Did You See Secretary of State Clinton’s Message for Increasing Donations to Pakistan’s Flood Victims?

I suggest, my readers, that you pass on this note to all your friends and loved ones: Please donate the small, though value of $50 to the flood relief effort in Pakistan. Consider that private pledged donations to Pakistan’s flood victims are 1/40th the dollar value pledged for the victims of the Haiti earthquake and for the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. Consider that the median value for those relief efforts was also $50. But, now, at the face of politics and fear, fewer people than before have pledged donations to the relief effort (slowly) underway in Pakistan.

The fact that the government of Pakistan is corrupt; that there are militant elements run through in the country does not alleviate the urgent need for aid, help for the millions of flood victims–most precious of whom are innocent, hungry children. The qualities and short-comings of a government are no anchor or trailer to the lives of a people, to the value of their dignity and their promises and best hopes.Please click on the link below to go to the State Department’s page on private donations to Pakistani victims of the flood. Mrs. Clinton’s message remains important and, even now, timely. Please attend to that message.http://www.amanatwelfaersociety.blogspot.comconsider/ Secretary Clinton’s thoughts on the U.S. effort in delivering aid to Pakistan.
“The Pakistani people are friends and partners, and the United States is standing with them as the tragic human suffering from flooding continues—up to 20 million people have been affected. Americans have always shown great generosity to people facing crises worldwide. I urge you to join this effort and send much needed help to the people of Pakistan as they face substantial relief, recovery and reconstruction challenges. Your financial contribution will go towards providing shelter materials, food, clean water, and medical supplies to those in need.”
Then consider that this message was put out 2 weeks ago. Consider that 5 weeks after the floods, aid money is still trickling in drips and drabs.

chirstian pepole poor in flood

If all Christians would tithe (or give generously, if you prefer) 10% of their income, think of the people that could be fed and housed, diseases that could be eliminated, lives that could be saved, and so on. Unfortunately, studies show that Christians give only 2-3% of their incomes, the same as non-Christians. For a group where a major part of the teaching is on giving to help others, this is surprising and disturbing.I'm not so sure many churches today would spend the money wisely even if they had it. Many seem more interested in building big buildings and keeping the flock comfortable and entertained than they are in helping the poor. Not that there's anything wrong with going to a service that's done in a nice place and with excellence, but so many have taken it to an extreme.I hang around Christians quite often and I can verify that most of them are against "big government." And yet their giving (as a group) could make the government much smaller. But they're (as a group) not willing to make the personal sacrifices required to give as they should. Kind of ironic, isn't it.
All this said, Christians do give a ton of money, just look at giving dollars in the absolute. You'll see that "religious" giving is always at or near the top. All I'm saying is that if it was three or four times greater (the amount, on average, that it would be if every ChristianThis post isn't meant to be a debate on tithing, I've just used that amount to set a standard. I've written enough about tithing in other posts, so check those out and comment there if you have a beef with the concJust because many Christians don't give as they should doesn't mean that all are cheapskates, of course. I'm not saying that, so don't accuse me of it (I know someone was thinking of it.) All I'm saying is that Christians have a mandate to help the poor and IMO we've fallen way short of the standard. As a result, government has had to step in to fill the void. Agree or disagree

tell you johnson

i am johnson sindhu personal secrtary chirmanThe Church — the Body of Christ — continues its laxity in assisting the poor, the homeless, the diseased and the mentally ill in the United States. In the days before Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal and Lyndon Baines Johnson's Great Society, it was the Christian church that provided food, clothing and shelter for the poor and destitute members of society.For example, During The Great Depression and thereafter, the majority of "soup kitchens" and "shelters" were run by local churches. The homeless were provided a warm meal, a place to rest and a chance to hear the Good News of salvation through Jesus Christ. Christians in those days understood that in order to address the needs of the soul, it's best to first address the needs of the body.       But today, it appears that Christian leaders and church members have passed on the role of charity givers to the government — a government that prohibits even the mention of Jesus Christ within the public realm.

To put it succinctly, Christian men and women have changed from a people who literally give the shirts off their backs to cheapskates. And we have more than merely anecdotal evidence to back up that claim.The article then goes on to detail a few studies showing that giving among Christians is way down over the past decade or so. It then gives these thoughts:
With such a shabby record of giving by churchgoers, it is difficult for churches — an important institution for community stabilization — to perform their Christian duties to feed, clothe, and shelter the poor, disabled, mentally ill and others in American society who depend on the charity of others.
With this lack of charity comes the unintended consequences of government programs that are intrusive and ineffective. For instance, public assistance, or welfare, has done more to destabilize the nuclear family than any other program in history. One of the stipulations for qualifying for public assistance is that a mother be alone in raising her children. So, in order to qualify, millions of women forgo marriage and create a single-parent home for their children. Another drawback is welfare payments being based on the number of children in the home. This further increases the number of children who grow up without a father.
Honest sociologists long ago realized the destructive nature of government-run "charity." Yet, conservatives — especially Christian conservatives — may find it difficult to condemn the welfare system without performing their Christian duty to be charitable.
Ok, so here's my take on the issue mr johnson sindhu

AMANT CHIRSTAIN WELFARE SOCITY

HELP IN PAKISTAN  POOR  PEOPL Lahore: Minister for Food and Tourism Punjab Malik Nadeem Kamran has said that He said that private sector should supplement the efforts of the government in the noble cause of promotion of education as it will help root out ignorance from the society. He was addressing the oath-taking ceremony of All Pakistan Private Schools Welfare Association (APPSWA) at a local hotel. The Minister said that the dream of national development could not come true without promotion of education. He said that efforts put forth by the private sector for the promotion of literacy rate are commendable as private institutions are playing a pivotal role for the promotion of quality education in the country. Central President APPSWA, Syed Zulqarnain Shah, who has been elected unopposed for a period of three years, also spoke on the occasion and said that private educational institutions are working day and night for the promotion of education and they fully support government efforts in the field of education as it is a social service also. However, he lamented the fact that government treats this sector as a commercial entity and ekes out taxes and charges which is totally unjustified. He demanded the government to allocate the share of private sector in the education budget in accordance with their size and also announce the facilities for their administration, teachers and students, equivalent to the public sector. He demanded the government to announce national talent award and encourage best performing institutions belonging to the education sector. He also reiterated his commitment that he and other office-bearers would leave no stone unturned for the betterment of private educational institutions and continue fighting for their genuine demands.F.P. ReportES