I see… a debate coming on….
Author: Statistics Show Religious Conservatives Are More Generous
Syracuse University professor Arthur C. Brooks is about to become the darling of the religious right in America — and it’s making him nervous.
Brooks has written a book that concludes religious conservatives donate far more money than secular liberals to all sorts of charitable activities, irrespective of income.
The book’s basic findings are that conservatives who practice religion, live in traditional nuclear families and reject the notion that the government should engage in income redistribution are the most generous Americans, by any measure.
Brooks says he started the book as an academic treatise, then tightened the documentation and punched up the prose when his colleagues and editor convinced him it would sell better and generate more discussion if he did.
To make his point forcefully, Brooks admits he cut out a lot of qualifying information.
I used to commend one minister I knew for giving away a tenth of everything he stole. :-)
The document
I wonder if this counts the amount these people donate to their church which gets used to build a newer bigger church or countless other non charitable projects.
Why do these discussions about who is more charitable always exclude donation of time. Certainly it is hard to measure that, but at least it should be part of the equation, especially if the point being made is “who is the most generous”. As a professional, I donate time to clients that have worthy causes. I am sure this would never show up on any survey. Many people I know donate money for notoriety and brag about it. It is easy to donate money. It is much harder to donate time. People that donate time are much less likely to seek gratification from others for their deeds.
Yes I am sure it counts the money people donate to churches, just as it counts the money people donate to universities, museums, theaters and other places of the arts.
another interesting study you can look up shows how conservatives donate more money to organizations that actually are serving the poor while liberals are more likely to doante to politcal parties, universities, museums, theaters and other places of the arts. However it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that one out liberal canidates almost always have way more money to spend than conservative canidates.
To the person who posted that idea of liberal orginzations being Doctors without border, I’m sure they will be happy to know they now push a certain political agenda. By the way they fail to meet the BBB’s standards for ethical giving, and only actually spent 84 percent of their funds on programs.
Toys for Tots, I’m sure the United States Marine Corp while be thrilled to discover they are a liberal organization as well.
Feed the Children is a Christian organization, which advocates no political position they will be happy to know you have now changed their position.
Hey but one out of four is not bad. Oxfam makes no secret of being a liberal political organization however to say they actually spend 83 percent of their giving on stopping world hunger may be a little over board, since a huge percent of their budget is spent on public awareness and in legistation. Oxfam has also been in a world of trouble of their attempts at pushing more for legislation and politics and in some countries may be losing its status as a pure charitable organization.
Just to set the record staight though Oxfam was also founded as a Christian organization.
It’s easy to say liberals do the same thing but they do it through the government but liberals don’t give anymore through the government then conservatives do who make the same amount. Conservatives are doing it twice through their taxes and again through their own personal responsibilitiy.
There is really a concept that says actions speak louder than words. And money talks.