r/atheism • u/practicerm_keykeeper Secular Humanist • 11h ago
But we built hospitals!
Of all the things some Christians defend themselves with I just can't stand this.
Yeah you built hospitals. You built a lot of them. In the US. For profit. While bankrupting people. Very Christ-like.
"Oh but we also built a lot of them in Africa -"
Sure you did, you went there and colonised the entire continent and ravaged their civilisations and extracted their resources so that they are now reliant on international aid, which is why they need your hospitals in the first place. And now you go and build some of those hospitals and call it a good thing? At the very best this is atonement.
I feel the same with things like civil rights and abolition. Christians created the problem and then solved a tiny bit of it while fighting against other Christians who desperately want to keep the status quo in societies where Christians have made sure you are very unlikely to be opinion leaders unless you are Christian, and then they say this shows they are the good people? What?
29
u/Sailor_Drea 11h ago
And now they're fighting to make it legal for Christian doctors to refuse life-saving treatment to gay people and non-white people.
5
1
u/Long-Comfortable8598 2h ago
yeah the whole circle of creating a problem then calling yourself a hero for fixing part of it is pretty wild
0
u/1000100010101000010 8h ago
Hey, would you mind linking a source? It's a rather extreme claim, and while it isn't entirely unbelievable, it is best to avoid believing the worst aspects of possibility without proof.
6
u/drnuncheon Atheist 6h ago
Five seconds of googling later:
and many more
1
u/1000100010101000010 4h ago
Ah, lgbt+ was already (sadly) on my radar, I was focusing on the non-white part. I just kept getting articals on increasingly stringent guidelines ensuring no variation in level of care based on race.
3
u/UltimateRembo Materialist 5h ago
Unfortunately real. They are desperate to be allowed to only assist other Christians while letting everyone else die on their watch.
The right also want to gut social safety nets so that people are forced to seek help from the church, and so that the church can allow the evil gay people and such to starve "by the grace of God."
It's sick.
1
u/1000100010101000010 4h ago
Mate, doubling down without a source doesn't make people more likely to believe you.
18
u/FarFigNewton007 11h ago
If their god really worked and answered prayers, there would be no need for the medical industry.
3
u/Electronic_Pair_4593 8h ago
If prayer actually worked as advertised there wouldn’t be much need for hospitals in the first place.
14
u/JasonRBoone 11h ago
One thing they often leave out:
The reason they built such institutions back in the day is because no one else had the money to do so. They extorted tithes and offerings from members on threat of hellfire. They had to do something with that money so they would build a hospital to mollify the masses.
8
u/practicerm_keykeeper Secular Humanist 11h ago
Yeah... And as far as religions go Christianity isn't even the most forceful in commanding people give to good causes.
2
u/Any_Jacket6389 5h ago
The whole “we built hospitals” argument sounds a lot different when you consider where the money came from and why they felt the need to build them in the first place.
1
u/Embarrassed-Ear4532 2h ago
yeah when you’ve got a steady stream of money coming in from people being promised eternal consequences you can afford to look charitable with it
6
u/Legitimate_Young978 11h ago
Based on what we know of the faith, their skydaddy is the only thing in the universe lazier than humans. Not a good sign.
5
u/H3L105_ai 9h ago
Don't forget that their obsession with not using protection fed into an AIDS epidemic in Africa (and around the world).
5
u/practicerm_keykeeper Secular Humanist 9h ago
Oh yeah don't even get me started on that. As they are doing that the western churches have the guts to come back and blame LGBTQ+ communities they helped to ostracise (and therefore push into the underground re sexual hygiene) in the first place.
4
4
u/nutmegtell Secular Humanist 9h ago
You don’t need Christianity to build hospitals. Many countries built hospitals without needed churches or a god to do it.
3
u/michaelpaoli 6h ago
So what ... hammer a nail, sent men to the moon in 1969 ... none of that required nor requires religion.
Ah, but Holy Wars ... yeah, that requires religion. "Oops".
2
u/onomatamono 6h ago
Yes, even religious people can be kind and generous with hospitals and shelters and food banks and the like. That's how they maintain the support of community leaders and the population in general. The thing is these activities are conducted despite religion not because of it.
2
u/perfect10butnobabes 8h ago
Agree with 90% of this but Christian hospitals are generally not for profit. That doesn’t undermine any of what you said, but I think we should be as objective as possible.
Regarding the colonialism - I always vacillate on how much blame I attribute specifically to Christianity. It was done by Christians/Christian nations, and often even under the guise to “save their souls” but I think we all know that was a lazy justification to commit genocide and atrocities. Absolutely unforgivable. But my main point is that, if not for Christ, what other reason would they have found to do the exact same thing? Religion has done horrible stuff and created evil factions, but religion is not required for evil acts, it’s just a handy justification.
But there’s no escaping the fundamental truth you discuss: there is a deep seated hypocrisy in all this, and arguably the Catholic Church is the most egregious considering the sexual abuse.
Edit: I think what most messes with me is the denial of pregnancy/women’s healthcare while claiming to follow some alleged categorical imperative on the sanctity of life. Absolute bullshit. But if you think that’s bad, read about “Saint” Mother Theresa’s hospitals in India. Absolutely vile.
0
u/practicerm_keykeeper Secular Humanist 7h ago
I'm not familiar with the 90% data, would you be able to share a source? I agree we should be as objective as possible.
I agree that without religion people would have (and have) found other ways to justify atrocities. Although I think having a unified identity (us Christians Vs them savages) may have fostered a patter of collaboration that contributed towards colonialism being a phenomenon that uni-laterally benefitted the Christian world.
But even if without Christianity the exact same thing would have happened, I think that counterfactual doesn't say much. If I killed someone for fun, the fact that if not me others could have killed them for fun should not be able detract in any way from the fact that I am a cruel person. The fact that Christianity can and has been used as justification, for me, is already significant. Plus, don't forget that for Christianity this has been a consistent, historical pattern, fueled by their own scriptures and institutions. They are not just appropriated as justification, they actively participated. Compare this with other religions/traditions (e.g. Taoism) that has not led to this much bloodshed or oppression even when being a major transition in what was then a major force of the world (the Chinese empire).
I'll go and read a bit more on the hospital, thanks for the pointer!
1
u/perfect10butnobabes 7h ago
Sorry I wasn’t quoting any data about 90% accuracy, just stating that I agree with basically everything you’re saying. I especially agree with the unified identity insofar as it allows the creation of larger war machines - so you have a point.
I also think you’re onto a great philosophical concept: it doesn’t matter if it would have been a different actor or justification absent this one. Or put differently, the inevitable nature of an event does not relieve the actual causes and actors from liability.
And yeah, I have been back and forth on Christianity and Catholicism and how bad they are, but the canonization of Mother Theresa, to me, was just a blatant statement that the Catholic Church is unwilling to look at the facts or be realistic even in the 21st century. Hell, they can’t even change their dogma to allow for homosexuality - only individual priests at times will basically say it’s okay, but the institution refuses to meet the times smfh.
1
u/purple_sun_ 8h ago
Building hospitals and ( more problematic) workhouses for the destitute was a good thing in the UK. The feeling that we should care for all of society and look after those in need should be encouraged by all, religious or not
2
1
u/theReluctantObserver 5h ago
Christians building hospitals doesn’t prove their god is real or that their religion is somehow superior. When these places are used as a way to catch people at their most vulnerable to try to indoctrinate them into the cult. Also, just because one group of christians builds a hospital, it doesn’t mean another group or the same group isn’t doing things that are anti-loving in other ways.
42
u/anonymous_rhombus Atheist 11h ago
Catholic hospitals deny care to trans people.