My family's church: most voted Repub, but they feed the homeless

[Ladyhawk]

on weekends.

I think they do it to assuage guilt. Wouldn't it be much better to vote for people who would make sure there were no homeless people?

What do you think about fundy churches that do this? Am I just being a bitch because I can't stand fundamentalism? :)

[OKDem08]

1. gave $5.00 this evening

to a gentleman...yes, an an incredible gentleman on the street corner with a cardboard sign that said:
traveling: dog hungry: ME--I want a beer!
This could have been me at some time in my life.

[NAO]

2. warning - a very cynical answer - they do it because...

They do it primarily because they are trying to win new converts. Don't kid yourself that they don't talk to those homeless they are feeding about JC & Co.

By feeding the homeless, they get to act sanctimonious, assuage their guilt for electing Bush, and get an (hunger captive) audience for their Bible thumping diatribes.

Don't get me wrong - it's a good deed to feed the homeless. It's just better if there is not a covert ideological agenda behind it - if it's motivated by genuine human charity rather than evangelical soul quotas.

[FreedomAngel82]

3. I don't know

My church does that and helps with innercity and things like that. We used to give clothes to people but the woman in charge of that has been having personal problems so they're not doing that right now. I guess I don't understand how someone can not like the government programs like Social Security and welfare. I've tried talking to some rightwingers about it but it boogles my mind. I always bring up Christ and the poor and his teachings and they say we should give from our hearts and not tax dollars. Society, to me, is about people participating and being able to get help.

[Yupster]

11. The thinking is

that when the Good Samaritan found the hurt traveller, he didn't call the Romans or the local Jewish leaders and tell them there was a guy who needed help, he helped him. When he left him with the inn keeper, he paid his own money to have him cared for, he didn't point to the local Centurian's barracks.

That's the theory. That god calls us to help the poor. Not to yell to have other people's taxes raised so the poor can get help.

If you're really interested, read "The Tragedy of American Compassion," where the thinking is laid out.

I think there's merit to it, or at least there was. The problem is local churches and communities would be overwhelmed with the charge of helping the poor today. Plus, many communities of need go on for miles and miles, and there are not local groups and churches that are there to help. There's no doubt in my mind that only the government, and sometimes only the federal government has the reach and resources to do what needs to be done today.

[FreedomAngel82]

12. But what I think

is we're all a society and we all pay tax's to help each other out. Pave the roads, public education, picking up your garbage etc. The government programs help keep people out of poverty. Would you rather someone be homeless or give them a chance? I've just never understud I guess.

[Yupster]

19. While I'm reading this,

I'm printing off info for my Sunday school class that I'm teaching in the morning. The topic is the definition of a "Just War".

Anyway.

Would you rather someone be homeless?

No of curse I wouldn't. but neither would the local Christian church.

Wouldn't you rather they be given a chance?

Of course, but so would the local church.

That's why they set up America's great charitible enterprises like the Salvation Army and the YMCA. By the way the YMCA didn't used to be a swimming pool and gym. For the first 100 years, it was a place where homeless people could get a place to stay, a place to eat and a place to get clean until a local person could hook them up with a job.

There were rules though. You had to listen to sermons. You had to not be drunk. You had to chop wood. The chopping wood part wasn't so much for the need. It was to show people that they were still capable of helping others in worse shape than they were regardless of how bad off they were.

Oh - and no bathing suits in the swimming pool.

These Christian conservatives you say you don't understand. They don't want people hurt. They are just looking to the past on which way is the best way to help them. That's hardly a surprise. Isn't looking to the past what conservatives do?

[Lindacooks]

23. That's just it. The only times there have ever been significant

improvements in the standard of living for large groups of people is when the federal government is involved. The New Deal, Social Security, the War on Poverty - these things made a real and measurable difference. Individual and church charity is fine, but it just doesn't go far enough.

[bobbieinok]

30. a young colleague voted for a repub representative in 94

a year or so later she was intensely regretting her vote......he had been all over the media saying there should be no govt funding of welfare, social security, etc......it should all be done by the churches...........she was furious 'he knows, or should know, that there's no way the churches can do this if the govt stops'

like so many younger people at the time, she had bought the idea that 'democrats had controlled congress for years and there were lots of problems; the country should give the republicans a chance to solve the problems' ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

[halobeam]

4. Catholic charities fed us for over a year.

These women were so kind, never making us feel like we were worthless, quite the opposite. There are good people in this world.

[Ladyhawk]

13. There are.

I'm so glad you got the help you needed, too. Because of my upbringing, I feel guilty for relying on the government...odd because I now cognitively endorse social programs. I still feel the shame, even though I can't help that I'm disabled. I feel I'm not disabled ENOUGH to warrant help, sometimes.

A member of the church I mentioned--not a member of my family--tried to proselytize me and I was NOT amused. :( He's a Bush voter, too. I'm feeling especially antagonistic toward this particular church at the moment...full of hypocrites, I'm thinking. Maybe I'm wrong. I hope I'm wrong.

I know Quakers don't ever proselytize. They do good just for the sake of doing good. I like the philosophy of the Quakers. Good folks.

[halobeam]

17. Many extreme righties will behave that way....UNTIL...

Someone they love dearly needs money/food, etc. and they can't help them because they aren't well off themselves. Then all of a sudden, the programs the DEMS fight like hell for, seem like a "good idea".

Sorry you went through that. I know little of the Quakers, but I've always believed in doing good for the single sake of doing good. Wonder if I should do some more reading on this. hmm....
I have a hard time with ANY reciprocation someone would offer me, if I did something for them. I almost feel like it would negate the meaning or something. At the same time, since I've been on the other side of true givers, I would love the opportunity to be there for them and would be thankful to be able to.

[DemBones DemBones]

5. No doubt many of them do mean well and

are unable to see the problems caused by voting Republican. In all fairness, the Dems are pretty much corporate-owned now, too, so electing a Democrat doesn't guarantee help for the poor -- remember Clinton and welfare reform, NAFTA, etc.

I think most church congregations are like any other group of people: 10% -- really good people, 10% -- people ranging from sorry to really bad, 80% -- people just trying to do their best.

[OKDem08]

8. DemBones..my God, what absolute accuracy

and sincerity.

My sister-in-law, a church secretary at a local 'Christian' church would always insert, upon giving to those asking for help that they smelled like alcohol. I wondered if that were accurate or simply her perception. It was as though that negated and disparaged their need. It always made me ill--the judgmental attitude.

[Ladyhawk]

20. I would like to talk about the dogma spewed from the pulpit at these fundy

churches and how it can poison the hearts of even the most decent of people. I could write a book on all I've witnessed, but it's bedtime. I'm tire. I'll just leave you with some interesting quotes:

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."-- Carey Goldberg. "Why Are We Here?" International Herald Tribune, Paris ed., no. 36,125; Monday, Apr. 26, 1999; p. 10.

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."-- Blaise Pascal

"How many evils have flowed from religion!"-- Lucretius

"Religion, then, is not all bad; and even devout religiosity has some saving graces. But on the whole and in the main? The legacy and the future of dogmatic religion seems to be indicative of considerably more harm than good."--Dr. Albert Ellis, from "The Case Against Religiosity", published by American Atheist Press.

See also: Holy Horrors: An Illustrated History of Religious Murder and Madness by James A. Haught.

As for your assessment of the Dems, I absolutely have to agree.

[Yupster]

21. I don't think that's fair

Pol Pot, Mao and Stalin brought evil to a pretty high level without religion having anything to do with it.

[DerekG]

27. Precisely: the Grand Inquisitors are sacred and secularist alike

The New Testament brought legitimacy to the institution of slavery; the New Testament also inspired abolitionists and soldiers to destroy it.

As I understand it, religious zeal is the impetus for the most abominable evil, but also the wellspring from which flows the greatest good.

[SoCalDem]

6. Why they do it? To make themselves feel charitable to the poor folks

and so they can barter their way into heaven. When they start offering jobs and affordable housing to those same hungry people, and agreeing to raise their taxes so those poor kids can get a decent education, I will have some respect for them.

[DerekG]

7. I've learned to hesitate when making assumptions

I've known Republicans who are incredibly decent people; I've also known leftists who, despite harboring utopian ideals, are avaricious and unpleasant.

Human beings are complex.

[halobeam]

9. YES.

[Ladyhawk]

14. Yes they are, but if they would stop voting Republican,

maybe there wouldn't be a homelessness problem?

[DerekG]

26. My intent is not to make excuses, but merely to offer a caveat...

The last Democrat who declared war against poverty was one Lyndon Baines Johnson--who would sacrifice that war for the one waged against peasants--and the last nominee to offer us something similar was probably George McGovern.

I often wonder how these good Republicans would respond if the Democratic Party brought forth a visionary...I just don't know.

[JVS]

10. Not voting Republican will not cure the homelessness problem

If the Democratic party really cared about it then there would have been great changes under Clinton

[Ladyhawk]

15. Good point, unfortunately.

We need a revitalized Dem party...or a new party that isn't Republican Lite. I don't know if I will see such a thing in my lifetime.

[OKDem08]

16. Clinton at least tried

to adopt a health care program. Better than the Bush administration whose priorities are elsewhere.

[JVS]

18. I'm underwhelmed by the Democrats' effort on this

Neither party gets a cookie on this issue

[whitebear]

29. Not every democratic president is Clinton

I'm tired of people throwing Clinton in our faces as what's wrong with the democratic party.Personally I think Clinton could have done a few things differently,but he saved the California redwoods.

Hey can anybody start discussions here or is it just the dem underground staff who can?

[JVS]

32. But every democratic president in the last 20 years was Clinton

So as far as judging how we govern, he's the only recent president to look to.

[Montauk6]

22. They're playing up the drown-govt-like-baby-kittens schtick

The idea is that ALL PROBLEMS of the world can ONLY be solved by the private sector and churches are much better at dealing with poverty than government.

[1932]

24. If you're really curious about this issue, read JimWallis's God's Politics

He would argue that liberals let this happen by not trying to argue about why they're liberals in spiritual terms.

[enki23]

25. it's not charity, it's a recruitment effort

for the worlds largest and most frightening conspiracy.

[cornermouse]

28. They must think the homeless should eat only on weekends.

If it was motivated by guilt, I think they'd do more than weekends.

No, I think this is being done for appearances sake and also probably some vanity, not genuine concern.

[solinvictus]

31. At least they're doing something..

Most of the mega-churches around Birmingham only care about foreign missions while we have homeless all over the place. Unfortunately, no person or entity will ever end homelessness because some people's actions cause a downward spiral of their lives that's irreversable. Those that need and want the help, however, we as public citizens should do all we can to assist.

[MountainLaurel]

33. Relevant quote

"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint.
When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist."

--- Dom Heider Camera