Of course, this image demonstrates that people don’t really want to cut anything from the federal budget. Except one thing. You know, the one most Christian thing on this list. That, they want to get rid of.
Drew Downs
Make a New Normal
Proof the U.S. is not a Christian Nation
10 responses
-
Stewarts
Fr. Drew – I enjoyed reading your blog today but with sincere respect I disagree with some of your comments. If I have mis-read or misunderstand your comments, please accept my sincerest apologies. Though I appreciate what I think your point might be, I must dispute your blog entry for several reasons. Firstly, from the wording of your statement and the graph that accompanies it, it appears you are suggesting that “the one most Christian thing on this list” is “aid the world’s needy.” Is it your contention that helping international needy is more Christian than helping “Aid to needy in U.S.” (6th on the list)? Upon what do you base that opinion? I am not proposing that the inverse it better, I am only suggesting that aiding needy in Central America, for instance, is not more Christian than aiding needy in Detroit. They are both worthy efforts and I don’t believe that one is more Christian than the other. Secondly, your statement suggests the data show that the poll respondents want to “get rid of” aid to the world’s needy. The data do not show that. True, 48% would like to see that amount decrease but “decrease” does not mean “get rid of.” Furthermore, the data show that a slightly greater percentage (21% + 28% = 49%) would like to see aid to the world’s needy stay the same or increase. So, it is not accurate to say that the poll respondents want to “get rid of” aid to the world’s needy, but it would be accurate to say that a little more than one-half of the respondents would like to see aid to the world’s needy stay the same OR increase. Finally, your blog title indicates that these data provide proof “that the U.S. is not a Christian nation.” That the U.S. is or is not a Christian nation is, of course, arguable, but I do not see how these data prove it one way or the other. What is it about these data that prove this? The data suggest that greater percentages of poll respondents want to see increases in all “need” related categories except aid to world’s needy and unemployment. Aid to US needy, health care, medicare, disaster relief, education, social security, education – each of these categories scored higher for increase than for decrease. As mentioned earlier, respondents favored present levels or increase for aid to world’s needy, and by a wide margin (65% to 32%) favored present levels or increases for unemployment. I am not suggesting that I agree or disagree with any of the categories, but I do not see in these data proof that the U.S. is an un-Christian nation. If the increase to “aid to world’s needy” was greater than increases to US needy, health care, medicare, disaster relief, education, social security, and education, would that change your view? If so, why?
Again, I apologize if I have misunderstood your comments, and my comments here are not intended to convey any lack of respect. Best regards, Stewarts
-
Thank you for the comment, and the charitable response! I think we no doubt agree. My response was quick and snarky. You did catch me in a flippant response.
My gut response to the graph was how many more people see “Aid to world’s needy” as expendable–virtually half of respondents want to cut it–which is less than 1% of our GDP. It has also been a favorite political punching bag since the start of the Great Recession, despite how little we give and what little impact it would have domestically. And yet, it would have a huge effect internationally in the lives of those who benefit from our pennies. Yes, each of these elements on the graph has a faith component, including “Aid to needy in U.S.”. However, this is an area the U.S. has long struggled to show leadership on, which is particularly troubling when we make virtuous claims about our moral character.
You are also right to point out the appropriate Christian character of helping those in need in Detroit. I whole-heartedly agree. Our moral character in helping our neighbors is thankfully strong and a persistent place in our public conversation. It is also not useful to pin one moral character against another in the general sense. However, in this specific sense, it is important to recognize how many lives can be saved in other parts of the world through simple economic investment, education programs for girls, and mosquito netting. The difference is pennies on the dollar. This is also so clearly our moral deficit when the U.S. hordes 40% of the world’s wealth, but gives only 1% in aid. This disparity is an unconscionable systemic problem.
Lastly, my snarky title was just that: snarky. I was hoping it would cause a little rise in the reader. The one kernel of truth I was going for was based on one of the few times Jesus gives a parameter for judgment in how we are doing as followers: how you treat the “least of these” is how we treat Jesus. It seems to me that the least of these are the world’s needy.
I hope this helps illuminate my thinking. I don’t hope to criticize the good work most Christians are a part of, and certainly half of people don’t want to cut foreign aid (and many more certainly don’t want to cut these other, responsible programs). I just found it interesting that the one that more people were willing to cut was the one that helps “the other”.
-
Stewarts
Fr. Drew – I appreciate you taking the time to respond so thoughtfully. I enjoy your blog. Best regards, Stewarts
-
It is my pleasure. I appreciated your comment. It helped me clarify in my mind how others responded to it–particularly in ways I didn’t predict! Thanks again!
-
-
-
-
Fred Garvin
“Hoards”? How does the US “hoard”? Is there some sort of communal cookie jar that the US has special access to?
If this is your view of international economics, it’s no wonder mainline Protestantism is about as popular as 8-track cassettes.
And fortunately the US is not a christian nation; this is clearly an attempt to guilt people who don’t agree with you into supporting an agenda. Same as the Fundiegelicals.-
Hi Fred,
Please don’t be patronizing. Of course I’m not speaking of cookie jars. Notice the disparity I was alluding to: that we account for 40% of the world’s wealth and give fewer than 1% back. The complexity in our own domestic system involves what we call “standard of living”, and it is there that I am referring to our hoarding: as in we spend money on ourselves and give less than a penny for every dollar to the world’s poorest. It is also a reference to not giving of our wealth in any comparable way–before the recession or after. We choose as a government to operate this way and as a people to live this way. I do not believe that it is out-of-bounds to suggest that we are much better at helping the people that look like us than the people who don’t. This is one area Jesus was most consistent about.Please also note that I don’t tolerate personal or mean-spirited attacks.
-
-
Mind if I reblog or link/reference in a Beliefnet discussion? B/c this makes a point I’ve heard and been trying to make much better than I can.
-
I *will* say, though, that I’m glad to see that people want to increase social security and veterans’ benefits. I think it’s important to care for our veterans, elderly and disabled. I don’t mean to be presumptuous but I think Jesus would feel the same.
-
I’m with you. As a whole, this graphic is great news, showing that most people don’t want to cut good things that are truly helping people. And look at the support for Education! Awesome. As I said in a previous comment, I was moved by what the one thing many people want to cut is one so necessary for the Christian mission.
-
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Leave a Reply