########http://www.grupo-utopia.com/blog/isou/archives/419_scams/##########3
2007-02-25 21:25:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by xxsanxx 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Firstly, there are more christians than atheists. Secondly, atheists are not an organised group, like christians are. Thirdly, many of those charities are bankrolled by donations. I'm an atheist. I donate money. I can't up and leave my life here to go overseas and help people, even though I want to. I have people depending on me for food and shelter here -- my family. I volunteer plenty. I donate plenty. But I don't make a big song and dance about it or wear a cross around my neck so everyone knows I'm a christian. I financially mentor women leaving domestic violence. My goal is to work at my crappy minimum wage job, make enough money through property investing to retire early, and then keep working as long as possible so that I can fund overseas charity. I work with so many people who survived refugee camps. I couldn't, with good conscience, know these people, and not do something to help. This bloke probably hasn't met that many atheists, especially since he goes to the US. They get some persecution over there so they lie low. Christians advertise their charity. Atheists give to usually pre-established charities, often christian charities, because the aid goes further when the channels for delivering it, and the administration organisation, are already established. Churches are groups. They have the infrastructure and the organisational abilities to send a group of people over to do charity work. Atheists don't join churches, so they don't have access to these things. I know this guy from Sierra Leone has had a rough life, but he's still a ******* bigot. I work my **** off for the ultimate goal of helping others. I give till my hands bleed. I grew up in dirt poor poverty, in a 'house' that was just a shed, with clothes that were ******* rags. Who is he to judge me? I go without stuff everyone else has just so that I can donate, and I earn minimum ******* wage. There are poor people all over the world. Seriously, tell him to go **** himself. I'm doing the best I can already.
2016-03-15 22:06:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
i use to work in sierra leone and the only charity there at the time that was any help was the red cross/cresent, in terms of other NGOs most were useless, the country needs infrastructure and teaching kids to play football is not the best way to achieve this (yes it helps morale, but kids will play football if given a ball it does not take a NGO to help them do this) I was really dissappointed with Medicin San Frounteers, they were charging locals 3 months salary (and most didnt have basic jobs) for simple operations, not what i call a charity.
I actually reckon that government agencies are the best way forward, if someone like DFID (Uk department for international development) took engineers, teachers, specialists etc into the country and did projects themselves employing locals who can learn from the experts the country would be in a better state, for several reasons, first the politicians would not be able to syphon off funds which are given as aid and secondly things will be built/repaired, thirdly locals would get employment and learn skills to carry out the repairs and construction. this would also apply to several other nations destroyed by war, poverty, bad governance and corruption
2007-02-24 04:42:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by Kev P 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Great question... I've been looking into Amnesty International.
2007-02-19 07:06:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by Holly Golightly 4
·
0⤊
0⤋