I was approached the other day by a member of a ‘certain’ Christian charity, informing me of a new campaign of good-will, and of course, looking for my financial support. I smiled and politely explained that I didn’t support Christian charities. With a puzzled look, he then tried to rebut stating that their charity was not discriminatory to non-Christians. I wished him well with his efforts and further clarified that I only support secular charities, which, for obvious reasons, shut down the short winded conversation. The look of bewilderment on this young man’s face after this encounter got me thinking that maybe it was an unusual (though valid) response and may require further explanation.
To my specificity of Christian rooted charitable organizations:
Though they may not currently be discriminatory, the Christian faith has a long history of (often violent) sexism, racism, homophobia and overall bigotry, not to mention a particularly strong intolerance to any other religious or spiritual sect that happens to challenge Christian dogma. To me, it would be no different than being approached by a charity that originated with the Third Reich.
On my preference to support only secular charities and organizations:
Though I am indifferent to the beliefs and faiths of others, I don’t agree with organized religion or structuralized spirituality. Change is part and parcel to the very fabric of existence, and these systems do not reflect the malleability of life itself. As they confine your thinking to a rigid box rooted in tribal superstitions and fallible dogmas, and condemn its followers to the acceptance of unquestionable (and unanswerable) methodologies and practices.
Now, I’m not here to pit sciences and religions together, or philosophy and spirituality or even to claim that I have answers to (presently) unanswerable questions. Though science has offered us insight and knowledge to many of life’s theoretical questions, it too has its faults, which are mainly due to the innate fallibility of man of which science relies. However, the dogma you may feed yourself with every Sunday or every day, was also written by the most fallible of creatures, so is it wrong to question its validity or ignorant to ignore its historical roots?
Our very existence is in a constant state of change – it is simply unnatural to confine myself to a set of intangible and ‘dark-aged’ expectations. So to the bewildered young man I politely dismissed, I prefer the malleable structure of secularity to the mental imprisonment of an unwavering faith.