Man, I type a response to a post and the post is gone before I can complete the reply.


It's happened several times.

There were some good posts I had responses to.




So, I just checked definition of secular and it turns out a religious person can be secular.

Seems reasonable since I know religious have founded secular charities.

According to the Wikipedia article on Secularism. "Significant contributions to principles
used in modern secularism came from prominent theologians and christian writers such as
St. Augustine, William of Ockham, Marsilius of Padua, Martin Luther, Roger Williams, John Locke
and Talleyrand"

Interesting, seeing christians lay a claim to secularism.

I'm no history expert, so who knows. Still, it makes me wonder.

A couple posters here have implicitly laid claims to secularism, without support, in posts that
are no longer around. Glad the posts are gone. I don't want to call them out on it.
Before coming here, I used to lay claim to secularism myself.

Basically their claim was along the lines of; we are secularists, secularism is good, religious aren't, so they are bad.

Yes religion is bull, - and very bad - but the fact remains that they are doing charity, and doing secular charity.

To date, when I've heard people talk about secular charities it's as if the charities were necessarily Atheist.
Sure some promote/are Atheism/Atheist, but, charities are defined by their mission statement. Many, if not most, take no position on god.

Difficult seeing the secular St. Jude Children's Research Hospital as Atheist. Secular Sunday Assembly and the Oasis Network explicitly
state that they are not Atheist. Who am I to know better than them? Murdock Trust, secular, promotes religious and secular organizations.
Atheist and promoting religion? Until recently secular Children International gave only to Holy Land causes. Was it Atheist?
The non-theistic American Ethical Union describes itself as a "religious movement, and is recognized by the U.S. government as a church.
Now there's a story. 

Claiming organizations, that take no position on god, for Atheism and Secularism didn't quite feel right to me.

It seemed to me that with %70 of Americans religious, roughly %70 of most secular charity volunteers should be religious,
and the same %70 should be true of most secular charities' paid management.

I've searched, and found no data on the beliefs/non-beliefs of such charity workers.

Now that I've seen the christians claim secularism (above).
If both religious and non-religious can claim most secular charities as theirs, on the basis that they share secular ideas...

Surely the people who have claim to a secular charity are the ones who work there, take responsibility for it, as well as those who donate to it.


Now, I'm not judging, or accusing anyone. I'm partial to using the word 'secular' liberally, myself. It is just that it is difficult to
keep my topic on course when I can't even apply a shared understanding of Secularism or Atheism.


Anyway, the topic of these posts was "I kinda wish atheists did charity better than them" not, "I wish secularists did charity better."

More when I can.

(June 30, 2025 at 9:15 pm)Sandman Wrote: 1) According to a 2022 Survey 63 percent of all food banks were religious.

What percentage of the population is religious?

Quote:2) Additionally, in the states surveyed, half of the religious congregations gave time and money to both christian and secular food banks.

What's the other half doing?

Quote:The AI also provided examples like the Los Angeles Regional Food Bank. A search of that site reveals multiple churches that support the organization.

Wow. More than one church.

(June 30, 2025 at 9:16 pm)Sandman Wrote: Man, I type a response to a post and the post is gone before I can complete the reply.

---

It's happened several times.

There were some good posts I had responses to.




So, I just checked definition of secular and it turns out a religious person can be secular.

Seems reasonable since I know religious have founded secular charities.

According to the Wikipedia article on Secularism. "Significant contributions to principles
used in modern secularism came from prominent theologians and christian writers such as
St. Augustine, William of Ockham, Marsilius of Padua, Martin Luther, Roger Williams, John Locke
and Talleyrand"

Interesting, seeing christians lay a claim to secularism.

I'm no history expert, so who knows. Still, it makes me wonder.

---

A couple posters here have implicitly laid claims to secularism, without support, in posts that
are no longer around. Glad the posts are gone. I don't want to call them out on it.
Before coming here, I used to lay claim to secularism myself. 

---

Basically their claim was along the lines of; we are secularists, secularism is good, religious aren't, so they are bad.

Yes religion is bull, - and very bad - but the fact remains that they are doing charity, and doing secular charity.

To date, when I've heard people talk about secular charities it's as if the charities were necessarily Atheist.
Sure some promote/are Atheism/Atheist, but, charities are defined by their mission statement. Many, if not most, take no position on god.

Difficult seeing the secular St. Jude Children's Research Hospital as Atheist. Secular Sunday Assembly and the Oasis Network explicitly
state that they are not Atheist. Who am I to know better than them? Murdock Trust, secular, promotes religious and secular organizations.
Atheist and promoting religion? Until recently secular Children International gave only to Holy Land causes. Was it Atheist?
The non-theistic American Ethical Union describes itself as a "religious movement, and is recognized by the U.S. government as a church.
Now there's a story. 

Claiming organizations, that take no position on god, for Atheism and Secularism didn't quite feel right to me.

It seemed to me that with %70 of Americans religious, roughly %70 of most secular charity volunteers should be religious,
and the same %70 should be true of most secular charities' paid management.

I've searched, and found no data on the beliefs/non-beliefs of such charity workers.

Now that I've seen the christians claim secularism (above).
If both religious and non-religious can claim most secular charities as theirs, on the basis that they share secular ideas...

Surely the people who have claim to a secular charity are the ones who work there, take responsibility for it, as well as those who donate to it.


Now, I'm not judging, or accusing anyone. I'm partial to using the word 'secular' liberally, myself. It is just that it is difficult to
keep my topic on course when I can't even apply a shared understanding of Secularism or Atheism.


Anyway, the topic of these posts was "I kinda wish atheists did charity better than them" not, "I wish secularists did charity better."

---

More when I can.

You are new here and ready to call out long time members.
Great plan.
More when you can - oh, the an-ti-ci-pa-tion.

(June 30, 2025 at 9:40 pm)Paleophyte Wrote:

(June 30, 2025 at 9:15 pm)Sandman Wrote: 1) According to a 2022 Survey 63 percent of all food banks were religious.

What percentage of the population is religious?

Quote:2) Additionally, in the states surveyed, half of the religious congregations gave time and money to both christian and secular food banks.

What's the other half doing?

Quote:The AI also provided examples like the Los Angeles Regional Food Bank. A search of that site reveals multiple churches that support the organization.

Wow. More than one church.

Ah, you asked something like this before. Glad to get to reply.

First, we are talking about churches that do food banks. Of course most of the many christians who do not go to church are not running food banks.
They support food banks, and other causes on their own. At least the percentage of those that do charity.
Additionally many rural churches are too small to host food banks, so they do other things.

Second, they have plenty of other charities to work on; housing for the poor, support for homeless shelters, drug rehabilitation, after-school programs and Tutoring,
home repair and maintenance for those in need, back to school supplies drives, and others. It may seem that with government programs, and all the work
secular charities do that there would be no need for church charity, but churches are finding need in their communities and beyond.

Third, the study I cited previously refers to churches generally supporting food banks. It does not specify secular or no.
For clarification, this is just added to demonstrate that churches do support secular food banks.

arewethereyet

(June 30, 2025 at 9:16 pm)Sandman Wrote: Man, I type a response to a post and the post is gone before I can complete the reply.


[hide]It's happened several times.

There were some good posts I had responses to.

........

More when I can.

You are new here and ready to call out long time members.
Great plan.
More when you can - oh, the an-ti-ci-pa-tion.

Great plan - Ha ha ha ha ha. Hey how can I learn if I don't ask questions?
Eh - I spent most of my life as an outcast anyway.
I'm not looking for social validation.
oh, the an-ti-ci-pa-tion - And you are replying to me?

(June 30, 2025 at 9:15 pm)Sandman Wrote: First, you say "selfish atheist" is a commonly held, idea/trope that is maybe wrong. So my claim is, what? Prejudiced or invalid? Not worth listening to? I've listened to plenty of people, address atheism, argue it.

There are selfish atheists, unselfish atheists, selfish theists, and unselfish theists. But it's a commonly-held trope that atheists are selfish. I'm not saying your claim is prejudiced or invalid, I'm pointing out that it regurgitates stereotypes without questioning them.

(June 30, 2025 at 9:15 pm)Sandman Wrote: Maybe once or twice have I heard the 'selfish atheist' term said and I'm not even sure about that. You say I have an unsupported Atheism claim. Please do support your claim that 'selfish atheist' is a commonly held idea. Considering your high standards for evidence, I expect I will be impressed and enlightened.

I asked you first to support your positive claim. It is unsupported because you haven't linked to reputable sources showing that atheists in fact donate less.

As for my writing that "selfish atheist" is a trope, well, perhaps you should read a little. Maybe talk to some of the Christians in your life. Maybe go on Christian forums where much back-patting happens. I don't think there's any scientific study on the matter, if that is what you're asking for, but I also don't see you providing anything other than your own anecdotal experience, in which case you really ought not ask me to satisfy evidentiary standards you cannot meet yourself.

(June 30, 2025 at 9:15 pm)Sandman Wrote: Btw, the above response is me supporting my claim.

Not so, sirrah -- repeating a claim is no giving evidence for it.

(June 30, 2025 at 9:15 pm)Sandman Wrote: Regarding AI:

1. A limited number of minor, technical errors in a video or document, does not automatically invalidate the entirety of it.
    Human made documents can contain typos that do not invalidate the document. The video does not demonstrate your otherwise valid point.
2. You only use human made evidence? Do I need to delve into the problems of human error?
3. It's true that the way an AI comes to it's results is obscure, and problematic. There are ways to check its results.
    When asked, the AI I use provides links to human sources, which you prize, to support it's results.
    I use the links, though not always. Certainly should use them more.

It's funny that you mention "human error". You see, when you ask AI a question, it searches human input and collates it without regard for sourcing or citation which supports it. This is why you get airplanes with propellers coming out of engine nacelles rather than off the spinner, which any human would recognize as wrong.

Now, rather than obvious photographical errors such as above, now try to correct written errors which may or may not be obvious to the reader.

In the fields I care about and study, I know who is trustworthy and who isn't. I've also read enough that when some human gets something wrong in those fields, I can raise a question-mark. The problem with your approach is that while your AI analyses may provide source-citations, you yourself have no way of knowing how the AI has analyzed the information, what data-points it has weighted, and whether or not it has cross-checked itself.

And yes -- I only use human sources, and I am well aware of the possibility of error, which is why I cross-check. It's laborious, and AI is easy, but facts matter more to me than ease.

(June 30, 2025 at 9:15 pm)Sandman Wrote: My statements, which you asked evidence for:


1) According to a 2022 Survey 63 percent of all food banks were religious.

The website is BMC Public Health.

The research report is titled "A descriptive analysis of food pantries in twelve American states: hours of operation, faith-based affiliation, and location"

Oooh, 12 states out of, what is it now, fifty?

(June 30, 2025 at 9:15 pm)Sandman Wrote: 2) Additionally, in the states surveyed, half of the religious congregations gave time and money to both christian and secular food banks.

Let's see those proportions.

(June 30, 2025 at 9:15 pm)Sandman Wrote: Okay, I followed the AI generated link and got an article:

The website is: The Conversation

The Article is: "Nearly half of all churches and other faith institutions help people get enough to eat"
        The research this article references is behind multiple paywalls.

If I had followed this link, I would have not made statement 2. so I definitely got that wrong. My bad. I should have followed the link first. Even so,


The AI also provided examples like the Los Angeles Regional Food Bank. A search of that site reveals multiple churches that support the organization.

Yeah, that doesn't answer my points, or points raised by others.

Think for yourself, brotha. Seriously.

(June 30, 2025 at 10:31 pm)Sandman Wrote:

(June 30, 2025 at 9:40 pm)Paleophyte Wrote: What percentage of the population is religious?


What's the other half doing?


Wow. More than one church.

Ah, you asked something like this before. Glad to get to reply.

First, we are talking about churches that do food banks. Of course most of the many christians who do not go to church are not running food banks.
They support food banks, and other causes on their own. At least the percentage of those that do charity.
Additionally many rural churches are too small to host food banks, so they do other things.

Second, they have plenty of other charities to work on; housing for the poor, support for homeless shelters, drug rehabilitation, after-school programs and Tutoring,
home repair and maintenance for those in need, back to school supplies drives, and others. It may seem that with government programs, and all the work
secular charities do that there would be no need for church charity, but churches are finding need in their communities and beyond.

Third, the study I cited previously refers to churches generally supporting food banks. It does not specify secular or no.
For clarification, this is just added to demonstrate that churches do support secular food banks.

With your fucking god on your side why are food banks necessary?


Let me guess, FREE WILL

(July 1, 2025 at 4:55 am)h4ym4n Wrote:

(June 30, 2025 at 10:31 pm)Sandman Wrote: Ah, you asked something like this before. Glad to get to reply.

First, we are talking about churches that do food banks. Of course most of the many christians who do not go to church are not running food banks.
They support food banks, and other causes on their own. At least the percentage of those that do charity.
Additionally many rural churches are too small to host food banks, so they do other things.

Second, they have plenty of other charities to work on; housing for the poor, support for homeless shelters, drug rehabilitation, after-school programs and Tutoring,
home repair and maintenance for those in need, back to school supplies drives, and others. It may seem that with government programs, and all the work
secular charities do that there would be no need for church charity, but churches are finding need in their communities and beyond.

Third, the study I cited previously refers to churches generally supporting food banks. It does not specify secular or no.
For clarification, this is just added to demonstrate that churches do support secular food banks.

With your fucking god on your side why are food banks necessary?


Let me guess, FREE WILL

Ah, for the good old days - manna, loaves, and fishes just there for the taking!

Boru

Sandman keeps pushing his agenda, and when someone tries to explain to him, he misunderstands what is being told to him and just keeps repeating the same crap.

(June 30, 2025 at 10:31 pm)Sandman Wrote:

(June 30, 2025 at 9:40 pm)Paleophyte Wrote: What percentage of the population is religious?


What's the other half doing?


Wow. More than one church.

Ah, you asked something like this before. Glad to get to reply.

First, we are talking about churches that do food banks. Of course most of the many christians who do not go to church are not running food banks.

So we've got 62% of the population supporting 63% of the food banks. I'm underimpressed.