Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

eomer

(3,845 posts)
77. You're right, I was too broad-brushed about motivations behind charity of religious groups.
Tue Nov 26, 2013, 08:32 AM
Nov 2013

I am sure there are religious groups that do charity for the right reasons. I am also certain there are religious groups that do charity for the chance to proselytize. What the percentage is of each I don't know.

Unfortunately the groups that I've encountered personally were of the type that do it to proselytize. I recently attended training for a prison visitation program of the Catholic Archdiocese in my area. It was quite surprising that the one and only thing being taught in a training class that lasted a full day was that the volunteers were to minister to the prisoners only on matters of religion. They were taught not to engage in discussion of the prisoner's personal life and the difficulties such as family relations due to being incarcerated. They were not to engage in discussion about conditions, including abusive conditions, at the facility. They were not allowed to minister to the person's human needs; they were allowed to do no other thing than proselytize!

(I say "they" in the above because the deacon doing the training and eventually everyone in the class knew I was a UU and an atheist. I was there because I thought I would learn something useful about prison visitation but did not because the approach we take in our new visitation program is the exact opposite - we ask volunteers not to engage on religion unless the prisoner specifically wants to and instead we engage on the human aspects of their incarceration. We're recruiting volunteers mostly from the community and not with any attempt to find people who are religious - in other words it is really a secular program.)

In another example, a family member wanted to volunteer for a program helping kids run by a local Baptist church. But even though she is Christian she did not meet their religious litmus tests and was not allowed to volunteer. Clearly the reason that her religious beliefs mattered to them was that they see religion as a central part of their ministering to these people in need of help.

All the instances in my personal experience are similar where clearly the program had proselytizing as a central component and motivation. As I said, I don't know what the percentage is in real life as obviously my personal experience could be a statistical outliier. So please allow me to modify my statement, with apologies, to say that I don't want religious leaders involved in government because I don't trust them to have the right motivations. Some of them do, some of them don't, and I don't see a particular need to have them involved anyway so my solution would be separation of church and state, vigorously applied.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Christian privilege, in a nutshell Act_of_Reparation Nov 2013 #1
This is a city full of Catholics. I think he can add a RC priest. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #8
That's right, the city is full of Catholics... Act_of_Reparation Nov 2013 #9
There are plenty of progressive prieststo put on the team. this was a mistake. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #10
It doesn't matter if they are progressives or bokononists Act_of_Reparation Nov 2013 #22
They are not obligated. Donahue is a joke that wants an issue. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #23
I'm sure you'd like to dismiss him skepticscott Nov 2013 #88
I know thete are people whpo agree with him but he is a joke. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #89
Guess what? whathehell Nov 2013 #76
I've already indicated as much Act_of_Reparation Nov 2013 #78
It's a city full of atheists, too. Goblinmonger Nov 2013 #14
I agree. There should be represented. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #15
Why should atheists be deliberately represented? skepticscott Nov 2013 #35
Beccause they are apart of my city and they should be represented. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #36
The Russian mob is part of your city skepticscott Nov 2013 #37
I said they should be included because I believe they should be. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #42
Basing political decisions on "faith" and "belief" skepticscott Nov 2013 #43
Pretended? The things you say. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #44
And why will he have to rely equally greatly on atheist leaders? skepticscott Nov 2013 #45
ok well judge me all you want. Leave me out of it. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #46
I'd be happy to leave you out of everything skepticscott Nov 2013 #47
Oh Lord help me! hrmjustin Nov 2013 #48
Lol! rug Nov 2013 #49
Let us know when His help arrives, willya? skepticscott Nov 2013 #50
oh he did help me. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #55
Wow, you really didn't mean it skepticscott Nov 2013 #57
Are you asking me how I wo6ld handle my mayor calling on a different God? hrmjustin Nov 2013 #58
Lol. It's one of those okasha Nov 2013 #53
Yeah something like that. lol. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #56
I wouldn't want my mayor to rely at all on religious leaders. eomer Nov 2013 #52
Any mayor in this city who does not rely on community leaders is not a good mayor. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #54
You aren't going to argue this away with one-sentence tropes... Act_of_Reparation Nov 2013 #59
Do you agree thatbhe has a right to pick religious leaders on his transition team? hrmjustin Nov 2013 #60
If you're going to take that angle, trotsky Nov 2013 #62
I asked a question. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #63
No it isn't. It's about establishing priorities and making plans to achieve them. rug Nov 2013 #61
As was said before Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #64
You're right, I was too broad-brushed about motivations behind charity of religious groups. eomer Nov 2013 #77
Sorry that you had such a bad experience Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #80
What I'm saying is that there is a movement called the faith-based initiative... eomer Nov 2013 #85
Religious leaders represent no part of the people? Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #91
Should they be appointed to positions of influence in secular government... trotsky Nov 2013 #96
Should they be denied a part in forming the mayor's agenda because they are religious leaders? Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #97
No, this is about getting special privileges simply by being a "religious leader." trotsky Nov 2013 #99
How would you know? rug Nov 2013 #18
I know Goblinmonger Nov 2013 #19
If you look closely, the people on the list are not there for their belief - or nonbelief - but rug Nov 2013 #21
I'm assuming you misclicked Lordquinton Nov 2013 #30
Your assumption is incorrect. rug Nov 2013 #31
So your Anti Atheist bias is showing Lordquinton Nov 2013 #32
Are you calling me a bigot, quinton? rug Nov 2013 #33
Don't you hate when you don't get the jury results you wanted? Goblinmonger Nov 2013 #39
Tell me about it. Isn't that what you use this forum for? rug Nov 2013 #40
Pick a side. It's really easier to have a conversation when you do. Goblinmonger Nov 2013 #38
Let me clear this up for you. rug Nov 2013 #41
How does he know there are no atheists on the list? Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #65
I expect he means representatives of atheist organizations. rug Nov 2013 #68
OK, that makes sense Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #71
What a glorious hodgepodge...I'm sure they're all very focused on the transition BeyondGeography Nov 2013 #51
He could but he didn't. last1standing Nov 2013 #26
75% of the voters brought him there. I agree Donahue is a bigot and a jerk, and he does hrmjustin Nov 2013 #29
Yeah, Bill Donahue really represents no one except himself. Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #66
Yeah he is a joke. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #67
That's a pretty lame joke. trotsky Nov 2013 #82
Guess we should ignore the Catholic League "at our peril" skepticscott Nov 2013 #87
Why should ANY religious leader speak on civil rights in a secular setting? rug Nov 2013 #2
Thank you rug. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #7
Wouldn't all of those be better served by the leaders of secular political/activist groups? Humanist_Activist Nov 2013 #11
Better? Not necessarily. It depends on who it is and what is said. rug Nov 2013 #12
Are you saying religious leaders and people can not lead movements. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #17
No, I'm saying our public officials shouldn't give them special consideration because... Humanist_Activist Nov 2013 #24
I can agree with that. I doubt de Blasio will. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #25
MLK was the mayor of DC? Goblinmonger Nov 2013 #13
Coyness is not your most flattering attribute. rug Nov 2013 #16
In most if not all cities of any size, okasha Nov 2013 #20
The difference is between "can" and "must." last1standing Nov 2013 #27
Donohue's an ass. DeBlasio is consulting with those he thinks will best help him run the city. rug Nov 2013 #28
Why are there ANY spirit-worshipers on any transition team? BlueStreak Nov 2013 #3
Despite the questionable (at best!) need for religious leaders on a transition team, trotsky Nov 2013 #4
What the hell is a 60-person transition team anyway? BlueStreak Nov 2013 #5
"That is essentially a bureaucratic function, not a political one." trotsky Nov 2013 #6
Apparently, you believe that believers are ipso factp idiots. Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #69
You could SAY that skepticscott Nov 2013 #72
No problemo Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #75
BWAH HA HA HA trotsky Nov 2013 #79
I notice that you did not apologize for implying that I lied. Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #81
Want to read this subthread a little more closely... trotsky Nov 2013 #83
Wow..too funny skepticscott Nov 2013 #86
I see Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #90
Now that you've posted four or five times in this thread, I can't separate it from your screen name. Iggo Nov 2013 #92
I think those jury results fall under the Goblinmonger Nov 2013 #94
If I'd said anything like that, your post might make sense skepticscott Nov 2013 #95
Sure seemed to me you were saying that. Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #98
Nice try skepticscott Nov 2013 #100
Here, read this again: trotsky Nov 2013 #102
Bwahahahaha! Epic Skinner smack down. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #107
Apparently his own words skepticscott Nov 2013 #110
Your whine is noted. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #106
Your whine is noted. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #104
believing in spiorits is not a skill needed for government transition. BlueStreak Nov 2013 #73
What I read you as saying is that believers have nothing to add Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #74
Belief in the supernatural is irrelevant to the orderly transition of government BlueStreak Nov 2013 #84
In other words, you agree with me that you believe the Mayor should shun certain groups Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #93
Or in other words, what you're saying... trotsky Nov 2013 #103
Notice how our friend skepticscott Nov 2013 #109
No. There is somply no reason to include groups because of their religious beliefs any more than BlueStreak Nov 2013 #105
Catholic priests in Britain stay away from political positions muriel_volestrangler Nov 2013 #34
In 1974, Pope John Paul II told Robert Drinan, SJ not to seek re-election to the US Congress Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #70
I'm guessing he doesn't want to hear from the crew that aren't taking MADem Nov 2013 #101
just keep religion out SummerSnow Nov 2013 #108
It’s Time to Play ‘Bill de Blasio or the Pope?’ muriel_volestrangler Nov 2013 #111
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Bill de Blasio under fire...»Reply #77