A homeless man said, ‘Atheists are more generous than religious people’
This homeless man in the USA is holding a sign that says ‘which religion cares the most about the homeless?’ and he put nine begging bowls in front of him.
Each bowl is labelled as ‘Muslim’, ‘atheist’, ‘Hindu’, ‘Jewish’, ‘Buddhist’, ‘spiritual’, ‘agnostic’, ‘pagan’, and ‘Christian.
The homeless man says, ”The atheists are winning”. It means atheists are giving him more money than others.
Religious people generally help the poor more than atheists. But they do it to get rewards in afterlife. Most of them are simply selfish and greedy. They do not help to really help others, they help others to help themselves. Mostly they donate money to build churches, mosques, temples, gurudwaras, pagodas, synagogues. They do not give a damn to the eradication of poverty programs. When atheists help, they help out of sympathy and solidarity, love and compassion. They do it to make the world a better place. They do not do it to go to heaven. They have no bad selfish motive behind helping others. Atheists’ help is real cool and clean help. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have given billions of dollars to charities. Both of them are atheists.
The stats say, religious people help the poor more than atheists.
I’d be interested to see how those “stats” are derived. Specifically, I’d like to know they distinguished religious from non-religius donations.
If an atheist gave money to Catholic Charities (maybe because he figured they were in the best position to support his favorite cause), would that donation be credited to “atheists” or “Catholics?”
Money raised in churches would undoubtedly be tallied as “religious” donations. But is money raised elsewhere so easy to categorize? If a bunch of religious and nonreligious people all donate to the same charity, how would anyone determine whether “religious” or “nonreligious” people gave more?
atheist or religious whatever when it comes to money they have a motive behind. And speaking of. Bill gates and warren buffeft their coffers are overflowing so a little charity wont make a difference
I am not a very religious person and more on the side of a non-believer. But I have to take issue with your characterisation of Gates/Buffet. Bill Gates especially is a dangerous person.He made lots of money through monopoly/copyrights on Windows, a sub-standard product which would not have survived in a
genuinely competitive market. He is out to destroy a decent public school system in the US and is leading an assault on the teaching profession as we know it. And Africa, in the name of tacking hunger, he is promoting genetically modified (GM) food while his foundation is invested in bio-terrorists like Monsanto corporation. He should stop fucking around things which he doesn’t have a clue about and go back to just fucking up Windows. This is a good one on Gates/Buffet brand of “philanthropy” :
http://newint.org/features/2012/04/01/bill-gates-charitable-giving-ethics/?utm_medium=ni-email&utm_source=message&utm_campaign=na-enews-2012-05-15 While
I agree lots of bad things have been done in the name of religion, let’s not forget atheist bigots who are Islamophobic. You wrote about Bill Maher. There were few who supported Bush’s wars on Muslims. It is because of that reason I don’t like stereotyping. There is more than meets the eye.
When I look at this, I see an exercise in ingenuity – this guy knows how to raise money!
But you know what I don’t see, and you shouldn’t see? An opportunity to exploit this man’s experiences to make your (non)religion look better.
Ask yourself: when’s the last time your (non)religion gave a shit about income inequality? If an outreach opportunity comes to mind, get off your ass and join in. If it doesn’t, f-ing start one.
But don’t you dare pat yourself on the back because another member of your (non)religion threw a few more pennies into a jar than the others did.
”Atheists are more generous than religious people” » No Country for Women
Atheists are more generous than religious people because they know the world is messed up and there is no God that’s going to fix it.
Seeing as how he specifically labeled each basket by belief system, I’m not sure this means much. First, it could be that more atheists pass by him in a day than non atheists. Second, I have a feeling many atheists would see it as a challenge to put one over those who are religious. It makes them look better by comparison, so it motivates them to donate.
We just don’t need recognition so no one sees it. Christains donate to these “charities” or churches that keep most of the money AND get subsidies. The reason Christains have well known charities is because they spending more money advertising than actually helping.