Utah’s safety net for the poor is so intertwined with the LDS Church that individual bishops often decide who receives assistance. Some deny help unless a person goes to services or gets baptized.
They appear to have set it up that way on purpose.
A single mother of one here is eligible for $399 a month in state assistance, and only if she has a net income of $456 a month or less.
Utah doesn’t do more for those in need in part because a contingent of its lawmakers, the overwhelming majority of whom are Latter-day Saints themselves, assume the church is handling the poverty issue; they also are loath to raise taxes to do the state’s share, a review of Utah’s legislative history demonstrates.
Agreed - working as intended, and it’s not just LDS. I’m in FL and churches here have been opposing publicly funded safety nets for my whole life, in favor of voluntary, often church-led, donations.
There was a time in my life where I got one meal a day for a few cents from charities.
On the weekends we had to sit through a religious sermon before they let us eat, and I will never forget how it made me feel to sit there for a full hour listening to this smug arrogant man lording it over us and telling us how he was so powerful he could materialise his body on other planets but he chooses not to because he is more enlightened than we are.
The united states needs to outlaw religious organizations using basic needs to coerce people in need. It’s just fundamentally violating and gross on a human level. We need a federal law separating the help that churches give to people, from their religious activities. We need a real safety net, too, but this is a specific abuse of power that needs to be addressed for what it is.
Utah’s safety net for the poor is so intertwined with the LDS Church that individual bishops often decide who receives assistance. Some deny help unless a person goes to services or gets baptized.
Utah doesn’t do more for those in need in part because a contingent of its lawmakers, the overwhelming majority of whom are Latter-day Saints themselves, assume the church is handling the poverty issue; they also are loath to raise taxes to do the state’s share, a review of Utah’s legislative history demonstrates.
“I made it so you can’t get help from them, only from me, and now I’m helping you, contingent on you doing what I tell you to. Aren’t I so nice and kind?”
This was not religious people trying to do good, this was religious people abusing legislative power to force people into their sphere of influence.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
deleted by creator
“That’s not a bug it’s a feature.” – LDS
Utah and LDS
Pam: they’re the same picture
“now give us 10% of your income.”
So the system is working as intended.
If you think that isn’t by design, you’re a fool.
I don’t have an issue with the fact that the church decides whom they help.
But that the state has so little in the way of social security that they instead have to forward people to a church instead, that’s crazy.
3rd world country.
They appear to have set it up that way on purpose.
us$10k/year
I doubt there is anywhere in the US where that is an adequate amount to pay for food and shelter. That is monstrous.
The LDS essentially owns the state of Utah, this issue is by design
Agreed - working as intended, and it’s not just LDS. I’m in FL and churches here have been opposing publicly funded safety nets for my whole life, in favor of voluntary, often church-led, donations.
There was a time in my life where I got one meal a day for a few cents from charities.
On the weekends we had to sit through a religious sermon before they let us eat, and I will never forget how it made me feel to sit there for a full hour listening to this smug arrogant man lording it over us and telling us how he was so powerful he could materialise his body on other planets but he chooses not to because he is more enlightened than we are.
Did they make that church as evil looking as possible on purpose? Looks like the legion of fucking doom.
The united states needs to outlaw religious organizations using basic needs to coerce people in need. It’s just fundamentally violating and gross on a human level. We need a federal law separating the help that churches give to people, from their religious activities. We need a real safety net, too, but this is a specific abuse of power that needs to be addressed for what it is.
Religious people try to do good
… And you took that personally.
Soinds like coercion
So she tried a different avenue that was not the state.
That different avenue might be coercive and have strict demands on who can receive money and for what, but it’s not tax payer money.
“I made it so you can’t get help from them, only from me, and now I’m helping you, contingent on you doing what I tell you to. Aren’t I so nice and kind?”
This was not religious people trying to do good, this was religious people abusing legislative power to force people into their sphere of influence.
If people need to rely on the church for food, the state has failed.