Agree. Because he gave to his church it is somehow viewed as not actually a charity?
I mean that money could be used to fund missions to help people, buy food and clothes for the needy. etc.
Mitt Romney
- Thread starter Pilgrim
- Start date
Agree. Because he gave to his church it is somehow viewed as not actually a charity?
I mean that money could be used to fund missions to help people, buy food and clothes for the needy. etc.
If one has Oprah money. One doesn't have to do diddly squat for the rest of one's entire life. Instead to he chose to try to make a difference.
It is easy to ridicule. People of faith are often subjected to it. The 'if they TRULY believed they would give it all' crowd is LOUD. I wonder how much of that crowd does ANYTHING other than complain and tell others how much they should do? This has NOTHING to do with Romney's politics or fitness for the office.
I don't like Romney, BUT, compared to Obama he shows the difference between an experienced man and a spoiled little boy. Romney has DONE things, Obama was elected with the experience of a hamburger flipper in high school.
I still won't vote for either.
Because the 10% tithing is NOT charity...but his duty and responsibility to his religion...besides the bible says tithing is necessary.....so they tell me....Agree. Because he gave to his church it is somehow viewed as not actually a charity?
But as far as i know it is still voluntary.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using EO Forums
Agree. Because he gave to his church it is somehow viewed as not actually a charity?
Correct. Not a charity. Churches, most of them, anyway, do charitable work, but that's not their main purpose.
Charity is not the primary purpose of most religions. Charity is, however, a basic tenet of most major religions. the worship of wealth is considered a sin in many. Wealth in itself is not bad.
pearlpro
Expert Expediter
Hes such a smart guy he doesnt know what to call a DOUGHNUT, and comparing Mitts Worth to Baracks worth is RIDICULOUS, The difference is one wants to give TO THE PEOPLE...the other wants to TAKE FROM THE PEOPLE....so Baracks Grades are secret, why are MITTS TAX RETURNS SECRET...maybe because he has enough money to HIDE in the Grand Caymans , I doubt if Barack EVER had or will have that much money
We dont elect a President anyway, hes a Figure head to a corrupt Govt process bought and paid for by Corporations....Lobbys run America.....Republicans and Democrats are both poor examples of the Nations Best...
and On and On and On....
We dont elect a President anyway, hes a Figure head to a corrupt Govt process bought and paid for by Corporations....Lobbys run America.....Republicans and Democrats are both poor examples of the Nations Best...
and On and On and On....
There is no law that requires one to release their tax returns. There is also no law that requires one to release their GPA. On the other hand, who in there right mind would hire anyone who CLAIMED to have multiple college degrees and not check them out? Obama claimed multiple degrees and STILL refuses to release that information. He must have something to hide. Tax returns are private, not a requirement for employment.
When I was indoctrined into the Mormon church....I was told it was so....highly pressured to do so...
I told them I could not afford the 10%....they quoted some mumble jumble about that God would provide for those that gave the tithing...it was a show of faith...to trust in the Lord.....
Sounds surprisingly similar to non forced dispatch.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using EO Forums
Funny guy....
But really I found the Mormons a very controlling bunch....always watching what you were doing...their missionaries dropping in for a free meal on the guise of just in the area....you could see them looking around the house, they would always offer "guidance"....they are also very sexist...the men after service go to Bible class to learn the Book to become ministers, and the women went to the auxillary to learn cooking and quilting classes...
Funny guy....
But really I found the Mormons a very controlling bunch....always watching what you were doing...their missionaries dropping in for a free meal on the guise of just in the area....you could see them looking around the house, they would always offer "guidance"....they are also very sexist...the men after service go to Bible class to learn the Book to become ministers, and the women went to the auxillary to learn cooking and quilting classes...
Never had a Moran on mission even hint at eating or asking to even step inside. I have met many and to a man they were good people.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using EO Forums
gee whiz.....voice to text?.....
when you are member of the church, you are supposed to feed the missionaries...it is in their teachings....
I suppose I should have stated the obvious - that I cut and pasted this from an email I received that seemed to be credible enough to pass along. Being too lazy to fact check every statement, I went to Snopes and found the following:
snopes.com: The Real Mitt Romney
Which offers an evaluation of "MOSTLY TRUE" and confirms that he indeed did graduate from the joint MBA/JD program, and was one of only 15 students to do so out of the 800 Business School and 550 Law school students that were enrolled in the dual program. He also did pass the MI bar exam in July 1975, so I'm having a hard time figuring out what's wrong with the first paragraph.
It's pretty obvious that Romney no longer WORKS at his jobs - since his initial run for president in '08 he's been a professional politician. Having been successful in his business career, he's made prudent investments and is able to live off interest, dividends and capital gains - imagine that!
He even has money (upon which the appropriate taxes have been paid) in LEGAL offshore accounts; does that put him in the same catagory as Bernie Madoff? I think not. Let's not fall for Obama's class warfare pitch - it's a da*n shame that being successful has been so negatively stigmatized by the mainstream media.
Granted, it appears the Obama charity donation figure was wrong and that they donated a little over 20% of their 2011 income. Call that a wash for anyone that thinks charitable giving by the candidates is a critical issue in a presidential race.
Nitpicking at it's finest. The bullet point simply says "unpaid bishop and state (stake) president for his church 10 years". No misrepresentation whatsoever, and this is an easy typo to understand. The facts are that he was bishop of his Mass. ward from 1981 to 1986 and president of his stake from 1986 to 1994. (source: Romney's Mormon faith helps shape his life, policies - San Jose Mercury News). How many readers among the great unwashed realize that Mormon bishops are unpaid? Perhaps this clarification might be forgiven, but the stated tenure of his service in these two combined positions actually IS incorrect - the true total is 13, not 10.
The fact remains that he could have taken the money, but didn't.
The bottom line is we've got two candidates running for POTUS this year. I suggest that everyone interested in casting an informed vote do a little research, as this OP was intended to inspire; read the info on the Snopes link, check out Romney's bio on Wikipedia, find some other sources through independant research instead of relying on the Obama campaing commercials and the stuff that's published in USA Today and babbled by George Stephanopolis on ABC. Then decide who you think has the best track record and which candidate is best prepared to guide the country - Mitt Romney or Barack Hussein Obama.
What's wrong with the first paragraph is the last sentence. It has very little to do with Romney and offers no facts about him at all. As to the rest, I've already stated quite plainly the problems with it, as it's not a piece about facts about Romney as much as it's an agenda driven piece to promote "Romney good, Obama bad." My only response to that is, well duh.
Well, I don't know that much or care for Romney, BUT, Obama IS bad. He is EVIL! Just let them lay there and die Barrack. His words, not mine.That IS a fact. ANYONE that could do that is BAD! SO, at least the Obama be BAD part is right.