouldn’t get too powerful and conversely, that citizens wouldn’t feel obligated or beholden to faith-based charities who were providing many of their basic needs. But c’mon. No state is realistically capable of doing charity at scale. Basically impossible. Therefore we re-invent church tax. Just look at the shitty situation of health care as the Secular West wrests it from Christian hegemony and literally needs to eviscerate Hippocrates. Many places with established religions just have the government funding that religion, and it’s not a tangled web like what we’re weaving in 2025. Disestablishmentarianism simply means “we’ll eventually need to reinvent religion in some form.”

pessimizer 2y ago

> I believe it was President George HW Bush who advanced the federal policy of "faith-based charity" initiatives in order to fill gaps in entitlements and State-administered welfare programs. I'm pretty sure that later Obama had to take it to court to defend it, because it obviously weakens the boundaries between church and state in the service of letting private entities provide services that the government is at a better scale to provide. Most people would be upset if the money were going to Scientologists, because it's not one of the right religions. Or if you sent the money to me, I'd both be able to distribute food and make myself a billionaire; it's obviously a subsidy. > the government cannot provide the volunteers or trained staff who are necessary to actually sustain operations, keep unemployment low, and foster organizational growth. Of course they can.

AStonesThrow 2y ago
> the government is at a better scale to provide But it's not. Never has been. They're firing federal workers because of the deficit, national debt, Deep State issues, crumbling empire typical issues, man. The only ‘volunteers’ the government provides are military forces! I have never once met anyone at church who says that Uncle Sam conscripted them into a ministry! Good God, can you imagine a bishop conscripting priests and colluding with the military to make them chaplains? The State has always relied on Subsidiarity to provide charity or welfare. The federal level is a last resort, an emergency safety net when Subsidiarity and every other non-profit and religion fails to fill the gap. The New Deal and all the social service programs here in USA and UK as well have arisen in a secular context just to ensure that churches wouldn’t get too powerful and conversely, that citizens wouldn’t feel obligated or beholden to faith-based charities who were providing many of their basic needs. But c’mon. No state is realistically capable of doing charity at scale. Basically impossible. Therefore we re-invent church tax. Just look at the shitty situation of health care as the Secular West wrests it from Christian hegemony and literally needs to eviscerate Hippocrates. Many places with established religions just have the government funding that religion, and it’s not a tangled web like what we’re weaving in 2025. Disestablishmentarianism simply means “we’ll eventually need to reinvent religion in some form.”