Comments

May 18, 2008 at 4:09 am

(1) Mark Davidson says:

Mr. Cline,

One point you failed to mention is that church/Synogogues/etc. members are very charitable towards the less fortunate per capita compared to atheists (see: http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism ). So certainly the state has a justification in not taxing churches/synogogues and in fact the state should want their to be more of them!

May 18, 2008 at 7:27 am

(2) Austin Cline says:

One point you failed to mention is that church/Synogogues/etc. members are very charitable towards the less fortunate per capita compared to atheists

This assumes that atheists aren’t trying to make the world a better place in ways that aren’t necessarily measured through traditional charities. In fact, I would say that if the only ways of being charitable that you can think of or that you can recognize involve donating money to a charitable organization, then religion has impoverished both your imagination and your morality.

You’ll notice, by the way, that countries like Sweden with a much lower rate of theism and religion also have lower rates of poverty, joblessness, sickness, etc. Curious how a nation with less religion and belief in gods also has less need for religion-based charity. I don’t think that it’s entirely coincidental.

So certainly the state has a justification in not taxing churches/synogogues and in fact the state should want their to be more of them!

May 18, 2008 at 11:29 am

(3) Mark Davidson says:

Mr. Cline,

I suppose we could debate the merits and weaknesses of capitalism and socialism. Both systems historically have had their excesses. And there are certainly strengths and weaknesses of both systems.

However, with that being said, Lincoln wisely said that there is great value regarding many matters to stick to the central issue. With that in mind, are atheists less or more charitable than theist? I do think it is important to compare apples with apples. So the question therefore is in regards to the issue you raised, Are Swedish theists more charitable than Swedish atheists? The extensive data in the USA would suggest that Swedish theists likely give more via personal private charities per capita than do Swedish atheists in addition to paying their taxes.

May 18, 2008 at 11:38 am

(4) Austin Cline says:

I suppose we could debate the merits and weaknesses of capitalism and socialism. Both systems historically have had their excesses. And there are certainly strengths and weaknesses of both systems.

Perhaps, but it wouldn’t necessarily be relevant to the claims you have made but not supported.

However, with that being said, Lincoln wisely said that there is great value regarding many matters to stick to the central issue.

You’re commenting on a post about the taxation of religious organizations and religious materials. Why would someone who has barely touched on the central issue try to promote the value of sticking to the central issue?

With that in mind, are atheists less or more charitable than theist?

Depends upon how you define “charity,” which in turn depends on what you consider the point of charity to be. If the point of charity is to make the world and community a better place, then the correct question of whether atheists do more, less, or about the same as theists when it comes to making the world and community a better place.

The extensive data in the USA would suggest that Swedish theists likely give more via personal private charities per capita than do Swedish atheists in addition to paying their taxes.

Really? That would only be a reasonable conclusion if you happen to know that behavior and economic patterns of American theists & atheists tends to match those of Swedish theists & atheists. I’m not aware of any such parallels — which is to say, I’m not aware of any data showing that the groups do parallel each other nor am I aware of any data showing that they do not. I would thus not presume that the economic behavior of American theists or atheists would be matched or not matched by Swedish theists or atheists.

You, however, are in possession of such data, yes? I’d like to see it and thus learn how strong of a foundation you are using to base your conclusion that differences between atheists and theists in American can be assumed to be true in Sweden as well.

May 18, 2008 at 9:53 pm

(5) Mark Davidson says:

Mr. Cline,

Given the disparity between the per capitia giving of Amnerican theists and American atheists, even when not counting church giving, one should easily be able to make the inference that Swedish theists give more than Swedish atheists. I cite the following:

“In regards to atheism and uncharitableness, charitable giving by atheists and agnostics in America is significantly less than by theists, according to a study by the Barna Group:

“ The typical no-faith American donated just $200 in 2006, which is more than seven times less than the amount contributed by the prototypical active-faith adult ($1500). Even when church-based giving is subtracted from the equation, active-faith adults donated twice as many dollars last year as did atheists and agnostics. In fact, while just 7% of active-faith adults failed to contribute any personal funds in 2006, that compares with 22% among the no-faith adults.[1] ”
Atheists and agnostics in America generally give significantly less to charity than theists.
Atheists and agnostics in America generally give significantly less to charity than theists.

Arthur C. Brooks wrote in Policy Review regarding data collected in the Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey (SCCBS) (data collected by in 2000 by researchers at universities throughout the United States and the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research):
“ The differences in charity between secular and religious people are dramatic. Religious people are 25 percentage points more likely than secularists to donate money (91 percent to 66 percent) and 23 points more likely to volunteer time (67 percent to 44 percent). And, consistent with the findings of other writers, these data show that practicing a religion is more important than the actual religion itself in predicting charitable behavior. For example, among those who attend worship services regularly, 92 percent of Protestants give charitably, compared with 91 percent of Catholics, 91 percent of Jews, and 89 percent from other religions.[2] ”

ABC News reported the following:
“ …the single biggest predictor of whether someone will be charitable is their religious participation.

Religious people are more likely to give to charity, and when they give, they give more money: four times as much. And Arthur Brooks told me that giving goes beyond their own religious organization:

“Actually, the truth is that they’re giving to more than their churches,” he says. “The religious Americans are more likely to give to every kind of cause and charity, including explicitly non-religious charities.”[3]”

cited from: http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism_and_Uncharitableness

May 18, 2008 at 10:10 pm

(6) Austin Cline says:

Given the disparity between the per capitia giving of Amnerican theists and American atheists, even when not counting church giving, one should easily be able to make the inference that Swedish theists give more than Swedish atheists.

Why, unless you already are in possession of information that patterns in America are paralleled by similar patterns in Sweden? Again, I ask you for that information. You claim that the inference is “easy ” to make. Fine, so provide the statistical basis for that inference. Provide the data allows you to infer anything from one nation to the other.

Or, alternatively, you can admit that you’re just making things up because they sound like they support bigoted presuppositions about atheists. I’m cool with either option, really.

Also, I should point out that you are — as feared — limiting “charity” to donations. That’s not just a poverty of imagination, but a poverty of moral imagination.

Religious people are more likely to give to charity, and when they give, they give more money: four times as much.

And this is all you are capable of understanding under the concept of “charity”? I’ve already pointed out the problem with this and, rather than directly address it, you simply attempt to reinforce it. Thanks, but I’m quite capable of pointing out the flaws in your position without your help. Please try to defend your position by directly addressing the challenges made to it rather than continually trying to make the holes wider so that no one can possibly miss them.

By the way, your attempts at link-spamming will fail because search engines don’t index the comments here. Thanks for trying — it has been amusing, I won’t deny it, but all the time and effort you’ve spent on that has been wasted. So there is no need to find excuses to include links back to your own Conservapedia articles. It won’t help any more than trying to use passive-aggressive tactics to get me to link to your irrelevant and unimportant articles in the hopes of having them rise up in search engine rankings.