Conservatives Give More To Charity Than Any Other Group

Expert’s Message About Charity That Liberals and Atheists Likely Won’t Want to Hear

Dec. 5, 2014 1:14pm Billy Hallowell

480

SHARES

One of the continued debates surrounding charitable giving centers upon whether liberals or conservatives donate more to charity — and it’s a question that one expert wasted no time answering while speaking recently about the current state of philanthropy in America.

“There’s no question that conservatives give more to charity,” Rick Dunham, president and CEO of Dunham+Company, told TheBlaze. ”The research objectively demonstrates that … conservatives tend to be more religious and therefore they give more to charity.”

In addition to these claims, which are consistent with some of the past research highlighted on the subject, Dunham, whose company assists with brand strategy and fundraising, was sure to note that it’s not as though non-believers don’t have a culture of giving.

Photo credit: Shutterstock

While some non-theists are charitable, he explained that individuals who attend religious services donate six times more than those who don’t, as “giving is more of a lifestyle” for them.

Dunham also defended churches against atheists and other who claim that houses of worship are not institutions that should be included when assessing charitable giving, noting that faith has traditionally held an important role when it comes to the “moral fiber of our culture.”

“I think it’s a straw man argument that individuals put up that giving to churches is not really charitable giving,” Dunham said. ”What’s kind of glossed over is the moral education, the moral inout of faith into life which again goes to one of the strands of our DNA as a country.”

As for the holiday season, Dunham said that the giving outlook is “pretty good.” He added that he’s been watching the stock market following the midterm elections, as the it is “the single most important indicator of charitable giving in America.”

Photo credit: Shutterstock

He also noted that the general economy is a strong indicator, explaining that the great recession yielded a historical dip in giving — one that hit the charitable sector hard. But with the economy improving, he said giving is also on the upswing.

Regardless of the specifics and the debate over who gives more, Dunham said that one thing is clear: charitable giving is ingrained in Americans’ DNA, especially when comparing it to other countries.

“[Many] countries have a culture that is dependent on government and, as a result, they feel theypay taxes and government should take care of it,” he said. “And as a result charitable center is a lot smaller than in America.”

Read more about about Dunham and his work here.

If You Are Hetero Sexual, You Are Bad. If You Believe Homosexuality Is A Sickness, You Are Homophobic. The World Today!

THE EMERGING INTOLERANCE OF ENFORCED HOMO-ORTHODOXY

Exclusive: Joseph Farah interprets recent Rhode Island court decision on 'gay' parade

Published: 21 hours ago

 JOSEPH FARAH About | Email | Archive

  Receive author alerts  Subscribe to feed

• 
• Text smaller
• Text bigger

     167

“Gay pride” is now the de facto state religion in America.

If you even think homosexuality, lesbianism and “transgenderism” might be sinful, you are a modern-day heretic – worthy of scorn, ridicule, fines, abuse, even loss of your business or job.

Bible-believing wedding cake bakers, photographers, videographers, florists and caterers have all faced lawsuits and government coercion to participate in same-sex marriage celebrations.

And now, the Rhode Island Supreme Court has joined the witch hunt against Christians who take their Scriptures and faith seriously by throwing out lawsuits brought by two Providence firefighters who said their constitutional rights were violated when they were ordered to drive a truck in a gay pride parade despite their religious objections.

The firefighters, Theodore Fabrizio and Stephen Deninno, argued that they are Roman Catholics and, therefore, do not and cannot support or condone homosexuality.

Seemed like a reasonable request given the First Amendment.

Not so, ruled Justice William Robinson, writing for all five members of the state high court in December. He wrote that the men appeared in the 2001 parade as public servants who were “relatively anonymous.” He called it a legitimate work assignment.

A couple questions come to mind:

• How does “relative anonymity” excuse the coercion of people to violate their religious convictions?
• How is attendance and participation in a “gay pride” parade a legitimate work assignment for a firefighter?

But these are the kinds of questions one cannot ask in the present state-enforced religious orthodoxy that goes something like this: “Gay is good. Thou shalt not allow your medieval prejudices based on misreading and misinterpreting of ancient myths to inhibit the forced celebration of all things gay.”

Do I have that about right?

This is another rather stunning ruling that places enforcement of the radically new secular humanist pro-gay ethos above the tenets of Christianity and Judaism, not to mention the heartfelt religious convictions of individuals.

Experience more of Joseph Farah’s no-nonsense truth-telling in his books, audio and video products, featured in the WND Superstore

Look at the twisted reasoning behind subjugation of the free exercise of religion: “The respondents’ appearance in the parade, solely as members of the Providence Fire Department, did not constitute a form of expression on their part. Rather, it was simply the accomplishing of a task assigned to an engine company of the Providence Fire Department.”

But it gets worse when you consider the abuse and harassment experienced by the firefighters forced to participate in this public exhibition and celebration of perversity.

The two lawsuits, filed in 2004, were brought against former Mayor Buddy Cianci and James Rattigan, who was fire chief in 2001. The firefighters sought compensatory and punitive damages for violations of their freedom of religion and speech. While the court said the men were assigned to work the parade because they served in an engine company that was closest to the parade route, the firefighters asked to be reassigned to other duties – like firefighting. That request was denied, according to their lawyer.

But to add insult to injury, the firefighters said they experienced sexual harassment from parade-goers and their co-workers.

Any sane, rational, moral person who has been in the vicinity of a “gay pride” parade knows exactly what these firefighters were alleging. I’ve seen it firsthand. I once had the misfortune of spending Father’s Day with my wife and small children in a city celebrating “gay pride.”

We were subjected to public nudity, crudity and rudity with impunity and incredulity.

After the parade was over and I thought it was safe to go outside, I took my young girls for a walk – one of them was in a stroller at the time. A group of about a half-dozen lesbians approached us with catcalls of “breeder, breeder!” I mean you can’t make this stuff up. It’s amazing the straightjacket America is forcing on its people in the phony names of “diversity” and “tolerance.”

In a truly diverse and tolerant society, we live and let live.

That’s not the case under the emerging homo-orthodoxy.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/01/the-emerging-intolerance-of-enforced-homo-orthodoxy/#DWJyhM695hkwmp2G.99

Are American Sanctions Against North Korea Any More Than A Swat At A Fly?

US Says NKorea Sanctions Step 1 in Sony Response

Saturday, 03 Jan 2015 07:09 AM

  Get Link |

  Email Article |

  Comment  |

   Contact  |

  Print   |

    A   A  

• inShare

The United States says its new round of sanctions against North Korea is just the opening salvo in its response to an unprecedented cyberattack on Sony. Yet there may be little else the U.S. can do to further isolate a country that already has few friends in the world.
Even the latest sanctions, handed down by President Barack Obama in an executive order, may not sting quite as badly as U.S. would have hoped. After all, North Korea is already under a strict sanctions regime imposed by the U.S. over the North's nuclear program.
The new round of sanctions unveiled Friday hit three organizations closely tied to the North's defense apparatus, plus 10 individuals who work for those groups or for North Korea's government directly. Any assets they have in the U.S. will be frozen, and they'll be barred from using the U.S. financial system.

But all three groups were already on the U.S. sanctions list, and officials couldn't say whether any of the 10 individuals even have assets in the U.S. to freeze.
Still, American officials portrayed the move as a swift and decisive response to North Korean behavior they said had gone far over the line. Never before has the U.S. imposed sanctions on another nation in direct retaliation for a cyberattack on an American company.
"The order is not targeted at the people of North Korea, but rather is aimed at the government of North Korea and its activities that threaten the United States and others," Obama wrote in a letter to House and Senate leaders.
North Korea has denied involvement in the cyberattack, which led to the disclosure of tens of thousands of confidential Sony emails and business files, then escalated to threats of terrorist attacks against movie theaters. Many cybersecurity experts have said it's entirely possible that hackers or even Sony insiders could be the culprits, not North Korea, and questioned how the FBI can point the finger so conclusively.
Senior U.S. officials, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity, repeated their assertion that North Korea was responsible and said independent experts don't have access to the same classified information as the FBI.

With this round of sanctions, the U.S. also put North Korea on notice that payback need not be limited to those who perpetrated the attack.
The 10 North Koreans singled out for sanctions didn't necessarily have anything to do with the attack on Sony, senior U.S. officials said. Anyone who works for or helps North Korea's government is now fair game, said the officials — especially North Korea's defense sector and spying operations.
Yet prominent lawmakers were already calling for an ever harsher stance. Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., who is set to chair the Senate Foreign Relations Committee this year, said it was time to concede the U.S. policy on North Korea isn't working.
Added House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, R-Calif.: "We need to go further to sanction those financial institutions in Asia and beyond that are supporting the brutal and dangerous North Korean regime."
Obama has said the U.S. is considering whether to put North Korea back on its list of state sponsors of terrorism. Beyond that, it's unclear what additional penalties the U.S. has in its arsenal. There is no appetite for a military intervention. The U.S. has said that some elements of its response may not be seen publicly, however.
The sanctions target the country's primary intelligence agency, a state-owned arms dealerthat exports missile and weapons technology, and the Korea Tangun Trading Corp., which supports defense research. The individuals sanctioned include North Koreans representing the country's interests in Iran, Russia and Syria.
There was no immediate response from North Korea. Sony declined to comment.
While denying any role in a cyberattack, North Korea has expressed fury over the Sony comedy flick "The Interview," which depicts a fictional assassination plot against North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Sony initially called off the film's release after movie theaters decided not to show the film. After Obama criticized that decision, Sony decided to release the film in a limited number of theaters and online.

The White House called the sanctions "the first aspect of our response" to the Sony attack, a declaration that raised fresh questions about who was behind a nearly 10-hour shutdown of North Korean websites last week. The shutdown prompted a blunt response from North Korea's powerful National Defense Commission, which blamed the U.S. and hurled racial slurs at Obama, calling him a reckless "monkey in a tropical forest."

© Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Does Being Religious Make You Happier? A Recent Study Says It Does.

THE ISSUES

 1  1

This New Study Identifies the Happiest People in America

A new study by the Austin Institute for the Study of Family and Culture has found there is a very high correlation between personal happiness and religious practice. According to the study, 45 percent of people who attend religious service every week characterize themselves as “very happy.” Only 28 percent of people who do not attend church weekly say they are “very happy.” Four percent of those who never attend church services are twice as likely to describe themselves as “very unhappy;” only two percent of those who worship say they fit that description.

The study was based on prior research, and was broad in scope, with a representative sample of 15,738 Americans between ages 18 and 60. Anarticle on the study in Breitbart News continues:

The study indicated that not only religious service attendance, but self-reported “religiosity” and religious “affiliation” are also linked with happiness levels. Yet of the three indicators, service attendance has the highest correlation to increased happiness. The study showed that higher levels of church attendance “predict higher life satisfaction,” even after accounting for how important religious faith is in people’s lives.

The correlation between religiosity and happiness is clear, but explanations of the connection and possible causal relationship are less clear. One theory suggests that the social support that religious communities can provide may be a key factor contributing to increased happiness, since “religious Americans are more apt to be involved in their communities.” Yet even here, the study found “that those who attend religious services often are happier than their peers with similar levels of involvement in the community.”

These statistics tying happiness to religiosity have held true over time. A similar survey conducted ten years ago generated similar results, leading to the same conclusions. When the General Social Survey asked a sample of Americans in 2004, “Would you say that you are very happy, pretty happy, or not too happy?” religious people were more than twice as likely as the non-religious to say they were “very happy” (43%-21%).

With the season of Christmas and Hanukkah observances now behind us, it might be interesting to know: Did those who went to church or synagogue have a happier experience than those who simply wished each other, “Happy Holiday”?