Conservatives donate more money

[Goat]

So their pastor can get his helicopter repaired

So their pastor can repair his helicopter

Can someone see something inherently wrong with this?

[Goat]

If you don't care why are you responding to this thread? Other than it being an excuse for you to complain yet again about liberals and/or atheists. Way to derail a thread.

I haven't derailed this poorly constructed thread in anyway. What I don't care about is your unreliable, biased sources. And what even makes it more funny is that people like you always complain about the sources East of Eden cites, yet Goat uses a biased blog. I seriously hope he never complains about sources again

Yet, you didn't respond to a extremely similar case from 'The Christian Post'. Is that a liberal blog??


And here is the same story from a very Christian source

http://global.christianpost.com/news/te ... des-98331/


The story can be confirmed by multiple sources, including Christian ones. Sorry.. but the story stands as written.

[DanieltheDragon]

my great goodness can the personal attacks cease and we actually discuss the issue at hand?

I am an atheist conservative. So I will put in my two cents. My wife and I donate to charity rather frequently roughly30% of our income after taxes. that being said the people who do donate to this man are not necessarily conservative nor would it matter if they were. If you want to donate money to your church that's fine. Personally I prefer medical research. However whether one is charitable or not is besides the point. the liberal idea is its the gov. that is responsible for taking care of the people so taxes are used to fund that. one could say that is charity and their desire to pay higher taxes is a desire to be charitable. I would prefer to pay lower taxes so I can specifically fund what I believe in vs what the gov. wants to do. so the reason conservatives appear to donate more to charity is essentially this private charity vs public charity neither group is more charitable it is just how they choose to fund what they believe will serve the public trust.

[keithprosser3]

The problem with private charity is that it is hard to allocate it to where they would do most good. Whether a cause gets the money it needs doesn't depends on its merits but on how 'sexy' is it - a charity that can advertise gets more than one that can't. What would really help out in a lot of Africa? Latrines. But not many people dig deep into their pockets for them, while pandas always have all the funding they can eat and more!

So free choice is a good thing, but it's not as simple as 'private charity good', 'public charity bad'.

[East of Eden]

I still don't care.

If you don't care why are you responding to this thread? Other than it being an excuse for you to complain yet again about liberals and/or atheists. Way to derail a thread.

If this was such an outrageous story you'd think some real media outlets would have picked up on it. But the only things you and Goat can seem to produce are these obscure blogs that I have no interest in reading.

You don't think anything is unusual about a preacher promising god will give a new car within a year to anyone that gives him $52?

And I can assure you that Christians do more good for the world then Atheists. I can assure you that this Pastor, whoever it may be, has contributed more to society than you, I or Goat. And besides, until you atheists begin giving large sums of money away you have no right to complain about the way religious groups use their money.

Us atheists? Who are you talking about? Last I checked I'm agnostic

That's funny, you told me a while back you were Catholic.

[Nilloc James]

This thread is a prime example of everyone being perfectly sure they are in the right and that the other side is abslutely and undeniably wrong. Therefore facts dont matter and character attacks and barbed comments are all thats happening. Its really a microcosm of american politics...

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 14 by East of Eden]

People do change their religious views 2 years ago I would Have told you I was a Southern Baptist Now I am an Atheist lets get back on topic instead of personal attacks I am pretty sure that's against the forum rules.

[Goat]

The problem with private charity is that it is hard to allocate it to where they would do most good. Whether a cause gets the money it needs doesn't depends on its merits but on how 'sexy' is it - a charity that can advertise gets more than one that can't. What would really help out in a lot of Africa? Latrines. But not many people dig deep into their pockets for them, while pandas always have all the funding they can eat and more!

So free choice is a good thing, but it's not as simple as 'private charity good', 'public charity bad'.

My point has nothing to do with 'public charity' verses 'private charity'. I was addressing the talking point from the conservatives that they claim 'they give more money'. A lot of them including tithing to the church as part of Charity.. but what do those 'tithes' go for?

While these two examples are extremes, helicopters don't seem to be 'charity' to me. Also, quite a bit of those 'tithes' go into the maintenance of their church, the salaries of the maintenance man and pastor, teachers for their schooling, and things like that? Who benefits from that?? The people who give the tithes. That doesn't seem to me to be the point of 'charity'.. if you know what I mean.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 17 by Goat]

Yes I think you have a valid point regarding the efficacy of said charity. However, this story is not a sufficient example of that. We know nothing of the churches demographics and whether or not they are liberal or conservative we don't even know how much money was raised. Private vs Public charity is more to the core of the issue. I don't believe one group is more charitable than another we just provide for our fellow man in different ways. so yes conservatives are generally more "charitable" in a loose sense of the term this does not make them better human beings. As you cant measure volunteer hours etc. that all people donate.

Yes some conservatives will tout that and be pride full of it. Just because you have 1 squeaky cog doesn't mean the whole machine isn't functioning normally.

[Goat]

[Replying to post 17 by Goat]

Yes I think you have a valid point regarding the efficacy of said charity. However, this story is not a sufficient example of that. We know nothing of the churches demographics and whether or not they are liberal or conservative we don't even know how much money was raised. Private vs Public charity is more to the core of the issue. I don't believe one group is more charitable than another we just provide for our fellow man in different ways. so yes conservatives are generally more "charitable" in a loose sense of the term this does not make them better human beings. As you cant measure volunteer hours etc. that all people donate.

Yes some conservatives will tout that and be pride full of it. Just because you have 1 squeaky cog doesn't mean the whole machine isn't functioning normally.

The church is in Texas.. and is a mega church. That gives plenty of information about 'conservative' verses 'liberal' right there.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 19 by Goat]

The megachurch is mostly African American judging from the pictures on the website for the church considering this demographic voted overwhelmingly for Obama I would venture to say they are democrats..... of course that would be me stereotyping much like you were in regards to this church being in texas again assumptions makes wild donkies out of us