Hacker News Reader

Comment by justinclift | Hacker News Reader

Yeah. This sounds like another case of religious organisations picking on the vulnerable for "conversion" / indoctrination purposes (aka brainwashing). :(

View on HN

Even if that's true, at least they're helping them. I'm sure when given a choice between being "not brainwashed" and being fed, most homeless people would go for the latter. Also, if you're homeless you literally have nothing, what's wrong with finding solace in religion? At least you'd have some comfort.

"Also, if you're homeless you literally have nothing, what's wrong with finding solace in religion?"

A significant portion of homeless people are actually 'invisible' homeless people- people living out of their cars, or sleeping on couches. They arguably do have things, up to and including a sense of identity and self for which any attempt of indoctrination must erode. I don't think someone who is sleeping on a friend's couch would be down for sleeping on a bed instead for the low low price of conversion therapy.

(FTR: I don't think religion is brainwashing/conversion therapy or whatever. I also just think this take is also very bad.)

This line of reasoning doesn't defend their practices nearly as well as you think it does. For instance, paying homeless people to fight each other will certainly make sure they have money for food, and it might provide them some much-needed organized activity!

If the reason you help someone is because you want to sell them something or use them, you're doing help wrong.

Not everyone agrees that intention is relevant. For me, it’s important to help while minimizing harm and trying to respect the agency and wishes of the recipient, which the fighting analogy violates. that is a challenging balance in practice, but we are talking about ethics, where there is more grey than b&w.

I suppose you could argue that religion is harmful.. but even as an atheist, that’s a stretch for me to agree with.

> I suppose you could argue that religion is harmful.. but even as an atheist, that’s a stretch for me to agree with.

How is that a stretch for you? Have you ever heard of conversion therapy. Do you know how that came to be and similar to slavery. I know a lot of LGBT+ friends that had religious parents throw them on the streets because of God wouldn't make them not be normal.

Let me guess, you also think that Muslims are terrorists? Why are we so found of generalisations? A number of individuals engaging in a horrible activity, doesn't make them a representative of the entire group. You can be religious without condoning any of those things because they don't affect your daily life, which is true for most religious people I'd argue. I am not religious but I can see why someone would turn to religion to give them a sense of purpose in their life. That doesn't mean that they have to convert people.

I spent nearly six years homeless. The programs holding you hostage to listen to a sermon and try to brainwash you were typically amazingly shitty programs that I didn't return to. The ones run by people simply practicing their faith and trying to do good in the world because it's an article of their faith were vastly better.

Catholic Charities had consistently good programs. In my experience, they did not ever require you to listen to a sermon to get the help you needed.

Yes, I chose to go hungry rather than attend shitty services with lousy food that put my welfare at risk with their shitty policies. Some so-called "help" is worse than nothing.

And not all homeless have literally nothing. Some have income, just not enough to support a middle class life. Some have regular jobs and live in fear of being fired if their employer learns of their situation.

Friend of mine worked for a Catholic Charity. She's Jewish. The Nuns the ran the place did not care. They didn't care that some of their employees were gay. They had no interest in converting the people they served.

The thing that bothers me now about the homeless is how many of them appear to have their basic shit together.

> The thing that bothers me now about the homeless is how many of them appear to have their basic shit together.

Hmm? I think there's a typo in there. Did you mean that it bothers you about homelessness (not the homeless people) that people with "shit" together still have trouble getting housing?

You said hostages, but I think you meant volunteers.

As someone who is religious, I think this is a bad approach because it is transactional and tries to force the will of someone unfortunate. Both of those directly oppose the values of my Christian faith (grace and freewill).

But unlike others, I don't agree that religious charities should not do any proselytizing. A genuine religious person believes their doctrine, not just in being a good person like anyone can be. Christians believe there are eternal issues at stake.

The point is that basic services should not be conditional and proselytizing should invitational, not mandatory.

There are variations of this in the Bible when talking about transactional religious behavior; they have their reward.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com