Oh, fer Pete's sake....since I have been called 'sensible'...('bout time!)...let me say: Of course good, worthwhile things have been done by Christian and Christian organizations.

Now, what I really wonder is: would people have done those things without the pressure of religious imperative to spur them to action? Aren't some needs so obvious that things like 'food for the hungry' and 'care of the lepers' and other charities would be seen whether in thename of 'X' or not?

What religions provide is organization. I have personally seen (in Kansas), Mennonite groups be the first on the scene after tornados...helping in rescues, feeding folks and helping strangers rebuild. And, let me add...they did this with NO preaching... they just helped and went home. Sure...there are aspects of their faith that help focus their attitude TO such good deeds, but I 'tend' to feel that these are people who would have that basic attitude anyway, and would have been a part of some other group...as the father of a friend of mine was a member of the local Civil Defense organization, and was often working beside the Mennonites!

   I give credit to ANYONE who sets aside time to do good, and who contributes $$$ to good works. Unfortunately, it is not possible to do a double-blind test to see if the same amount of good would get done if there were no religious groups. I guess we should just be grateful for good deeds, and keep the rationale for religion itself as a separate issue.

Now...am I still sensible, Ron? ;>)