The long history of religious groups doing charity in Haiti

since so many here seem to want to bash religion in the name of this disaster.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-01-20-haiti-church-volunteers_N.htm



and speaking as an Episcopalian, our cathedral and surrounding buildings in Haiti were also destroyed.

It's the people who practice the religion. I suggest we educate the people in Haiti about science and technology. It appears that they already know enough about religion. The people in Haiti are poor and ignorant for a reason. Why do these people have 6 to 8 children when they cannot afford one.

never mind. It would just get deleted anyway.

see first hand what some faith-based organizations are doing and have been doing, in Haiti. Many will donate...oh, but wait, its a religious group that getting the money-- can't do that! Sorry Haitians, can't help ya.

is NOT a religious group, and just happens to be doing much of the heavy lifting down there right now.

Don't forget them.

you had no intention or desire to recognize the Red Cross, either. Your glaring omission has been corrected.

If religious faith or religious aid was doing any significant good, Haiti wouldn't have been the most miserable spot on earth the day before the earthquake.

you know that. Right? All they do is help...not govern.

just the poorest in the Western hemisphere. The poorest countries are in the other hemisphere.

and what is significant to you and significant to someone there is probably quite different. Religion is not the base of economic development, nor would it make a claim to be. Help is help.

Not the poorest, but poverty is hardly the whole story.

and from what I can see doesn't come close.

the crippling foreign debt (which makes the poverty worse than it looks at a cursory glance) and the effect of all of that together. Plus a cripplingly high birth rate in a country that can't afford to feed the people it already has. And religious groups are not only not helping with that last one, in many cases they're making that ongoing disaster worse.

or religious charity, so your criticism of religion for these is pretty off-base. Way off-base, actually. High birth rates are true of many countries that are not Catholic or Christian, for that matter, though certainly the official position of the Catholic church is not a help. Many Catholics ignore the ban on contraception, but the high birth rate is certainly a problem.

My local TV news, on in the background, just showed a Catholic Relief hospital in Haiti.

the aid organizations, not all of which are religious, are reacting to the problems, not causing them.

raised by the earthquake, which for the record doesn't strike me as a trenchant point anyway. But you aren't rebutting the people who brought up theodicy after the quake happened. The question is not based on the premise that Catholics and other religious people never do any good anywhere.

I for one will continue to support Oxfam, the Red Cross, and Doctors Without Borders. My main problem with CRS is that most of the people who work for them (though there are dissenters) enforce the RCC's policy on condoms. This undermines their work in Haiti--as well as other countries where HIV is widespread--in a meaningful way. It shows that they have a priority other than doing what is medically necessary to help people. Their willingness to put religious doctrine above sound medical practice makes them, IMO, decidedly inferior to secular groups, with respect to AIDS relief if not more broadly.

----
Edit for clarity.

you find orphans you'll find religious groups exploiting them for profit, Haiti is no different.

are you just talkin' out you ass?

1) Is religion true?

This is not the same question as "Do some people find it a positive inspiration?" or "Do some people find it an effective coping mechanism?". The charitable work done in Haiti has no bearing on whether or not religious beliefs are factually true or superstitious nonsense.

Further, the horror of the earthquake, and even the pre-earthquake conditions in Haiti, rightly bring into question how well particular notions of God or the efficacy of prayer bear out in the real world.

2) Is the effect of religion a net positive effect?

Just like individual people or like other human organizations, you can always find a mix of good and bad. Pointing to the good works of religion is only half the equation.

This is not an attempt to take a shot at the people who sacrifice to help Haitians; nor is it a shot at the churches who believe they are doing good. It is a question of why Haiti has a long history of needing charity.

I don't think it's the fault of the churches. But, I do wonder if the churches ever question what they are accomplishing. My understanding of the problems in Haiti is that they are due to a number of international factors. One of which is world trade. Haitian farmers could not compete with this trade and were forced off their farms.

If Haitian poverty is due to international factors, have these churches spoken out against these factors. In the long term, speaking out against this system and mobilizing their parishioners to fight against this system may be far more effective than the current charity work that they are doing.

I don't intend any of this to deny that the churches do good in Haiti. Feeding and caring for poor people is clearly good and necessary work. However, I don't think anyone should accept that these people should continue to need help across the years.

n/t

President Aristide was a Catholic priest and an advocate of social justice. The U.S. deposed him TWICE.

earthquake were practising liberation theology? I believe that liberation theology is the right track for concerned religious people to advocate/follow. And, yes, Arisitde was a priest who advocated liberation theology. Aristide was also thrown out of his religious order for this advocacy. To my knowledge, most established US churces are opposed to liberation theology. Most, not all.

I think liberation theology goes in the right direction. It asks why people are poor and hungry and works to overcome those conditions. A lot of religious charity feeds and clothes the poor and hungary, a commendable act. But, if they don't work to overcome the causes of hunger and poverty, but rather to alleviate its effects, they could actually be working against the long term good of the people.

But I do know that Episcopal Relief and Development has been active in community organizing for years.

religious groups in general that are doing charity work in Haiti.

of being corrupt? I REALLY get tired of the presumption that because someone is of an approved religous bent they can't be a bad person! I think WWII should have put that nonsense to rest!
Sometimes advocates of social justice favor justice for certain groups. The Nazi regime arose because they felt like the Jews were cheating the populace you know.

Religious charities and religion are two separate things. I have my own issues with religious charities, but thats another topic.


Its not religious charities that are the threat to Haiti, it RELIGION in general.....

In the many years of my Christianity, I attended several churches. Each of them had missionaries in Haiti, and each of them received periodic reports from their missionaries regarding the work being done there. Each of those reports contained two separate messages.

The first message was humanitarian. The missionaries were helping to build things like wells and pumps, they were helping Haitians raise food and care for their sick, and they needed more money to continue these actions.

The second message, in my view, negated the first. The missionaries told us of how many souls they had saved, how many bibles they had passed out, how blessed they felt to be spreading the Word, and how they needed money and bibles to continue this "most important of Christ's works".

It is opportunistic to a fault to push your faith onto those who are desperate for your humanitarian assistance. It is opportunistic and FOUL to invite hungry people in a poor area to a makeshift cafeteria for dinner and then bombard them with a sermon in two languages (true story).

The bottom line for me is that missionaries are in Haiti for the wrong reasons. They are using money that could be better used to feed hungry children or, Pope forbid, pass out condoms to people who desperately need them, for the purpose of spreading their faith and passing out bibles. Their primary concern is to fulfill the "Great Commission."

Haiti, and other countries, need infrastructure desperately, and there is a charitable organization out there attempting to do just that. It's called Engineers Without Borders, and it recruits engineers from various colleges into the program to send them round the world to design and implement true infrastructure in 3rd world countries. They don't care about faith, and they don't have an ulterior motive. They are one of the charities that get my money, along with the International Red Cross, and Doctors Without Borders. Together, these organizations are attempting to help those in need, and they don't need any kind of faith-based motive to do it.

That's why Godless Communism never took hold in China.

If new atheists can't acknowledge the good work done by Christian charity groups in Haiti over many decades, then they are just as blinded by dogma as religious fundamentalists. New Atheist writers can only focus on the bad things that church groups have done, and dismiss the charitable work as something motivated by trying to please an angry god. A balanced view would be to acknowledge the good and the bad done by churches and religious adherents over the ages. From what little I know of the situation in Haiti, there would be no relief getting in if it wasn't for the know-how of religious charities that have been working there for decades.

You claim that we need fairness, and then you say this:
From what little I know of the situation in Haiti, there would be no relief getting in if it wasn't for the know-how of religious charities that have been working there for decades.

Sure, the Red Cross and other non-religious charities and entities never showed up down there until AFTER the quake, and couldn't have gotten into Haiti if not for the religious charities. :eyes:

BTW: It is easy to recognize the good work done by religious charities, while at the same time expressing disgust over their ulterior motives. It is perfectly possible to do the right thing for very wrong reasons.

If you did, you would notice that there have been thousands of U.S. church volunteers sent to Haiti over the years. Sure, some of their work may be just building churches and proselytizing, but many churches from other nations, like Canada for example, have also been working there:

Forty professional aid agencies had more than 2,000 staffers working in health, education, welfare and development stationed in Haiti, says Nasserie Carew of InterAction, a coalition of U.S.-based international non-governmental organizations that share expertise and coordinate humanitarian aid.

No network or coordinating group knows how many individual churches and ministries with tiny staffs and revolving volunteer crews were there when the earthquake hit, however.

And the Red Cross and Doctors Without Borders are not atheist charities! They are secular, meaning that they have no religious affiliation. There is no breakdown that I know of that asks what metaphysical beliefs the donors to these organizations have. There is also a lot of non-medical work that needs to be done that falls outside of the function of these groups.

BTW: It is easy to recognize the good work done by religious charities, while at the same time expressing disgust over their ulterior motives. It is perfectly possible to do the right thing for very wrong reasons.

I'm not a fan of religious proselytization, which is wiping out the local indigenous cultures in most of the Third World, and I mentioned the problems caused by missionaries interfering....killing gays and burning witches in recently Christianized areas of Africa would be recent examples in the news. But the opening post wanted to mention some of the good things done by mostly non-clergy church volunteers in Haiti. If Catholic Relief Services interferes with local programs on birth control and condom distribution, as alleged in an earlier post, that issue can be specifically addressed without going on the diatribe that "religion poisons everything."

You claimed that without the religious charities, others could not have gotten in. This is patently false.

Of course the Red Cross and Doctors Without Borders are not atheist charities. Who cares? They ARE non-religious, and they have been working in Haiti for years, which is a direct answer to your earlier claim that there would be no relief getting in if it wasn't for the know-how of religious charities that have been working there for decades.

As to your last paragraph, if you have a problem with a specific post in this thread, then I suggest you address that individual post. Your #28 is no better than the post you question, because it contains nothing but a broad-brush against all non-believers and non-religious charities.

Maybe my opening line wasn't worded the way I wanted it to be. I contribute to Doctors Without Borders, so I am aware of the work they do in Third World countries. But they and the REd Cross cannot be called "non-religious" any more than they can be claimed as examples of atheist charity, since there is no litmus test given to doctors, medical staff and other volunteers who sign up. All we know is that they do not organize from religious organizations. But their mandate is to deal primarily with health issues among the poor, and that can include bringing in people who are experts in sanitation and water supply, but D.W.B. and the Red Cross cannot do it all.

What I found offensive in a lot of the first comments that were coming in, is that every time a positive story is done on some church volunteers somewhere, there are hardline new atheists who feel the need to parachute in and remind everyone again of the bad things church leaders have done, and question whether or not the church volunteers are truly acting from altruistic motives. My own experience with Christian (even fundamentalist Christians) who do missionary and charitable work, even in dangerous places, is that they are not thinking constantly about the browning points they are racking up with their Lord! They go there because they want to help people, and the doctrinal beliefs are not their prime motivators.

As far as the broad brush goes, I can't help noticing the difference between attitudes regarding tolerance and charity that I find among atheists in the Unitarian Church, and the tiny loud minority of activist atheists who populate online atheist groups and humanist organizations.

is frankly none of my concern. You posted a patently false attack, and I answered it. If you are offended by something that was posted by someone else, you can always respond to them directly, but of course, the alert button is also your friend.

You say the Red Cross and D.W.B cannot be called non-religious? Then why don't you tell me which religion they belong to?

Their main project in Haiti was a women's health initiative, but they have also been involved in disaster relief for quite some time there.

This is according to a mailing sent to me before the earthquake.

If you don't know anything about the conditions in Haiti pre-earthquake, why would you speculate that secular charities had no involvement there? That's just ridiculous.

But how do the numbers stack up when it's just them and the Red Cross compared with all of the church-sponsored charities?

have ever volunteered at a Free Dinning room, or some charity-based organization? I'd like to know the percentage or even if they know where one is. I never heard of an atheist run charity

DONATE: http://ga1.org/ct/g1111111gRvM /

The Center for Inquiry is accepting disaster-relief donations through its S.H.A.R.E. program to support those providing care to the survivors of the 7.0 earthquake that struck Jan. 12 near the capital city of Port-au-Prince, Haiti.

All donations—100 percent with no operating costs retained—will be sent directly to the secular aid group Doctors Without Borders, which suffered the loss of all three of its medical facilities and is working against difficulties to provide the basics of first-aid care and stabilization.

The needs of those who’ve lost their family members, their homes, and their livelihoods will be very great. Your assistance will make a huge difference for the victims of this tragic disaster. Please join us and other humanists and skeptics as we help those in need in this time of crisis.

A contribution of any amount would be greatly appreciated by everyone at the Center for Inquiry. Thank you for your continued support of our work, and please consider a donation to S.H.A.R.E. in honor of those in Haiti who need help.

Please make your contribution to S.H.A.R.E. directly by clicking here. All funds sent to S.H.A.R.E. are tax exempt in the United States. http://ga1.org/ct/g1111111gRvM /

S.H.A.R.E. has been recently renamed the Skeptics and Humanist Aid and Relief Effort and has now become a program of the wider-reaching Center for Inquiry, responding to the need to continue providing an alternative for those who wish to contribute to charitable efforts without the intermediary of a religious organization in this time of great need.

DONATE: http://ga1.org/ct/g1111111gRvM /



More:
http://ga1.org/center_for_inquiry/notice-description.tc...

Hat-tip to: http://twitter.com/SkeptInquiry/status/7756594608

I would be a little leery about that 100% promise after all of the money they wasted setting up regional headquarters and other money-loosing schemes of the former director. There is a strong rumour that the more aggressive atheistic stance was made to try to get the hardline atheists to join up.

And they have no capacity to do charity work themselves, which is why the only option for CFI is to hand off the money to an actual relief organization. The hardline new atheists who want to abolish religion, should first step back and ask whether atheist organizations could take on all of the social roles that religious organizations provide. CFI and other humanist/atheist organizations don't do a whole lot besides complain about religion, and that's why I believe it would be a safe bet that there are far more atheists who have joined the Unitarian/Universalist churches than belong to humanist organizations.

Thanks.

Even though I'm 52 years old now, I'm still learning new things all the time and having to re-evaluate my beliefs. My biggest discovery in the last year has been the disappointing realization that fundamentalism doesn't just exist in religion any more. Atheism has developed a fundamentalist movement, thanks to the internet. They may be offended by the term, but atheists who believe all religion is harmful, religious liberals and moderates should be shunned as allies of the fundamentalists, and everyone should be a naturalist, are just as intolerant as religious fundamentalists who believe that everyone outside of their creed goes to hell.

trying to discuss one's believe with some of these atheist on DU, is like trying to discuss politics with a RW wacko.

"Atheism Fundametalism..." thats a good one.

I'm 72 and still changing my view on life. There is a old saying that "the young learn, but the old understand. Looks like you might fit in there too.

But I have never felt to comfortable with people who think they've got everything figured out. Dogmatic feelings of certainty seem to be just as common among some atheists who are on a mission to smash the idols and tear down the temples.

To be honest, I think someone who believes that everyone should be an atheist, and no one needs religion, is every bit as much a fundamentalist as someone who believes everybody needs to join their religion.

It isn't just the right who has bigots apparantly. Tell me how calling someone a fundamental atheist is any better than calling someone who believes in religion a believer in fairy tales? It isn't. Bigotry is bigotry.
You are just as bad as the RW in my book. Somehow, I'm of the opinion that all atheists are different. But what do I know, I'm just a fundie atheist!!:sarcasm:

Atheists volunteer in all kinds of organizations. I even know some atheists personally who volunteer with Habitat for Humanity, which is an organization that prays every morning before they start their work. When their own morality calls upon them to step up and help their fellow man, atheists will find a way to do so, even if it means dealing with the unwelcoming nature of religious-based organizations.

The lack of atheist run charities only goes to prove a point that many of us atheists here tried to make in an earlier thread: Atheism doesn't cause people to do anything at all. It doesn't motivate people to start charities, save lives, or to flip the coin, kill.

To start a charity specifically noted as "atheist run" would be pointless for two reasons:
1. There is no "atheist belief" that states charity is necessary, or even good. The morality of an atheist is dependent entirely on their own ideas about humanity and life, not on their atheism.
2. An incredible majority of American citizens would refuse to donate money to that charity, preferring instead one that did not, in fact, involve atheism specifically.

Your post attempts to put down "religion bashers", but all you've done is make a broad-brush remark against non-believers, and attempt to bash us with a false argument.

your group seems to do, continually, to believers in the Christian faith? I've been involved with faith-based charities for years and never personally meet one. That doesn't mean there aren't any. If you know of any, well God bless them.

there are plenty of charities run by atheists. And there are plenty of atheists who give to charities, work for charities, and care deeply about many causes worldwide.

Just as there are many religious organziations that do much good throughout the world

I hate how these threads become a freaking pissing contest. Just do the right thing, give for the sake of giving and helping others, and who cares what your religious background is.

why would you? How about Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders and other secular groups. But no, since the Right (and certain members of our own party) think that atheists have no rights, why would anyone who wants to have a successful charity advertise that they are atheists. Sheesh.

Many of those groups to Haiti were missions to convert people. While I don't doubt these organizations want to help, they also want to convert people. I've heard this is rampant in poor counties. So helping for a ultimately selfish cause. Forgive me if I trust the Red Cross and Doctors without Borders more.. Because their help does not have an agenda/string attached!

(St. Augustine in Park Slope, Brooklyn) is in the process of twinning with a Haitian church. A three person delegation from our parish was down in Haiti when the earthquake happened, and they experienced it all first hand.