If their mission is to collect as much as they can to support those less fortunate, why this? Sure there are woke libs that will feel a heart tug, but most people will be turned off by this crap. They need to keep their eye on the prize, not making them selves get a warm fuzzy. That's self serving, and I hate that shit.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:
If you’re looking for an easy way to give back this holiday season, ...

Sure-fire way to get me to shun something like this is to refer to my charitable donations as "giving back."

When I donate to a charitable cause I'm not "giving back" anything. I'm expressing charity.

It’s rather well established that Christians believe that everything, including personal health and talents, is a gift of the divine. Since Christ said that doing unto others is doing unto me, the phrase “giving back” is in common usage as recognition of this belief. It certainly isn’t a statement that is recognizing a socialist point of view. It is indeed a statement of selflessness, which really is the definition of charity, or Christ-like love.

If you give something to someone and expect ANYTHING in return it isn’t charity. Charity is selfless and that is the beauty of it.

I decided to check and found my Field of GiveaFucks is barren.

Not one GiveaFuck to be found.

The local Salvation Army chapter reports they are running short of donations by $35,000. Christmas Eve the one place in our town were they set up their bucket (Supermarket) no one was there.

I’m sure there were many hearts warmed and souls satisfied with all the apologies for being born white. More satisfying than a warm home and satisfying meal? Time will tell I guess.

quote:

It is indeed a statement of selflessness, which really is the definition of charity, or Christ-like love.

I haven't seen any previous indication where apologizing for being alive OR white is part of being able to make a voluntary charitable contribution to a service-oriented organization.

^^^ We're all on the same page here, but quoting that is taking it out of context. The author wasn't saying that.

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
... the phrase “giving back” is in common usage as recognition of [Christian] belief. It certainly isn’t a statement that is recognizing a socialist point of view.

Uh huh.

I wonder why, then, I've only the last few years started hearing the term "giving back" when what they really mean is being charitable?

God may have graced me with advantages. I'm not going to argue that one way or the other. But I still had to work for what I have.

"Giving back" to me implies some degree of reciprocity. It implies one owes something to somebody. Since I earned everything I have by the sweat of my own brow, nobody ever gave me anything, there's no giving back involved.

I find the term obnoxious.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: ensigmatic,

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
"Giving back" to me implies some degree of reciprocity. I implies one owes something to somebody. Since I earned everything I have by the sweat of my own brow, nobody ever gave me anything, there's no giving back involved.

I find the term obnoxious.

Correct.

I didn't 'take' anything, thus I cannot 'give it back'. There are exceptions, where I did get some college-subsidized (lower than market interest) loans and my contributions to my alma mater may be correctly termed as 'giving back.'

Other than that, someone asks me to 'give back' and they get precisely what they deserve: a polite 'Sorry, can't help at this time.'

What this is about, is that some (misguided) people who ask for donations feel better about themselves, when they ask potential donors to 'give back' vs. 'please give'. It makes it seem to them like the donors are somehow obligated and instead of asking for charity they pretend to themselves they are merely making us poor people aware of our (imaginary) obligations.

So, no.

I dont think the mainstream media covered it much. However, I do think that TSA got crushed on social media. I know you guys do not like Facebook, but I had a ton of friends post about it. This was not just a Sigforum issue. It was pretty widespread and it seems to have greatly effected their bottom line in a very significant way.

I'm surprised that BLM and the white leftists that support them, didn't take up the slack in donations. Regards 18DAI

quote:

Originally posted by redstone:
I dont think the mainstream media covered it much. However, I do think that TSA got crushed on social media. I know you guys do not like Facebook, but I had a ton of friends post about it. This was not just a Sigforum issue. It was pretty widespread and it seems to have greatly effected their bottom line in a very significant way.

I saw a “sponsored” ad on FB this morning for SA saying they were running short on donations. Comments were running about 15-1 with sentiments such ad “Get woke, go broke”

I was going to post the apology coupon pic from this thread, but it wouldn’t slow photos comments

quote:

Originally posted by redstone:
However, I do think that TSA got crushed on social media.

That’s what I get for not following any of those sites, and didn’t think of that common source of information that influences people today. That would make sense, so thanks.

As for “giving back,” I find it mildly annoying, but try to look at the big picture when reacting to such expressions. Not every one is motivated by nefarious intent, especially when they have become so common in certain contexts.

quote:

Originally posted by NavyGuy:
If their mission is to collect as much as they can to support those less fortunate, why this?

Because the mid-level people in that organization who are responsible for this care far more about payback than collecting for the needy. They have their unnecessary, shit jobs and they get a paycheck no matter what. They're not at the top of the organization, so it's not on their head when the numbers are down (but oh boy, it is now) and they're not on the street with the kettles so they don't have to hear the angry comments and see the stern looks. They thought they were being slick, but slick failed them miserably.

I'd be very surprised if that department didn't get a memo about this- a "strongly worded" memo, and were told that anything they intend publish on their page must first be reviewed by upper management, with the implicit threat of "heads will roll" if they fail to comply.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
"Giving back" to me implies some degree of reciprocity. [It] implies one owes something to somebody. Since I earned everything I have by the sweat of my own brow, nobody ever gave me anything, there's no giving back involved.

I find the term obnoxious.

Ohhh!!! PREACH ON, BROTHER!!!

for decades I always put something in the SA kettles. Every time I passed one.

It felt really awkward this year just to walk by w/o a look.

but I won't support any organization that is so bigoted they blanketly project that all white people are white supremacists and oppressing people of color.

"Bigoted" may be a bad description because so many charities are just tax free businesses pulling in big dollars. SA may not be as bigoted as they are just trying to put people in a "feel guilty" mood w false claims directly to people's faces. I encourage everyone I know to not accept false claims like that w/o a strong verbal response. Being polite in response is entirely optional.

After the Salvation Army's wokeness got known here, the kettles went away. It was really nice not hearing that irritating bell ringing for the rest of the time before Christmas.

The only kettle I've seen this year was st Sam's Club in North Little Rock.

The only one I saw here in temple was in front of the Hobby Lobby…i intentional walked around to the other entrance.

On the way out I watched, no one put in money…no one.