Comments on: It’s Called Reciprocal Altruism, Mr. Archbold

By: Slugsie

Slugsie — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 11:25:04 +0000

Let’s also not forget that some Christians *cough*Pat Robertson*cough* believe that it was God himself that cause the earthquake. So that would be God causing an earthquake so that a bunch of bible bashers can collect money in his name to relieve the suffering he caused, all the while glorifying his name.

Utterly sinful if you ask me.

By: epe

epe — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 04:32:15 +0000

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. @#%#$%#%

By: Buffy

Buffy — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 23:05:42 +0000

Archbold is lacking in reading comprehension skills, or perhaps he’s just got that selective reading theists are famous for. The part he quotes is only the secondary goal. The primary goal Dawkins cites is ensuring 100% of your donation goes to the Haitians. Many charities don’t do that, shunting huge chunks to administrative and/or publicity costs. And, of course, religious charities use much of the funding to push religion on the needy as part and parcel of their “services”.

By: Dom

Dom — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 21:36:08 +0000

I tend to mention, when confronted with this morality argument, that if Christians truly took their morality from the Bible they’d be stoning adulterers and anyone who gathers logs on a Sunday. Or possibly a Friday. When you should definitely not be eating meat.

Lots of people have gone a bit quiet at this point.

By: Chad

Chad — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 18:55:46 +0000

By donating to a secular charity you can also rest assure that aid will not be withheld until someone converts. People who need help will be seen as simply people who need help and not potential christians. I would only add that there are some very good organizations that are run by christians, such as Partners in Health, started by Paul Farmer, that I’m happy to give to because they do good work without conditions. Unlike some of those family values folks in the media that we heard from immediately after the quake.