You hear this all the time. “Look at all the good my church does! What do YOU do?” Is there any truth to this idea, that Christians contribute more than atheists do to society? The short answer is, “There is no way to know”.
The problem is one of data. We have data on how much Christians contribute to society financially. Atheism is not an organization of any sort, so there is no data to show how much atheists contribute to society. Surely it’s going to be less simply because there are far fewer atheists worldwide than there are Christians. If it were not less that would be very, very telling about the “charitable” nature of Christians. And how do you measure it? The claim doesn't specifically state that it's "financial contributions" and, in fact, examples given are usually not financial. But how do you measure the value of non-financial contributions to determine which is "more"?
Certainly we do know that atheists do contribute to society. We do have some records of various atheist groups helping out at various disaster sites or giving to various charities. We also have things like the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which contribute to society by protecting people’s rights from being trampled on by Christians, but I doubt Christians would count that as any form of “contribution” to society. So another problem becomes one of perception. What does it mean to “contribute to society”? And that is where we see the first real evidence that they are secretly stacking the deck. THEY choose what is and is not a “contribution to society”. Much of the known work atheists do they consider to be a “detriment”, not a contribution.
So let’s look at one example of what we do know of Christian contributions to society. Catholics just LOVE to point out that a lot of the hospitals worldwide are Catholic hospitals. What they don’t want to tell you is that they make a profit for the Catholic Church. What they also don’t want to tell you is that Catholic hospitals provide roughly HALF the “charity care” that public hospitals do according to a report by the ACLU (page 12). What they also don’t want you do realize is that every Catholic church is a veritable castle worth millions, a huge expenditure which could be better spent helping people, if that were the real ultimate goal. They also don’t want you to know that the Catholic Church isn’t just opening new hospitals left and right, they’re buying up existing hospitals, replacing the public hospitals which provide twice as much charitable care as they do. So the reality is that the Catholic Church is actually REDUCING charitable contributions to public health!!! That you’re providing half a bowl of soup and a slice of bread to feed the poor is IRRELEVANT if you do that by running out the people who are providing an entire bowl of soup and two slices of bread. It doesn’t make you a savior, it makes you a dick!
The reality of the situation is that we cannot look at the contributions of “Christians” any more than we can look at the contributions of atheists. We can look at the contributions of Christian and atheist “organizations”, who are required by law to report their financial activities. Individual Christians and atheists, unless they say, “Look at me! I’m helping!”, we have no way of knowing what they do. A quick search turns up numbers in America of 83% identifying as Christian with 3.1% identifying as atheist. So all things being equal we would expect Christians to “contribute” at a rate of a little more than 26.75x the rate of atheist contributions in America. It’s difficult to look up actual numbers, though, because people only really study the monetary contributions, much of which goes to the religious organizations themselves, for Christians. Yet this claim is mysteriously never about “monetary contributions”, it’s always the completely undefined vague “contributions” with hospitals being a common example with many hidden caveats actually making them less a “contribution” and more a “detriment” to society. And this is based, not on opinion, but the cold, hard fact that they are reducing charitable medical treatment by half, not to mention the many, many ways in which they can and do refuse care to people they disagree with. And let’s also not forget that Catholic hospitals do half the charity work that public hospitals do AND they’re tax free, making their actual contribution significantly less, once you figure in the lost public funds.
So essentially, these claims are made out of ignorance by the ignorant, those who have a couple of facts here and there, but are ignorant of the fact that they are ignorant of the facts. We don’t know what individual atheists or Christians contribute or what they contribute outside of their own interests, such as their church. We only know what organizations contribute, and then only financially. Christians are, by nature, more organized and they have much higher numbers, so of course they’re going to contribute more financially. But whether those monetary contributions help or harm society, that’s a lot harder to look up. Certainly it’s not a benefit to many members of society to refuse half of reproductive care, or to refuse to help transgender people. It’s also hardly a benefit to society to simply replace effective, giving hospitals with less effective, less giving hospitals, all without explaining to patients what rights they are losing by going to those hospitals, patients being transferred to them without even being told there are options, or even differences, and making access to more comprehensive, secular care less available and further away.
Is it really “giving to society” to replace something as a means of making money and imposing your beliefs on others? Is it really giving to society if you are actually eliminating half of the charity care? Is it really giving to society if you eliminate the hospital which will serve your every need and replace it with one which will serve every need they don’t have a problem with? Is reducing the availability of care, including charity care, really “giving” just because you provide half as much as what you’re replacing? To me, that seems like “taking” from society. They are taking choices, they are taking options, they are taking charity care away from society and giving back half as much. If that’s the standard then sign me up to be the givingest person ever! For every billion I take away from the American public I will give half a billion away!...to a business…which I own…which makes me money…and is tax free…and replaces a better business… What can I say? I’m a giver!
The problem is one of data. We have data on how much Christians contribute to society financially. Atheism is not an organization of any sort, so there is no data to show how much atheists contribute to society. Surely it’s going to be less simply because there are far fewer atheists worldwide than there are Christians. If it were not less that would be very, very telling about the “charitable” nature of Christians. And how do you measure it? The claim doesn't specifically state that it's "financial contributions" and, in fact, examples given are usually not financial. But how do you measure the value of non-financial contributions to determine which is "more"?
Certainly we do know that atheists do contribute to society. We do have some records of various atheist groups helping out at various disaster sites or giving to various charities. We also have things like the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which contribute to society by protecting people’s rights from being trampled on by Christians, but I doubt Christians would count that as any form of “contribution” to society. So another problem becomes one of perception. What does it mean to “contribute to society”? And that is where we see the first real evidence that they are secretly stacking the deck. THEY choose what is and is not a “contribution to society”. Much of the known work atheists do they consider to be a “detriment”, not a contribution.
So let’s look at one example of what we do know of Christian contributions to society. Catholics just LOVE to point out that a lot of the hospitals worldwide are Catholic hospitals. What they don’t want to tell you is that they make a profit for the Catholic Church. What they also don’t want to tell you is that Catholic hospitals provide roughly HALF the “charity care” that public hospitals do according to a report by the ACLU (page 12). What they also don’t want you do realize is that every Catholic church is a veritable castle worth millions, a huge expenditure which could be better spent helping people, if that were the real ultimate goal. They also don’t want you to know that the Catholic Church isn’t just opening new hospitals left and right, they’re buying up existing hospitals, replacing the public hospitals which provide twice as much charitable care as they do. So the reality is that the Catholic Church is actually REDUCING charitable contributions to public health!!! That you’re providing half a bowl of soup and a slice of bread to feed the poor is IRRELEVANT if you do that by running out the people who are providing an entire bowl of soup and two slices of bread. It doesn’t make you a savior, it makes you a dick!
The reality of the situation is that we cannot look at the contributions of “Christians” any more than we can look at the contributions of atheists. We can look at the contributions of Christian and atheist “organizations”, who are required by law to report their financial activities. Individual Christians and atheists, unless they say, “Look at me! I’m helping!”, we have no way of knowing what they do. A quick search turns up numbers in America of 83% identifying as Christian with 3.1% identifying as atheist. So all things being equal we would expect Christians to “contribute” at a rate of a little more than 26.75x the rate of atheist contributions in America. It’s difficult to look up actual numbers, though, because people only really study the monetary contributions, much of which goes to the religious organizations themselves, for Christians. Yet this claim is mysteriously never about “monetary contributions”, it’s always the completely undefined vague “contributions” with hospitals being a common example with many hidden caveats actually making them less a “contribution” and more a “detriment” to society. And this is based, not on opinion, but the cold, hard fact that they are reducing charitable medical treatment by half, not to mention the many, many ways in which they can and do refuse care to people they disagree with. And let’s also not forget that Catholic hospitals do half the charity work that public hospitals do AND they’re tax free, making their actual contribution significantly less, once you figure in the lost public funds.
So essentially, these claims are made out of ignorance by the ignorant, those who have a couple of facts here and there, but are ignorant of the fact that they are ignorant of the facts. We don’t know what individual atheists or Christians contribute or what they contribute outside of their own interests, such as their church. We only know what organizations contribute, and then only financially. Christians are, by nature, more organized and they have much higher numbers, so of course they’re going to contribute more financially. But whether those monetary contributions help or harm society, that’s a lot harder to look up. Certainly it’s not a benefit to many members of society to refuse half of reproductive care, or to refuse to help transgender people. It’s also hardly a benefit to society to simply replace effective, giving hospitals with less effective, less giving hospitals, all without explaining to patients what rights they are losing by going to those hospitals, patients being transferred to them without even being told there are options, or even differences, and making access to more comprehensive, secular care less available and further away.
Is it really “giving to society” to replace something as a means of making money and imposing your beliefs on others? Is it really giving to society if you are actually eliminating half of the charity care? Is it really giving to society if you eliminate the hospital which will serve your every need and replace it with one which will serve every need they don’t have a problem with? Is reducing the availability of care, including charity care, really “giving” just because you provide half as much as what you’re replacing? To me, that seems like “taking” from society. They are taking choices, they are taking options, they are taking charity care away from society and giving back half as much. If that’s the standard then sign me up to be the givingest person ever! For every billion I take away from the American public I will give half a billion away!...to a business…which I own…which makes me money…and is tax free…and replaces a better business… What can I say? I’m a giver!
Have you ever noticed all the drug commercials on TV lately? Why is it the side effects never include penile enlargement or super powers?
Side effects may include super powers or enlarged penis which may become permanent with continued use. Stop taking Killatol immediately and consult your doctor if you experience penis enlargement of more than 3 inches, laser vision, superhuman strength, invulnerability, the ability to explode heads with your mind or time travel. Killatoll is not for everyone, especially those who already have convertibles or vehicles of ridiculous size to supplement penis size.
Side effects may include super powers or enlarged penis which may become permanent with continued use. Stop taking Killatol immediately and consult your doctor if you experience penis enlargement of more than 3 inches, laser vision, superhuman strength, invulnerability, the ability to explode heads with your mind or time travel. Killatoll is not for everyone, especially those who already have convertibles or vehicles of ridiculous size to supplement penis size.
