Some do. Many churches have food pantries and routinely engage in a variety of charitable contributions. I have worked with church groups on a variety of charitable projects.

As for 1: Because the government seeks to seize power in every role it can. The government does thousands of things it doesn't need to do- just because the government does it does not mean the government was actually needed. 

2: Many hungry, homeless and poor do go to churches then turn around and go to the welfare office too. A handful are decent enough folks to only take the charity they need. Others simply work the system and get everything they can for free. 

3: We also have secular organizations that perform similar functions. We certainly need a lot more because the mentality that it is the governments job to do charity work is becoming part of our societies mentality. About the only good thing religion does is motivate people to be charitable. As atheists, we should also do our part to make private charities the answer to our countries problems rather than the force of government. Donate to a charity today or even start one yourself. 

In the US we are the government. Politician are better at promising new things. That is how they get elected. So the government keeps expanding. Churches are just another human organization that have to grow to stick around. They too take in more than they deliver. Churches have a more narrow view of the world which makes them more dangerous. The catholic church is obscenely wealthy while claiming to take a vow of poverty and look who gives them most of the money. A beautiful racket to behold. The church I used to belong to did help people but it was always to evangelize and bring in more people to bring in more money. No free lunch.

I liked this part

Well I don't know if they were doing an adequate job. Just that they did, and still do to some extent, provide those types of services. Some seem to do it for the sole purpose of proselytizing, others seem to have a genuine desire to aid the disadvantaged. What do you think Bush's faith based initiative was all about? He was asking the churches to partner with the government to do charitable work. Churches have to ask people to give money with only the imaginary threat of hell, government can use the real threat of guns.

Add to that the fact that giving money to poor people is an easy way to get a ton of votes. Any cut in the rate of federal spending is always met with accusations that poor old people won't get their SS check and people will go without food stamps and therefore starve in the streets. As a vote getter, social safety net programs are king. What politician is going to pass that up?

There is quality control in private charity. The people giving and running the charity have the responsibility to make sure the charity is effectively achieving its goal. Yes, there are a lot of charities that are garbage. Many churches raise funds then use them more for themselves than for charity. I tend to agree with you that handing someone food does little good, so I don't go out of my way to give to food banks. It is the responsibility of the giver to determine whether a particular charity has a good cause and whether or not they are achieving it effectively. Many people are too lazy to do so, but it is their money. Let them be scammed.  

A little confused here... all charities are results based in the sense that they have a specific goal and use money/volunteers to work towards that goal. Sure, some have misguided goals. So what? Sure, many homeless shelters, food banks etc. are taken advantage of and most do little to help fix the problems that led people to those situations, but that doesn't take away from charities with more effective goals.

I believe that the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society has gone a long way towards advancing the fight against cancer since I started donating to them 14 years ago. How is that anything other than using science and reason to solve a real problem?  

Other charities don't seek to "solve" a problem but just to make someones life suck a little less. Make A Wish or Hunt of a Lifetime both cater to children with terminal diseases to give them the experience of a lifetime. I believe that is worthwhile. 

I am also involved in an orphanage down in Mexico. It is ran by a religious organization, but they take in kids who are abused and provide them with an education and a family environment. In a country where those kids would have grown up with no options, the orphanage hopes to give them choices other than joining a drug cartel. There are no secular charities that are active in Mexico that I am aware of, it takes a certain kind of crazy to live down there and devote your life to helping those in need when you could live in the US. From what I have personally seen, they have made a very positive influence on the community they are in. 

And yeah, giving to charity makes you feel good. So what? 

I have to assume you mean "pantries", but that is so much more boring.

I would like a pair of chocolate ones, please.

The one thing we know is that religion is immune from any scientific analysis of the net benefits of their charity, just like all their other beliefs are immune to analysis.

Sadly, the same thing is true of government social safety nets. They are done to make supports feel good rather than solve real problems without negative or perverse unintended consequences.

Survival rates have increased substantially. I doubt there will ever be a perfect "cure" found, I'm not sure it is possible but the techniques and technologies that they use to treat it today are substantially better than they were 10-15 years ago.

And a person eating in America has absolutely no effect on a kid in Africa. People are starving to death in Africa because of distribution problems, mostly caused by extreme violence. Even if you go anorexic, you will not be saving the lives of any kids in Africa. If you want to do that, the only way is to go do some charitable work over there to teach people how to grow food for themselves. Or follow in the footsteps of the late Norman Borlaug who fed millions of people in the world through his research. You can donate to various universities that have good programs that support those types of research.  

Like I said, there are some charities that are a waste of money either because their goals don't actually solve the real problems, or some of them are outright frauds with only a little of the money doing good. However, there are many charities out there that do great things for people and have a positive effect on their lives. In my mind, it is up to the donor to have due diligence in examining exactly what the charity is doing and to go out in the field and see first hand what the money is being used for before making the decision. Any legitimate charity will be more than happy to host you at a site where they work. Just like any other business investment, you ought to check things out before you make your investment. 

<~~

So what's she going to sucker you out of, lol.