The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church • Hacker News Board

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#141

Post by Osiris » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 4:17 PM UTC

snuxoll wrote: post #112

annoyingnoob wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think having your members tithe is a big part of it. I know some wealthy mormons that have always given their 10%, at least that's what they tell me. I also know a couple of really large mormon families, like 12 kids large - they all tithe.

> at least that's what they tell me. Assuming the countless anecdotes on /r/exmormon are to be believed, nobody really gets a choice. Your local leaders will browbeat you and try to look over your financials if they don’t feel you are tithing appropriately.

> try to look over your financials

If this happens it's against church policy. At the end of each year your Bishop asks if you are a full tithe payer or not. They record your answer and that's it.

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#142

Post by xtracto » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 4:18 PM UTC

zippie wrote: post #75

weare138 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God." -Jesus Matthew 19:24

I see this quoted a lot whenever there is discussion of wealth. However, as with all verses, the context is important as well as the follow up verses. This is not in defense of. 17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.” “Which ones?” he inquired. Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you…

As an atheist I love reading these passages.. it is amazing how people in this day and age are trying to find "meanings" from a book full of the stories of one person... who lived 2000+ years ago.. imagine if someone tried to find meaning in Beckhams biography 2000 years from now...

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#143

Post by mindcrime » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 4:19 PM UTC

zozbot234 wrote: post #114

tasogare wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can do both at the same time like Raël (Claude Vorilhon) did.

> You can do both at the same time Of course you can. Do you know whom that quote came from?

L. Ron Hubbard?

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#144

Post by tomrod » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 4:21 PM UTC

adaisadais wrote: post #139

x1oqw wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It always surprises me that wealthy churches pretend to take Christ seriously, when Jesus was not very fond of amassing money. I get why the churches do it (of course they don't believe in Christ), but why do the exploited masses believe them?

A lot of what the Mormon Church teaches is not based on the teachings of Jesus Christ. Mormonism and Christianity are two separate things much like Christianity and Judaism are separate.

This is true of virtually every religion under the Christian umbrella.

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#145

Post by dropit_sphere » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 4:22 PM UTC

Honestly you guys, we really don't care about the money, take it and fund another Uber or something if you can find a loophole that lets you do it, we live and breathe this stuff.

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#146

Post by keiferski » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 4:22 PM UTC

mrosett wrote: post #128

snuxoll wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> at least that's what they tell me. Assuming the countless anecdotes on /r/exmormon are to be believed, nobody really gets a choice. Your local leaders will browbeat you and try to look over your financials if they don’t feel you are tithing appropriately.

/r/exmormon has a very particular perspective, largely driven by the people who are active there are usually the ones who genuinely had the worst experience.

This is pretty much true of any online community built around the opposition to something. People that had a positive or simply ‘meh’ experience don’t tend to spend time talking about it online.

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#147

Post by conanbatt » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 4:22 PM UTC

2ion wrote: post #31

weare138 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God." -Jesus Matthew 19:24

"It is easier for a rich man to enter Heaven seated comfortably on the back of a camel than it is for a poor man to pass through the eye of a needle." - Supply Side Jesus, https://imgur.com/gallery/bCqRp

That comic is hilarious!

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#148

Post by dorian-graph » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 4:25 PM UTC

randallsquared wrote: post #129

samdoidge wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this starts with the assumption that what people like me went through is trivial. I did not read it as that, and don't believe that is what his statement conveys.

The part "it's sometimes not one-sided", taken literally and minimally, tells us only that there are some people whose own actions reduce their dignity. Given a sample population of any size, this provides no additional information about the topic under discussion: there are some asinine people everywhere. What information could the poster have been conveying, then, if not nothing? In context, I think it's clear that…

> Probably only they will ever know. :)

Today's your lucky day ;)

> In context, I think it's clear that the intended update for readers was to raise the possibility that tomrod's indignities were self-inflicted.

It wasn't in reference to tomrod's experience at all. Mystery solved.

> It could be that the poster was trying to smear tomrod

Absolutely not! And I find that suggestion reprehensible.

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#149

Post by tomrod » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 4:25 PM UTC

dorian-graph wrote: post #44

tomrod wrote: post #9

That is just what is uncovered in the investment market with one subsidiary. They also own 2% of Florida[0], huge land tracts in Argentina, Oklahoma and elsewhere, and attractive urban real estate in most major metropolises including apartment complexes in PA. They centralize donation collection of tithes and good will offerings such that about 8% stays back at congregations (based on personal observation as the fina…

> For the record I left several years ago, but have many family members still heavily involved. It's an organization which does not allow you to leave with your dignity intact. I've seen people leave with and without. As to why they've not left with dignity, it's sometimes not one-sided. Edit: For those who are making many negative guesses and assumptions about my comments. My comment had nothing to do with the OP's…

Regarding your edit, I believe I more properly characterize my thought in this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22276276

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#150

Post by jacques_chester » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 4:25 PM UTC

shemnon42 wrote: post #113

cultus wrote: post #39

I cannot fathom why churches are automatically tax exempt. Regular nonprofits have to jump through all kinds of hoops to prevent these kind of shenanigans. We are supposed to have a secular government. How is it that we single out this one class of institution for special treatment?

It's the first amendment and separation of church and state. The IRS is fairly certain that if they tried to tax the land chapels are on that the supreme court (even the liberal judges) would say it violates church and state separation. Shutting down a church for failure to pay taxes is the end game the courts won't allow, and so where we are basically falls out from that. Now if you run a for-profit child care cente…

This is a slippery-slope argument, assuming judges are automatons who can be iteratively led to violate the separation of church and state.

It turns out a lot of them are pretty smart and understand how to treat each case on its own details. Their profession is about picking out exact details to unpack exact consequences, not being swept along by generalities.

The basis of the exemption of churchs is due to the historical development of trusts and revenue law, going back at least as far as the Charitable Uses Act in 1601 -- long before the US Constitution was drafted and adopted. Religious purposes were exempted because at the time genuine belief was common.

Charitable purposes as a concept therefore has a shared origin across all of the common law countries, including the UK, the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and others. But common law is subordinate to new legislation, and so is historical legislation.

The reason churches are given a free ride is that nobody wants to pay the incredible political capital it will require to fix this relic.