User:InProgress/Website reviews/TI

1. REDIRECTTemplate:Test3

A FAIR Analysis of: MormonThink A work by author: Anonymous

FAIRMORMON'S VIEW OF THE CRITICS' CONCLUSIONS

The positions that the MormonThink article "Tithing" appears to take are the following:

• That the Catholic definition of offerings is somehow supposed to affect the Mormon definition of tithing.
• That the requirement by the Church for members to pay tithing and offerings is a "guilt trip."
• That unverified rumor about the Church's land holding in Florida constitutes some sort of valid data.
• 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.
• The critics conclude that the Church spends little on humanitarian aid, and that members ought to send their contributions elsewhere.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Critic's Comment: The above quote is from a Catholic priest who responded to an ex-Mormon asking about tithing. Perhaps the priest is correct. We are not called to tithe. We are asked to make offerings. When the elderly widow gave her last two mites, it was an offering, not a tithe. That would have been 10% of her last two mites. We are not called to tithe, but to make an offering to sustain the church. Plus, if I were to announce that I had given 10% of my income to a homeless shelter, that would not be acceptable to the church, but it is just what the Bible tells us we should do with our tithes. Please check out Deut. 14 for the Old Testament law on tithing. Christians are no longer under that obligation.

FairMormon commentary

• That is apparently the Catholic view. What does this have to do with the Latter-day Saint view?
• We are not sure what the attempt to redefine "tithing" as "offerings" is intended to convey.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Our Comment: It appears that the LDS Church defined tithing differently in the early days of the LDS Church than they do now. Regardless of how it may have been defined in the past, the LDS Church expects its current members to pay 10% of their income to the church, in addition to fast offerings and other donations.

FairMormon commentary

• In the early days of the Church, tithing consisted of 10% of your increase in property. For example, for farmers, this would represent 10% of the food that they produced. They would transport their tithing to the Bishop's storehouse.
• As society has evolved, so has the way tithing is paid.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Our comment: We are tithe payers (the ones that Hinckley referred to as making the contributions). When can we see the financial information? The LDS Church does not allow its members to see any financial records. Most churches do publish some financial information and budgets so their members can see what their donations are used for and to assess the needs of the organization that they support with their hard-earned money. Why is the one, true church less open and forth-coming about their finances and how the money is spent than the apostate churches? Intuitively we would think that the 'false' churches would likely be more secretive about how much money they have and how it's spent and that God's one, true church would be very open about how they spend their members' donations.

FairMormon commentary

•   The author is pretending to be a believer  —The critics pretend to be believers by using phrases such as "we believe," even though they do not.
  No, you are not tithe payers. You may have once been tithe payers when you were believers. MormonThink editors may wish to update their wording to reflect their current status as non-believers.
• Active members who pay tithing never ask to see the financial information—the people that do demand to see this are closet disbelievers who do not trust the Church, and ex-Mormons.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Tithing as the Catholic priest said above should be a gift, but the LDS Church makes it an obligation. Fear is often used as a motivator to get people to pay a full tithing. How many times have you heard the term 'fire insurance' associated with tithing? He who is tithed shall not be burned at Christ's' 2nd coming. Malachi 8:10 is often quoted - "Will a man rob God, yet ye have robbed me".

FairMormon commentary

• You cannot take the Catholic definition of tithing and apply it to Latter-day Saints.
• Yes, Latter-day Saints do use the scriptures as a basis to support the payment of tithing.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The guilt placed upon Latter-day Saints can be considerable. We are not considered members in 'good standing' if we're not paying tithing. We cannot attend the temple if we don't pay our tithing. We cannot have temple-related callings or any high-profile positions if we're not full tithe-payers. And if we are full tithe-payers, we're often counseled to then start paying generous fast offerings, contributing to the missionary fund, etc.

FairMormon commentary

• That is because Latter-day Saints consider all they they have been blessed with to belong to the Lord anyway, and giving back ten percent of that plus offerings as a small price to pay.
• Why would you want to attend the temple if you were not willing to consecrate all that you have to the Lord? That is one of the commitments that you make in the temple. If you are not willing to give 10%, then why go to the temple and commit to give everything?

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
This blog is interesting. The author did some calculations using the church's vast cattle ranches in Florida to calculate that they own some 0.7% of Florida's land, or 12 times what Disney Corp owns. We haven't verified this but that seems about right. Also, check out his commentary on the free labor they get for their non-taxed businesses in Florida.

FairMormon commentary

•   The author is applying circular reasoning  —The premise used by the critic depends upon validity of the conclusion.
  "We haven't verified this but that seems about right"?
• Aren't cattle ranches by definition "vast"?

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
President Hinckley, in a public interview, admitted that the church is very wealthy. However, he then went on to say that the assets owned by the church are not income producing but are instead income draining. This is very deceptive. The church owns many businesses that generate profits. The $6 Billion or so is profit that the church takes in from contributions by its members and its businesses every year. The church has very little expense in relation to its income. The money it receives is almost all tax-free. The property is exempt from taxes. The church owns virtually all of its properties so it doesn't have to pay rent. The utilities on those buildings and the meager funds allotted to the wards for their discretionary budget funds are just a drop in the bucket compared to its income.

FairMormon commentary

•   The author is namecalling: liars   —Critics often assume or claim that LDS leaders or members are lying or dishonest. They do not consider or grant that even if they are in error, they might have made an error innocently or unintentionally. Any error (real or perceived) is evidence of lying.
  
• The critics are mixing up profits from Church-owned tax paying businesses with Church contributions. The Church owns businesses, and these businesses pay taxes just like any other business.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
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?

FairMormon commentary

•   The author is asserting that the Church is simply a corporation  —Critics like to portray the Church as a for-profit business.
  The Church is not a business. Church members are not customers. Members do not donate tithing expecting to make a return on an investment.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
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.

FairMormon commentary

•   The author is making mutually exclusive claims:  —When critics need an attack against the Church, any excuse will do, even if they are mutually self-contradictory: if one argument is true, the other cannot be.
  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.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Critic's Comment: As demonstrated by the Tsunami, the church doesn't always spend the money where the members are told it's going. The church refuses to publish how it spends its money so no one knows for sure what all it spends it's vast wealth on except for some of the things that gets published or leaked out. But it's clear that the church has far more than it needs and some of the things it spends its money on like The Mall or the Hunting Preserves are probably things Jesus would not spend money on if he was physically running the church.

FairMormon commentary

•   The author is "speaking for Jesus"  —The critic, despite not believing in God, presumes to "speak for Jesus".
  

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Christ taught that one should sell all that one has and give it to the poor. While that's not practical, why couldn't the church sell its non-ecclesiastical assets and help the poor? Does the church really have need of anything other than chapels, temples, MTCs, family history centers, and visitor centers?

FairMormon commentary

• Church-owned businesses are businesses. They are not part of the Church. They deal with their own financial issues, including profit and loss.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The church sometimes acts like it's poor and needs money. Around the year 2000, the Church laid off the meetinghouse custodians and other church workers, some of whom had worked in the Church Office Building. The church custodian, although not a high-paying job, was a nice job for at least one person in buildings which house 2-3 wards on average. It was often a nice way for the church to help out someone that really needed a job. Now they expect members (as if they didn't spend enough time in church service) to clean their own buildings on their days off.

FairMormon commentary

• We suspect that the editors at MormonThink are not the ones cleaning the chapels. The members who do this consider it a service to the Lord. Who are you to question that?

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
We would recommend that the church give more money to the poor and needy (both inside and outside of the church) without expecting anything in return from the members. Also build enough meetinghouses so the members can use the buildings during reasonably desirable times. The church should raise the ward budgets so the members can actually use more of the money that they donated on a local level. The church should employ custodians again and give those jobs to people in the ward that really need them. The church should continue the good work it does with employment offices and expand them as they are able. The humanitarian funds, missionary funds, etc. should all be covered by the tithing receipts which are more than enough to completely cover them many times over. The church should keep enough funds invested to keep it sound, but billions and billions invested in businesses, when it could be helping others, is probably not really the way Jesus would have intended his church to be run, in our opinion.

FairMormon commentary

•   The author is "speaking for Jesus"  —The critic, despite not believing in God, presumes to "speak for Jesus".
  
• There is one chapel built every 24 hours, according to the Church.
• We do not presume to dictate to Church leadership how they should allocate money and resources that we freely give.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
In Oct. 2006 General Conference, Pres. Hinckley told Latter-day Saints, "The church is undertaking a huge development project in the interest of protecting the environment of Temple Square. While the costs will be great, it will not involve the expenditure of tithing funds." That is a very deceptive statement. Although technically the funds may come from the profits of the church-owned businesses or merely from the interest on its enormous investment capital, where did the money come from to buy the businesses, stocks and other investments to generate those profits? Everything the church owns ultimately came from money donated to the church by its members - past and present.

FairMormon commentary

•   The author is namecalling: liars   —Critics often assume or claim that LDS leaders or members are lying or dishonest. They do not consider or grant that even if they are in error, they might have made an error innocently or unintentionally. Any error (real or perceived) is evidence of lying.
  It is a cop-out to simply go back in time until you can equate everything that the Church has to a tithing or offering donation. This does not make President Hinckley a liar.
• How many of you reading this have ancestors that owned slaves? Does that mean that you must consider slavery acceptable?
• How many of you have ancestors who were polygamists? Does that mean that you actually must accept polygamy?
• How many of you have ancestors that paid tithing to the Church? Does that mean that you paid that money?

Additional information

• City Creek Center Mall in Salt Lake City—Members and critics have questions about the Church's involvement in the redevelopment of the city center in Salt Lake. (Link)

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Critic's comment: Of all the things Jesus would tell Gordon Hinckley, He told the Prophet to buy a mall? For ten years, the only new light and knowledge given to the world by Jesus through His Prophet are the doctrines of "no penny poker," "no multiple earrings," and "no gay rights." And now we are expected to believe that Jesus' latest revelation is the need for His church to get in the shopping mall business?

FairMormon commentary

•   The author is "speaking for Jesus"  —The critic, despite not believing in God, presumes to "speak for Jesus".
  
•   Trivialization  —Critics take a complex idea and attempt to trivialize it down to a few simple sound bites in order to prove their position.
  These items are certainly not the "only new light and knowledge given to the world." They are a trivial strawman subset of things that the prophets have said.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
It's disgraceful to read the propaganda the Church puts out about tithing. Read the article 'Tithing Shoes' based on a true story from the Church's magazine Friend, Nov 2007: LDS.org The story recounts a destitute mother with a child that did not have any shoes to wear. She had just enough money to buy some shoes for her son. Instead, she feels too guilty if she spends that money on her son instead of giving it to the church as tithing, so she gives it to the church. Of course a 'miracle' happens and the bishop gives her son some shoes he happened to have.

FairMormon commentary

•   The author is using sarcastic reasoning  —The critic makes sarcastic claims that are intended to generate an emotional reaction.
  "Of course a 'miracle' happens..." To those of us who actually believe in God and miracles, this is an inspirational story. For those of you that do not believe in God and miracles, you are left only with sarcastic comments about "miracles".

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
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.

FairMormon commentary

•   The author is using mocking language and hyperbole to try to make his or her point  —The critic intentionally exaggerates claims in order to mock believers.
  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.
• 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.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
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.

FairMormon commentary

• 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.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Many former Mormons continue to pay their tithing, but now do so to more traditional charities - where they know how the money will be spent.

FairMormon commentary

• The word "tithing" means "ten percent." We seriously challenge any ex-Mormon to demonstrate that they are now paying 10% of their income to traditional charities. The standard ex-Mormon position is that you should stop wasting your money by paying tithing, so that you will have more money.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
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.

FairMormon commentary

•   Trivialization  —Critics take a complex idea and attempt to trivialize it down to a few simple sound bites in order to prove their position.
  "Sure the LDS Church does some good with their money..."
•   The author is asserting that the Church is simply a corporation  —Critics like to portray the Church as a for-profit business.
  The critics now portray the Church as an "enormous financial empire."
• The critic takes this position based upon assumptions and little data.

On their old website, MormonThink claims...
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.

FairMormon commentary

•   The author is "speaking for God"  —The critic, despite not believing in God, presumes to know what God ought to require.
  This is coming from alleged "active" members of the Church?