Despite believing in Gods, Lucretius, like Epicurusfelt that religion was born of fear and ignorance, and that understanding the natural world would free people of its shackles. Voltaire complained about Jews killed by other Jews for worshiping a golden calf and similar actions, he also condemned how Christians killed other Christians over religious differences and how Christians killed Native Americans for not being baptised. Voltaire claimed the real reason for these killings was that Christians wanted to plunder the wealth of those killed.
Print this page What's wrong with charity Most people would say that charity is always good, but not everyone. Some argue that charity is sometimes carried out badly - or less well than it should be - while others think that charity can bring bad results even when it is well implemented.
The earlier arguments in this section are criticisms of the whole idea of charity and charitable giving. Later arguments focus on some aspects of charity that they claim are bad. Thinking too small Charities often target symptoms, not causes The accusation is that charity helps the recipient with their problem, but it doesn't do much to deal with the causes of that problem.
Particular aspects of this are dealt with in the next two topics. It certainly is true that some charities do stopgap or 'band-aid' work, either exclusively or some of the time. But in fact, a lot of charity work is devoted to dealing with the fundamental causes of problems: These two examples highlight very different problems.
Combating cancer is a relatively simple scientific problem, while global poverty requires more than a scientific operation, or finding a better way to manage world resources.
Combating poverty involves slow processes of political, cultural and social change, with many stakeholders, significant opposition and serious issues of self-determination and coercion to be navigated.
And long-term campaigns pose another ethical problem: The famous story of the boy and the starfish shows why using charity to fix individual problems can be very valuable. Once upon a time, a man walking along a beach saw a boy picking up starfish and throwing them into the sea. He asked the boy why he was throwing starfish into the sea.
The boy replied, "The tide is going out. If I don't throw them in, they'll dry up and die.
You can't possibly make a difference! The idea is that charity is wrong when it's used to patch up the effects of the fundamental injustices that are built into the structure and values of a society. Charity, from this viewpoint, can sometimes be seen as actually accepting the injustice itself, while trying to mitigate the consequences of the injustice.
One person who wrote on this is the American theologian Reinhold Niebuhr. We have previously suggested that philanthropy combines genuine pity with the display of power and that the latter element explains why the powerful are more inclined to be generous than to grant social justice.
Reinhold Niebuhr, Moral Man and Immoral Society, Niebuhr thought that a powerful person's donation to charity was a display of his power and an expression of his pity.
And Niebuhr added His generous impulse freezes within him if his power is challenged or his generosities are accepted without suitable humility. Reinhold Niebuhr, Moral Man and Immoral Society, One example given by Niebuhr who was writing in s USA was the way charitable help for black education didn't deal with the roots of the problem.
His language is not in line with modern racial sensibilities, but the point is still of value. The Negro schools, conducted under the auspices of white philanthropy, encourage individual Negroes to higher forms of self-realisation; but they do not make a frontal attack upon the social injustices from which the Negro suffers.
Reinhold Niebuhr, Moral Man and Immoral Society, Failing to change society Charity may not provide the best solution to a problem Let's agree that the purpose of giving to charity is to solve particular problems and choose the problem of world poverty. Let's also agree that we want to do the most effective thing to help reduce world poverty.Religions and Development Research Programme Corruption, Religion and Moral Development Heather Marquette International Development Department School of Government and Society University of Birmingham Working Paper 42 - Religions and Development Research Programme The Religions and Development Research Programme Consortium is an international research partnership that is .
Many religious institutions are corrupt and exploit the vulnerable for financial gain. Religion has been used as a form of social control. Most religions are patriarchal in nature and have promoted the subjugation of women.
Religion and Politics. One reason for the importance of this topic is that religions often make strong claims on people’s allegiance, and universal religions make these claims on all people, rather than just a particular community. this would be a much more difficult argument to make.
Against these positions, the liberal tradition has. Even before the Supreme Court’s decision granting same-sex couples a constitutional right to wed, legal scholars and others have been trying to determine how such a ruling might affect religious institutions.
Resources. The case against human rights If this argument is Both an argument against religions as corrupt institutions foreign aid and human rights enforcement can be corrupted or undermined because western GLOBAL PROGRAMME AGAINST CORRUPTION CONFERENCES Vienna.
The Case Against School Prayer The original pre Pledge, without "under God." "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.".