It does, but be careful: social conservatives don't have a monopoly on that- there are social progressives who tithe, too.
...sometimes, out of the same checking account.
...sometimes, out of the same checking account.
Abortion
- Status
Ryujin
Legend
True enough. It would certainly be interesting to see how it breaks down based on political leanings and religious declaration. An interesting point, that I came across a while back, was that Americans are more 'generous' in their charitable donations than are Canadians. Perhaps it has something to do with our feeling that we're already doing some good, via our taxes as applied to the social safety net?
I suspect that is true. At the very least, it has to be a major psychological factor, because the expatriate Canadians I know here in Texas are no less charitable than anyone else I know.
I'm with Peter Singer on this. Since I read Practical Ethics at school I haven't seen a more rational approach on the subject, although it raised quite a controvery. Here's a summary of the relevant chapter:
So much for trying to escape Church doctrine...
I quite clearly remember how, after I had left Church, our teacher in the ethics class (who was a catholic priest...) condemned his views as being 'unchristian'. When I challenged him by asking why that was relevant in a class about ethics, he told me in no unclear terms that in his class, we'd learn about 'Christian ethics'. Period.
So much for trying to escape Church doctrine...
Kramodlog
Naked and living in a barrel
Québec is the province who gives the least to charity. The rational that has been brought up is that we were use to giving to the Catholic Church which was in charge of redistribution. After the Quiet Revolution, the state took over the Church, the tithe became taxes and charity became social programs. It was a switch of institutions, but not habits.
Kramodlog
Naked and living in a barrel
But it is when it comes to women and pregnancy. Those who want to force women to complete their pregnancies disregard the risk they are taking and if they are taking these risks volontarely. A father can't be forced to give blood to his two years old child that needs the blood to live, but a woman should be forced to give her uterus to a zygote. It is a double standard.
Pregnancies also carry a risk of injury and death. Why should one be a choice, but not the other?
Survivability is not the crux of the issue here. It is the sovereignty the dad has over his body, that a woman cannot fully enjoy. Well in some part of the world. Here a woman can get an abortion anytime she wants, at least legally. You are not a person until your are fully born alive.
Kramodlog
Naked and living in a barrel
It certainly was, thus the quotation marks. It is just that coat hangers are the poster child of the risk some women are willing to take to stop their pregnancies when nothing better is available.
Ryujin
Legend
I believe that it's also the most heavily taxed Province (though with the attendant benefits like very cheap child care), which would tend to line up with my premise.
Hard to say. I pay taxes with no itemized deduction loophole magic. Happily. I grew up on welfare. I know that the taxes of the good people of my country helped raise me up and now that I am upper middle class, it is my duty to return the favor.
I also know that if church charities were so awesome, they'd have solved poverty by now. i trust centralized secular government to help more poor people without judging them than I do a church.
The "Puritan work ethic" has had an unfortunate side effect. If you push the message that work = financial success too strongly, you reinforce poverty = lazy by implication. It can be quite a chore getting through to people that luck and opportunity (and other advantages) have a lot to do with success as well.
- Status
Similar Threads
