While I agree that a lot of religious beliefs are silly, I don't see what harm there is in having "faith" in something if that's what gets you through the day.
its a tough call and sorta how i feel about state lotteries. everyone knows that lotteries are generally funded by the poor or lower middle class who spend a chunk of their paychecks every week on the dream of becoming rich and quitting their shitty jobs. obviously, the chances of winning are soo remote, so its almost cruel for states to have lottos, when the reality is that many families are being deprived of things they need because their parents have this "faith". however, like in your example, that faith gets them through the workweek.
One thing that never fails to amaze me over and over again is some Christians beliefs that G-d cares about the minutia of their lives. Such as Baseball. While millions starve around the world, Christians are being slaughtered in Darfur, and the next natural disaster is waiting to happen, God is concentrating on baseball.
I have family members who tell everyone they are praying for new living room furniture. Then when a church member of a family member gives them some living room furniture they thank G-d instead of the person who just gave it them.
To me it a conceit to think G-d is that concerned with your material or sporting wishes.
But hey, that's just me.
I think God hsa the love and capability to be concerned with both the major catastophies of this world and an individual's life details, though I totally feel you on the "why would God care about getting you new furniture when a lot of people don't even have houses". the more important question is, "why does this person care so much about new furniture when some don't even have houses".
Once again, I think American Christians are largely impacted by the culture of materialsm, apathy and self-interest around them, which is anti-thetical to the themes of the gospels. I personally would find it difficult to make a spiritual issue out of finding a new toy for me (if it had no spiritual significance other than bringing me temporary pleasure, if that is spiritual at all). that being said, some folks would really put things like new furniture to use as far as using it to help others in some way. Additionally, I think God wants to be involved in life details of anyone who is serious about following him...even if they are shallow and self interested at first. God may give them a stupid toy if that is how he can relate to them where they are in life...of course, continuing to follow Him would eventually require them to get out of their self absorbed world and their desires should change to reflect that.
I have family members who tell everyone they are praying for new living room furniture. Then when a church member of a family member gives them some living room furniture they thank G-d instead of the person who just gave it them.
To me it a conceit[/b] to think G-d is that concerned with your material or sporting wishes.
But hey, that's just me.
LW.....do you consider these family members idiots??
While I agree that a lot of religious beliefs are silly, I don't see what harm there is in having "faith" in something if that's what gets you through the day.
Unless you cause harm or rationalize wrongdoings with your religious beliefs, why should what people think or say bother you??
Or do you view these people as intellectually inferior to you and feel that their beliefs harm you in some way??
Whether you are religious or not, each person in our country receives one vote and everyone's power is equal in that respect.
One thing that never fails to amaze me over and over again is some Christians beliefs that G-d cares about the minutia of their lives. Such as Baseball. While millions starve around the world, Christians are being slaughtered in Darfur, and the next natural disaster is waiting to happen, God is concentrating on baseball.
I have family members who tell everyone they are praying for new living room furniture. Then when a church member of a family member gives them some living room furniture they thank G-d instead of the person who just gave it them.
To me it a conceit to think G-d is that concerned with your material or sporting wishes.
But hey, that's just me.
I think God hsa the love and capability to be concerned with both the major catastophies of this world and an individual's life details, though I totally feel you on the "why would God care about getting you new furniture when a lot of people don't even have houses". the more important question is, "why does this person care so much about new furniture when some don't even have houses".
Once again, I think American Christians are largely impacted by the culture of materialsm, apathy and self-interest around them, which is anti-thetical to the themes of the gospels. I personally would find it difficult to make a spiritual issue out of finding a new toy for me (if it had no spiritual significance other than bringing me temporary pleasure, if that is spiritual at all). that being said, some folks would really put things like new furniture to use as far as using it to help others in some way. Additionally, I think God wants to be involved in life details of anyone who is serious about following him...even if they are shallow and self interested at first. God may give them a stupid toy if that is how he can relate to them where they are in life...of course, continuing to follow Him would eventually require them to get out of their self absorbed world and their desires should change to reflect that.
The part about G-d's capacity and love and the part and G-d wanting to be involved echoes their theology. They don't pray for toys, but for things they "need" to live a decent middle class life. Like decent living room furniture or swimming lessons for the kids.
I like this discussion, but will save my theology for some day when we do a theology thread.
I have family members who tell everyone they are praying for new living room furniture. Then when a church member of a family member gives them some living room furniture they thank G-d instead of the person who just gave it them.
To me it a conceit to think G-d is that concerned with your material or sporting wishes.
But hey, that's just me.
LW.....do you consider these family members idiots??
While I agree that a lot of religious beliefs are silly, I don't see what harm there is in having "faith" in something if that's what gets you through the day.
Unless you cause harm or rationalize wrongdoings with your religious beliefs, why should what people think or say bother you??
Or do you view these people as intellectually inferior to you and feel that their beliefs harm you in some way??
Whether you are religious or not, each person in our country receives one vote and everyone's power is equal in that respect.
My sister is born again and I have never heard her pray about anything that wasn't in her own personal self-interest. What's worse is her constant need to rationalize all of life's events through the lens of God's will. Of course, I have never heard her conclude that I am more in God's favor because I make more money than her or have a happier marriage. But Seeing as how I am a Jew this would take some 'splaining.
As for harm, people like my sister have consistently voted to undermine institutions that help the poor, the disenfranchised and the oppressed. So yeah, their one vote does make a big difference in defunding public schools, preventing gay people from exercising the fullest range of civil rights and women from exerting control over their own bodies.
I don't see what harm there is in having "faith" in something if that's what gets you through the day.
ah...religion is a crutch...you are correct sir.
I have to say that most of the Christians I have met (I was brought up Catholic and lived in the Bible Belt most of my life) are, well, I dont know, whats the term I am looking for?...ah, yes, Un-Christ-like
I don't see what harm there is in having "faith" in something if that's what gets you through the day.
ah...religion is a crutch...you are correct sir.
I have to say that most of the Christians I have met (I was brought up Catholic and lived in the Bible Belt most of my life) are, well, I dont know, whats the term I am looking for?...ah, yes, Un-Christ-like
I've never met a human who I thought was "Christ-like"
I'm not a Christian but I certainly have my "crutches" and I'm betting you do too.
As long as our "crutches" don't harm anyone but ourselves I have no problem with them.
And as far as Christians helping the poor and unfortunate, most of the larger charities in our country are either Christian founded or Christian run.
If the concept of one man/one vote harms segments of our society I don't how to overcome that in a democratic way.
One of the funniest calls I've ever heard on talk radio was a guy who genuinely felt that the "Separation of Church & State" meant that Christians should not be allowed to vote.
I don't see what harm there is in having "faith" in something if that's what gets you through the day.
ah...religion is a crutch...you are correct sir.
I have to say that most of the Christians I have met (I was brought up Catholic and lived in the Bible Belt most of my life) are, well, I dont know, whats the term I am looking for?...ah, yes, Un-Christ-like
I've never met a human who I thought was "Christ-like"
I'm not a Christian but I certainly have my "crutches" and I'm betting you do too.
As long as our "crutches" don't harm anyone but ourselves I have no problem with them.
And as far as Christians helping the poor and unfortunate, most of the larger charities in our country are either Christian founded or Christian run.
If the concept of one man/one vote harms segments of our society I don't how to overcome that in a democratic way.
Yes, I have crutches, but my crutches dont require monolithic structures, political lobbying, nor do I feel it to be my duty to "spread its word" and try to convert this country back to a moral, pure era that never actually exsisted...
And by Christ-like I mean forgiving, non judgemental, take care of the less fortunate, follow the Golden rule, not making money of one's religion, accepting of others different than you, not having a unwarranted sense of entitlement and superiority over "non believers", being nice....
Yes, I have crutches, but my crutches dont require monolithic structures, political lobbying, nor do I feel it to be my duty to "spread its word" and try to convert this country back to a moral, pure era that never actually exsisted...
Well....my particular crutch requires that I break the law, has a lobbying group in Washington fighting for it's legalization, has a longtime publication used for "spreading the word" and generates more cash than just about any other industry in our country.
Yes, I have crutches, but my crutches dont require monolithic structures, political lobbying, nor do I feel it to be my duty to "spread its word" and try to convert this country back to a moral, pure era that never actually exsisted...
Well....my particular crutch requires that I break the law, has a lobbying group in Washington fighting for it's legalization, has a longtime publication used for "spreading the word" and generates more cash than just about any other industry in our country.
How about yours??
I suppose we might have the same crutch, but I do not participate in any of the above actions listed above, except for the breaking the law part...this is tantamount to a Christian who follows the edicts of his/her religion while minding his/her own business...that is a kind of Christianity I dont think anybody has a problem with...that kind of Christianity doesnt feel that it needs to tell the rest of the world what to do...
I think a lot of people misunderstood me when I said I would like to perfect her face with a baseball bat. Some people seemed to think that I had violent anti-free-speech intentions. All I meant was what Leo Pitts here said:
By LEONARD PITTS JR. I already know what's going to happen after I write this column.
Someone is going to say, why did you waste space condemning the latest drivel from the mouth of Ann Coulter? Don't you know she says these outrageous things only to promote her books? Why reward her with attention?
The argument is not without merit. Coulter plays the news media like Louis Armstrong once played his cornet. She is a virtuoso of stage-managed controversy. So there's something to be said for refusing to play along, for ignoring her in the hope that she will just go away.
But some things only fester and grow in the dark. Some things use silence as assent.
Last week, Coulter said that in her perfect America, everyone would be a Christian. She said this to Donny Deutsch, who was hosting her on his CNBC program, The Big Idea. Deutsch, who is Jewish, expressed alarm. Whereupon Coulter told him that Jews simply needed to be ''perfected'' -- i.e., made to accept Jesus as savior. Which is, of course, one of the pillars (along with the slander of Christ's murder) supporting 2,000 years of pogroms, abuse and Holocaust.
I suspect the reason some people believe that kind of ignorance is best ignored is that they find it difficult to take it seriously, or to accept that Coulter -- or those who embrace her -- really believes what she says. After all, this is not 1933, not 1948, not 1966. It is two-thousand-by-God-oh-seven, post-Seinfeld, post-Gore-Lieberman, post-Schindler's List. We no longer live in the era when open anti-Semitism could find wide traction. This is a different time.
But time, Martin Luther King once observed, is neutral. Time alone changes nothing. It is people who make change in time. Or not. So you have to wonder if this determined sanguinity in the face of intolerance is not ultimately an act of monumental self-delusion.
While some of us are cheerfully assuring one another that They Don't Really Mean It, the Southern Poverty Law Center reports that the number of hate groups in this country has risen by a whopping 40 percent in just the last seven years. If you had spent those years, as I have, jousting in print the agents of intolerance, you would not be surprised. It would be all but impossible to quantify, but I've noted a definite spike, not simply in the hatefulness of some people, but in the willingness to speak that hatefulness openly and without shame. What used to be anonymous now comes with a name and address.
Like Coulter, many of those people find intellectual cover under the cloak of conservatism. It is a development that thoughtful conservatives (the very need to use that qualifier makes the case) ought to view with alarm. For all that Colin Powell, J.C. Watts, the presidents Bush and others have done to posit a friendly new ''big tent'' conservatism, Coulter and others have done even more to drag the movement back toward open intolerance.
That will be read as criticism of conservatism, but I intend a larger point. After all, liberalism has had its own unfortunate extremes -- the drug use of the '60s, the Weather Underground, the Symbionese Liberation Army and the like. The difference is, say what you will about Michael Moore or Jesse Jackson, they are not pushing back toward that which has been discredited. Coulter is.
And if some of us are laughing that off, not everybody is.
So this is not about bashing conservatives. It is, rather, about challenging them, and all of us. Within living memory, we have seen Jews in boxcars and blacks in trees and silence from those who should have been shouting. They pretended it wasn't happening until it already had.
So, what about Ann Coulter? What about the push-back against diversity, pluralism and tolerance, that she represents? I keep hearing that we should just ignore it.
My point is, that's been tried before. It didn't work.
The Salvation Army, an international movement, is an evangelical part of the universal Christian Church. Its message is based on the Bible. Its ministry is motivated by the love of God. Its mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in His name without discrimination.
Feed The Children is a Christian, international, nonprofit relief organization with headquarters in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, that delivers food, medicine, clothing and other necessities to individuals, children and families who lack these essentials due to famine, war, poverty, or natural disaster.
4) American Cancer Society No historical or current religous mission or ties.
The American Cancer Society's international mission concentrates on capacity building in developing cancer societies and on collaboration with other cancer-related organizations throughout the world in carrying out shared strategic directions.
6) AmeriCares No religous affiliations in history or mission. Works with a wide range of NGOs both religous and non-religious.
AmeriCares is a non-profit disaster relief and humanitarian aid organization. It provides immediate response to emergency medical needs, as well as supports long-term humanitarian assistance programs for all people around the world, irrespective of race, creed or political persuasion.
7) YMCAs in the United States Young Mens Christian Association.
Top Person: Kenneth L. Gladish Top Salary:* $ 347,760
8) American National Red Cross Cross. Since its founding in 1881 by visionary leader Clara Barton, the American Red Cross has been the nation's premier emergency response organization. As part of a worldwide movement that offers neutral humanitarian care to the victims of war, the American Red Cross distinguished itself by also aiding victims of devastating natural disasters. Over the years, the organization has expanded its services, always with the aim of preventing and relieving suffering.
Top Person: Marsha Evans Top Salary:* $ 468,599
9) Catholic Charities USA Catholic.
Top Person: Larry Snyder Top Salary:* $ 148,995
10) America's Second Harvest No religious history or affiliation.
Our mission is to feed America's hungry through a nationwide network of member food banks and engage our country in the fight to end hunger.
Top Person: Robert H. Forney Top Salary:* $ 356,232
If you really want to have some fun find the figures of who donates more to the above charities...
Red States vs. Blue States
Dems vs. Rep
Christian vs. Non-Christian
Christians believe in taking care of the poor and unfortunate, they just don't believe in passing oxymoronic legislature that forces people to be charitable whether they want to be or not..
If you really want to have some fun find the figures of who donates more to the above charities...
Red States vs. Blue States
Dems vs. Rep
Christian vs. Non-Christian
Christians believe in taking care of the poor and unfortunate, they just don't believe in passing oxymoronic legislature that forces people to be charitable whether they want to be or not..
I did find some proof. Why don't you find some proof to back up your idiotic statements from time to time.
You come out with these total bullshit statements as if they were true. Then when they are shown to be false you just make more unsubstantiated statements.
One of the funniest calls I've ever heard on talk radio was a guy who genuinely felt that the "Separation of Church & State" meant that Christians should not be allowed to vote.
I think a better question would be should Christians vote, or does the act of voting go against the teachings of Jesus?
If you really want to have some fun find the figures of who donates more to the above charities...
Red States vs. Blue States
Dems vs. Rep
Christian vs. Non-Christian
Christians believe in taking care of the poor and unfortunate, they just don't believe in passing oxymoronic legislature that forces people to be charitable whether they want to be or not..
I did find some proof. Why don't you find some proof to back up your idiotic statements from time to time.
You come out with these total bullshit statements as if they were true. Then when they are shown to be false you just make more unsubstantiated statements.
Yeah....total bullshit....I said that "most" of the big Charities are Christian and you proved it to be bullshit by claiming only 5 of the top 10 are....wow.
I know that most of the money donated to charities* in this country is from Christians.
I know that the Republicans donate more money to charities* than Dems.
But I also know that you are the type of asshole to dispute whatever sources I cite as being biased.
So it's much easier to manipulate you into coming up with whatever statistics you DO believe and prove to yourself that I'm right.
BTW 13 of the top 20 Charitable organizations in the U.S. ar Christian based.
Choke on that.....you're beyond easy.
Note: * Charities that help the poor and needy, not "special interest groups".
If you really want to have some fun find the figures of who donates more to the above charities...
Red States vs. Blue States
Dems vs. Rep
Christian vs. Non-Christian
Christians believe in taking care of the poor and unfortunate, they just don't believe in passing oxymoronic legislature that forces people to be charitable whether they want to be or not..
I did find some proof. Why don't you find some proof to back up your idiotic statements from time to time.
You come out with these total bullshit statements as if they were true. Then when they are shown to be false you just make more unsubstantiated statements.
Yeah....total bullshit....I said that "most" of the big Charities are Christian and you proved it to be bullshit by claiming only 5 of the top 10 are....wow.
I know that most of the money donated to charities* in this country is from Christians.
I know that the Republicans donate more money to charities* than Dems.
But I also know that you are the type of asshole to dispute whatever sources I cite as being biased.
So it's much easier to manipulate you into coming up with whatever statistics you DO believe and prove to yourself that I'm right.
BTW 13 of the top 20 Charitable organizations in the U.S. ar Christian based.
Choke on that.....you're beyond easy.
Note: * Charities that help the poor and needy, not "special interest groups".
When have I ever doubted one of your sources? I don't recall you sighting any sources ever. Except for the one time you used a made for tv movie based on a true store to prove that torture was a good thing.
The sources I used above was Forbes (hardly some left wing biased source) and the charities own web sites. I didn't look them up to prove you wrong. I suspected that you had made the statistics up and I was curious to see how close you came. I didn't know the count until I was done posting the research.
I will agree that most money given to charities in the USA comes from Christians. This is makes sense since the vast majority of Americans are Christians.
Even non-Christians like myself donate to Christians charities. Mercy Corps and NW Medical Teams are two of my favorite charities. Unlike Evangelical charities, such as Salvation Army, converting those who receive their services is not part of their mission.
If you really want to have some fun find the figures of who donates more to the above charities...
Red States vs. Blue States
Dems vs. Rep
Christian vs. Non-Christian
Christians believe in taking care of the poor and unfortunate, they just don't believe in passing oxymoronic legislature that forces people to be charitable whether they want to be or not..
I did find some proof. Why don't you find some proof to back up your idiotic statements from time to time.
You come out with these total bullshit statements as if they were true. Then when they are shown to be false you just make more unsubstantiated statements.
Yeah....total bullshit....I said that "most" of the big Charities are Christian and you proved it to be bullshit by claiming only 5 of the top 10 are....wow.
I know that most of the money donated to charities* in this country is from Christians.
I know that the Republicans donate more money to charities* than Dems.
But I also know that you are the type of asshole to dispute whatever sources I cite as being biased.
So it's much easier to manipulate you into coming up with whatever statistics you DO believe and prove to yourself that I'm right.
BTW 13 of the top 20 Charitable organizations in the U.S. ar Christian based.
Choke on that.....you're beyond easy.
Note: * Charities that help the poor and needy, not "special interest groups".
When have I ever doubted one of your sources? I don't recall you sighting any sources ever. Except for the one time you used a made for tv movie based on a true store to prove that torture was a good thing.
The source I used above was Forbes (hardly some left wing biased source) and the charities own web sites. I didn't look them up to prove you wrong. I suspected that you had made the statistics up and I was curious to see how close you came. I didn't know the count until I was done posting the research.
I will agree that most money given to charities in the USA comes from Christians. This is makes sense since the vast majority of Americans are Christians.
Even non-Christians like myself donate to Christians charities. Mercy Corps and NW Medical Teams are two of my favorite charities. Unlike Evangelical charities, such as Salvation Army, converting those who receive their services is not part of their mission.
Comments
its a tough call and sorta how i feel about state lotteries. everyone knows that lotteries are generally funded by the poor or lower middle class who spend a chunk of their paychecks every week on the dream of becoming rich and quitting their shitty jobs. obviously, the chances of winning are soo remote, so its almost cruel for states to have lottos, when the reality is that many families are being deprived of things they need because their parents have this "faith". however, like in your example, that faith gets them through the workweek.
I think God hsa the love and capability to be concerned with both the major catastophies of this world and an individual's life details, though I totally feel you on the "why would God care about getting you new furniture when a lot of people don't even have houses". the more important question is, "why does this person care so much about new furniture when some don't even have houses".
Once again, I think American Christians are largely impacted by the culture of materialsm, apathy and self-interest around them, which is anti-thetical to the themes of the gospels. I personally would find it difficult to make a spiritual issue out of finding a new toy for me (if it had no spiritual significance other than bringing me temporary pleasure, if that is spiritual at all). that being said, some folks would really put things like new furniture to use as far as using it to help others in some way. Additionally, I think God wants to be involved in life details of anyone who is serious about following him...even if they are shallow and self interested at first. God may give them a stupid toy if that is how he can relate to them where they are in life...of course, continuing to follow Him would eventually require them to get out of their self absorbed world and their desires should change to reflect that.
ha!
Or you could read my post.
Asshole.
The part about G-d's capacity and love and the part and G-d wanting to be involved echoes their theology. They don't pray for toys, but for things they "need" to live a decent middle class life. Like decent living room furniture or swimming lessons for the kids.
I like this discussion, but will save my theology for some day when we do a theology thread.
Not only do I read your posts but I understand them well enough to be thankful that this will be the last generation of LW logic.
My sister is born again and I have never heard her pray about anything that wasn't in her own personal self-interest. What's worse is her constant need to rationalize all of life's events through the lens of God's will. Of course, I have never heard her conclude that I am more in God's favor because I make more money than her or have a happier marriage. But Seeing as how I am a Jew this would take some 'splaining.
As for harm, people like my sister have consistently voted to undermine institutions that help the poor, the disenfranchised and the oppressed. So yeah, their one vote does make a big difference in defunding public schools, preventing gay people from exercising the fullest range of civil rights and women from exerting control over their own bodies.
ah...religion is a crutch...you are correct sir.
I have to say that most of the Christians I have met (I was brought up Catholic and lived in the Bible Belt most of my life) are, well, I dont know, whats the term I am looking for?...ah, yes, Un-Christ-like
people would be like "have you found jesus?" and I could be like "yeah, he's back in the kitchen at china palace. He buys me alchohol."
I've never met a human who I thought was "Christ-like"
I'm not a Christian but I certainly have my "crutches" and I'm betting you do too.
As long as our "crutches" don't harm anyone but ourselves I have no problem with them.
And as far as Christians helping the poor and unfortunate, most of the larger charities in our country are either Christian founded or Christian run.
If the concept of one man/one vote harms segments of our society I don't how to overcome that in a democratic way.
Yes, I have crutches, but my crutches dont require monolithic structures, political lobbying, nor do I feel it to be my duty to "spread its word" and try to convert this country back to a moral, pure era that never actually exsisted...
And by Christ-like I mean forgiving, non judgemental, take care of the less fortunate, follow the Golden rule, not making money of one's religion, accepting of others different than you, not having a unwarranted sense of entitlement and superiority over "non believers", being nice....
Well....my particular crutch requires that I break the law, has a lobbying group in Washington fighting for it's legalization, has a longtime publication used for "spreading the word" and generates more cash than just about any other industry in our country.
How about yours??
I suppose we might have the same crutch, but I do not participate in any of the above actions listed above, except for the breaking the law part...this is tantamount to a Christian who follows the edicts of his/her religion while minding his/her own business...that is a kind of Christianity I dont think anybody has a problem with...that kind of Christianity doesnt feel that it needs to tell the rest of the world what to do...
her face with a baseball bat. Some people seemed to think that I had
violent anti-free-speech intentions. All I meant was what Leo Pitts here said:
http://www.miamiherald.com/living/columnists/leonard_pitts/story/274100.html
By LEONARD PITTS JR.
I already know what's going to happen after I write this column.
Someone is going to say, why did you waste space condemning the latest drivel from the mouth of Ann Coulter? Don't you know she says these outrageous things only to promote her books? Why reward her with attention?
The argument is not without merit. Coulter plays the news media like Louis Armstrong once played his cornet. She is a virtuoso of stage-managed controversy. So there's something to be said for refusing to play along, for ignoring her in the hope that she will just go away.
But some things only fester and grow in the dark. Some things use silence as assent.
Last week, Coulter said that in her perfect America, everyone would be a Christian. She said this to Donny Deutsch, who was hosting her on his CNBC program, The Big Idea. Deutsch, who is Jewish, expressed alarm. Whereupon Coulter told him that Jews simply needed to be ''perfected'' -- i.e., made to accept Jesus as savior. Which is, of course, one of the pillars (along with the slander of Christ's murder) supporting 2,000 years of pogroms, abuse and Holocaust.
I suspect the reason some people believe that kind of ignorance is best ignored is that they find it difficult to take it seriously, or to accept that Coulter -- or those who embrace her -- really believes what she says. After all, this is not 1933, not 1948, not 1966. It is two-thousand-by-God-oh-seven, post-Seinfeld, post-Gore-Lieberman, post-Schindler's List. We no longer live in the era when open anti-Semitism could find wide traction. This is a different time.
But time, Martin Luther King once observed, is neutral. Time alone changes nothing. It is people who make change in time. Or not. So you have to wonder if this determined sanguinity in the face of intolerance is not ultimately an act of monumental self-delusion.
While some of us are cheerfully assuring one another that They Don't Really Mean It, the Southern Poverty Law Center reports that the number of hate groups in this country has risen by a whopping 40 percent in just the last seven years. If you had spent those years, as I have, jousting in print the agents of intolerance, you would not be surprised. It would be all but impossible to quantify, but I've noted a definite spike, not simply in the hatefulness of some people, but in the willingness to speak that hatefulness openly and without shame. What used to be anonymous now comes with a name and address.
Like Coulter, many of those people find intellectual cover under the cloak of conservatism. It is a development that thoughtful conservatives (the very need to use that qualifier makes the case) ought to view with alarm. For all that Colin Powell, J.C. Watts, the presidents Bush and others have done to posit a friendly new ''big tent'' conservatism, Coulter and others have done even more to drag the movement back toward open intolerance.
That will be read as criticism of conservatism, but I intend a larger point. After all, liberalism has had its own unfortunate extremes -- the drug use of the '60s, the Weather Underground, the Symbionese Liberation Army and the like. The difference is, say what you will about Michael Moore or Jesse Jackson, they are not pushing back toward that which has been discredited. Coulter is.
And if some of us are laughing that off, not everybody is.
So this is not about bashing conservatives. It is, rather, about challenging them, and all of us. Within living memory, we have seen Jews in boxcars and blacks in trees and silence from those who should have been shouting. They pretended it wasn't happening until it already had.
So, what about Ann Coulter? What about the push-back against diversity, pluralism and tolerance, that she represents? I keep hearing that we should just ignore it.
My point is, that's been tried before. It didn't work.
1) United Way
Activly non-religous though they do give funds to a wide spectrum of religous charities including Christian charities.
Top Person: Brian A. Gallagher
Top Salary:* $ 629,950
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/14/CH0253.html
2) Salvation Army
Religious 100%
The Salvation Army, an international movement, is an evangelical part of the universal Christian Church. Its message is based on the Bible. Its ministry is motivated by the love of God. Its mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in His name without discrimination.
Top Person: W. Todd Bassett
Top Salary:* $ 175,050
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/14/CH0144.html
3) Feed the Children
Religious.
Feed The Children is a Christian, international, nonprofit relief organization with headquarters in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, that delivers food, medicine, clothing and other necessities to individuals, children and families who lack these essentials due to famine, war, poverty, or natural disaster.
Top Person: Larry Jones
Top Salary:* $ 155,786
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/14/CH0065.html
4) American Cancer Society
No historical or current religous mission or ties.
The American Cancer Society's international mission concentrates on capacity building in developing cancer societies and on collaboration with other cancer-related organizations throughout the world in carrying out shared strategic directions.
Top Person: John R. Seffrin
Top Salary:* $ 902,009
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/14/CH0003.html
5) Gifts in Kind International
No mention of religious goals, ties, or history. No clergy on board of directors.
Top Person: Richard Wong
Top Salary:* $ 192,264
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/14/CH0071.html
6) AmeriCares
No religous affiliations in history or mission. Works with a wide range of NGOs both religous and non-religious.
AmeriCares is a non-profit disaster relief and humanitarian aid organization. It provides immediate response to emergency medical needs, as well as supports long-term humanitarian assistance programs for all people around the world, irrespective of race, creed or political persuasion.
Top Person: Curtis R. Welling
Top Salary:* $ 289,296
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/14/CH0014.html
7) YMCAs in the United States
Young Mens Christian Association.
Top Person: Kenneth L. Gladish
Top Salary:* $ 347,760
8) American National Red Cross
Cross.
Since its founding in 1881 by visionary leader Clara Barton, the American Red Cross has been the nation's premier emergency response organization. As part of a worldwide movement that offers neutral humanitarian care to the victims of war, the American Red Cross distinguished itself by also aiding victims of devastating natural disasters. Over the years, the organization has expanded its services, always with the aim of preventing and relieving suffering.
Top Person: Marsha Evans
Top Salary:* $ 468,599
9) Catholic Charities USA
Catholic.
Top Person: Larry Snyder
Top Salary:* $ 148,995
10) America's Second Harvest
No religious history or affiliation.
Our mission is to feed America's hungry through a nationwide network of member food banks and engage our country in the fight to end hunger.
Top Person: Robert H. Forney
Top Salary:* $ 356,232
http://www.forbes.com/2005/11/18/largest-charities-ratings_05charities_land.html
If not most, half of the top ten aint bad.
Red States vs. Blue States
Dems vs. Rep
Christian vs. Non-Christian
Christians believe in taking care of the poor and unfortunate, they just don't believe in passing oxymoronic legislature that forces people to be charitable whether they want to be or not..
I did find some proof. Why don't you find some proof to back up your idiotic statements from time to time.
You come out with these total bullshit statements as if they were true. Then
when they are shown to be false you just make more unsubstantiated statements.
I think a better question would be should Christians vote, or does the act of voting go against the teachings of Jesus?
Yeah....total bullshit....I said that "most" of the big Charities are Christian and you proved it to be bullshit by claiming only 5 of the top 10 are....wow.
I know that most of the money donated to charities* in this country is from Christians.
I know that the Republicans donate more money to charities* than Dems.
But I also know that you are the type of asshole to dispute whatever sources I cite as being biased.
So it's much easier to manipulate you into coming up with whatever statistics you DO believe and prove to yourself that I'm right.
BTW 13 of the top 20 Charitable organizations in the U.S. ar Christian based.
Choke on that.....you're beyond easy.
Note: * Charities that help the poor and needy, not "special interest groups".
http://www.soulstrut.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=crates&Number=965737&fpart=&PHPSESSID=
unpause.
When have I ever doubted one of your sources? I don't recall you sighting
any sources ever. Except for the one time you used a made for tv movie based
on a true store to prove that torture was a good thing.
The sources I used above was Forbes (hardly some left wing biased source)
and the charities own web sites. I didn't look them up to prove you wrong.
I suspected that you had made the statistics up and I was curious to see
how close you came. I didn't know the count until I was done posting
the research.
I will agree that most money given to charities in the USA comes from
Christians. This is makes sense since the vast majority of Americans are Christians.
Even non-Christians like myself donate to Christians charities. Mercy Corps
and NW Medical Teams are two of my favorite charities. Unlike
Evangelical charities, such as Salvation Army, converting those who receive
their services is not part of their mission.
You've just had the last word.