How Charitable are US Churches?

Not very, apparently. Thought I can't say that I'm too surprised.

I suggest everyone read both this blog post from Pharyngula as well as the source for his article at SecularHumanism.org [link currently down]

A few interesting bits:

Heck, even I am more charitable than that! But then again, I'm not sending out missionaries across the globe. Do the missionaries get some sort of financial support during their stay? I've met several of them, and I must be honest that I'm glad they're giving people a pleasant first-hand impression of the US. But we don't need religion to do that.


This is a better way to incentive charitable giving, clearly. Consider it tithe on commercial activity!

[IMG=http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/files/2012/06/cragun-table-1.png]http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/files/2012/06/cragun-table-1.png[/IMG]

$71,000,000,000 per year. Every year.

Or, for a more digestible number:
$195,000,000 per day. Every day.

Oh, still to big to really understand?
$135,000 per minute.

Tick, tock!


As you can probably tell by now, I'd much rather see that money put to better use. Education, anyone?
Well how much does WalMart take in v. those churches?
A lot of churches in my area have community service projects and food drives for the poor, which doesn't come directly from money but from food donations and participation.

A big misconception is that every American church is has gold statues and rich ministers like it's the Vatican :lol:
Most of the Vatican's operational cost is financed with visitors. I'm not sure selling the common heritage of mankind so it disappears into the hands of a private collector in order to temporarily reduce a portion of problems is the greatest idea
It is worth noting that many religious institutions underwrite schools and universities. Catholic parochial schools are an excellent example as they provide superior education for fair less than many other private schools.

When you discuss education as a better way to spend your charitable giving, consider just where that's going as well. When you donate to your alma matter's alumni fund is that money going to provide a scholarship or to put in a new stadium. (Of course a new stadium might bring in more money for scholarships. Just shows how complex the ethical calculus of charitable giving can be.)
The Church also runs a number of hospitals in the US (10% IIRC).
I think providing a means of indoctrinating future generations isn't charity by any stretch of the imagination. Now, if they actually ran totally free secular schools with no religious instruction whatsoever in poor neighborhoods which accepted everybody no matter their religious beliefs that would be an entirely different story.
So people should run expenses that provide absolute zero returns? Sounds financially sound.
I've never seen any Catholic charity that required baptism to receive charity. How would they even check for that? Fill out some paperwork and hope your old diocese hasn't chucked the records?
Are diocese even allowed to destroy the records?
My experience most religious private schools would probably be in the top half of public high schools. I don't have experience with secular private high schools.

"Missionaries are suppose to lead by example. They should be helping the community. They should use this good work and examples as a way to bring people to understand the grace of God"

This doesn't mean they are trying to force people. (That mindset changed hundreds of years ago at least for Christians) They want people to join their religion because they believe it is for their good. Just like they help them with things they need for their own good. Most religions don't have nefarious intentions. They believe what they are doing is for the betterment. A lot of them are doing things for the betterment of people.
I think Anti-science Protestant church schools might convince you otherwise
Winner I don't know what you think MOST churches and religions are but they certainly don't force people to convert anymore. Most of the missionaries honestly want to help people. Just like Habitat for Humanity people (or other secular charity). The fact that these people believe a certain religion and hope to share the message of that religion with these people while doing good work doesn't take anything away from them. Most won't turn someone away because of a religious difference. They just believe what they believe and want to share the good news of that belief with people.

Whether they are wrong is up for another debate but they do think they are doing another good work by sharing their beliefs.
He thinks religion makes people stupid
 
I wonder if this is an example of memetic evolution. Without charity Churches wouldn't spread, so that nowadays most big churches do charity because all those that don't are either extinct or negligible.
 
Possibly. I think Churches were always supposed to be vaguely communistic for the betterment of their congregation but, at least in the US, material wealth is such that frequently they find their need helping those that aren't members.
 
I think Anti-science Protestant church schools might convince you otherwise

He thinks religion makes people stupid

Well I went to a Lutheran protestant church school through grade school and when I went to it well rated public high school I was smarter and better at school than most of my schoolmates. I taught my freshman science class a lot of things about science because I had already learned it the years before.

I'd rather have a bunch of nice stupid people helping me do something than a bunch of condescending obnoxious people.

Religion doesn't force people to do or be anything it just presents what they believe and give people an opportunity to agree or join.
 
Well I went to a Lutheran protestant church school through grade school and when I went to it well rated public high school I was smarter and better at school than most of my schoolmates. I taught my freshman science class a lot of things about science because I had already learned it the years before.

I'd rather have a bunch of nice stupid people helping me do something than a bunch of condescending obnoxious people.

Religion doesn't force people to do or be anything it just presents what they believe and give people an opportunity to agree or join.
I have heard that Lutherans have a decent education thing going on, I'm talking low church Protestants and Pentecostals
 
Most of the Vatican's operational cost is financed with visitors. I'm not sure selling the common heritage of mankind so it disappears into the hands of a private collector in order to temporarily reduce a portion of problems is the greatest idea

I never said we should. I'm just saying I don't people should compare the Church to a "corporation".
 
I have heard that Lutherans have a decent education thing going on, I'm talking low church Protestants and Pentecostals

When you do get it figured out which schools you are talking about let us know.
 
When you do get it figured out which schools you are talking about let us know.
All the non-Lutheran, non-Catholic and non-Orthodox I've ever seen have seemed to have been horrible.
 
Baptists usually aren't horrible. No experience with any others but I'm only experienced with the northern midwest.

A lot of times with these religious schools you have a much smaller class sizes. I know of schools that have 10 people or less in a grade. Some have one teacher teach two grades many of the subjects. These schools serve small communities that do not have a public school in the town.

BTW most of the cost of running these schools is taken from church donations not from the private schools "tuition". So teaching these children better than most public schools
 
I generally don't donate money to organizations that don't have "helping the needy" as their #1 priority. That includes churches and big-name organizations who pay their CEOs $500,000+ a year.

In my opinion, every time we overpay for something because it's a 'brand name', we're essentially donating money to an organisation that is trying to pay its CEOs $500,000+
 
In my opinion, every time we overpay for something because it's a 'brand name', we're essentially donating money to an organisation that is trying to pay its CEOs $500,000+

Well technically it is the board of directors that is trying to pay its CEO $500,000+ which to be honest I wouldn't want to be a CEO for less than $500,000+ it is a very stressful 24/7 job.
 
I don't want to be doing what I'm doing for less than $500,000 either. Yet, here we are.
It's the customers who give the CEOs the money. The BoD is just part of the mechanism.
 
I'm happy with my rate of pay. I don't have a 24/7 job. I don't have the stress of making decisions that can make or break a company. I don't have the responsibilty of hundreds of jobs under me. I have someone else that give me directions. I am perfectly fine making the money I make for now. It is what someone is willing to pay me for my skills.
 
Interesting that whenever a company does poorly, it is rarely the CEO or upper management that gets fired.
 
Happens all the time... Do you spend a lot of time paying attention to how often upper management gets fired?

But back to churches. They really are quite charitable and spend a lot of time doing services to the community the live in. It is not a parasitic relationship. It is a very symbiotic relationship.
 
But when supported by public funding it's not a very outlandish demand to ask them to have bookkeeping which shows where the funds are spent is it? In the name of transparency.

I don't know whether this already happens though.
 
Back
Top Bottom