But, in my view, many televangelists are businesspeople first.

of Christianity. But the televangelists are in it to enrich themselves, not help the poor.

Care for the stranger.

Televangelists need those Private Jets....

No deduction for the private jet.

What do you think, guillaumeb?

Then again, it could just be that priests raping children need another "counterpoint".

Is the answer STILL "both"?

that is what they decide to do.

And that explains much of your Biblical analysis as well.

You think religion can motivate people to do good things, but never motivate them to do bad things.

If that is an erroneous summation of your beliefs, please correct me.

Correction is impossible.

I'm asking you point blank if you think religion can ONLY motivate people to do good things.

Since you won't answer, I can only assume you hold the double standard position.

A religionist does something good. Thanks religion!

A religionist does something bad. Human nature!

I expected nothing more.

Guess we'll never know. At least with the areligious, one knows where we stand.

But you are entitled to your beliefs.

However, they are buying the very least expensive debts, the ones that are all but written off. The people who had that debt were never going to pay, so the cost of buying that debt is a tiny percentage of the debt itself.

Still, it's a nice gesture on the parts of those churches. But, it's important to note that such buyouts do nothing to help people in earlier stages of dealing with medical debt. It only relieves people who could never possibly their debts. They're buying debt that even the sleaziest collection agencies don't want to bother with, due to the impossibility of collecting on them.

That the US healthcare system is dysfunctional.

It's great to see people doing this sort of thing, but it's a band-aid on a broken limb. "Churches" again do far more harm than good in this area, giving them cover with these types of stories doesn't help the situation.

That is the problem.

They also enforce their beliefs on people they give treatment too, usually in the case of women's health care. Is that a systemic issue or a theological one?

But the problem with the US healthcare system is one of access and cost.

Are the religious hospitals doing anything to address the problem with access and cost? Or are they just going with it, while also using it to enforce their beliefs on a captive audience?

You're confusing non-profit for 'end-run around Roe Vs Wade' as these hospitals have had to cease or outsource abortion, physician assisted suicide, tubal ligation, and other family planning to conform to Catholic medical ethics as they are wholly taken over, jointly operated, or joint billing.

You really don't know what you're talking about here. The RCC takeover has not made medical care cheaper. That's not why they are doing it.


https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/ties-between-uw-peacehealth-worry-medical-trainees-grad-students/

Overlake is the last hospital standing, free and unfettered by the Religious and Ethical Directives for Catholic Health Care (ERDs).

"But the problem with the US healthcare system is one of access and cost."

Access is part and parcel of RCC terminating reproductive care for religious reasons.
Which they are doing. Right now.

But I never said what you claimed that I said.

And that was my issue with your assertion.

"But the problem with the US healthcare system is one of access and cost."

I'm not saying you said anything. I'm addressing this claim, which is harmed by catholic involvement (access) and neutral (cost).

Giving some money to hospitals helps. But? It may be that giving a million times more, would still not make up for the damage done by their disinformation/faith healing campaigns, etc..

...done by religious organizations that have for centuries prioritized their station above public health.

do so as well?

ethics rules.

That means, no tubal ligation. No abortion. Etc.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/10/health/catholic-hospitals-procedures.html