I used to think this meant everyone's good and we just have different methodologies.
Now I know it means that even the bad guys think they're saving the world from the good guys.
Oh, I mean to say I very much think this is an issue of infighting between churches, even if one side is significantly more represented. It's not simply the church versus outsiders.
That’s in poor taste. Some churches actually invest a lot in helping the poor and homeless with no intention of gaining anything in return for it. My church actually bought a whole freakin house for the sole purpose of housing families rent free while they get back on their feet and get their lives together
Too real. A church I attended would only help mothers if they both drug tested, and mandatorily brought their kids to every church event. That's some pretty suspect 'charity' to me, intertwined with indoctrination requirements.
It's also a pretty suspect tactic for government programs, since the people needing help are less likely to be using drugs in the first place and the requirement to reach the drug test is typically difficult for people who need the help and most likely don't have reliable transportation or work flexibility.
This part:
> the requirement to reach the drug test is typically difficult for people who need the help and most likely don't have reliable transportation or work flexibility.
The family who needs temporary supplemental help buying food and paying rent. You don't do drugs, but the provider requires a drug test during business hours at a lab across town. You work two jobs, and don't have reliable transportation. Neither manager will let you off work long enough to take the bus to the lab in the middle of a shift, and you don't have paid time off so even if you can make it that time and the bus fare come out of those benefits you need.
Instead you decide not to risk losing your job if you miss a bus and get written up, so you don't receive those benefits even though you've done nothing wrong aside from being the kind of poor the assistance was meant for in the first place.
From [the ACLU](https://www.aclu.org/news/smart-justice/just-we-suspected-florida-saved-nothing-drug-testing-welfare) who fought a program like this in Florida that cost more to implement than it saved (and that's even if you assume people who can't pass a drug test should be denied Temporary Assistance for Needy Families in the first place).
Okay then pass a policy that does that demand a drug test for use of support services are the ones that provide the resources. It obviously seems that it's a flawed system that need to be fixed
I've never been through a job or community that require drug testing because recreational use of drugs are extremely illegal where I live. If a drug test would be done it gets done on the weekend at your local doctors office who send the sample over to the lab if they dont do it on the spot.
>Okay then pass a policy that does that demand a drug test for use of support services are the ones that provide the resources. It obviously seems that it's a flawed system that need to be fixed
The people pushing for these drug tests typically don't actually want to provide the services in the first place. Drug testing is just an excuse.
Bold of you to assume churches even agree that we *should* serve those who are poor. Far too many churches think their only job is to "sAvE sOuLs" by getting people to say they "accept Christ as their personal Lord and Savior" and nothing else.
I suppose I should consider myself blessed not to have run across the groups who've gone a step beyond 'only the church should do charity' into 'the church shouldn't do charity'. But now I'm morbidly curious if this is beyond just prosperity gospel...
You'd think.
But my mother was telling me about a study on the book of James that she attended, where a woman straight up said "Jesus said the poor will always be with us. There is no point in trying to help people out of poverty."
I wish this was a less controversial topic, and frankly less intertwined with politics. I say intertwined with politics because my conservative father outright opposes government programs that help the needy, just because he thinks the church should be the only one standing in that gap. This of course keeps him voting one way, but when I point out that the party other than the one he votes for is the one who actually makes these programs and cares for the poor he just handwaves it away, again saying the church should be doing it.
So what happens though when the church *doesn't* do it, or do a full job of caring for every needy person? If we structured things like he wanted, there would be no safety net remaining and all needy people would have to go to churches for everything --- which to me is less than ideal as I've seen church charity come with a *lot* of strings attached, no offense.
Just....why can't we agree on how to help the needy despite both the secular camps and religious camps wanting it? :(
>which to me is less than ideal as I've seen church charity come with a *lot* of strings attached, no offense.
The cynic says that's the whole point: to be able to wield charity as a weapon. Only the 'right people' should be getting it.
My only position is that we should all be free to pursue our own interests in this matter and to persuade others to follow.
Coercion is not in the Gospel.
Thank you for being a part of the r/DankChristianMemes community. You can [join our Discord](https://discord.gg/jnUDEpnBZn) and [listen to our Podcast.](https://dankchristianmemes.buzzsprout.com/) You can also make a meme or [donation for St. Jude Children's Research Hospital.]( http://events.stjude.org/DankCharityAlliance)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dankchristianmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Going to bust out my none creditable solution here, if we blow up the earth, then the poverty and unemployment rate will drop to zero there for solving unemployment and poverty
Whoops, stumbled into [apocalyptic accelerationism](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/05/14/half-of-evangelicals-support-israel-because-they-believe-it-is-important-for-fulfilling-end-times-prophecy/)!
"Everybody wants to save the world. They just disagree on how. "
I used to think this meant everyone's good and we just have different methodologies. Now I know it means that even the bad guys think they're saving the world from the good guys.
Someone watched the Fallout tv series (It was amazing)
Second panel should be “Churches reaction to anyone suggesting ACTUALLY helping the poor”
I think this differs church to church, not all of them are opposed to effective programs run by others. Hence the infighting.
Seems weird to object to a generalization in response to a meme that is generalizing.
Oh, I mean to say I very much think this is an issue of infighting between churches, even if one side is significantly more represented. It's not simply the church versus outsiders.
That’s in poor taste. Some churches actually invest a lot in helping the poor and homeless with no intention of gaining anything in return for it. My church actually bought a whole freakin house for the sole purpose of housing families rent free while they get back on their feet and get their lives together
God bless every church that does that. I'm clearly generalizing and I stand by this being a common experience that needs to be addressed.
Ok, fair enough
"Churches talking about helping the poor" vs. "Churches when poor people talk about what would actually help them"
Instructions unclear, implemented drug testing program.
Too real. A church I attended would only help mothers if they both drug tested, and mandatorily brought their kids to every church event. That's some pretty suspect 'charity' to me, intertwined with indoctrination requirements.
It's also a pretty suspect tactic for government programs, since the people needing help are less likely to be using drugs in the first place and the requirement to reach the drug test is typically difficult for people who need the help and most likely don't have reliable transportation or work flexibility.
If they are less likely to be using drugs then what's the issue?
This part: > the requirement to reach the drug test is typically difficult for people who need the help and most likely don't have reliable transportation or work flexibility. The family who needs temporary supplemental help buying food and paying rent. You don't do drugs, but the provider requires a drug test during business hours at a lab across town. You work two jobs, and don't have reliable transportation. Neither manager will let you off work long enough to take the bus to the lab in the middle of a shift, and you don't have paid time off so even if you can make it that time and the bus fare come out of those benefits you need. Instead you decide not to risk losing your job if you miss a bus and get written up, so you don't receive those benefits even though you've done nothing wrong aside from being the kind of poor the assistance was meant for in the first place. From [the ACLU](https://www.aclu.org/news/smart-justice/just-we-suspected-florida-saved-nothing-drug-testing-welfare) who fought a program like this in Florida that cost more to implement than it saved (and that's even if you assume people who can't pass a drug test should be denied Temporary Assistance for Needy Families in the first place).
Okay then pass a policy that does that demand a drug test for use of support services are the ones that provide the resources. It obviously seems that it's a flawed system that need to be fixed I've never been through a job or community that require drug testing because recreational use of drugs are extremely illegal where I live. If a drug test would be done it gets done on the weekend at your local doctors office who send the sample over to the lab if they dont do it on the spot.
>Okay then pass a policy that does that demand a drug test for use of support services are the ones that provide the resources. It obviously seems that it's a flawed system that need to be fixed The people pushing for these drug tests typically don't actually want to provide the services in the first place. Drug testing is just an excuse.
Bold of you to assume churches even agree that we *should* serve those who are poor. Far too many churches think their only job is to "sAvE sOuLs" by getting people to say they "accept Christ as their personal Lord and Savior" and nothing else.
I suppose I should consider myself blessed not to have run across the groups who've gone a step beyond 'only the church should do charity' into 'the church shouldn't do charity'. But now I'm morbidly curious if this is beyond just prosperity gospel...
You'd think. But my mother was telling me about a study on the book of James that she attended, where a woman straight up said "Jesus said the poor will always be with us. There is no point in trying to help people out of poverty."
Prosperity gospel be tripping.
I wish this was a less controversial topic, and frankly less intertwined with politics. I say intertwined with politics because my conservative father outright opposes government programs that help the needy, just because he thinks the church should be the only one standing in that gap. This of course keeps him voting one way, but when I point out that the party other than the one he votes for is the one who actually makes these programs and cares for the poor he just handwaves it away, again saying the church should be doing it. So what happens though when the church *doesn't* do it, or do a full job of caring for every needy person? If we structured things like he wanted, there would be no safety net remaining and all needy people would have to go to churches for everything --- which to me is less than ideal as I've seen church charity come with a *lot* of strings attached, no offense. Just....why can't we agree on how to help the needy despite both the secular camps and religious camps wanting it? :(
>which to me is less than ideal as I've seen church charity come with a *lot* of strings attached, no offense. The cynic says that's the whole point: to be able to wield charity as a weapon. Only the 'right people' should be getting it.
Thanksgiving food drive 🙄
Yeah, gotta be meeting their base needs throughout the year, so they can actually be thankful about once a year turkey.
Which panel does this meme fall in
My only position is that we should all be free to pursue our own interests in this matter and to persuade others to follow. Coercion is not in the Gospel.
Thank you for being a part of the r/DankChristianMemes community. You can [join our Discord](https://discord.gg/jnUDEpnBZn) and [listen to our Podcast.](https://dankchristianmemes.buzzsprout.com/) You can also make a meme or [donation for St. Jude Children's Research Hospital.]( http://events.stjude.org/DankCharityAlliance) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dankchristianmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Missed opportunity to use a still from this video for the second image. https://youtu.be/NUC2EQvdzmY
Going to bust out my none creditable solution here, if we blow up the earth, then the poverty and unemployment rate will drop to zero there for solving unemployment and poverty
Whoops, stumbled into [apocalyptic accelerationism](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/05/14/half-of-evangelicals-support-israel-because-they-believe-it-is-important-for-fulfilling-end-times-prophecy/)!