Howdy all,
I’ve got a situation at work I’d like to get some humbles opinions on…
Our very large company (10k+ employees) has a dress code that doesn’t allow blue jeans any day. Yet, we are allowed to do fund raising activities on a departmental level that allow amnesty to wear said offensive clothing. For the last couple of months our department has a $1 a Friday to wear blue jeans with proceeds going to a local Children’s Hospital.
It was just announced that for the next 4 months the proceeds would go to Toys For Tots (www.toysfortots.org in case you need more info about this charity).
The problem is the fact as an atheist I find this charity rather offensive and as someone that discourages conspicuous consumption I find this charity offensive and as a humanitarian I find this charity offensive.
Offensive why? one might ask.
As an atheist, imo, TFT gifts are solely to celebrate a Christian holiday. The gifts are distributed two-three days prior to Christmas, so it’s not very inclusive to other holidays such as Hanukkah, Ramedan etc.
As some against conspicuous consumption, this charity only accepts brand new toys (no hand made toys, no clothing, no books)
As a humanitarian, I’d much rather feed a starving child than give him a toy.
My problem is the fact that the person who is organizing this charity event is very into Christianity (paraphenalia strewn about her desk) and doesn’t see how this is a Christian organized charity. Nor is she will to set up an alternative charity for non-Christians or people who find this charity offensive.
So, I’m thinking of going to HR about this or should I just not contribute to any charity or contribute to a charity of my choice and wear jeans and wait for a possible confrontation.
While I don’t agree with you, your objections are valid. I would say the best way to make your objection obvious would be to not wear blue jeans on Friday. That’s right, don’t donate and make it obvious that you didn’t. It can’t be that bad if you wear the same style of clothes the rest of the week.
Personally, I like the idea of giving children who would not get much of anything for Christmas a toy or two.
Out of curiousity, do you not celebrate Christmas? It seems to me that the whole holiday has become mostly secular as far as the public celebration is concerned. Sure, people still go to church, they still have nativity scenes, but as far as stores and other businesses are concerned, it’s all about money. Maybe I just miss my childhood… I dunno.
Dilbert
I grew up in a secular household, we did spend “the holidays” together, but that’s was mainly due to the fact that we all had time off of work and school. Both of my parents were brought up Christian (Mom was Catholic, Dad was Lutheran) and they decided not to bring my sister and I up as such. They let us decide what we wanted to believe, I’ve gone the way of Atheism (actually I’m more a humanist) and my sister became a Catholic when she turned 30.
Here are some of my opinions, offered as an atheist as well:
As far as Christmas goes, yes, there is a Christian holiday called Christmas, that celebrates the birth of Christ. There is also a secular, cultual celebration that takes place at the same time. 99.99% of the trappings of Christmas are entirely secular (or at least non-Christian, like the Yule log) in nature, and grow from a centuries-old tradition of celebrating around that time of the year.
I’m not a big holiday person myself, but that’s just me. I certainly am not going to take it out on my nieces and nephews, and tell them they can’t have Christmas presents because Uncle Phil is an atheist and doesn’t dig holidays. They’re kids, for pete’s sake.
I can understand their reasoning for accepting only new toys: They like to give underprivleged children an opportunity to have something new, that belongs to them. I wasn’t aware that they didn’t take handmade items, but I’m sure if someone wanted to donate such a thing and spoke to a local coordinator, it could be worked out. Again, if I have a philosophical problem with consumerism or somesuch, I wouldn’t take it out on the children. They don’t know from philosophies–they just like to play with the toys.
pldennison quote:
Again, if I have a philosophical problem with consumerism or somesuch, I wouldn’t take it out on the children. They don’t know from philosophies–they just like to play with the toys.
Using that statement as basis in fact, that would mean that we’d be taking it out on children who were Jewish or Muslim by not giving them Christmas presents. Besides this seems to be like capitalistic proselytization by playing red rover with a shiny toy. I have heard the argument that Christmas is a secular holiday. You can find how religions and mythology has permuted this holiday into its present day celebrations (citing Sir James George Frasier’s The Golden Bough) but as it is right now in America, it is a Christian holiday.
One of my bigger beefs about this charity organisation that I didn’t mention in the OP was that according to the website for TFT there is no proof that this is doing any good. To me, I’d much rather donate money to a homeless shelter, Amnesty International, or American Cancer Society or any other of a myriad of charities out there that can prove that they have had a positive societal impact.
Sorry for the rant, maybe this should be moved to Great debates…
Say you put aside the atheist/consumerist angle, and accept that children should get toys. I agree it’s not the most important thing a charity should do, but surely there’s room for this kind of thing too. There are charities that fight extreme poverty and disease, and there are charities that buy poor children musical instruments or give grants to artists. Those in the latter category may not be livesaving, but it’s still valid to support them along side the more serious organisations.
I’ve taken issues to HR in my time. Things like late payments of salaries… or the fact that I’m expected to be up-to-date with all my technical skills, but the company allocates no money for training… or the problem with having no air-conditioning, so we have to have the windows open, so we have to work with insects crawling all over us… these struck me as legitimate concerns to raise.
But, if I were such an utterly insufferable sanctimonious prig as to be offended - triply offended, I notice - by the idea of something so innocuous as a charity giving toys to children at Christmas* … I don’t think I’d want Human Resources, or anyone else for that matter, to know about it.
stpauler, if it is in my power to arrange it, expect three ghostly visitors on Christmas Eve.
*[sub]Or Hanukkah, or Kwanzaa, or Eid al-Fitr, or James Randi’s birthday, for that matter.[/sub]
Umm, how would you know if it’s doing any good? Are you waiting for a 30 year study to see if these kids grow up to be great humanitarians or scientists because they got toys when as underprivileged kids?
The purpose of this particular charity is to give poor kids a chance to get new toys. Are the kids not receiving the toys? If they are, then that’s all that counts.
You don’t agree with the charity on philosophical grounds? Fine, don’t contribute. It’s that simple.
Arguing about the religious aspect doesn’t work since Christmas is not so much a religious holiday anymore as currently celebrated despite it’s roots or supposed purpose. I’m not christian and I celebrate christmas as a time to get together with my family and close friends, exchange gifts if we want, and generally socialize and distance ourselves from the regular daily stresses of our lives. Most people I associate with see it the same way.
You need to get over yourself. Live and let live and if you feel strongly enough, support your own charities, at work or otherwise.
Doing something merely to make a public statement is just childish rebelliousness. IMO of course.
Speaking as an atheist myself, I don’t have any problem with TFT or christmas, for that matter. I celebrate christmas every year, even though it has no religious significance to me. As for giving kids toys when they also need food, well, the two ideas aren’t mutually exclusive. Kids also need toys.
If you really have a problem with the religious basis of the holiday and the toy drive, why not start your own? Raise money to buy kids food or clothes for winter.
Although not Toys for Tots, specifically, a friend of mine volunteers for the Salvation Army Angel Tree. If you go by the names (Abdullah, Mohammed, Fatima, plus many Cambodian/Vietnamese names) many of these children aren’t Christian. They don’t ask the children (or their parents) any sort of questions about religious backgrounds. They give new toys and clothes to children that need them. This is not a bad thing. And as it’s completely voluntary, you’re not required to participate. Get over it. Wear your regular clothes and give your money to the charity of your choice.
Good lord, it’s not like stpauler is advocating going around on Christmas Eve and slapping toys out of children’s little hands. He just doesn’t agree with this organization’s philosophy. Some people choose not to contribute to Boy Scouts because they don’t allow homosexuals. No one here would call those folks big meanies for depriving the little ones of camping trips and such. This is exactly the same.
Besides, the whole thing of the entire office knowing who has and who hasn’t contributed disturbs me. Can these folks not collect for charity without using peer pressure to shake their coworkers down?
If you have beef with the charity, don’t give them anything. I’m sure there are plenty of other people in your company giving to them that they won’t miss your one buck.
Whether you agree with it or not, they are still giving to help others, so standing in their way is not a good idea.
I suggest you either wait for your turn again or ask if they can do a split for seperate charities.
No matter what, nobody is actually losing anything here.
That’s not necessarily the case… I’d have no problem with contributing to the charity, but I wouldn’t wear the jeans (I don’t own any jeans), so nobody would know I’d done it… so you can’t be sure that someone who’s not wearing jeans isn’t contributing.
I guess the question could have been better phrased and I’m glad crazycatlady posted because it gave me the idea as to how to phrase it better.
Using the jeans day charity premise (and let’s say we all love to wear jeans)… what if the company gave us the charity option that went against our morals/beliefs. Let’s say it was for Operation Rescue or Planned Parenthood (contingent on what side of the fence of that issue you sit on). Would it make you concerned by the fact that yes, these charities do help kids one way or another, they may be opposed to the way you think. Then you’re faced with the problem that you disagree with the charity that is set up and there is no allowance for another option. Would you be silent and just not participate, would you try and involve a charity that you did believe in by bringing this issue up to HR, or would you pursue another option.
Hmm, I wouldn’t contribute if someone at work was asking for donations to the Bin Laden Benevolent Fund, but to paraphrase your OP, it tells us that a) you don’t think kids should be given toys, b) you don’t think toys should be given at a specific time of the year, and c) the person who is organising it is a Christian. I’m sure sticking to these morals makes you feel good, but to me, it makes you look like a big meanie.
And if “a big meanie” isn’t defined by the words “someone who refuses to contribute the odd dollar to buy toys for sick kids” then I really don’t know what is. :rolleyes:
stpauler - my company does andatory meetings to push contribution to United Way. Because I have a problem with contributing to an organization that gives money to Planned Parenthood (even though they give money to adoption organizations, too) I don’t contribute. I don’t raise a stink about being compelled to attend these meetings. I go and when it comes time to fill out a pledge card, I write in 0. I make no secret of the fact that I don’t contribute, and if anyone asks why I tell them outright that I don’t want my money going to UW since they support the programs of PP.
