Comments about ‘How much did President Obama donate to his local church?’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, April 16 2014 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Turtles Run
Houston, TX

Ken wrote: Can you imagine if Mitt Romney had given so little a percentage at any point?

Too bad we will not know since he refused to release his tax filings.

t-ville, UT

Desnews 2012 - Mitt shouldn't have to disclose his charitable giving and tax information because it's a private matter.

Desnews 2014 - Does Obama contribute enough to his local church? Let's check his taxes...

The dissonance of this paper is becoming more and more palpable. How about a bit of consistency? Why does it matter if a president has a local church to begin with?

Here, UT

@Liberal Ted;

It isn't 'his church', it is man-made and a money making enterprise (as are the majority of other churches out there).

No, 100% of your tithes and offerings do not go to the poor and needy (not even close). You can look at the financials your church publishes in England and Canada to verify that if you're actually interested.

Salt Lake City, UT

As with looking at Mitt Romney's charitable donations, that is not need-to-know, it is voyeurism.

Coach Biff
Lehi, UT

I sit here smiling because I have first hand knowledge of the money my church donates and the good it does locally because I have been in leadership positions which oversaw donations and a very close relative works for one of the church's many entities. To tell you that you are so wrong would be such an understatement that it would seem pointless. The LDS church is in a lose/lose situation from such folks. They would be accused of tooting their own horn if they disclosed their donations. So the church takes the high road and doesn't say anything, because it's none of these nattering nabob's business, and just accepts their groundless criticism.

Houston, TX

The word "charity" means love. The salvation of individuals is the highest expression of love. Therefore, I am very comfortable that tithing is a worthy means toward that lofty end. The LDS church owns many buildings (paid and maintained through tithing funds), and those buildings are used for ordinances that are essential for salvation. They are expensive because they are built to last. Our Savior definitely approves.

Mcallen, TX

@Furry1993- your info is flawed.

@OtisBDriftwood- with our country declining, eighty percent increase to the debt, and over half our people on their knees for a variety of welfare,--Anti Obama is expected of those who love the country.

Just Me
Richfield, UT

@ JoeBlow

It's called Fast Offerings. Those funds are used to feed the hungry, pay their utility bills and help with health care.

It' a separate donation outside the 10%.

If the government ran like the church you bash, things would be so much better.

Just Sayin'

Durham, NC

Good gosh this has gotten silly where just about every discussion devolves into either anti-Obama or anti-religion debates. Neither are as good, nor as bad as most make both out to be.

And no - the church doesn't disclose its financials, no - Romney doesn't need to disclose anything, and no - Obama isn't the anti-Christ, and yes, the economy crashed nearly 2 years before he was elected.

Lets get a little sanity back to these discussions.

Federal Way, WA

I dont see the relevance of how much Obama donated to a church that he rarely attends. He doesnt proclaim to be "religious" and certainly is not inclined to support Religious Freedom over a more secular view. With that being the case, what would you expect?

Also,as someone else said, do you really think that donattions to a church are more honorable that donating to a relief agency?

Kind of a tacky article to focus on his church donations. Sounds like a little bit of "holier than thou" empahsis.

Mcallen, TX

A test question for you:

" the economy crashed nearly 2 years before he was elected."

A. since than, the economy has worsened
B. since than, the economy has progressively improved
C. the economy hasn't worsened, or improved
D. if Obama can't strengthen the economy, nobody could have

American Fork, UT

He's giving quite a bit. At least he's not wasting it all on religion.

Provo, UT

This is tabloid journalism.

DN, please try to retain some dignity.

Salt Lake City, UT

It is nice to see that Obama has given to charity. And technically it might be accurate to claim the amount given is 12% of his income. However, He does not pay rent. Vacations at taxpayer expense. Of the 6 years he has been in office 1/2 year has been spent on the golf course. His family vacation to Hawaii last year, though Obama and friends picked up the tab for the rental, cost the taxpayers over $3 million.

So many of the American people unemployed and struggling financially and we have a President that Parties like its 1999.

I don't see how anyone can argue to defend this kind of spending. It is not political, it is just not right.

Henderson, NV

Oh but, Outside-View, Mr. Obama DOES claim to be a Christian, and his brothers' keeper, and yet these numbers reflect otherwise.

Then, consider how in 2011 Mr. Obama chose to make charitable contributions of 22% of gross income; a far, far greater amount than he'd ever before given. Of course Barack knew that he would likely be running against the very charitable Mitt Romney, who historically gives at least 10% of his income to his church, not to mention other charities.

Lastly, the Obamas' returns show that the couple made very few charitable contributions, sometimes less than 1 percent of taxable income, until Mr. Obama began his run for the White House. In 2004, before Mr. Obama entered the Senate, he and his wife gave $2,500 to charity, just 1.2 percent of their taxable income. The next year, the donations jumped to $77,315, or nearly 5 percent of their taxable income. Their charitable giving only went up when it looked like he was campaigning for the presidential office. (from a NY Times article dated March 26, 2008 by Leslie Wayne)

Far East USA, SC

"If the government ran like the church you bash, things would be so much better."

Care to point out where you feel I "bashed" the LDS church? I actually agree that if all charity
organizations ran like the LDS charitable arm, things would be run very good. And I stated exactly that in my post.

"It' a separate donation outside the 10%."

Actually, it sounds as if you have substantiated my post. Which took exception to ones claim that " 100% of my donation will actually go to those in need?"

Phil Allred
New Rochelle, NY

Really, Deseret News, is there a need to publish how much he donates to his church. We all know his religious tendencies when he said that when people get bitter they cling to guns and religion. Nothing he has done since is inconsistent with that statement.

Virginia Beach, VA

"How much did President Obama donate to his local church?"

What's it matter?

salt lake city, UT

Don't get all worked up by the most outspoken posters on the blog. This country has 20% of the population that refuses to objectively educate themselves on the issues. Unfortunaltely 80% of them blog here.

Riverton Cougar
Riverton, UT

"pointing out what has been done with Obama since taking office, and not even mentioning GWB's contribution to that escalation of the debt is a double standard."

Here's a fact:

In March 2012, having only been in office for little more than 3 years, the amount of debt Obama has added matched the amount Bush added in all his 8 years as president. It took Obama 3 years and 2 months to match Bush's 8 years of debt-adding, yet liberals want to make it sound like Obama's spending is nothing compared to Bush's spending.

Here's some math: It took 8 years for Bush to add as much debt as Obama did in 3.16666 years. If Obama's rate of debt increase were to remain constant, that means that by the time he leaves office he would have added about 2.5 TIMES as much debt as Bush did. Bush added about 5 trillion; at Obama's rate he will have added about 13 trillion. Ouch!

"This country has 20% of the population that refuses to objectively educate themselves on the issues."

That can't be right. If the number were that low, Obama wouldn't have been re-elected. Obama thrives on low-information voters.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments