Those who 'deserve' charity are those who are in trouble through no real fault of their own, for instance if the plant or the mill closed, if the house burnt down, if they became ill, or if mother nature decided to get capricious.

Those 'undeserving' of charity are those who have gotten into trouble entirely on their own, through the choices they've made, such as habitual drug/alcohol use (these are things you CHOOSE to do, they're not a REAL illness), sleeping with everybody without taking adequate precautions, or simply deciding they'd rather not work (I know a lady like that who likes to visit our library. She constantly talks about how much money she can get out of the system.)

"Even the government? It steals money from productive people, then gives it to others with no regard to whether they deserve it or not."

Well, if they don't deserve it ("deserve" meaning what Rob just said, which sounds reasonable), it wouldn't really be charity, would it? Just because something is called "charity", that doesn't make it so.

"Just because people do good things in the name of religion, that doesn't make the religion itself good."

"It does if they wouldn't be doing the good deed without the religion. Don't you realize that all semblance of morality would have disintegrated long ago without religion?"

As I already pointed out, but you apparently missed, that's precisely why religion is bad in this situation. It teaches people that the only reason to be nice to each other is because such-and-such deity says so, and will kick your ass if you don't. People need to learn that morality comes from the common good, not some supernatural overlord. But religion has totally screwed that up.

>"Don't you realize that all semblance of morality would have disintegrated long ago without religion?"

I couldn't disagree with this more, for obvious reasons.

quote:

---

It's not God's word, it's the word of some schmoe from way back when that felt like writing a book...

Except that that's in contravention of all evidence. Heck, even Rob knows better than to propose that it was all written by a solitary human.

---

Religion was an important part of pulling the human race out of barbarism - but it can be compared to using a ladder to climb out of a pit. After you've climbed it - using the ladder only brings you down into the pit again.

- Schmidt's Maxim on Religion

Only those who look upwards can see that we're not out of the pit.

Rob:

I don't know, why would you burn women at the stake for practicing witchraft?

Christians don't. People CLAIMING to be Christians have, but I can hardly be held responsible for the actions of my dopplegangers, can I?

Lee:

So. . . any charity is therefore bad?

No, just ones you're forced into.

And what's this stealing? It's called "taxation."

Taxation for unauthorized purposes. They're taking our money for things that we never said for which they could do so. Thus, stealing.

And I don't like the sound of this "deserving" clause you've worked in

Too bad.

after all, you're not the most tolerant of people, Omeychops.

You have a screwy definition of "tolerant". Have I tried to burn you at the stake because you disagree with me? No? Then I'm tolerant.

Treknophyle:

Why can't (insert religious affiliation here) followers simply follow their faith - NOT tell us about it, and live in the serene hope of their eternal reward?

Because then we WOULDN'T be following our faith.

------------------
"How do you define fool?"
"I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination."
- CJ Cherryh, Invader

Has it ever occured to you that your belief that religion is stupid might BE what leads you off a cliff?

------------------
"How do you define fool?"
"I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination."
- CJ Cherryh, Invader

"Christians don't. People CLAIMING to be Christians have, but I can hardly be held responsible for the actions of my dopplegangers, can I?"

So am I right in assuming you wouldn't consider the administration of the Spanish Inquisition Christian? How about the people who fought in the Crusades who massacred, raped, and pillaged in God's name? How about the people who excommunicated Gallileo for simply stating the Earth wasn't the centre of the universe?
Or what about missionaries who spread disease in North America so they would be more convincing to the natives when their local medicine man looked helpless?
How about the 20 million who fought and died in China for who they thought was another Jesus Christ?
Or how about the papacy that even Dante condemmed to Hell in Dante's Inferno?
Would anyone who participates in an abortion be Christian?

Where exactly do you draw the line?

------------------
"The Guide says that there is an art to flying...or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." - Life, the Universe and Everything

Man, I don't care religion and what not, when you kill woman for prositution, then it's just plan wrong. And in this case, they choice probably some of the most painful and barbarious way to kill, STONED TO DEATH!

Man, it's the freakin' 21 century man? There is such a thing call compassion man!!

------------------
What is the difference between a terriorist and your girlfriend?
- With terrorist, there is a chance of negotiation.

In any case, from a Christian viewpoint:
I can't see how stoning is any worse than say: abortion.....or capital punishment by electrocution.

At least she committed a crime...wheras that un-born child is blameless for its own creation and has committed no crimes.

------------------
"The Guide says that there is an art to flying...or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." - Life, the Universe and Everything

They didn't follow the teachings of Christ, and thus would not constitute Christians. Now since their actions were born of enforced ignorance, they can't be held quite as guilty as they would be had they known the truth. I can tell you with a great deal of certainty, though, that some popes are gonna burn.

How about the people who excommunicated Gallileo for simply stating the Earth wasn't the centre of the universe?

Disfellowshipping someone is only permissable for continued sin, and then only after every attempt has been made to resolve the situation. Disagreeing with the pope does not constitute a sin.

Or what about missionaries who spread disease in North America so they would be more convincing to the natives when their local medicine man looked helpless?

There's no evidence of that.

How about the 20 million who fought and died in China for who they thought was another Jesus Christ?

They didn't follow Christ's teachings.

Or how about the papacy that even Dante condemmed to Hell in Dante's Inferno?

As I said, a number of them will most certainly burn in Hell. It's written (in James, IIRC) that teachers should be careful, lest they teach falsely, for they will be judged more strenuously than the rest. There were popes that PURPOSEFULLY taught that which they knew to be false, who deceived entire generations, and were responsible for thousands of deaths.

Would anyone who participates in an abortion be Christian?

Ah, now you're getting into people who are actually still alive. I refuse to comment on the eternal state of people for whom said state has not yet been finalized. Needless to say, abortion is the killing of an innocent human being, and is thus sin (assuming no mitigating circumstances, such as total fetal inviability). However, all have sinned, and sin can be forgiven, if asked. Draw your own conclusion.

As for your so-called Christian viewpoint, Mucus...

Abortion is the worst single crime that I can imagine. It is the murder of the very essence of innocence. Stoning someone for something as minor and harmless as this, however, is pretty close. Executing a deranged serial killer, however, is perfectly justifiable. It saves lives.

------------------
"How do you define fool?"
"I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination."
- CJ Cherryh, Invader

And I didn't say that "electricution" is fun either.

I said stoning is consider to be more barbarious and more painful then the other.

When stoned, you die of a slow death, unless a big one hits you on the head and nock you out. By exectricution, things can be over in 10 seconds.

------------------
What is the difference between a terriorist and your girlfriend?
- With terrorist, there is a chance of negotiation.

Not that I ever said I supported electrocution.

------------------
"How do you define fool?"
"I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination."
- CJ Cherryh, Invader

Anytime one of them (or a lot of them, in the cases of the Inquisition and the Crusades) go bad, the other ones just blithely claim "Oh, those guys weren't like US, they're PSEUDO-Christians! We're the REAL Christians. We'd NEVER do anything like THAT..."

Of course, you don't see them actively condemning what was done, or opposing it, or taking steps and making sure that such things could never happen again (by, for instance, making the wall of separation of Church and State HIGHER and STRONGER.)

I mean, if I was an advocate of "Bob-ism," and I went around seeing other Bobists doing things that I KNEW were wrong in the name of Bob, I'd be REALLY pissed off, and most certainly take up whatever was necessary to oppose them. Actively. Not sit passively back and go 'oh, those aren't REAL Bobists.' No sir, as an adherent to a creed, it is one's DUTY to see that that creed is not abused by other adherents.