Sono_hito wrote:Im with harmony on this. I have absolutely no objection whatsoever to any person or organization that wishes to aid and help people. But when money taken for that purpose is then spent on commercial ventures, that's when i see the issue. I could care less on temple or meetinghouse spending. They will do what they feel they need to to fulfill needs in that area. What i object to, is when organizations like this begin to become a corperation invested in capital gain.
As i said in a different thread on this same subject, i think that organizations such as the red cross could be used as an example. I think that it is a very honorable to work purely for the betterment of mankind. But if such an organization was to begin investing donated money into say...microsoft. I think that is unethical. To my personal world view, donated money does NOT in any way belong to said organization. It belongs to the people who donated it.
Lets be honest here, the 6-8billion dollars spent just on the SLC mall could have been used to help MILLIONS of people who legitimately NEED such basic things as food, medical care, shelter, clothing, etc. I feel that it is required for such organizations to have someone to report to so that they do not missapropriate funds that could likewise SAVE A LIFE! To me that is why i see such spending as not only unethical, but completely appaling. I know this line could be a cheap shot, but think of the children. Do we need some place easier to shop tommorow? or do their kids need food so they do not starve to death today!?!
My debate is not on how much the upper ends get, that's for the members to decide. But on the things such money could likewise be used for. The idea of religion is to help people! Not to make ventures into places to make more money for the leaders.
I agree with you that helping the poor is important, but I don' t necessarily see that as mutually exclusive to investing money. Consumption by the phat cats at the top is one thing. Investing is another. Why couldn't one take the attitude that investing allows you to help people down the road? I heard in church that the Church saves 10% of their income just as they encourage the members to save 10% of their income. I don't see a problem with this with the Church or the Red Cross, or whatever religious or humanitarian organization does. I always knew they had a big pot of money they were sitting on and in a way I was happy to know that.
While I made that comment about Bro. Sanchez to illustrate the difference in the corporate bosses and the foot soldier/galley slaves, as a whole I think the Church puts a lot more money into Latin America than it takes out. I just don't like the elitism going on.
It just seems so much more distasteful to me to see the Brethren thinknig of themselves as corporate CEOs, as if the Church was some kind of corporation? Men called to these positions by revelation, inspiration, and above all
relation.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.