The hypocracy of conservative charity

[spectrumc01]

The hypocracy of conservative charity.

As a conservative you believe in helping yourself and taking personal responsibility for yourself. You are stuggling because of the choices you make. Giving more unemployment extensions promotes unemployment. Make the welfare people do voulunteer work for their checks (isn't that like working for your pay i.e. a paying government job?, different thread). Give a hand up not a hand out. Give a man a fish and he eats for the day, teach a man how to fish he eats forever. I don't want the government doing charity work, if I want to give I'll give and to whom I want to give to. There are other things you can donate besides money.

Than they go and do the exact opposite. Why don't these principals ever apply to the people they are helping. If you want the guy to eat for ever quit giving him food, and get him a job. Taking the elderly meals is great, but why can't you cook their own food? Homes for humanity, really, just going to give them a home for next to nothing? I'll build my own home for that. Donations to charitys is great, but have you seen what the CEO' of these "non-profit" organization make? Six figures plus perks (Charity Navigator: Non-Profit CEO Pay and Government Funding). If large enough the donation the tax breaks kick in, but I'm sure they never claim that. Look at they tell you about the poor and why and than compare that to what they do for charity and notice the contradictions.

 

[martybegan]

The hypocracy of conservative charity.

As a conservative you believe in helping yourself and taking personal responsibility for yourself. You are stuggling because of the choices you make. Giving more unemployment extensions promotes unemployment. Make the welfare people do voulunteer work for their checks (isn't that like working for your pay i.e. a paying government job?, different thread). Give a hand up not a hand out. Give a man a fish and he eats for the day, teach a man how to fish he eats forever. I don't want the government doing charity work, if I want to give I'll give and to whom I want to give to. There are other things you can donate besides money.

Than they go and do the exact opposite. Why don't these principals ever apply to the people they are helping. If you want the guy to eat for ever quit giving him food, and get him a job. Taking the elderly meals is great, but why can't you cook their own food? Homes for humanity, really, just going to give them a home for next to nothing? I'll build my own home for that. Donations to charitys is great, but have you seen what the CEO' of these "non-profit" organization make? Six figures plus perks (Charity Navigator: Non-Profit CEO Pay and Government Funding). If large enough the donation the tax breaks kick in, but I'm sure they never claim that. Look at they tell you about the poor and why and than compare that to what they do for charity and notice the contradictions.

The prime difference you between charity via taxation and true charity you do on your own is choice. When government gets into charity it forces you to pay into it, then performs the charity based on the views of a small minority of activists and advocates. When you perform your own charitable giving, you can decide where it goes, be it a soup kitchen, habitat for humainity, or some form of job creating charity.

Most conservatives issue isnt with charity itself, it is governments getting into the charity business.

 

[spectrumc01]

The hypocracy of conservative charity.

As a conservative you believe in helping yourself and taking personal responsibility for yourself. You are stuggling because of the choices you make. Giving more unemployment extensions promotes unemployment. Make the welfare people do voulunteer work for their checks (isn't that like working for your pay i.e. a paying government job?, different thread). Give a hand up not a hand out. Give a man a fish and he eats for the day, teach a man how to fish he eats forever. I don't want the government doing charity work, if I want to give I'll give and to whom I want to give to. There are other things you can donate besides money.

Than they go and do the exact opposite. Why don't these principals ever apply to the people they are helping. If you want the guy to eat for ever quit giving him food, and get him a job. Taking the elderly meals is great, but why can't you cook their own food? Homes for humanity, really, just going to give them a home for next to nothing? I'll build my own home for that. Donations to charitys is great, but have you seen what the CEO' of these "non-profit" organization make? Six figures plus perks (Charity Navigator: Non-Profit CEO Pay and Government Funding). If large enough the donation the tax breaks kick in, but I'm sure they never claim that. Look at they tell you about the poor and why and than compare that to what they do for charity and notice the contradictions.

The prime difference you between charity via taxation and true charity you do on your own is choice. When government gets into charity it forces you to pay into it, then performs the charity based on the views of a small minority of activists and advocates. When you perform your own charitable giving, you can decide where it goes, be it a soup kitchen, habitat for humainity, or some form of job creating charity.

Most conservatives issue isnt with charity itself, it is governments getting into the charity business.

We are looking at the idea behind the charity itself. The idea for denying charity is contrary to the act itself of being charitable.

 

[Claudette]

The hypocracy of conservative charity.

As a conservative you believe in helping yourself and taking personal responsibility for yourself. You are stuggling because of the choices you make. Giving more unemployment extensions promotes unemployment. Make the welfare people do voulunteer work for their checks (isn't that like working for your pay i.e. a paying government job?, different thread). Give a hand up not a hand out. Give a man a fish and he eats for the day, teach a man how to fish he eats forever. I don't want the government doing charity work, if I want to give I'll give and to whom I want to give to. There are other things you can donate besides money.

Than they go and do the exact opposite. Why don't these principals ever apply to the people they are helping. If you want the guy to eat for ever quit giving him food, and get him a job. Taking the elderly meals is great, but why can't you cook their own food? Homes for humanity, really, just going to give them a home for next to nothing? I'll build my own home for that. Donations to charitys is great, but have you seen what the CEO' of these "non-profit" organization make? Six figures plus perks (Charity Navigator: Non-Profit CEO Pay and Government Funding). If large enough the donation the tax breaks kick in, but I'm sure they never claim that. Look at they tell you about the poor and why and than compare that to what they do for charity and notice the contradictions.

The prime difference you between charity via taxation and true charity you do on your own is choice. When government gets into charity it forces you to pay into it, then performs the charity based on the views of a small minority of activists and advocates. When you perform your own charitable giving, you can decide where it goes, be it a soup kitchen, habitat for humainity, or some form of job creating charity.

Most conservatives issue isnt with charity itself, it is governments getting into the charity business.

Yup. I agree.

I prefer to pick and choose the charities I give to. The Govt has decided that those with need to support those without.

Doesn't fly in my book. If you don't have. Get off your ass and go get it.

 

[spectrumc01]

The hypocracy of conservative charity.

As a conservative you believe in helping yourself and taking personal responsibility for yourself. You are stuggling because of the choices you make. Giving more unemployment extensions promotes unemployment. Make the welfare people do voulunteer work for their checks (isn't that like working for your pay i.e. a paying government job?, different thread). Give a hand up not a hand out. Give a man a fish and he eats for the day, teach a man how to fish he eats forever. I don't want the government doing charity work, if I want to give I'll give and to whom I want to give to. There are other things you can donate besides money.

Than they go and do the exact opposite. Why don't these principals ever apply to the people they are helping. If you want the guy to eat for ever quit giving him food, and get him a job. Taking the elderly meals is great, but why can't you cook their own food? Homes for humanity, really, just going to give them a home for next to nothing? I'll build my own home for that. Donations to charitys is great, but have you seen what the CEO' of these "non-profit" organization make? Six figures plus perks (Charity Navigator: Non-Profit CEO Pay and Government Funding). If large enough the donation the tax breaks kick in, but I'm sure they never claim that. Look at they tell you about the poor and why and than compare that to what they do for charity and notice the contradictions.

The prime difference you between charity via taxation and true charity you do on your own is choice. When government gets into charity it forces you to pay into it, then performs the charity based on the views of a small minority of activists and advocates. When you perform your own charitable giving, you can decide where it goes, be it a soup kitchen, habitat for humainity, or some form of job creating charity.

Most conservatives issue isnt with charity itself, it is governments getting into the charity business.

Yup. I agree.

I prefer to pick and choose the charities I give to. The Govt has decided that those with need to support those without.

Doesn't fly in my book. If you don't have. Get off your ass and go get it.

That is my point, if you truly believe in "If you don't have. Get off your ass and go get it." Why are you doing charity work at all? The basic concept of charity is giving to people who won't get off their ass and go get it.

 

[Si modo]

How is it 'charity' when compelled (by law) to do it?

 

[Ringel05]

The prime difference you between charity via taxation and true charity you do on your own is choice. When government gets into charity it forces you to pay into it, then performs the charity based on the views of a small minority of activists and advocates. When you perform your own charitable giving, you can decide where it goes, be it a soup kitchen, habitat for humainity, or some form of job creating charity.

Most conservatives issue isnt with charity itself, it is governments getting into the charity business.

Yup. I agree.

I prefer to pick and choose the charities I give to. The Govt has decided that those with need to support those without.

Doesn't fly in my book. If you don't have. Get off your ass and go get it.

That is my point, if you truly believe in "If you don't have. Get off your ass and go get it." Why are you doing charity work at all? The basic concept of charity is giving to people who won't get off their ass and go get it.

 

[spectrumc01]

How is it 'charity' when compelled (by law) to do it?

The discussion isn't about the law it is about the idea of charity itself and how is in conflict with the conservative idea of self reliance, and personal responsibility. The two concepts appear to be polar opposite.

 

[Jackson]

The hypocracy of conservative charity.

As a conservative you believe in helping yourself and taking personal responsibility for yourself. You are stuggling because of the choices you make. Giving more unemployment extensions promotes unemployment. Make the welfare people do voulunteer work for their checks (isn't that like working for your pay i.e. a paying government job?, different thread). Give a hand up not a hand out. Give a man a fish and he eats for the day, teach a man how to fish he eats forever. I don't want the government doing charity work, if I want to give I'll give and to whom I want to give to. There are other things you can donate besides money.

Than they go and do the exact opposite. Why don't these principals ever apply to the people they are helping. If you want the guy to eat for ever quit giving him food, and get him a job. Taking the elderly meals is great, but why can't you cook their own food? Homes for humanity, really, just going to give them a home for next to nothing? I'll build my own home for that. Donations to charitys is great, but have you seen what the CEO' of these "non-profit" organization make? Six figures plus perks (Charity Navigator: Non-Profit CEO Pay and Government Funding). If large enough the donation the tax breaks kick in, but I'm sure they never claim that. Look at they tell you about the poor and why and than compare that to what they do for charity and notice the contradictions.

Your first paragraph was right on!

So how much do you want to pay a CEO of a charitable organization? They are responsible for thousands of employees and volunteer people not to menmtion managing logistics of quite a big job. Then just in passing, helping out millions of people. I don't begrudge them a cent. Their worthwhile efforts help people dramatically that might not have recovered from disasters.

 

[spectrumc01]

The hypocracy of conservative charity.

As a conservative you believe in helping yourself and taking personal responsibility for yourself. You are stuggling because of the choices you make. Giving more unemployment extensions promotes unemployment. Make the welfare people do voulunteer work for their checks (isn't that like working for your pay i.e. a paying government job?, different thread). Give a hand up not a hand out. Give a man a fish and he eats for the day, teach a man how to fish he eats forever. I don't want the government doing charity work, if I want to give I'll give and to whom I want to give to. There are other things you can donate besides money.

Than they go and do the exact opposite. Why don't these principals ever apply to the people they are helping. If you want the guy to eat for ever quit giving him food, and get him a job. Taking the elderly meals is great, but why can't you cook their own food? Homes for humanity, really, just going to give them a home for next to nothing? I'll build my own home for that. Donations to charitys is great, but have you seen what the CEO' of these "non-profit" organization make? Six figures plus perks (Charity Navigator: Non-Profit CEO Pay and Government Funding). If large enough the donation the tax breaks kick in, but I'm sure they never claim that. Look at they tell you about the poor and why and than compare that to what they do for charity and notice the contradictions.

Your first paragraph was right on!

So how much do you want to pay a CEO of a charitable organization? They are responsible for thousands of employees and volunteer people not to menmtion managing logistics of quite a big job. Then just in passing, helping out millions of people. I don't begrudge them a cent. Their worthwhile efforts help people dramatically that might not have recovered from disasters.

I have found that when an emergency happens people step to the plate. Weather the red cross is there or not aid will still be rendered. People will not just give up because there is not a red cross. These CEO's have filled not one sandbag, or unloaded one truck of supplies, unless it was for the camera's. They should at least give the impression they understand what their job is andwhere their pay comes from. Their pay comes from me and you, we have donated our money so this person can live high one the hog. The nice thing about it is I don't have to pay their salary.

 

[spectrumc01]

Yup. I agree.

I prefer to pick and choose the charities I give to. The Govt has decided that those with need to support those without.

Doesn't fly in my book. If you don't have. Get off your ass and go get it.

That is my point, if you truly believe in "If you don't have. Get off your ass and go get it." Why are you doing charity work at all? The basic concept of charity is giving to people who won't get off their ass and go get it.

Strawman or not does not lessen the hypocracy, nor do away with it.

 

[martybegan]

The hypocracy of conservative charity.

As a conservative you believe in helping yourself and taking personal responsibility for yourself. You are stuggling because of the choices you make. Giving more unemployment extensions promotes unemployment. Make the welfare people do voulunteer work for their checks (isn't that like working for your pay i.e. a paying government job?, different thread). Give a hand up not a hand out. Give a man a fish and he eats for the day, teach a man how to fish he eats forever. I don't want the government doing charity work, if I want to give I'll give and to whom I want to give to. There are other things you can donate besides money.

Than they go and do the exact opposite. Why don't these principals ever apply to the people they are helping. If you want the guy to eat for ever quit giving him food, and get him a job. Taking the elderly meals is great, but why can't you cook their own food? Homes for humanity, really, just going to give them a home for next to nothing? I'll build my own home for that. Donations to charitys is great, but have you seen what the CEO' of these "non-profit" organization make? Six figures plus perks (Charity Navigator: Non-Profit CEO Pay and Government Funding). If large enough the donation the tax breaks kick in, but I'm sure they never claim that. Look at they tell you about the poor and why and than compare that to what they do for charity and notice the contradictions.

The prime difference you between charity via taxation and true charity you do on your own is choice. When government gets into charity it forces you to pay into it, then performs the charity based on the views of a small minority of activists and advocates. When you perform your own charitable giving, you can decide where it goes, be it a soup kitchen, habitat for humainity, or some form of job creating charity.

Most conservatives issue isnt with charity itself, it is governments getting into the charity business.

We are looking at the idea behind the charity itself. The idea for denying charity is contrary to the act itself of being charitable.

Well the idea behind charity is basically helping those less fortunate than you. While conservative/libertarian principles favor taking care of oneself, and dealing with the results of life's setbacks and difficulties, they do not preclude someone making thier own descision to give some of thier reasources to someone who is less well off, is having troubles in life, or is suffering from some illness, etc.

It would be interesting to see what type of charities conservatives donate to, to see where thier money is going. Is it going to things similar to our governmental entitlements? or is it going to work making and life improving charities.

I also disagree that the source of the charity is not part of the issue. Again, making your own descion to be charitable, vs. being forced to be charitable via taxation is a very important part of the overall debate. it is also a matter of control, When i donate money to "group x" I am deciding how I want my charity spent. When I am taxed to fund a charitable action, the choice of what I am donating to is done by others.

 

[Ringel05]

That is my point, if you truly believe in "If you don't have. Get off your ass and go get it." Why are you doing charity work at all? The basic concept of charity is giving to people who won't get off their ass and go get it.

Strawman or not does not lessen the hypocracy, nor do away with it.

 

[Si modo]

That is my point, if you truly believe in "If you don't have. Get off your ass and go get it." Why are you doing charity work at all? The basic concept of charity is giving to people who won't get off their ass and go get it.

Strawman or not does not lessen the hypocracy, nor do away with it.

Yes, your strawman demonstrates hypocrisy! ZOMG! Such hypocrisy!

Now, how about you discuss what he actually said instead of arguing with yourself?

 

[spectrumc01]

Strawman or not does not lessen the hypocracy, nor do away with it.

Yes, your strawman demonstrates hypocrisy! ZOMG! Such hypocrisy!

Now, how about you discuss what he actually said instead of arguing with yourself?

Well he didn't say anything to begin with. "Cut and paste" is not saying anything.

 

[Si modo]

Strawman or not does not lessen the hypocracy, nor do away with it.

Yes, your strawman demonstrates hypocrisy! ZOMG! Such hypocrisy!

Now, how about you discuss what he actually said instead of arguing with yourself?

Well he didn't say anything to begin with. "Cut and paste" is not saying anything.

Still doesn't change the fact that you love strawmen - the tool of the intellectually lazy.

 

[spectrumc01]

Yes, your strawman demonstrates hypocrisy! ZOMG! Such hypocrisy!

Now, how about you discuss what he actually said instead of arguing with yourself?

Well he didn't say anything to begin with. "Cut and paste" is not saying anything.

Still doesn't change the fact that you love strawmen - the tool of the intellectually lazy.

Not lazy at all, what is lazy is when you realize the OP is right, you have no logical arguement so plead "strawman". Now that is lazy.

 

[Si modo]

Well he didn't say anything to begin with. "Cut and paste" is not saying anything.

Still doesn't change the fact that you love strawmen - the tool of the intellectually lazy.

Not lazy at all, what is lazy is when you realize the OP is right, you have no logical arguement so plead "strawman". Now that is lazy.

What's funnier is seeing those who don't know what a strawman is, even after the concept has been explained to them.

*note to self: Add another idiot to the list for play*

 

[spectrumc01]

Still doesn't change the fact that you love strawmen - the tool of the intellectually lazy.

Not lazy at all, what is lazy is when you realize the OP is right, you have no logical arguement so plead "strawman". Now that is lazy.

What's funnier is seeing those who don't know what a strawman is, even after the concept has been explained to them.

*note to self: Add another idiot to the list for play*

Ah, the joys of learning the hard way. I stand corrected. My thanks.
needed a moment to get up to speed.

P.S. this is how it is done.

 

[percysunshine]

The hypocracy of conservative charity.

As a conservative you believe in helping yourself and taking personal responsibility for yourself. You are stuggling because of the choices you make. Giving more unemployment extensions promotes unemployment. Make the welfare people do voulunteer work for their checks (isn't that like working for your pay i.e. a paying government job?, different thread). Give a hand up not a hand out. Give a man a fish and he eats for the day, teach a man how to fish he eats forever. I don't want the government doing charity work, if I want to give I'll give and to whom I want to give to. There are other things you can donate besides money.

Than they go and do the exact opposite. Why don't these principals ever apply to the people they are helping. If you want the guy to eat for ever quit giving him food, and get him a job. Taking the elderly meals is great, but why can't you cook their own food? Homes for humanity, really, just going to give them a home for next to nothing? I'll build my own home for that. Donations to charitys is great, but have you seen what the CEO' of these "non-profit" organization make? Six figures plus perks (Charity Navigator: Non-Profit CEO Pay and Government Funding). If large enough the donation the tax breaks kick in, but I'm sure they never claim that. Look at they tell you about the poor and why and than compare that to what they do for charity and notice the contradictions.

First paragraph: "As a conservative you believe in .."

Second paragraph: "Than they go and ..."

Did you lose your audience again? Look, if you ever expect to convince anyone of anything, you will need to know the difference between second and third person narratives.