[Eleopteryx]

I was well aware of that before I commented. It's still a non sequitur and a remarkable logical leap.

If he or she had left it at the church having the capacity to alleviate loneliness, I could go along with that. "Church maintains a healthy society" is a big assertion that is more multifaceted and complex than "church volunteer therefore good", not only within the topic of church but the topic of loneliness as well. Also without even beginning to define what constitutes "a healthy society". Furthermore the assertion is deeply lacking in historical context; what is the historical prevalence of loneliness? How long have we even been paying attention to the topic of loneliness as a public health concern to even keep track of this?

The article makes a very straightforward point: if you're lonely, volunteering could probably make you feel less lonely. But jumping from that to "therefore church is unequivocally and obviously a net positive on the fabric of society (than some people say)" is making all sorts of implications and doing absolutely no work to piece that thesis together.

It's a tenuous assertion, on multiple levels.

[sprucely]

I have a feeling that OP hit on a sensitive issue for you. I'm not asserting that OP unequivocally and obviously did so. But I did present a perfectly plausible/tangential perspective which, given the up votes, some others might share. That said, this thread does not hold enough interest to motivate me to do the work of piecing together a thesis.

[jcims]

Who are you quoting here?

>"therefore church is unequivocally and obviously a net positive on the fabric of society (than some people say)"

If it’s me, how do you get to your statement from

>I have a feeling that church plays a larger role in maintaining a healthy society than it is given credit in some circles.