User:InProgress/Website reviews/TI - Revision history

RogerNicholson: redirect

2012-05-22T03:29:16Z

redirect

RogerNicholson: /* */ hide

2012-05-22T03:22:27Z

: hide

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:22, 22 May 2012
Line 108:		Line 108:
	}}		}}

	==== ====		<!-- ==== ====
	{{MormonThinkIndexClaim		{{MormonThinkIndexClaim
	\|claim=The LDS Church owns and operates at least two hunting preserves; Deseret Land and Livestock, and Westlake Hunting Preserve in Utah County. Many LDS were appalled to learn about a Church-owned/run/sanctioned hunting preserve where missionaries are called to tend to flocks of birds and other animals so that they can multiply and be hunted down for large profit. You can read about it on Deseret News as well as listen to a Sunstone discussion on the LDS hunting preserves.		\|claim=The LDS Church owns and operates at least two hunting preserves; Deseret Land and Livestock, and Westlake Hunting Preserve in Utah County. Many LDS were appalled to learn about a Church-owned/run/sanctioned hunting preserve where missionaries are called to tend to flocks of birds and other animals so that they can multiply and be hunted down for large profit. You can read about it on Deseret News as well as listen to a Sunstone discussion on the LDS hunting preserves.
	\|think=		\|think=
	\|quote=		\|quote=
	}}		}} -->

	==== ====		==== ====

RogerNicholson: /* */ mod

2012-05-22T03:18:54Z

: mod

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:18, 22 May 2012
Line 190:		Line 190:
	\|claim=Our comment: This absolute devotion of choosing to pay a religious entity that is worth some $100 Billion over feeding her children or paying the mortgage is nothing to be admired. It is tantamount to child abuse in our opinion.		\|claim=Our comment: This absolute devotion of choosing to pay a religious entity that is worth some $100 Billion over feeding her children or paying the mortgage is nothing to be admired. It is tantamount to child abuse in our opinion.
	\|think=		\|think=
	*{{antispeak\|mocking}} This claim is absurd. The Church has an extensive welfare program that takes care of members ~~- ''even those who do not pay tithing''~~.		*{{antispeak\|mocking}} This claim is absurd. The Church has an extensive welfare program that takes care of members.
	*The critic neglects to mention that the Church will ''not'' let this woman or her children go hungry. There is no mention of the Bishop's storehouse, which is specifically for this purpose.		*The critic neglects to mention that the Church will ''not'' let this woman or her children go hungry. There is no mention of the Bishop's storehouse, which is specifically for this purpose.
	*Nor do the critics mention that the bishop can and often will help pay the mortgage. Any Church finance clerk has written mortgage checks more than once.		*Nor do the critics mention that the bishop can and often will help pay the mortgage. Any Church finance clerk has written mortgage checks more than once.

RogerNicholson: /* */ mod

2012-05-22T03:17:26Z

: mod

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:17, 22 May 2012
Line 21:		Line 21:
	*The the Church should divest itself of any profit-making businesses, and that any profit from those businesses should be given to the poor.		*The the Church should divest itself of any profit-making businesses, and that any profit from those businesses should be given to the poor.
	*That the Church is simply a corporation that does not provide sufficient return-on-investment to its members.		*That the Church is simply a corporation that does not provide sufficient return-on-investment to its members.
			*The critics conclude that the Church spends little on humanitarian aid, and that members ought to send their contributions elsewhere.

	==== ====		==== ====

RogerNicholson: /* */ mod

2012-05-22T03:16:30Z

: mod

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:16, 22 May 2012
Line 102:		Line 102:
	\|claim=The church hardly spends any of its money on humanitarian aid. It appears that less than 1% of its revenues goes to really help the poor and needy. And those funds are usually donated as a high-profile contribution....However, in more recent times, the church has loosened its purse strings in some areas that it is often criticized for. The LDS Church did make some sizeable contributions to Haiti after their devastating earthquake. Most of the contributions came in the form of material goods.		\|claim=The church hardly spends any of its money on humanitarian aid. It appears that less than 1% of its revenues goes to really help the poor and needy. And those funds are usually donated as a high-profile contribution....However, in more recent times, the church has loosened its purse strings in some areas that it is often criticized for. The LDS Church did make some sizeable contributions to Haiti after their devastating earthquake. Most of the contributions came in the form of material goods.
	\|think=		\|think=
	*{{antispeak\|mutually exclusive}} Critics often complain that the Church's financial records are closed. How then, can they conclude that "the church hardly spends any of its money on humanitarian aid" and that "it appears that less than 1% of its revenues goes to really help the poor and needy?" Such data is simply not at the critics' disposal.		*{{antispeak\|mutually exclusive}} Critics often complain that the Church's financial records are closed. How, then, can they conclude that "the church hardly spends any of its money on humanitarian aid" and that "it appears that less than 1% of its revenues goes to really help the poor and needy?" Such data is simply not at the critics' disposal.
	*We suspect that the critics are not so much champions of the poor and needy as much as they are interested in making the Church look bad.		*We suspect that the critics are not so much champions of the poor and needy as much as they are interested in making the Church look bad.
	\|quote=		\|quote=

RogerNicholson: /* */ mod

2012-05-22T03:14:45Z

: mod

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:14, 22 May 2012
Line 189:		Line 189:
	\|claim=Our comment: This absolute devotion of choosing to pay a religious entity that is worth some $100 Billion over feeding her children or paying the mortgage is nothing to be admired. It is tantamount to child abuse in our opinion.		\|claim=Our comment: This absolute devotion of choosing to pay a religious entity that is worth some $100 Billion over feeding her children or paying the mortgage is nothing to be admired. It is tantamount to child abuse in our opinion.
	\|think=		\|think=
			*{{antispeak\|mocking}} This claim is absurd. The Church has an extensive welfare program that takes care of members - ''even those who do not pay tithing''.
			*The critic neglects to mention that the Church will ''not'' let this woman or her children go hungry. There is no mention of the Bishop's storehouse, which is specifically for this purpose.
			*Nor do the critics mention that the bishop can and often will help pay the mortgage. Any Church finance clerk has written mortgage checks more than once.
			*Nobody that pays tithing is subsequently abandoned by the Church to starve. That is what fast offerings are specifically used for.
	\|quote=		\|quote=
	}}		}}

RogerNicholson: /* */ mod

2012-05-22T02:59:52Z

: mod

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:59, 22 May 2012
Line 102:		Line 102:
	\|claim=The church hardly spends any of its money on humanitarian aid. It appears that less than 1% of its revenues goes to really help the poor and needy. And those funds are usually donated as a high-profile contribution....However, in more recent times, the church has loosened its purse strings in some areas that it is often criticized for. The LDS Church did make some sizeable contributions to Haiti after their devastating earthquake. Most of the contributions came in the form of material goods.		\|claim=The church hardly spends any of its money on humanitarian aid. It appears that less than 1% of its revenues goes to really help the poor and needy. And those funds are usually donated as a high-profile contribution....However, in more recent times, the church has loosened its purse strings in some areas that it is often criticized for. The LDS Church did make some sizeable contributions to Haiti after their devastating earthquake. Most of the contributions came in the form of material goods.
	\|think=		\|think=
			*{{antispeak\|mutually exclusive}} Critics often complain that the Church's financial records are closed. How then, can they conclude that "the church hardly spends any of its money on humanitarian aid" and that "it appears that less than 1% of its revenues goes to really help the poor and needy?" Such data is simply not at the critics' disposal.
			*We suspect that the critics are not so much champions of the poor and needy as much as they are interested in making the Church look bad.
	\|quote=		\|quote=
	}}		}}

RogerNicholson: mod

2012-05-22T02:56:28Z

mod

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 {{MormonThinkSummaryHeader|Tithing}}
+*That the Catholic definition of offerings is somehow supposed to affect the Mormon definition of tithing.
 ==== ====
@@ Line 206: / Line 210: @@
 |claim=LDS tithes are not used for charity, but are used to build the kingdom. Sure the LDS Church does some good with their money, like helping out with the earthquake in Haiti, but they could really do so much more with their enormous financial empire that's been built from the generous donations of its members over the last century.
 |think=
 |quote=
 }}
@@ Line 213: / Line 220: @@
 |claim=The modern LDS Church in the 21st century simply no longer needs additional tithing dollars.  If you feel you need to still pay tithing, then pay your tithing to reputable charities that distribute their money to the poor and needy or look for cures to diseases and the like.  God knows you paid money to these organizations - even without a tithing settlement.
 |think=
-|quote=
+*{{antispeak|speaking for God}} This is coming from alleged "active" members of the Church?
 |quote=
 }}

RogerNicholson: /* */ mod

2012-05-22T02:49:36Z

: mod

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:49, 22 May 2012
Line 190:		Line 190:
	\|claim=LDS leaders often hint at promises that tithe payers will receive increased income from paying tithes, yet Utah remains one of the poorest states in the US and ranks among the highest in personal bankruptcies. Utah has led the nation for the last few years in bankruptcy filings. Not only was Utah #1 in 2005, but it also had a record number of (bankruptcy) filings....Our Comment: We wonder how much the bankruptcies would decrease in Utah if the members paid their legal obligations first and then gave donations to the church as they could afford them.		\|claim=LDS leaders often hint at promises that tithe payers will receive increased income from paying tithes, yet Utah remains one of the poorest states in the US and ranks among the highest in personal bankruptcies. Utah has led the nation for the last few years in bankruptcy filings. Not only was Utah #1 in 2005, but it also had a record number of (bankruptcy) filings....Our Comment: We wonder how much the bankruptcies would decrease in Utah if the members paid their legal obligations first and then gave donations to the church as they could afford them.
	\|think=		\|think=
	*The Church does not teach that tithe payers will receive increased income from paying tithes.		*The Church does not teach that tithe payers will receive increased income from paying tithes. The Church teaches that members who pay their tithing will be blessed as a result. The form of that blessing can vary, but there is no guarantee that it will be in the form of increased income.
	\|quote=		\|quote=
	}}		}}

RogerNicholson: /* */ mod

2012-05-22T02:47:52Z

: mod

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:47, 22 May 2012
Line 90:		Line 90:
	\|claim=Imagine if you had a corporation where the business model was to have your customers give you 10% of their income every year, and all you primarily had to provide in return were the buildings to meet in, a few social programs and some speeches made periodically by the owners. Just how phenomenally profitable would that corporation be?		\|claim=Imagine if you had a corporation where the business model was to have your customers give you 10% of their income every year, and all you primarily had to provide in return were the buildings to meet in, a few social programs and some speeches made periodically by the owners. Just how phenomenally profitable would that corporation be?
	\|think=		\|think=
			*{{antispeak\|corporation}} The Church is not a business. Church members are not customers. Members do not donate tithing expecting to make a return on an investment.
	\|quote=		\|quote=
	}}		}}