Legislating Morality

[DavidB]

I disagree.

Edited October 15, 2012 by DavidB

[Bikeemikey]

I disagree.

So how do you explain the beginning of the verse?

Cheers

[thesometimesaint]

Well we seem to agree that "charitable donations and service" within the LDS religion are not just "moral obligations." If it was purely a "morality" concern, one could argue that there would be no need to ban members from the temple if they fail to pay their full share of tithing. Thus, tithing is more than a moral concern, it is in fact a kind of "poll tax" in which members cannot access certain privileges unless they pay their fair share.

While I agree that charitable giving and service to others are the essence of true religion, does the requirement to pay tithing in the LDS church come from a place of charity, or one of a more self-serving desire to access the temple and increase one's chances of paradisaical glory? Likewise, in my experiences in the LDS church, service was generally performed out of an obligation intrinsic to a lay ministry, and less from a genuine desire for simple charity. For if simple charity were the goal, wouldn't my hours at the local, non-LDS soup kitchen count as much as the hours that I put into the latest Elders quorum service project, or would I be frowned upon in church for not pulling my weight in the EQ? If the goal was simply charity, couldn't I just take my 10% and give it directly to charity, instead of funneling it through the church as tithing?

In the end, I don't see much difference between the OP's premise that "certain taxes or government programs are akin to satans plan because it takes away the choice of the person taxed to decide for themself to support a program that is intended to benefit the poor, widowed, etc." and the law of tithing. In either scenario, one does not have input into how the monies are spent and one can be punished for not paying their fair share.

There is no law of man that I contribute anything to any church, at least here in the US.

As we ourselves determine what that "fair share" is, which can include $0.00, it is a false assertion that anyone is turned away from the Temple for not paying money. Secondly no one has the right to attend the Temple, as opposed to voting. Use of the Temple is by written invitation only.

Sophistry. No one is required to attend the Temple to receive all the blessings of the Gospel. In fact many more members of the Church haven't attended the Temple than have.

More sophistry. You can determine to what extent, if any, monies you give to a charity, or public entity that runs off of donations. IE; I support PBS. However there is nothing that gives me the right to determine what programing is broadcast by them.

[Bikeemikey]

Giving to the LDS church is really not the same as giving to many other charities if the giver is a member.

As a membership group we are the large recipient of our own donations. They come back to us via buildings, facilities maintenance, missionary opportunities for our children, broadcast conferences, websites, iphone apps, and member centric welfare programs, etc etc. This is not a good or a bad thing. It is simply the way things are.

Though our church finances are not public, it is clear much of the tithing donation does not go directly to aid and relief efforts like many other charity groups.

To me this does not mean the LDS church tithe is a tax, or that the LDS church is not a charity. It is however a different relationship than say the red cross where the vast bulk of the giving goes into welfare and humanitarian efforts, and I would say that some factor of zero comes back as a direct temporal advantage to the giver.

Edited October 16, 2012 by Bikeemikey

[wenglund]

Well we seem to agree that "charitable donations and service" within the LDS religion are not just "moral obligations." If it was purely a "morality" concern, one could argue that there would be no need to ban members from the temple if they fail to pay their full share of tithing. Thus, tithing is more than a moral concern, it is in fact a kind of "poll tax" in which members cannot access certain privileges unless they pay their fair share.

While I agree that charitable giving and service to others are the essence of true religion, does the requirement to pay tithing in the LDS church come from a place of charity, or one of a more self-serving desire to access the temple and increase one's chances of paradisaical glory? Likewise, in my experiences in the LDS church, service was generally performed out of an obligation intrinsic to a lay ministry, and less from a genuine desire for simple charity. For if simple charity were the goal, wouldn't my hours at the local, non-LDS soup kitchen count as much as the hours that I put into the latest Elders quorum service project, or would I be frowned upon in church for not pulling my weight in the EQ? If the goal was simply charity, couldn't I just take my 10% and give it directly to charity, instead of funneling it through the church as tithing?

In the end, I don't see much difference between the OP's premise that "certain taxes or government programs are akin to satans plan because it takes away the choice of the person taxed to decide for themself to support a program that is intended to benefit the poor, widowed, etc." and the law of tithing. In either scenario, one does not have input into how the monies are spent and one can be punished for not paying their fair share.

While there are several things in your thoughtful post that I believe are deserving of a response, I have given DavidB my commitment to not pursue this tangent further on his thread. If you would like to start another thread where it is on topic, I will be pleased to respond there.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-