Although there are some who think that individuals who are secular humanists are materialistic, we know that is not the case. Many people who are not religious are frustrated that so many charitable organizations, especially those that help people afflicted by natural or human disasters, have efforts coordinated by religious organizations. These organizations sometimes proselytize to the people in need of their services. This is entirely unacceptable to secular humanists.

About twenty years ago, the Secular Humanist Aid and Relief Efforts or S.H.A.R.E. was developed to provide an alternative for those who wish to contribute to such efforts but to do so without the intermediary of a religious organization. S.H.A.R.E. is a program of the Council for Secular Humanism, which for 25 years has been the leading organization promoting the rights and values of secular humanists in the U.S. and abroad.

S.H.A.R.E. has contributed most recently to the Tsunami disaster relief effort and victims of Hurricane Katrina. By donating to S.H.A.R.E., you can pool your resources with other like-minded individuals who wish to affect change in the world because they are humanists, and they are humane.

S.H.A.R.E will keep you updated as to the progress of our relief efforts, and we are always happy to receive suggestions for targets for our efforts in the future. Together, we can change the world, and help save people whose needs exist in the here-and-now.

Some people feel that we atheists are "all talk and no action" regarding humanity.

Here's a short list of secular charities and aid groups:

*DonorsChoose.org
*Kiva.org
*The Union of Concerned Scientists
*American Red Cross
*American Civil Liberties Union
*United Nations Children's Fund
*Doctors without Borders
*Amnesty International
*Oxfam International
*The Nature Conservancy
*Population Connection
*DefCon: Campaign to Defend the Constitution
*The SEED foundation

Many more listed HERE.

I know most of the organizations, and have worked for one of them. At least the ones I know are, for the most part, good organizations. However, they (at least the ones I know of, maybe not all) are not athiest organizations. They are secular organizations.

Secular means to have no religious ties. How much more atheistic can that be??? Do you think we should open a charity with an Atom symbol logo and then be accused of proselytizing or converting like the Salvation Army routinely does???

I'm not going to get in an argument with you on this one. As I said, of the organizations on that list that I know, they are good.

But I will tell you, from the inside of at least one of those, there are religious believers in them and they work with religious organizations if it helps meet their goals. Athiesm is not part of their mission (at least not most of the organizations) nor does athiesm drive them.

They are just good organizations. That's all. Not all good organizations take a stance (pro, con or agnostic) on religion.

If atheists organized together as atheist-only, then we would be deemed as a religion.

It's somewhat off subject but there are athiest organizations. For example:

Athiest Alliance International
American Athiests
Agnostic & Atheist Student Assoc (AGASA)
Atheist Coalition of San Diego
Atheists & Agnostics Group of Rossmoor
Atheists and Other Freethinkers
Atheists of North Coastal San Diego County
Atheists of Silicon Valley
East Bay Atheists
Humanist Society of Santa Barbara
Orange County Atheists
San Francisco Atheists
Shasta Atheists & Freethinkers
Iowa Secularists
Center for Inquiry, Long Island
Freethinkers of Upstate New York
Hudson Valley Humanists
New York City Atheists
PA Non Believers
Military Assoc of Athiests & Freethinkers
Rationalists of East Tennessee
The Wonderful Athiests of Central Florida
The Agnostic & Athiest Student Association
Athiests for Human Rights

(ok, you get the idea) If you feel the need to affliate, there are opportunites. Just seek them out.

Getting back to charities...

Atheists tend to donate to secular charities instead of religious-founded organizations.

Some people feel that we atheists are "all talk and no action" regarding humanity.

Good idea


Nice, so? Many religious people also donate to secular charities.


People who say this are either ignorant or bigoted. Athiests are, at least from my experience, not particulary different than anyone else.

I think the real issue here is whether the charitable organization has a religious agenda or not - not the composition or beliefs of its membership.
...
I personally feel no animosity about religious charitable organizations, but I think they should give out aid with no "strings". If they want religious literature available for people at tables at their relief center that they can take without pressure or coercion - fine. Otherwise they are using aid as a "club" with which to proselytize.

Good idea


Nice, so? Many religious people also donate to secular charities.


People who say this are either ignorant or bigoted. Athiests are, at least from my experience, not particulary different than anyone else.

Why do you misspell atheists? Is that intentional?
How would you feel if I purposely misspelled Jew? I don't take swipes at others on that level.

Why do you misspell atheists? Is that intentional?
How would you feel if I purposely misspelled Jew? I don't take swipes at others on that level.

No. I apologize to you (and or anyone else) who I've offended by that. Lack of spell check. You may notice I often misspell words, especially transposing ei and ie.

Why do you think I have any animosity toward atheists? Have I ever said or indicated such? In fact, have I ever indicated whether or not I am an atheist or a believer or an agnostic, or a Jew or a Christian or a Muslim or a Buddhist.

I simply don't contribute to organizations where I don't like the way they operate.

Where it is much more of a problem is in relation to government funding of organizations that have religious ties. I don't have a problem using religious organzations as vehicles to help people, but where the government is funding them there should be NO religious test, NO religous suasion. Period. And if the government is going to use religious based organizations as delivery vehicles, then there must be tight, and honest, oversight to assure these guidelines.

That said, on the second point, I would go further. I personally don't support the faith-based initiatives program at all. Taxpayer money should not be going to private religious charity at all. If you'll read David Kuo's book -- and he formerly was an advocate of the program - it led to too much political manipulation and chicanery. Therefore, there would be no need to worry about your test.

However there have been, historically, religious created organizations that have delivered fair and honest programs with public funding. Jewish, Catholic and Lutheran charities have, for decades provided valuable assistance to immigrants, for example. And they have done it without aspects of religious persuasion. (It would be hard to deny however, that when a group does do good work, it reflects positively on them and attracts some interest -- or at least sympathy.)

Jefferson said government aid to religion ends up endangering the autonomy of the institutions on either side of the transaction, and I still agree.