If your house is on fire, do you ask the firefighter if he or she is an atheist before you accept his or her help? I doubt it.
Similarly, I'm wondering about the real reasons The American Cancer Society will not work with the atheist charity organization, Foundation Beyond Belief. It appears that the foundation would be able to raise up to $500,000 for the Relay for Life, with $250,000 of that being matched funds from Todd Stiefel of the Stiefel Freethought Foundation.
The ACS initially seemed amenable to the idea, but then suddenly decided not to move forward with the relationship. Atheists are not happy with the outcome, reminding ACS that cancer strikes everyone, regardless of one's views on religion.
The ACS response was that they only accept teams from corporate sponsors. Since Foundation Beyond Belief is technically a corporation, the only conclusion some have been able to draw is that the ACS problem is with atheist charities.
In recent developments, atheist complaints have led to a campaign on the ACS Facebook page and a public statement from ACS in the form of a status update. ACS is apparently willing for members of Foundation Beyond Belief to join other accepted national teams, but not create their own.
The story is a strange one. If this is a case of prejudice against atheists, it wouldn't be the only one. According to The Christian Century, the ACLU was once embarrassed when an email went public that the ACLU would not take money from the American Humanist Association because "the majority of Mississippians tremble in terror at the word 'atheist.'"
Prejudice is a strange creature. For example, on more than one occasion, and at more than one school, I've used texts in my classrooms by Diarmaid MacCulloch, the winner of the 2010 Cundill Prize in History Award. MacCulloch is one of the best historians on the subject of the history of Christianity; he is also gay. The latter was apparently enough for a minority of my students to wonder whether this disqualified him as an historian of Christianity. It does not.
Do people ask if their bus driver is gay before riding to their next stop? Does one ask his or her plumber if he's an atheist before hiring him to fix the pipes? No. The question is one of qualification.
The last time I checked, atheists are human beings plagued with all the same ills of humanity; cancer is no respecter of persons. And while most people would likely understand not taking money from recognized criminal and terrorist organizations, this situation does not apply. So is ACS essentially slapping the hand of the Good Samaritan? A half-million dollars can go a long way for cancer research and why the ACS would turn this down is (wait for it) beyond belief.
Follow Brandon G. Withrow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bwithrow
American Cancer Society :: Information and Resources for Cancer ...
Learn About Cancer - American Cancer Society
Employment Opportunities - American Cancer Society
http://www.rall.com/rallblog/2011/10/18/nine-figure-charity-shakes-down-poor-cartoonists-for-pro-bono-spec-work
Then again, the ACS didn't even give anyone a chance, maybe they should have taken the money, and those that protested them would have been shamed instead.
Either way, I'm no longer donating to the ACS... I'll give my atheist tainted money to a more deserving organization.
No, people don't usually ask those questions. But it they find out that they are dealing with "ungodly" people ... many religionists (and those pandering to, or afraid of religionists) will take their business elsewhere.
They are turning down money to help cancer victims of any religious denomination—or none at all—but oh yeah, we atheists are such terrible people because religionists and religion have failed to convince us to believe in their cause. Sheesh.
It is a pity that such charities have to choose between being discriminatory and being funded. It will take a long time before the iron grip of fundamentalism has been weakened enough to make discrimination fade -- even by organizations that might not actually want to discriminate.
Had this not occurred in the context of the Republican Presidential Debates and the upcoming elections, I really think the ACS might have taken the risk of accepting the atheist money. But the shrill voices of the Right are drowning out all reason lately, and the ACS might have envisioned itself as a victim if it drew undue attention to itself at this time.
I am not excusing the American Cancer Society. But I can postulate likely motivations for their actions, not all of which actually condemn them so much as it condemns society at large.
Nice clear article. I do have to make one correction though: atheists are plagued with one less than all of the ills that plague humanity.
Has the Foundation tried just sending ACS or some other cancer research group a check? Relay for Life is almost as much about making a name for your group as it is about fighting cancer. If atheists are so much smarter than others, why haven't they figured that out? Did they want the recognition of having done a good thing as much or more than the glow of having done that thing?
My husband, a faithful Christian all his life, died of lymphoma at 41. Five-year survival rate is up over 30% from what it was then. Money made most of that difference. We would have been thrilled to acknowledge that atheists funded the research into his treatments, but Relay for Life isn't the way to get the most test tubes for your dollar.
I'm deeply sorry to hear about your husband. Far too many people have lost loved ones to this monstrosity, and we all should do what we can to help out. It is deeply unfortunate that the ACS feels a need to say no to money from a group simply because of that groups beliefs. If there is one great lesson from science and the enlightenment it is that people can disagree and still work together for the betterment of humanity. It is sad that the ACS has apparently not learned this centuries old lesson.
I wonder what the dying atheists would have to say about this; discriminating against the dying...great job ACS.