Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 8 minutes ago, Teancum said: Pure speculation and conjecture. Any notion to the contrary is pure speculation and conjecture on your part. By the way, I’ve been on the ground where those T shirts have been deployed. They serve a practical purpose in letting public safety personnel and victims know at once that those who are wearing them are trustworthy rescue and relief volunteers. One man I talked to had been involved in so many such efforts that he kept his yellow T shirt always laundered and at the ready. 2
jkwilliams Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 9 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Kind of sounded like it there for a moment. But I’ll take your word for it. Nah. I’d probably mind a little if I were still giving them money.
Teancum Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 6 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Then why fuss over it? Oh, I know. It’s because the Church, notwithstanding the good it does, is not doing it in a manner that precisely meets with your approval. No Scott. But in your arrogant piety that is so often on display I understand why you reach such a conclusion. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 1 minute ago, jkwilliams said: Nah. I’d probably mind a little if I were still giving them money. So you do disapprove, then.
Teancum Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Any notion to the contrary is pure speculation and conjecture on your part. The church could certainly dispel any question if they were transparent with their financial information. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 2 minutes ago, Teancum said: No Scott. But in your arrogant piety that is so often on display I understand why you reach such a conclusion. Then you tell me: Why fuss over it?
jkwilliams Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: So you do disapprove, then. Nope. I have no standing.
Teancum Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: Then you tell me: Why fuss over it? Discussing isn't fussing.
Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Teancum said: The church could certainly dispel any question if they were transparent with their financial information. I doubt even that would quell the hostile critics — if it were any of their business. Which it isn’t.
jkwilliams Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: I doubt even that would quell the hostile critics — if it were any of their business. Which it isn’t. Is it the business of tithe-paying members?
Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Teancum said: Discussing isn't fussing. Well now, that depends on the nature of the “discussing,” right?
Teancum Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 1 minute ago, jkwilliams said: Nope. I have no standing. My guess is some of the large sums on money you and I gave over the years is part of the $100 billion. But I don't tithe anymore though I still do give to the fast offering fund periodically.
jkwilliams Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Teancum said: My guess is some of the large sums on money you and I gave over the years is part of the $100 billion. But I don't tithe anymore though I still do give to the fast offering fund periodically. Yeah. I guess that’s the only annoying thing: realizing that, despite what I thought, my tithing wasn’t necessarily going to operate the church. Oh, well. Moot point now. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 Just now, jkwilliams said: Is it the business of tithe-paying members? By and large, those who understand and embrace the principle of tithing don’t care where the money goes. I know I don’t. If they disapprove, they are free not to pay it. I’ve observed that those who make a fuss DON’T pay it — or no longer do. 1
Teancum Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I doubt even that would quell the hostile critics — if it were any of their business. Which it isn’t. Of course you doubt it. But it is certainly the business of the members of which I am still one. One that has donated hundreds of thousands of $ to the Church and tens of thousands of hours. So in a way I think it is still my business. Further, the church is tax exempt and donations tax deductible. All other tax exempt entities are required to report their financial data on a Form 990 annually. Organizations that receive public donations over a certain amount are required by law to proved audited financial statements by an independent CPA firm and publish those those statements. Why church's are exempt from such a requirement makes no sense to me. American taxpayers are subsidizing the LDS church. And that $100 billion grow annually, tax free. One could argue it is their business as well. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 2 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: Yeah. I guess that’s the only annoying thing: realizing that, despite what I thought, my tithing wasn’t necessarily going to operate the church. Oh, well. Moot point now. So you don’t disapprove. You’re just “annoyed.”
jkwilliams Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: By and large, those who understand and embrace the principle of tithing don’t care where the money goes. I know I don’t. If they disapprove, they are free not to pay it. I’ve observed that those who make a fuss DON’T pay it — or no longer do. So, you don’t think the church should be transparent with its members. And only people who don’t pay care, anyway, right?
Teancum Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: By and large, those who understand and embrace the principle of tithing don’t care where the money goes. I know I don’t. If they disapprove, they are free not to pay it. I’ve observed that those who make a fuss DON’T pay it — or no longer do. When I was a tithe payer I advocated for the church being transparent financially. But maybe it is the CPA in me the urged me to that position. So yea most members don't care but there are reasons for that as well. But that is another topic likely NOT for another day. 2
jkwilliams Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: So you don’t disapprove. You’re just “annoyed.” I’m slightly annoyed that I may have paid for an insurance bailout and a mall. Apparently that means I am operating in bad faith. I seriously don’t care, Scott. But make a big deal out of my slight annoyance if it makes you feel better. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Teancum said: Of course you doubt it. But it is certainly the business of the members of which I am still one. One that has donated hundreds of thousands of $ to the Church and tens of thousands of hours. So in a way I think it is still my business. Further, the church is tax exempt and donations tax deductible. All other tax exempt entities are required to report their financial data on a Form 990 annually. Organizations that receive public donations over a certain amount are required by law to proved audited financial statements by an independent CPA firm and publish those those statements. Why church's are exempt from such a requirement makes no sense to me. American taxpayers are subsidizing the LDS church. And that $100 billion grow annually, tax free. One could argue it is their business as well. I dare say the Church accomplishes enough social good in society and relieves the government of part of its burden thereby that taxpayers have no real standing to begrudge the Church its tax exempt status. Furthermore, under the law, any of them are welcome to form or donate to a 501(c)3 corporation and thereby enjoy a similar benefit in supporting their favorite cause, whatever it is. So you will pardon me if I don’t have a great deal of sympathy for that position. Edited June 17, 2021 by Scott Lloyd
Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 6 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: So, you don’t think the church should be transparent with its members. And only people who don’t pay care, anyway, right? Um, yeah, that pretty much sums it up.
jkwilliams Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 Just now, Scott Lloyd said: Um, yeah, that pretty much sums it up. I do know active members, a serving stake president for one, who have told me they wish the church would be transparent with their finances. I guess they are non-payers. Go figure. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 6 minutes ago, Teancum said: When I was a tithe payer I advocated for the church being transparent financially. But maybe it is the CPA in me the urged me to that position. So yea most members don't care but there are reasons for that as well. But that is another topic likely NOT for another day. Oh, I clearly remember your complaining. And then, as now, you seemed to be clearly in the minority on this issue among Church members.
jkwilliams Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 Just now, Scott Lloyd said: Oh, I clearly remember your complaining. And then, as now, you seemed to be clearly in the minority on this issue among Church members. I didn’t realize the majority determines right from wrong. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2021 Posted June 17, 2021 8 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: I’m slightly annoyed that I may have paid for an insurance bailout and a mall. Apparently that means I am operating in bad faith. I seriously don’t care, Scott. But make a big deal out of my slight annoyance if it makes you feel better. What “insurance bailout”? Are you speaking of Beneficial Life? And the mall, like other Church-owned commercial ventures is self-sustaining.
Recommended Posts