Are most religious charities nothing more than fronts...

[DCal430]

Are most religious charities nothing more than a front to spread their propaganda to the masses using tax payer money?

I have long suspected that most religious charities are not real charities at all but a front for them to spread their bullshit to the masses while collecting and using tax payer money.

 

[Farmer]

They are fronts for an international cabal of militant Zionists aiming at world domination by controlling wheat production.

 

[Bateluer]

This ought to be good.

 

[Nik]

Yes. However, to qualify for charity status, they have to be non profit and have to use a certain % of their donations toward what they say they're doing. The whole "religious" aspect of the charity just helps them jump through the non profit tax-evasion status hoops to get started.

Lots of "non religious" charities still employ religious missionaries and do the same thing.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Most probably do at least some charitable work. I cringe every time I go by a giant super church complete with theme park and Starbucks though. I'm also sure there's charities that are supposed to be purely charities that are also just fronts.

 

[QueBert]

I can't speak for most, but out here we have a bunch that do a lot of work in the community. 1 collected shoes last month to send to Japan and ended up getting something like 2,000 pairs. And I know the Church I go to is always collecting money and putting it towards cleaning up the parks and getting various after school programs for troubled teens into place. Sure there are a lot of bullshit groups associated with religion, but that can be said about any group of people religious or not. And on the flip side there are plenty that actually go out in the community and help people in need.

 

[BoomerD]

Some do good work with at least a portion of the donations, but I've always been an advocate of eliminating ALL tax deductions for charitable contributions. It amounts to a government subsidy of said charities.
If folks want to give, let them give without taking it as a write-off.

 

[BoberFett]

Is DCal430 nothing more than a front for a poster who was banned for trolling?

 

[nick1985]

DCal 4 elite!

 

[AreaCode707]

This seems like less of a question that requires opinions and more of a question that requires facts.
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=topten

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=topten.detail&listid=115


Rank Charity Overall Score Consecutive
1 Center on Budget and Policy Priorities 69.18 10
2 The Children's Aid Society 67.70 10
3 Dana-Farber Cancer Institute 67.48 10
4 Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston 64.24 10
5 Compassion International 63.26 10
6 Food For The Poor 62.85 10
7 Goodwill Southern California 61.54 10
8 Carnegie Institution for Science 60.06 10
9 American Endowment Foundation 69.63 9
10 Energy Outreach Colorado 69.50 9

 

[SparkyJJO]

Posting in a dcal thread.

 

[Scotteq]

This ought to be good.

< Offers Popcorn >

 

[Soundmanred]

Is DCal430 nothing more than a front for a poster who was banned for trolling?

Well, he's done his research about what riles people up here, I'll give him that.
Too bad everyone has heard it all before and doesn't really care anymore.

 

[AreaCode707]

Better yet, if you want to run the numbers here's a nice list of religious charities. You can do the work to summarize their star rating or their expense efficiency, and then do the same for non-religious charities and compare the two.
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.results&cgid=9&cuid=26

Interested to hear your findings.

 

[Taejin]

AreaCode707

Can you please stop injecting objective fact finding into this thread? It's threatening to make it less retarded.

Thanks.

 

[Mursilis]

Is DCal430 nothing more than a front for a poster who was banned for trolling?

"Yes" seems to fit quite nicely here.

 

[CPA]

Yes. However, to qualify for charity status, they have to be non profit and have to use a certain % of their donations toward what they say they're doing. The whole "religious" aspect of the charity just helps them jump through the non profit tax-evasion status hoops to get started.

Lots of "non religious" charities still employ religious missionaries and do the same thing.

And a lot of charities are non-religious yet have not-for-profit status, so your claim doesn't make much sense.

 

[Nik]

And a lot of charities are non-religious yet have not-for-profit status, so your claim doesn't make much sense.

It's easier to start a charity if you're already a non-profit tax-exempt religious organization.

 

[MotF Bane]

Nominate for reban.

 

[SonnyDaze]

Hmmm.....could be.

 

[spaceman]

yes
the whole world is a lie
u will do better believin precisely the opposite of what anyone/thing says

 

[CPA]

It's easier to start a charity if you're already a non-profit tax-exempt religious organization.

All you need to do is fill out one form with the IRS and get the determination letter. It really isn't that difficult if you meet the criteria.

 

[mugs]

Is DCal430 nothing more than a front for a poster who was banned for trolling?

DVK916? Dude just keeps coming back... and does a really bad job of disguising who he is.

 

[IAteYourMother]

Some do good work with at least a portion of the donations, but I've always been an advocate of eliminating ALL tax deductions for charitable contributions. It amounts to a government subsidy of said charities.
If folks want to give, let them give without taking it as a write-off.

I think that's the point of the tax write off, it's not exactly a secret that it acts as a subsidy

 

[Nik]

All you need to do is fill out one form with the IRS and get the determination letter. It really isn't that difficult if you meet the criteria.

It was pulling teeth to get our museum that status and we're already on the national historic register as the only ranch style house. Now that we have it, it would be really easy to set up a charity.