Cancer charity rejects £10000 donation.

That's the problem with fundis of all religions. Not representative but perception sadly becomes fact.

Cheers

Harry

I heard the piece about this on the Today programme and was stunned by the distinctly 'un-christian' stance of the 'Christian Voice' activists who were threatening to picket the charity offices if they accepted the 'tainted' money. In stark contrast was the generosity of the Stars/cast who gave their time free to provide funds for the support of people suffering from cancer! Which of these approaches is the truly Christian one I wonder??

This reminds me of that Bill Hicks joke about pro-lifers murdering doctors who carry out abortions. tis a mad world.

Notice these groups have names like "Christian Voice" or "Moral Majority" to give the impression of much broader membership than they truely have.In truth they have no Voice are not moral or in the majority and especially NOT christian in their behaviour.
If they are so worried about a few so called negative comments/acts will effect their religion, then it needs a re-think.

I also wonder where their funding comes from?

Howard

Religion has been hijacked by extremists on all sides. I have heard that Christians of the more "Charasmatic" type (yes, that is what they call themselves!! ) always ask themselves "what would Jesus do?" (for some unknown reason, they worship Jesus, and not God ). I am sure then, that Jesus would take the cash and put it to do some good. But these fanatical loonies make their own rules to justify whatever suits them; homophobia, racism, etc etc.
I have no time for religion, and looking back, I expect I can blame that entirely on the evangelical baptist types. It really frightens me to be honest.

It should be said that the actions of 'Christian Voice' are not approved by more moderate Christian groups.

quote:

Jonathan Bartley from Ekklesia:
It is a terrible irony that campaigners against blasphemy have distorted the Christian message through their actions in this way.

Whatever your views about 'Jerry Springer: The Opera', this is not the way to go about making your case.

Christian Voice claim to be defending the Jesus portrayed in the gospels. But that Jesus emphasised compassion over religiosity.

Theological news from ekklesia

Regards
Steve M

Perhaps we should refer to the christian militant tendency as the Caliban - a merger of taliban and christian

An act by these so called Christians which sits ill with the values they are supposed to espouse!

G

I agree in principle with what you're saying, but what if it was a group of whores that collected their proceeds and donated it to the cause?
It is the same thing in the eyes of this group and likely the charity would rather give up this donation in favor of more morally upstanding donors.
I have no use for Springer, hell he got started in my town. His famous gaff early on was paying buy check for a prostitute. He has not become smarter since, just more popular. Ugh.
If I was an upstanding charity I'd probably refuse money from anything associated with Springer on grounds that he's an idiot and has legions of like-minded fans. That is if I could afford to refuse the money... And if it was offered!
David

Religion is a bloody menace again and agin and again...............................

quote:

but what if it was a group of whores that collected their proceeds and donated it to the cause?

So what - they are just as liable to have friends and relatives and themselves to benefit from the charitable organisation.

A group of people have foregone their right to the own money and given it to a charity

or should they be gambling it away or buying booze or drugs or fast cars.

Next you will be saying that only legal and moral incomes should be taxed and the immoral should not pay tax.

quote:

Originally posted by NaimDropper:
I agree in principle with what you're saying, but what if it was a group of whores that collected their proceeds and donated it to the cause?
David

One of the Pharisees asked Jesus to come to his home for a meal, so Jesus accepted the invitation and sat down to eat.
A certain immoral woman heard he was there and brought a beautiful jar filled with expensive perfume.
Then she knelt behind him at his feet, weeping. Her tears fell on his feet, and she wiped them off with her hair. Then she kept kissing his feet and putting perfume on them.
When the Pharisee who was the host saw what was happening and who the woman was, he said to himself, "This proves that Jesus is no prophet. If God had really sent him, he would know what kind of woman is touching him. She's a sinner!"
Then Jesus spoke up and answered his thoughts. "Simon," he said to the Pharisee, "I have something to say to you." "All right, Teacher," Simon replied, "go ahead."
Then Jesus told him this story: "A man loaned money to two people -- five hundred pieces of silver to one and fifty pieces to the other. But neither of them could repay him, so he kindly forgave them both, canceling their debts. Who do you suppose loved him more after that?"
Simon answered, "I suppose the one for whom he canceled the larger debt." "That's right," Jesus said.
Then he turned to the woman and said to Simon, "Look at this woman kneeling here. When I entered your home, you didn't offer me water to wash the dust from my feet, but she has washed them with her tears and wiped them with her hair.
You didn't give me a kiss of greeting, but she has kissed my feet again and again from the time I first came in.
You neglected the courtesy of olive oil to anoint my head, but she has anointed my feet with rare perfume.
I tell you, her sins -- and they are many -- have been forgiven, so she has shown me much love. But a person who is forgiven little shows only little love."
Then Jesus said to the woman, "Your sins are forgiven."
The men at the table said among themselves, "Who does this man think he is, going around forgiving sins?"
And Jesus said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

— Luke 7:36-50

Nicely put Adam!

Some Christians have a fundemental problem with Christ.
Just my opinion - but I do not think the Christian message that I read was so much to do with hatred.
I am an atheist and my sins - - "and they are many" -- do not require me to seek out greater 'sinners' to justify my life.

I am a complete non-believer. There is no hope for me

Christianity was born as a radical offshoot of Judaism. It is the religion of (St) Paul who employed the Christ of Galilee figure retrospectively as a martyr. If religion is an early expression of politics then Paul is where the power originally lay: we who are 'Christians' are really 'Paulists'.

Music can be a celebration of human spirituality, often without subtext. Religion is the hijacking of human spirituality, mostly without permission.

Maybe.

Sir Cycle

quote:

Originally posted by Sir Cycle Sexy:
Music can be a celebration of human spirituality, often without subtext. Religion is the hijacking of human spirituality, mostly without permission.

It's often a substitute for spirituality, with permission but without knowing.

The search for meaning is a very human thing. Religion can be a quitting of that search.

Maybe.
Regards
Steve M

Excellent reference, Adam.
Not sure it directly correlates, as the Springer Show isn't exactly being repentant. They’re not looking for forgiveness of their sins.
Perhaps their motives are good, I have no idea.
Point I was trying to make is that the gains are tainted in the minds of those opposing this situation. Accepting the money implies approval of the activity / morals that got the money. And only encourages more of the same activity and morals.
I’m not defending the position, but it’s the same reason that W and the ultra right wing types won’t allow new research grade stem cell lines to be developed from already aborted fetuses. Even if the research could have cured Reagan’s Alzheimer’s disease and he could have lived forever. Doesn’t matter, it would encourage abortion. Or so they think.
Hard to argue with or understand zealots, religious or otherwise.
David

quote:

Originally posted by NaimDropper:
Hard to argue with or understand zealots, religious or otherwise.

David,

You make some strong points.

You said before that if you were an upstanding charity you'd probably refuse money from anything associated with Springer... if you could afford to refuse the money.

I believe that the issue in this case was not whether or not the charity accepted or refused the payment but that they were threatened by an extremist Christian organisation. Are we not examining the behaviour of this organisation more than that of the charity?

Regards
Steve M

Seems that way, Steve. A few extremists must have the ear of those in charge.
I'm certain that people of any morals would refuse aid (and thereby association) with SOME group. Even if it is the "Round Earth HiFi Society" or whatever. Pick your favorite repulsive organization.
International Association for the Advancement of Baby Seal Clubbing for example.
David

Taking the premiss firstof all,That all Cancer Research/Help should be funded by central Goverment after all this is the 4th richest nation.
And of course, all of those people associated with that "Christian" organisation would refuse any help from Maggies Centres if their Kids were unfortunate enough to contract cancer, hypocrites all of them, by their selfish actions they have deprived other from help and assistance in their times of need.
"Christians"?????I'm pleased I'm a Atheist.
oldie.

The point seems to be that the charity implied "further" action could ensue if they accepted the donation.


Howard (Atheist)

quote:

Originally posted by Rasher:
Religion has been hijacked by extremists on all sides. I have heard that Christians of the more "Charasmatic" type (yes, that is what they call themselves!! ) always ask themselves "what would Jesus do?" (for some unknown reason, they worship Jesus, and not God ). I am sure then, that Jesus would take the cash and put it to do some good. But these fanatical loonies make their own rules to justify whatever suits them; homophobia, racism, etc etc.
I have no time for religion, and looking back, I expect I can blame that entirely on the evangelical baptist types. It really frightens me to be honest.

I know what you're trying to say Rasher; but you only have to undertake the most cursory reading of the Bible or Koran to see where all this stuff comes from. They are books full of hate and loathing, and all the "extremists" are doing is pulling out the less attractive aspects of their creeds. All these desert monotheism religions are "extremist" and need to be watched very carefuly, as religion represents the biggest threat to our freedoms today (along with New Labour).

As for this bullying bunch of fanatics, they were featured on the Today programme this morning and a very weird bunch theyu are too - and, I would venture, completely unrepresentative of even the most rabid evangelical Christians.

I bet they didn't offer to make up the difference to the chairty, the hypocritical self-righteous scumbags.

Kevin

quote:

Originally posted by oldie:
Taking the premiss firstof all,That all Cancer Research/Help should be funded by central Goverment after all this is the 4th richest nation.

And, arguably, if it wasn't for the welfare system we'd be the richest, with both higher standards of health & education and lower levels of poverty.

To have Cancer Research funded by central government would be the worse thing we could possibly do (IMO of course).

General medical consensus is that the 5 biggest medical breakthroughs pre-1945 were:

• The understanding of cholera epidemics
  
• The development of vaccines
  
• The use of anaesthetics
  
• The use of antiseptics (prevented infections during surgery)
  
• The discovery and use of antibiotics

Britain played the major role in all of these breakthroughs.

Below is a list of medical breakthroughs where Britain has played a major role since the central government funding of the NHS ...



...

Oh dear.

Regards
Steve M

Medical breakthroughs c/o the NHS

MRSA

How to abuse people by lack of commen sense and care

Using central government wealth or lack of to prevent local investment to meet local needs

Demonstrate how by not investing in various typres of scanning machines one can get a set of worse outcomes than countries that do invest in them.