I think that this, though probably not intentionally, is sending the message that the church values married parents over any other of its members.

why do we want to emulate churches? If we like what they are doing so much, why not just join? I don’t get it.

I think Hemant’s point is that churches offer some perks that are hard to come by as an atheist. I left the church because I couldn’t stand the message. However, I miss some of the community aspects of church, especially as they relate to my kids. Camp Quest is a thousand miles away and costs $500 per kid while church camp is nearby and costs $150 per kid. My husband played bass with the church praise band. My oldest son helped out with the younger kids at VBS, and both kids participated in the Bible Bowl. Having grown up as a missionary in South America, I looked forward to taking them on a mission trip to Mexico so they could get a sense of what life is like outside this country. My husband and I were part of a Sunday school group for couples that focused on marriage skills. You get the picture.

Ultimately, those perks weren’t worth the price of constant guilt and being told what to think, and, what’s worse, having my kids brainwashed the same way I was. It would just be nice if it were a little easier to get some of these benefits outside the church. Being out here in the atheist world sometimes feels very lonely, even to an anti-social type like myself.

To say that the money would be going to a subset of the congregation that “most likely didn’t need it” and that this would upset single/childless members makes no sense to me, since it is precisely the single/childless members who typically are less in need of this kind of perk.

David is dead-on. For at least ten years, my husband and I were rarely able to get a minute to ourselves. When the church sponsored a “Parents’ Night Out” (which was rare, and generally done as a youth-group fund-raiser), we gladly paid for it. Frequently, we did nothing more than go to the grocery store together without the kids. If we’d gotten a restaurant gift certificate, we’d probably have gone out to eat, but that would have been secondary.

All that to say, I find it hard to ascribe an ulterior motive to this. The only moral flaw I can think of is that they probably excluded single and gay parents. But, hey, it’s a Christian church. What did you expect?

or maybe people are silly and think two people need two entrees, which usually results in enough leftovers to feed two more people, unless one goes to a French restaurant.

Actually, when my boyfriend and I go out, we do eat two entrees. I don’t always finish mine, but he usually finishes his. $30 probably wouldn’t be enough for both of us.

It may not be quite as obnoxious here since it’s extended to the already converted but I too see something other than generous charity being the true motivation. They’re rewarding parents for being married and possibly encouraging them to add to the congregation.

I’m skeptical of this one. I really don’t believe that a church could possibly think thirty dollars could be a serious incentive to get married, let alone have kids.

They probably did get the vouchers compted though, as someone pointed out 30$ isn’t enough for a meal for two and it is good advertising.

The last 10 times I was taken out to eat, meal for two would have fit comfortably within $25 (incl 20% tip). Where did I go? Mekong (great Thai food, mediocre service), Cedars of Lebanon (great middle-east food, great service), Shanghai (good Vietnamese food, good service ), The Other Place (great Greek food, good service). Most of you have never heard of these places, but the point is they (mostly) aren’t commoditized chain restaurants.
I guess restaurant eating outside of Utah must be more expensive – and this must have happened in the last 6 months – or maybe people are silly and think two people need two entrees, which usually results in enough leftovers to feed two more people, unless one goes to a French restaurant.

Granted, anyone can enjoy a subsidized meal, but child care is of no use to anyone without kids, and that is worth a fair bit of money in its own right. In fact, as I see it, child care is the main “prize”; the dinner gift certificate is just an added bit of glitz to stimulate the “romantic date” aspect.

Exactly, and the voucher is so the parents spend some time together and don’t just use the time away from the kids to catch up on housework or have individual nights out with the boys/girls. That’s community building. You do something to encourage the families that you perceive as your core.

Oh come on people, most churches sponsor things for singles too, but I think David is right, the main benefit is the childcare.

Thanks for the nod! :^D

I’m sure that one can find ulterior motives that can be applied to such a setup if one wants to — but there’s certainly no need for them. And doing such an organized event as an organized event reinforces the sense of community in the church, which is not in itself necessarily a bad thing; in fact, it’s one of the few things I liked about going to church, and I occasionally miss it.

I think the people providing that childcare are probably being guilted into it….

Not necessarily. I spent considerable time at two different churches in which there were similar events, and there was never any shortage of truly eager volunteers for babysitting (especially girls ranging from junior high school students to college graduates, several of whom either genuinely enjoyed taking care of children or were giving an Oscar-worthy performance to that effect — and if nothing else, it was an interesting shared experience among them that further bonded them).

~David D.G.

My only problem is the fact that it’s organized.

Sabayon makes a good point:

all the good Christian girls who will have to give up their Friday night to some church function.

When anything with good intentions becomes an organized effort, there will always be some people who feel obligated to participate when they don’t necessarily want to. And the ones who do the least amount of work end up doing the most amount of criticizing and/or complaining.

I don’t have a better alternative, however. I’m just making an observation. Perhaps there’s no way around it.

Also, not to be a snob, as I rarely spend a ton of money on dinner, but I don’t think you can even get dinner at the Olive Garden for $30.

Its a nice idea, but I think they should expand their outreach. I don’t blame them for, say, not donating the money to the poor, as I don’t think there is anything wrong with putting the money they get into many causes- but I don’t think its fair to offer it to married people and not single people.

This is the church putting its money where its mouth is, trying to build up something they think is important. To try to find something wrong with it only makes you look desperate. It’s as though you can’t admit that anything Christians do can possibly have merit, or it might give them credibility. At least Hement gets it.