Den writes:
I think what I am saying is being taken out of context, Im looking at things from a practical sense. Im not religious, but I respect the work many religions do in order to help the needy.
What about the works atheists do in order to help the needy?
It is irrellevant who does more - secular charities vs Religion, when the fact is that no-one is trying to destroy secular charities, on the other hand there is an Athiest movement attacking Religion with the ambition to reduce its membership and influence, prefferably irradicating it altogether.
Curiously though, these "attacks" are never aimed towards the charity organizations, unless they have some stupid prereq for helping people, like requiring them to accept the lord first.
The fact is that religious groups donate billions of dollars a year with armies of unpaid volunteers dedicated to charitable causes, what happens if you turn that tap off?
Why would it be turned off if these people become atheists? Are you saying the only reason they help people is because they believe in a god? So they don't help people because they want to help people? That makes them pretty big assholes in my book.
even slowing the tap down will have a negative effect, so my point here is that should the Athiest movement which is trying to turn the tap off accept any responsibility for the consequences of this situation should it occur?
The "atheist movement" is not trying to turn off the tap. It is trying to make people think more rationally, or at least try to stop them from pushing their religious views on others.
I mean every person that the athiest movement convinces to leave religion, makes one less person donating their time and money towards the charitable initiatives of the church, = less for charity.
Bullshit. Atheists donate plenty of money to charities. It would perhaps not go to christian charities, but it would go to secular ones instead. Ergo, there's just as much money.
Lets assume that all the people who leave the church commit the same donations to secular charities instead(unlikely, but a percentage probably would),
Why is this unlikely?
what about the lost volunteers?
They can start work at the secular organisations.
ime is just as important, this you cant get back once these people have turned Athiest. Athiesm does not have intiatives mobilising people to donate their time to charitable causes the last time I checked.
Of course,
atheism doesn't say anything at all about charity. Now,
atheists however, do participate in charity, and quite often organize things for a charitable cause as well.
It really makes a case as to which party has moral superiority
Athesits, for they help people because they want to help people, not because they believe in a god.
but as an institution it is obvious as daylight as to who leads this race.
Since atheism isn't an institution, I don;t see anything to compare here.