So of course they went full fundie.

🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮

.

You've got to play these fucker's game and beat them at it.

If that's their parameters, let those who follow along with it be the ones sent there.

.

Sickening! 🤮

i went and got groceries from a food bank. they made me pray before i could leave with the food. i was thankful. but i was thankful to them! i don't believe in gawd, and don't have to, i know how to think.

i mean i had to stand in a circle holding hands with them. i stood there with my eyes wide open and watched them.

Food should not be conditional upon that sort of thing.

Odd the way they are always pushing their beliefs on others.

i don't go around knocking on doors telling you all the reasons you're wrong. don't do it to me.

Ever read "Ishmael?" Speaks to the issue of food as socio-political control mechanism.

Should be able to get electronic copy from library! 👍

thanks!

btw, it's a series. Ishmael is the 1st. 😊👍

that's being a good person. I can do that without a gawd.

THEY were influenced by their religion to give you food. It very well be that the principles of their religion to feed the hungry was THEIR motivation. I completely agree that just being a good person can and in some cases leads people to insure that people in need get food, but for these specific people it is living their religion that makes them provide this service to the broader community.

I also see a big difference between this and the Central Park hospitals. Here, it may be their religion that leads them to give of themselves and possibly even risk their own lives or health, but this requirement may limit the volunteers they can get in NYC and among the ones they have I suspect they will have many people who lie - if this is the only place they can volunteer.

I would guess the city gave them permission - even knowing they would do this - because the need for hospital beds is so great.

i'm not trying to change them. they are trying to change me. i want mutual respect. my beliefs are just as valid.

Religious intolerance and corporate greed.

The good samaritan helped and did so without demanding the passing of a religious test . That is the point of the story Jesus told.

Always exploiting! 🤬

if they have a pantry.

The receiver of the blessing is under duress. Our church never requests a performance of someone under duress. Doing that doesn't bring them closer to God; it only makes them feel inadequate and that they are being manipulated. A gift has no strings attached, just love.

It's like being with little kids and playing some nursery game with invisible friends.
You just smile and act nice - but its really really weird.

obviously i was in a hard place. i really felt like they were trying to get me to join their church.

are like this. I volunteer at a satellite food bank for St. Mary's Food Bank here in Phoenix, Arizona. We have written instructions that there is to be NO prayers until after the food box is given and only if the receiver wants a prayer. The receiver must initiate the request, we are not to offer to pray for them or with them.

it's respectful.

and charity.

It would be different if they were charging for their services or rejecting some patients based on whether they signed the statement of faith... but they’re donating their own time and treasure to help others (because that too is part of their faith).

wants to volunteer with them, yet to do what they're requiring is akin to betraying their own faith?

Orgs shouldn't have such requirements to offer assistance, but most of the faith-based orgs do, which is a huge problem in the poverty-assistance and disaster-relief sectors.

we're good people too.

Trying to push their bs brand of control... 🤮

I think most of us think of atheists/agnostics in these situations but I wanted to present the idea of someone who devoutly follows another faith.

Notice the anti-choice dynamic? No surprise there! Sickening!🤮

... it isn't about providing volunteer opportunities.

I was a minister who ran a volunteer recovery program after Hurricane Katrina. I would never have asked people to swear an oath of faith before they were allowed to volunteer. Why limit yourself to only true believers? How about you let them work alongside your true believers and perhaps be inspired to join your church? This is religious BS, and I can't imagine how anyone truly interested in relieving suffering would demand this. It's way more out of Caesar's playbook than Jesus'.

I don't have any problem with faith-based organizations that are both about serving the community AND providing an avenue for service opportunities to whoever wants to participate. The Salvation Army is actually a denomination, but I think anyone can volunteer to be a bell-ringer.

But I also wouldn't have a problem with Catholic Charities wanting one of their ministries to be just a Catholic outreach as long as they don't require church membership for recipients of the charity.

Since I believe in knowing the enemy, I looked up Samaritan's purse is technically a good charity, according to Charity Watch. However, they insist on spreading their vile rhetoric with each "good work" they perform.

Having been raised southern babtist, and having been throw out of Sunday school in eighth grade for saying I did not agree with the lesson of the day - "Wives be subservient to your husbands" - I find evangelicals to be vile, self serving hypocrites.

In general.

I have also known some very good and nice baptists. But their leadership was taken over in the 1970's and they became a cult.

They aren't staffing with just people of their own church or faith.
They are literally in The Commons, trying to enforce their faith on outside staff.

They aren't enforcing their faith on anyone.

We'll see. When staff becomes the patients, they'll be left with a lot of volunteers.
I have no idea why on this earth you are giving a pass to Franklin Fucking Graham.

They don't put a sign on their tents asking anyone with medical training to help out... they organize from within their network. In fact, that's likely the purpose of their "statement of faith".

I have no idea why on this earth you are giving a pass to Franklin Fucking Graham.

Because they showed up at risk to their own lives to help those in danger of losing theirs.

As long as they have no standard (apart from need) for whom they will help... I won't set a standard for who they can associate with. I certainly won't insist that they run their doctrine by me first before they'll be allowed to help.

but if all the staff really do believe God "will banish the unrighteous to everlasting punishment in hell", it's not clear. It seems the assurance asked for by the state senator has not yet been received.

There are two parallel messages in the parable:

1) You shouldn't allow your own prejudices (Samaritans hated Jews) to keep you from helping someone in need... or restrict you to only helping people like you.

2) You shouldn't allow your own prejudices (Jews hated the Samaritans) to keep you from recognizing true charity in someone you would otherwise dislike

I'd say that the SP volunteers show that they pass #1... while a fair number of DUers on this thread show that they fail test #2. There are a fair number of metaphorical jews looking at the metaphorical samarian and doubting that he would actually help people they assume he hates.

There's nothing in the parable that addresses the OP directly. No discussion of whether or not a church that wants to perform good works can or can no limit their ministry to others with similar beliefs.

I think of the Good Samaritan as a riff on love your neighbor as yourself....and everyone is your neighbor plus "do onto others"

I am surprised but not shocked.

God doesn't give a shit about Franklin Graham and his narcissistic brand.

Franklin Graham doesn't do anything unless it does.

Isn't that the repukes' 1st commandment?

and wth are they always trying to force others to think the way they do? I suppose they don't realize whst a boring world it would be...like robots. 🤮

In the end Samaritan's will get sued.

fuck them

🤮

Yuk!

straight Christians?