Not quite. He’s only 4’13".
Pseudo-dragon then?
It’s wonderful to hear the Pope has decided to give away the Catholci Church vast wealth becuase he doesn’t belive in hoarding. Oh wait I might have misread that, he was talking about everyone except him and his cronies. They need that money to be able top pay lawyers to revictimise all those people they raped as kids.
Miscavige’s horde consists of all the deluded followers of the ‘church’ he leads, whereas his gold is a hoard. Only picking this nit because it bears stating that he does have two of them - each spelt differently, and each giving him more power than any psychopath/sociopath should ever be allowed anywhere near. But the world seems full of them these days, all with their gold and their armies of fans. Late stage religion?
Nah, it’s always been this way.
Upon reflection, you are of course correct. It is modern mass media and its (mis)use by religionists that makes it seem otherwise.
I was distracted, fighting a bad case of Windows Update Constipation on another machine.
It matters morehow you got the money. Not the fraction you spend on PR or" “charity” to pretend you weren’t responsible for things like the land grab that was the various inquisitions.
Ouch, you have my commiserations. There is no laxative for that.
My doctor told me to lose weight, but he was fat, himself, so I told him to fuck off, and died of diabetes. That’ll show him!
The article says the estimate is a total US spend of $170 billion per year, $150 billion of which goes to its own network of hospitals and universities. That would include Notre Dame University, with an annual tuition approaching $50K in 2015-16. Doesn’t feel very charitable. The article also makes the case that the Catholic church has those institutions in the US as a way of exerting political power as a religion in the minority.
I feel like I’m not seeing what you’re seeing re: the charitable spending. Are you counting every dollar the church spends as a charitable expenditure? What am I missing here?
The Catholic Church is the largest private provider of health care in the United States of America.[42] During the 1990s, the church provided about one in six hospital beds in America, at around 566 hospitals, many established by nuns.[41] The church has carried a disproportionate number of poor and uninsured patients at its facilities and the American bishops first called for universal health care in America in 1919. The church has been an active campaigner in that cause ever since.[41] In the abortion debate in America, the church has sought to retain the right not to perform abortions in its health care facilities.[41] In 2012, the church operated 12.6% of hospitals in the USA, accounting for 15.6% of all admissions, and around 14.5% of hospital expenses (c. 98.6 billion dollars). Compared to the public system, the church provided greater financial assistance or free care to poor patients, and was a leading provider of various low-profit health services such as breast cancer screenings, nutrition programs, trauma, and care of the elderly.[43]
Maybe you are missing the subtle difference between a ‘charity’ and a ‘charitable cause’.
A British example. Places like Eton (public schools in UK parlance, private in US terms) are technically registered charities, subject to charity regulations and benefits. Nobody would ever call them charitable causes (e.g. Save The Children).
Seems many of the Catholic church’s ‘charitable causes’ are technically charities, but …
Catholic healthcare doesn’t meet standards of care for women’s reproductive health. Also reproductive health in general.
They refuse to do things like tubal ligations, D&C procedures, abortions, provide birth control, provide modern family planning and even vasectomies.
The catholic church is also buying out public hospital systems and installing itself as the only choice in healthcare for massive regions of the US.
I don’t consider rendering subpar healthcare while expanding their political control of the country and removing people’s choices to be very charitable.
Jesus Christ though, here’s the paragraph immediately following that from the same Wiki article:
Roman Catholic medical facilities refuse treatment which runs counter to their beliefs. Contraception among other treatments is not provided, complications due to existing contraception may not be treated. Users may be unaware of these restrictions, even unaware that their health provider is connected with the Roman Catholic Church till something goes wrong. For example, a woman bleeding and in pain due to a misplaced Intrauterine contraceptive device was refused treatment.[44]
We think that people should be aware that they may face limitations on the kind of care they can receive when they go to the doctor based on religious restrictions. It’s really important that the public understand that this is going on and it is going on in a widespread fashion so that people can take whatever steps they need to do to protect themselves. (Lorie Chaiten, director of the women’s and reproductive rights project of the ACLU Illinois)[45]
Thanks but no thanks, Catholics.
That’s the big problem with religious charity vs social safety nets and entitlements. Religious help always comes with strings attached.
And it’s not like it’s all free care at your local Catholic hospital. They’ll still bill the fuck out of you, even if you’re Catholic.
Blue Cross Blue Shield, NC is also a “nonprofit.” But their CEO makes millions annually, and they sure as shit don’t give anything away for free.
Yeah whatever.
I’m not interested in discussing the US’s health care system. The problems you mentioned are also in my quote of wikipedia.
My topic here was “rich church not spending money for the poor”.
