Why do Liberals donate to charity less than Conservatives?

Because they want to force others to donate via taxes.

This New York Times piece by Nicholas Kristof* ("Bleeding Heart Tightwads") explains it nicely, and it includes blood donations, not just monetary ones the author wanted to disprove that it was true and found confirmation. Very sad:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristo...

He normalizes the comparison for things like religious contributions and income disparity (and Conservatives still come out ahead), but here is the most interesting part:

"Conservatives also appear to be more generous than liberals in nonfinancial ways. People in red states are considerably more likely to volunteer for good causes, and conservatives give blood more often. If liberals and moderates gave blood as often as conservatives, Mr. Brooks said, the American blood supply would increase by 45 percent"

* In case you doubt his credentials, he was Harvard and Oxford educated (you can click on his bi-line for a full biography). "Nicholas D. Kristof writes op-ed columns that appear twice each week in The New York Times. A two-time Pulitzer Prize winner, he previously was associate managing editor of The Times, responsible for the Sunday Times."

They think paying taxes is giving to charity. So they already gave.

By the way these studies have been done over and over again and they always come out the same. Conservatives give a lot more than liberals in both time and money.

Those who say well its churches do not understand how churches work. All the money taken in is given away except to pay the bills. Only the money given away is counted.

Where do all these volunteers by the millions come from during disasters.? They come from local churches from across the country and the travel housing and board of these church members are paid for by these same churches.

This misconception that liberals give is just that a misconception. That is why Obama, a liberal, says we need to volunteer more.

We are the most giving nation in the world. The average Conservative Christian who earns less than $50,000 a year gives about $3,000 a year to charity and several hours a week doing work for others.

n done over and over again and they always come out the same. Conservatives give a lot more than liberals in both time and money.

Those who say well its churches do not understand how churches work. All the money taken in is given away except to pay the bills. Only the money given away is counted.

Where do all these volunteers by the millions come from during disasters.? They come from local churches from across the country and the travel housing and board of these church members are paid for by these same churches.

That's not true! Liberals are more than willing to donate somebody else's money to charity!

And just to add to the point..

Conservatives give more money.

Conservatives donate more time.

Conservatives even donate more blood.

And for the record, the McCain have donated MILLIONS ( including every penny from sale of his biography ).

The fundamental right to privacy, guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution, protects against unwarranted invasions of privacy by federal or state entities, or arms thereof. As early as in Roe v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113 (1973), the U. S. Supreme Court acknowledged that the doctor-patient relationship is one which evokes constitutional rights of privacy. But even that right is not absolute and must be weighed against the state or federal interest at stake. For example, in Whalen v. Roe, 429 U.S. 589 (1977), a group of physicians joined patients in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a New York statute that required physicians to report to state authorities the identities of patients receiving Schedule II drugs (controlled substances). The physicians alleged that such information was protected by the doctor-patient confidentiality, while the patients alleged that such disclosure was an invasion of their constitutional right to privacy. The Supreme Court did not disagree with the lower court’s finding that “the intimate nature of a patient’s concern about his bodily ills and the medication he takes … are protected by the constitutional right to privacy.” However, the high court concluded (after balancing the state’s interests) that “Requiring such disclosures to representatives of the State having responsibility for the health of the community, does not automatically amount to an impermissible invasion of privacy.” - "Although studies suggest a link between mental illnesses and violence, the contribution of people with mental illnesses to overall rates of violence is small, and further, the magnitude of the relationship is greatly exaggerated in the minds of the general population (Institute of Medicine, 2006)." - "…the vast majority of people who are violent do not suffer from mental illnesses (American Psychiatric Association, 1994)." - "The absolute risk of violence among the mentally ill as a group is very small. . . only a small proportion of the violence in our society can be attributed to persons who are mentally ill (Mulvey, 1994)." -"People with psychiatric disabilities are far more likely to be victims than perpetrators of violent crime (Appleby, et al., 2001). People with severe mental illnesses, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or psychosis, are 2 ½ times more likely to be attacked, raped or mugged than the general population (Hiday, et al.,1999)." The second admendment gives citizens the right to defend themselves and you want to disarm a lot of victims of their rights for a few news clip stories. It's a scam to disarm anybody and everybody slowly. The definition of insanity is repeating the same thing repeatedly with the same results, prohibation of a product that have customers who don't care it's banned in mass never works. Obama has been accused twice of gun smuggling once with project gunrunner fast & furious in Mexico and Bengazi by foreignors which both countries have restrictive gun rights. Obama hails from Chicago where law enforcement is giving up or becoming violent themselves. Chicago has the most gun restrictions then everywhere but second admendment supporters are nuts for knowing the history of the yellow badge of shame.

Excellent post. Yeah, that's a good question...oh I guess they really don't care about the needy now do they?

Liberals are elitists....these political hacks like Obama, Clinton, Kerry, Gore, etc. They just want to keep the poor, poor and make themselves richer doing it. Dish out welfare to them instead of teaching them how to work for themselves.

Barack "millhouse" Obama and Joe Biden aka "the former dumbest man in the senate".

They are the gruesome twosome.

Because democrats know they that taxes can support everyone.

1. You're making an awful assumption. Mind you, there are also some conservatives that are against religion.

2. Precisely the opposite.

3. Instead of demonizing a group you don't like, I suggest you learn where they are coming from, so that you can still disagree with them, but with civility and knowledge.

Oh, and how much did McCain donate?

You can make stats say what you want, when it comes to helping people who need it the proof is in the pudding, 50 million people who have no health care, screw em say the conservatives, and of coarse taxes, taxes are what we raise to run the country better and give some people who may need it a helping hand, mention raising taxe to a neo-con and prepare to get your head ripped off!!

Bottom line, if the tax levels were where they should be, there would be no need for charity!!! A little girl needs and operation and her parents do not have insurance, she should not have to beg for charity, it should be covered through the government with taxpayer money.

For the same reason why when someone is choking at a restaurant, liberals yell,"Call somebody!" and a conservative clamly gives the heimlich maneuver.

It's very true, here is your source, about as good as it gets, it's from real clear politics:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/...