Hi MC jae,

I think this speaks to the insufficiency of charity and the paucity of genuine agape.

Charity is what we give out of our excess and we tend to view it as an investment.  We put our money into causes we find worthwhile and rarely examine what refusing to put money into says about those who suffer from what we fail to find worthwhile.

You think someone without a home is an investment opportunity.  By giving them money maybe they can, at the very least, be sheltered.  That is a noble investment.

You don't think someone with aids is an investment opportunity.  By denying them money maybe they fail to get treatment and die and if not die perhaps they suffer a bit.  Where is the nobility in that?

I am not saying that you actually want those with aids to suffer or die.  I am pointing out that since you do not feel their cause is worthy of your charity then you are okay with that.  I mean, you had disposable income to give to the homeless and you thought you would donate to that and then you found that the need was for something else and whatever feelings of charity you had simply evaporated.

True, the homeless are your neighbour and you should love them.

True, those with AIDS are no less your neighbour and you should love them as well.

Indeed the question remains, "why?"

Only you can answer that for certain.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Yes giving to charities becomes a problem when discernment distorts into self rightousness.

Some of the 'homeless', of course, also have HIV/AIDS to cope with.  A local man (not homeless) has HIV/AIDS from a blood transfusion many years ago.  I'm glad that most educated people no longer treat HIV positive people as badly as lepers used to be treated.   

This is an interesting topic, I think.  Most of us have a certain amount of money in our 'donations' pocket.  I think about where this money should go others hand it over in a more random fashion.  Likely none of us get it 'right'.  Some people only give in ways that get them a tax receipt, others don't want one no matter the size of the donation.  I know someone who tithes to their church and gives the subject no more thought.  The church decide how that money is used - likely some of it goes for salaries, power bills etc. for the church building. 

FWIW I avoid charities that do lots of advertising.  I avoid charities that I know have highly paid staff members.  I have no interest at all in supporting charities that waste (in my opinion) our finite world on things like buying plastic and paper goodies to go in shoeboxes to be transported to other countries.  I would however donate towards a well that would be dug locally. 

Thank you revjohn,

I welcome your comments.

I don't think that most people think of helping others as being an investment. Rather, I just think that some people are affected more by one thing than another. As an example, many people in my family have had heart disease including my uncle, aunt, father, grandfather, and others. This truth builds an empathy within me to help others who face the same challenge of this deadly disease. I imagine that if I personally knew someone who had had AIDS, then I would be more willing to give to fight that syndrome.

While I have never personally known anyone who was homeless, I have certainly encountered homeless people here in Toronto. Also, a very good friend of one of my sister's (a man whom I'm in contact with via facebook) just voluntarily spent the month of November living homeless on the streets of Dallas. That was in my mind as well.

It is these touchpoints with others that I think we need to be mindful of in seeking to live  productive lives of public service. 

Rich blessings.

That is of course true, waterfall. We must be constantly vigilant. There is much good to be done here on planet Earth if only we can get over ourselves.

Rich blessings.

Why do we support some and not all?  It's pretty difficult to support all the different charities out there.

We do have different values about what we support.  For example, I prefer to do things more locally rather than internationally.  I prefer to help people over animals.  Some people are the opposite.  Others who are from another country may choose to help people in their homeland, likely because they feel connected.

I can't speak for your reasoning, but I probably would not have donated either.  The term AIDS victims bothers me, I would have preferred to hear the term AIDS patients or people with AIDS, but charities do like to use terms that get a bigger reaction.  I would need a further explanation, where is the money actually going?  What is it for?  Some AIDS treatments are total BS and I don't want to support that.  I also prefer planned giving, and not randomly giving some change, but it sounds like you don't have a problem with that as you would give if it were for the homeless.  Fiinally, I like to see how much money is used for actual charity and how much is used to run the charity.  Moneysense has a decent guide to help with that.

Yes, that is true kaythecurler, HIV/AIDS and homelessness are not mutually exclusive.  

Thank you for the compliment. Personally, I'm one of those who don't care about getting a tax receipt. I'm not giving in order to get a tax receipt, I'm giving to help someone out. The way I see it, I don't need a pat on the back from my government to require me to do so. There is I think entirely too much money spent on church building operations. Surely this is the old way of doing church. I think a lot of the money that goes into church buildings could much better be spent on evangelism and missions.

I agree with you on the issue of highly paid staff members. On the issue of the shoeboxes -- my church does participate in Operation Christmas Child. We've done so for several years now. Most of our boxes are sent to children in Latin America. As for the sending of "plastic and paper goodies," there are two things that I think should be taken into consideration. The first is that it is up to each individual packer of a shoebox to decide just what items they will pack (there are a few basic guidelines to follow -- no toy guns, for example). The second is that some of the "goodies" include things like hair brushes, combs, toothbrushes, and school supplies.

Rich blessings.

Hi MC jae,

Whether they think of it as an investment or not does not mean it is not an investment.

Which is how they are invested in any particular issue.  And there is nothing wrong with that.  Personal tragedies can be powerful drives.

I agree with you.

Although I think you in denial.  In your own testimony you tell of making a decision to support because you assumed that the cause was a specific thing.  So the gates of generosity were already open.  When you found that your presumption was in error you slammed the gates shut.

Nobody knew what you were planning to give and certainly you were not obligated to give one way or another yet you had made the decision to give.  Right at that moment you were open to assisting another and then, when the other was not who you thought, you slammed the gate shut and ignored that need.

Note also your language, "willing to give."  You are willing to give to some and not to others and that betrays investment thinking as well.

In the parable of the Good Samaritan we see individuals of limited willingness pass by a beaten and dying man.  They were unwilling to pay the social price of interacting with that victim.  The Priest would have to perfom ceremonial washing if the body was dead.  His job was too important.  The Scribe likewise and his job is also too important.  The Samaritan sees rendering assistance as the most important part of his schedule so he helps (and is commended by Jesus for doing so).

Charity tells us that the problem is somebody else's business.

Agape tells us that it is ours.

As creatures of limited means we cannot possible help all as much as we would like to.  Nobody faults us for those limitations of ability.  We also get a pass on prioritizing causes because for many reasons certain causes will be worthy of our support while others won't.

None of that means that we are completely unloving or lack compassion for all others.  It means that we are okay putting some at the bottom of the pile and we will help them only if there are leftovers of leftovers.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Interesting that you've posted this on World AIDS Day, jae. I wonder, did you stop to talk about the project with those requesting donations, to learn more, or did you just walk on?   Do you wonder about finding yourself face to face with someone in this situation - perhaps the Spirit acting in your life.  

You say you've never met anyone with AIDS - possibly you have, and not known this. 

I agree with RevJohn.

I tend to support charities that I have had some personal connection with. I don't have enough money to support all of the causes that I would like to, so I choose the ones that mean the most to me. I've had loved ones die of cancer and heart disease, so I always support fundraisers in aid of those organization. I get a lot of personal support for my work from my local children's health foundation and have seen a lot of the good work it does locally, so I support that. We have United Church-supported ministry for homeless and marginally-housed people in town that I support with mostly in-kind donations (for example purchasing a Christmas gift for someone who uses the facility). Tonight I'll go and watch a parade and make a donation to the food bank.

Today is World AIDS Day carolla? Honestly, I had no idea. It does seem to suggest, however, why the person was out asking for donations yesterday (and I would guess that someone -- possibly the same person -- was also there looking for donations today).

Now, you ask if I stopped to talk to the person. My answer is no, I didn't. I suppose for two reasons really. One, I wasn't interested in giving, so why stop and talk. Two, I had pressing homework to attend to, both on the train and at home.

Perhaps in time I'll meet someone with HIV/AIDS, but, as you say, to the best of my knowledge it  hasn't happened yet.

Rich blessings.

I agree that it's often about what touches us most deeply.  In my case, it's poverty in the developing world.  That's where I focus the majority of my charitable giving.  I think that for me helping people to meet their most basic needs has to come first.  If I had an infinite amount to give, I'd help everyone, but I don't so I try to give in ways that are most important as I see it.  I don't think that's a bad thing, either.  Other people have different values and help different causes.  

Interestingly, even after Jim died 8 months ago, cancer is still lower down on my list. I've thought about that a lot and wondered why; before he got sick, I had almost no personal experience with cancer so it made sense in a way that it wasn't my main priority, but now I've seen it first hand.  I've watched my husband suffer with it and die.  Still, it's the impoverished child who tears my heart out, not the cancer patient.  The best explanation I've been able to find is that there is no natural reason for people to starve to death or to be enslaved, but cancer (like other diseases) is naturally occurring (although obviously other things can encourage it to start or to grow).  Death is also a natural part of life.  I think I'm most outraged by suffering that is caused by humans than suffering that happens naturally.

I guess I am too "Street".

I don't buy that a genuine charity would collect for "aids victims"  in a subway.

I know of groups that help aids victims (I sang at a remembrance service for aids victims yesterday). None of these groups canvass subways but I have seen several phoney chairities on the streets.

In my opinion, if they look like canvassers and are on the streets, they are likely to be phoney. 

Your thoughts make sense to me Judd.  I have given money to a kid or grandkid to drop in the Salvation Army kettle - reasonable chance they are genuine.  I don't give to random askers whether they say the money is for them or someone else.  

I find there are plenty of valid and useful ways to donate to various causes.  Some seem to spend less on overhead than others.    The needs are great locally, provincially, nationally and internationally.  Hard choices to make!

Judd, that's a good point.  I do think legitimate charities could be canvassing at the subway, I have seen university groups doing so for charities near LRT stations.  It's worthwhile checking them out more first before donating.

Hi Judd,

That is a fair point.

Grace and peace to you.

John

I give, mainly through my church - local, M&S, special appeals.  I trust their bookkeeping  - that most of the money goes to the causes (rather than to administration).  I also like the idea that they work with local peoples around the world and focus on long term needs.  It makes more sense to ask 'What do you need?  and 'How can I help?' than making decisions from our point of view.  (ie  I doubt if many from Haiti after the earthquake would have said 'Please spend your money on providing security, in beefing up the police force and army' rather than 'food, clothing, shelter, schools, opportunities to get back on our feet and earn a living for our families'.)

I give to some door-to-door canvassers - Cancer, Heart & Stroke, Kidney.  The amount may depend on how closely these diseases have hit home (more to Cancer recently), or it may depend on how much money I have available the day the canvasser knocks on my door.

I give to the local food bank (again usually through my church), and to the community kitchen.  And I figure if the college kids who collected for the food bank on Halloween hold back a can or beans or of tuna, they must be hungry too.)

I give to people I know who are struggling - more often gifts in kind  (Costco often sells two or three boxes as a package - I give the second one to my daughter, the food bank, Seelerman's niece).

And, if I have it in my pocket, I sometimes give to street people.  If they ask politely. 

I also give of myself and my time working at my church with programs that serve the poorest of the poor.

I don't give to charities I don't recognize; or to those who support causes I don't believe in (ie protection of baby seals); or those who I suspect use much of my gift for salaries and administration; or to those who I suspect have an ulterior motive (converting the heathen as opposed to feeding the hungry).  I don't do Christmas shoe boxes.

Sorry this is a little off-topic, but I thought it was worthwhile sharing:

I don't usually give money to homeless people, although I have given them food before.

There are some quite aggressive homeless people who hang out near the businesses within walking distance and there was a murder that involved two of them.  If chemguy and I are together they approach from my side, not his.

I really appreciated when a homeless man came up to me at the grocery store and offered to take my cart back if he could have the loonie in it.  He approached me in a manner such that I didn't feel trapped between him and the car or cart.  When I agreeed, he then helped me load the groceries into my truck, after asking if he could.  I was having a flareup of pain and some things were quite heavy.  It wasn't charity on my part!  A dollar well spent :)

I just wish I had thought to contact the store and suggested hiring him.  Remember when grocery stores used to offer that service?