Televangelist seeks donations for $54M private jet

[KnighttimeJoe]

The vast majority of churches in this country use their tax-emept status to do good work in their communities. Where I hunt in Tennessee, you see a church every 2 miles and most of them are extremely modest. You don't see ridiculous arenas with a jet in the parking lot.

The biggest problem I have with the TV religion people is how they prey on poor people. "SEND US YOUR MONEY and your credit card debt will go away!!!" "Send us your money and God will cure your cancer!!!" That's bullshit.

 

[ucflee]

Cue chemie to say this sucks

 

[NinjaKnight]

The vast majority of churches in this country use their tax-emept status to do good work in their communities. Where I hunt in Tennessee, you see a church every 2 miles and most of them are extremely modest. You don't see ridiculous arenas with a jet in the parking lot.

Idk, when I lived in GA is was pretty nuts, it was a pretty small town but we had at least 10 sprawling "megachurches" and dozens more multi million dollar very nice churches. The problem is we really don't know, since it's cocpletely unregulated.

Most studies suggests only about 2% of church donations actually goes to help people in need, while the 98% is spent on salaries, mortgage, programs, admin, denominational fees, etc.

Contrast this with the 92% from the Red Cross.

Source:
https://galileounchained.com/2012/05/14/are-churches-more-like-charities-or-country-clubs/

 

[UCFBS]

I should have posted this earlier, right at 14:14 ...



Although this is still my favorite segment of all-time (the very first one), starting at 5:08.



"I'm going to go even further ... I'm going to make it any sin beginning with the letter 'B' ..."

 

[The Branch]

Idk, when I lived in GA is was pretty nuts, it was a pretty small town but we had at least 10 sprawling "megachurches" and dozens more multi million dollar very nice churches. The problem is we really don't know, since it's cocpletely unregulated.

Most studies suggests only about 2% of church donations actually goes to help people in need, while the 98% is spent on salaries, mortgage, programs, admin, denominational fees, etc.

Contrast this with the 92% from the Red Cross.

Source:
https://galileounchained.com/2012/05/14/are-churches-more-like-charities-or-country-clubs/

As with all non-profits, you have to be careful with the stat that says "how much of the money goes to people in need".

That statistic is extremely misleading.

 

[NinjaKnight]

As with all non-profits, you have to be careful with the stat that says "how much of the money goes to people in need".

That statistic is extremely misleading.

How so?

 

[UCFWayne]

knew id get the church hating people in this thread

 

[NinjaKnight]

knew id get the church hating people in this thread

Knew you'd resort to ad hominems because you can't refute the central point. Who is attacking churches?

 

[bqknight]

knew id get the church hating people in this thread

Who is hating on churches?

 

[UCFKnight85]

As with all non-profits, you have to be careful with the stat that says "how much of the money goes to people in need".

That statistic is extremely misleading.

There is also the fact that is completely lost on non-religious people, often those who are openly hostile to religion, that the Church itself (the physical building) is often as valuable to people in need as anything else. My Church has people who go to Mass every Sunday who are in pain, suffering, have experienced loss, etc and find spiritual strength by attending Mass and being part of the community.

And I can vouch that most everyone that we know at our Church goes out and does their own charity work in the community and donates to many various causes. Our friends work at the St Vincent DePaul society and spend every Sunday afternoon going around to do personal outreach to people living in poverty.

That said, I don't belong to a "super church" and would never, ever donate to some idiot asking for a private jet.

 

[1ofTheseKnights]

Yep, people LOVE to hate on the Catholic Church or even mainline protestants, but in absolute & relative terms the amount of "good" done is staggering. Oversight and accountability pay off vs. "private jet" and fancy clothed "pastors" with huge ass private residencii. All you ever hear about from our lovely "media" friends is: "PEDOPHILES PEDOPHILES PEDOPHILES" and "SEE FRANCIS IS A COMMIE WHO LIKES THE GHEYS!"

Typically Catholic Charities etc crush it in ratings on sites like charitynavigator Diocese of St. Pete for example: https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=16146

 

[UCF11and1]

There are undoubtedly poor people out there listening to them and making these donations. It's absolutely scummy.

Same thing as asking poor people to buy the $40 hats

 

[NinjaKnight]

Yep, people LOVE to hate on the Catholic Church or even mainline protestants, but in absolute & relative terms the amount of "good" done is staggering. Oversight and accountability pay off vs. "private jet" and fancy clothed "pastors" with huge ass private residencii. All you ever hear about from our lovely "media" friends is: "PEDOPHILES PEDOPHILES PEDOPHILES" and "SEE FRANCIS IS A COMMIE WHO LIKES THE GHEYS!"

Typically Catholic Charities etc crush it in ratings on sites like charitynavigator Diocese of St. Pete for example: https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=16146

You do realize you quoted a specific charity, not the general "donations fund" for churches. I'm talking about the usual tithes to churches, only about 2% gets distributed to those in need. Your post missed the entire point or was blatantly misleading on purpose.

That charity does have a very good score though, I use charity navigator to ensure my donations are actually spent on those in need and I'd have no problems donating to them.

 

[UCFBS]

Who is hating on churches?

To some people, Religion = Churches = Christians. They are incapable of separating the political religious right wing from real Christian values or even small Churches that focus on charity. They will blanket stereotype and that view is immutable in their eyes.

 

[NinjaKnight]

To some people, Religion = Churches = Christians. They are incapable of separating the political religious right wing from real Christian values or even small Churches that focus on charity. They will blanket stereotype and that view is immutable in their eyes.

As usual you spend entirely too many words to answer this question. The correct answer is:

no one.

@UCFWayne still waiting on a response.

 

[1ofTheseKnights]

You do realize you quoted a specific charity, not the general "donations fund" for churches. I'm talking about the usual tithes to churches, only about 2% gets distributed to those in need. Your post missed the entire point or was blatantly misleading on purpose.

That charity does have a very good score though, I use charity navigator to ensure my donations are actually spent on those in need and I'd have no problems donating to them.

Idk what you're arguing here. 2% of tithes what? You could argue it'd be 0% absent the Church. I can only speak from a Catholic perspective, yes each parish pays its bills first etc, then pays whatever to the Diocese, there is a ton of oversight and internal control. I have no idea but I suspect you can't look up charity navigator for organizations tethered to Jessue Duplantis, Joel Osteens, and non denoms like my personal fav. I used to drive by in Orlando, Rethink Life (which sounds like a suicide cult) https://www.rethinklife.com

 

[UCFKnight85]

Idk what you're arguing here. 2% of tithes what? You could argue it'd be 0% absent the Church. I can only speak from a Catholic perspective, yes each parish pays its bills first etc, then pays whatever to the Diocese, there is a ton of oversight and internal control. I have no idea but I suspect you can't look up charity navigator for organizations tethered to Jessue Duplantis, Joel Osteens, and non denoms like my personal fav. I used to drive by in Orlando, Rethink Life (which sounds like a suicide cult) https://www.rethinklife.com

lol I love these "new age nondenom" churches that are really just Baptist churches with hip websites and student music bands. There's one over where I live too. I get that they're trying to attract millennials but it just comes off as total cheeseball to me. I much prefer the ritual and quiet reflection of Mass.

 

[NinjaKnight]

Idk what you're arguing here. 2% of tithes what? You could argue it'd be 0% absent the Church. I can only speak from a Catholic perspective, yes each parish pays its bills first etc, then pays whatever to the Diocese, there is a ton of oversight and internal control. I have no idea but I suspect you can't look up charity navigator for organizations tethered to Jessue Duplantis, Joel Osteens, and non denoms like my personal fav. I used to drive by in Orlando, Rethink Life (which sounds like a suicide cult) https://www.rethinklife.com

I'm talking about normal protestant churches. They take in tithes and offerings, and pay for their building, pastor and staff salaries and all that other stuff. Only about 2% of the tithes actually go to helping people in need. What you linked sounds like a separate charity that is not a part of the church funds. People donate directly to this charity and they use their money responsibly to help people. You are right about Joel Osteens and other churches all the way down to the modest ones, they don't list on Charity Navigator because they really aren't charities, yes they do some good but the vast majority of their funds go to the upkeep of their buildings and staff payrolls. I'm not saying their is anything wrong with the, but don't act like you are giving to charity by tithing to your local church, unless its like what bt described (which is obviously the exception).

 

[UCFBS]

Idk what you're arguing here. 2% of tithes what? You could argue it'd be 0% absent the Church. I can only speak from a Catholic perspective, yes each parish pays its bills first etc, then pays whatever to the Diocese, there is a ton of oversight and internal control. I have no idea but I suspect you can't look up charity navigator for organizations tethered to Jessue Duplantis, Joel Osteens, and non denoms like my personal fav. I used to drive by in Orlando, Rethink Life (which sounds like a suicide cult) https://www.rethinklife.com

Some Churches even refuse to take money from the public for its operations, and put 100% of that to charity, and has their membership pay 10% (tithe) of their income for actual operations. Those are the churches that impress me most.

Again, blanket stereotyping by the typical, Progressive media-spewing, American. It gets really old when they blanket stereotype to the point they just end up alienating anyone with a modicum of spirituality.

lol I love these "new age nondenom" churches that are really just Baptist churches with hip websites and student music bands. There's one over where I live too. I get that they're trying to attract millennials but it just comes off as total cheeseball to me. I much prefer the ritual and quiet reflection of Mass.

Hey man, if it works for them, and they are true Christians with a mission, and the church reflects that, I have no problem with it. More power to them.

Especially if they can save on facilities and more goes to charity.

 

[The Branch]

How so?

Person A has a small charity that raises $100,000 and donates $90,000 to the abused woman's shelter. They donated 90% of their funds.

Person B has a larger charity that raised $1,000,000 and donates $800,000 to the abused woman's shelter. They donated 80% of their funds.

If you are the abused woman's shelter, where the funds are needed for the good works, which charity do you prefer? Some would argue that if everybody just gave to Person A, it would work out better. First problem is it just doesn't happen like that. 2nd problem with that is Person A's percentage will drop the larger they become and the more money they are expected to raise.

Measuring a non-profit by the percentage of their money that goes to the charities is a flawed measurement and unfortunately is weighted too heavily in people's decision whether to donate or not.

 

[NinjaKnight]

Person A has a small charity that raises $100,000 and donates $90,000 to the abused woman's shelter. They donated 90% of their funds.

Person B has a larger charity that raised $1,000,000 and donates $800,000 to the abused woman's shelter. They donated 80% of their funds.

If you are the abused woman's shelter, where the funds are needed for the good works, which charity do you prefer? Some would argue that if everybody just gave to Person A, it would work out better. First problem is it just doesn't happen like that. 2nd problem with that is Person A's percentage will drop the larger they become and the more money they are expected to raise.

Measuring a non-profit by the percentage of their money that goes to the charities is a flawed measurement and unfortunately is weighted too heavily in people's decision whether to donate or not.

Sounds like people should just donate to Person A. Your reasoning is incredibly flawed. "It just doesn't happen like that" is 100% bullshit. Also for churches we aren't talking about 90% vs 80% going to people in need. We are talking 2%. That is also bullshit if you claim you are a charity.

Still waiting @UCFWayne

 

[The Branch]

Sounds like people should just donate to Person A. Your reasoning is incredibly flawed. "It just doesn't happen like that" is 100% bullshit. Also for churches we aren't talking about 90% vs 80% going to people in need. We are talking 2%. That is also bullshit if you claim you are a charity.

Still waiting @UCFWayne

Hey ... I'm not going to defend 2%. But my reasoning is not incredibly flawed ... and their are plenty of articles about it ... Your "people should just donate to Person A" was exactly what I thought you would say ... because it is what everyone says ... and it's just uninformed because that is not how the world works.

 

[NinjaKnight]

Hey ... I'm not going to defend 2%. But my reasoning is not incredibly flawed ... and their are plenty of articles about it ... Your "people should just donate to Person A" was exactly what I thought you would say ... because it is what everyone says ... and it's just uninformed because that is not how the world works.

I agree if you are saying people are illogical when it comes to finances. But I try to be logical about it, which is why I use charity navigator when picking charities. I don't want to donate to one that has a very high admin fee or pays their CEO millions of dollars, I want one that gives most of it to the people that need it in an efficient manner.

 

[sk8knight]

I'm talking about normal protestant churches. They take in tithes and offerings, and pay for their building, pastor and staff salaries and all that other stuff. Only about 2% of the tithes actually go to helping people in need. What you linked sounds like a separate charity that is not a part of the church funds. People donate directly to this charity and they use their money responsibly to help people. You are right about Joel Osteens and other churches all the way down to the modest ones, they don't list on Charity Navigator because they really aren't charities, yes they do some good but the vast majority of their funds go to the upkeep of their buildings and staff payrolls. I'm not saying their is anything wrong with the, but don't act like you are giving to charity by tithing to your local church, unless its like what bt described (which is obviously the exception).

You missed 85's essential point that every member of the congregation is served by that church. You're defining "in need" by your worldly definition, but every member of the church is "in need" of spiritual and community aspects that the church provides. Therefore, 100% of your tithes goes to those "in need."

Put another way, the church provides a value system and accountability to that system, a network of people of like values that provide opportunities, support, counseling, and a safety net. It provides a place to meet where people can share their burdens of life and their pains, where they can feel connected, where there is a framework of introspection that at least once a week causes you to look at yourself and see how you can be a better person. Churches provide this far better than our government and many secular institutions. I know many people that would be a tax on society if it weren't for their church family and many more that live very productive lives in the working world largely due to the influence of the church's activities and congregation. I would feel very confident in saying that there would be a great many more people that would meet your definition of "in need" if it weren't for the normal activities of churches. That's not even talking about your "2%" of external charity or mission work.

I'm an agnostic so I don't even have a reason to be pro-church (damn, I sound like UCFBS). Except that it is common for people to point out the few places where bad people have abused the power of faith and taken advantage of their congregations and totally ignore the great many places where churches quietly do great work for society and don't go out and trumpet it everywhere.

 

[The Branch]

I agree if you are saying people are illogical when it comes to finances. But I try to be logical about it, which is why I use charity navigator when picking charities. I don't want to donate to one that has a very high admin fee or pays their CEO millions of dollars, I want one that gives most of it to the people that need it in an efficient manner.

I'm not going to disagree with your thought process there. It is solid and pretty much the best information you have at the time. Just keep and eye out from year to year. Small charities that donate 90% of their funds turn into big charites that don't.

 

[UCFBS]

You missed 85's essential point that every member of the congregation is served by that church. You're defining "in need" by your worldly definition, but every member of the church is "in need" of spiritual and community aspects that the church provides. Therefore, 100% of your tithes goes to those "in need."

In other words, Progressives have this attitude ... "Let's use the government's agencies and guns to decide, not the right to freely assemble into a church, that whole pesky 1st Amendment thing. After all, those 'religious right people' are doing it 'to us' with Trump! We need to 'fight back' against them ... all of them!"

I'm an agnostic so I don't even have a reason to be pro-church (damn, I sound like UCFBS).

The horror! Welcome to the 'dark side of the freedom' my friend.

Except that it is common for people to point out the few places where bad people have abused the power of faith and taken advantage of their congregations and totally ignore the great many places where churches quietly do great work for society and don't go out and trumpet it everywhere.

Which is why most people don't believe who is really resettling refugees in this country. The literally refuse to believe it, and other charities.

 

[UCFKnight85]

You missed 85's essential point that every member of the congregation is served by that church. You're defining "in need" by your worldly definition, but every member of the church is "in need" of spiritual and community aspects that the church provides. Therefore, 100% of your tithes goes to those "in need."

Put another way, the church provides a value system and accountability to that system, a network of people of like values that provide opportunities, support, counseling, and a safety net. It provides a place to meet where people can share their burdens of life and their pains, where they can feel connected, where there is a framework of introspection that at least once a week causes you to look at yourself and see how you can be a better person. Churches provide this far better than our government and many secular institutions. I know many people that would be a tax on society if it weren't for their church family and many more that live very productive lives in the working world largely due to the influence of the church's activities and congregation. I would feel very confident in saying that there would be a great many more people that would meet your definition of "in need" if it weren't for the normal activities of churches. That's not even talking about your "2%" of external charity or mission work.

I'm an agnostic so I don't even have a reason to be pro-church (damn, I sound like UCFBS). Except that it is common for people to point out the few places where bad people have abused the power of faith and taken advantage of their congregations and totally ignore the great many places where churches quietly do great work for society and don't go out and trumpet it everywhere.

I assume you're arguing with the person on this board that has been openly hostile towards Christianity in particular during the individual's entire time here.

 

[1ofTheseKnights]

Yeah I can't speak with much knowledge for any protestant church (aside from being fascinated by Episcopal churches becoming Catholic) but for Catholic Charities of (insert place, I used St. Pete for example) they both (the local parish and "Catholic Charities of") roll up to the same place in that they're under the direction of the Diocese and its Bishop. For my money it is comforting to see main charitable arm in any given Diocese is right there on Charity Navigator (even tho in a lot of cases I don't particularly care for charities helping people who broke the law to get here etc.) vs. Pastor Joe Blow's big room with stage, lighting, rock band and coffee hangout area.

 

[UCFBS]

Yeah I can't speak with much knowledge for any protestant church (aside from being fascinated by Episcopal churches becoming Catholic) but for Catholic Charities of (insert place, I used St. Pete for example) they both (the local parish and "Catholic Charities of") roll up to the same place in that they're under the direction of the Diocese and its Bishop. For my money it is comforting to see main charitable arm in any given Diocese is right there on Charity Navigator (even tho in a lot of cases I don't particularly care for charities helping people who broke the law to get here etc.) vs. Pastor Joe Blow's big room with stage, lighting, rock band and coffee hangout area.

Speaking of which ... (major tangent) ... anyone watch Waco earlier this year?

 

[NinjaKnight]

Yeah I can't speak with much knowledge for any protestant church (aside from being fascinated by Episcopal churches becoming Catholic) but for Catholic Charities of (insert place, I used St. Pete for example) they both (the local parish and "Catholic Charities of") roll up to the same place in that they're under the direction of the Diocese and its Bishop. For my money it is comforting to see main charitable arm in any given Diocese is right there on Charity Navigator (even tho in a lot of cases I don't particularly care for charities helping people who broke the law to get here etc.) vs. Pastor Joe Blow's big room with stage, lighting, rock band and coffee hangout area.

Didn't you read sk8's post? They are in a spiritual need for their coffee bar and multi million dollar audio visual system.

 

[NinjaKnight]

I assume you're arguing with the person on this board that has been openly hostile towards Christianity in particular during the individual's entire time here.

So now you are just lying. You are too much of a baby to have a debate without blocking everyone you disagree with and just blatantly lie. What a great Catholic you are, the death threats and cyber stalking of board members wives really would make Jesus proud.

 

[NinjaKnight]

You missed 85's essential point that every member of the congregation is served by that church. You're defining "in need" by your worldly definition, but every member of the church is "in need" of spiritual and community aspects that the church provides. Therefore, 100% of your tithes goes to those "in need."

Put another way, the church provides a value system and accountability to that system, a network of people of like values that provide opportunities, support, counseling, and a safety net. It provides a place to meet where people can share their burdens of life and their pains, where they can feel connected, where there is a framework of introspection that at least once a week causes you to look at yourself and see how you can be a better person. Churches provide this far better than our government and many secular institutions. I know many people that would be a tax on society if it weren't for their church family and many more that live very productive lives in the working world largely due to the influence of the church's activities and congregation. I would feel very confident in saying that there would be a great many more people that would meet your definition of "in need" if it weren't for the normal activities of churches. That's not even talking about your "2%" of external charity or mission work.

I'm an agnostic so I don't even have a reason to be pro-church (damn, I sound like UCFBS). Except that it is common for people to point out the few places where bad people have abused the power of faith and taken advantage of their congregations and totally ignore the great many places where churches quietly do great work for society and don't go out and trumpet it everywhere.

I'm sorry but this is just hogwash. No one has a spiritual need for a pastor to have a multi million dollar jet. No one has a spiritual need for these massive mega churches with entire coffee bars and crazy sound systems. No one has a spiritual need for a church that has dozens of people (or even one) on their pay roll.

I'm not saying these people don't enjoy those things, but don't try to act like donating to a church that used to be a stadium is even remotely the same as donating to a real charity. I can 100% guarantee you that Jesus would be utterly ashamed if he set foot in 99% of the modern day churches out there while we have people literally starving to death.

 

[1ofTheseKnights]

Didn't you read sk8's post? They are in a spiritual need for their coffee bar and multi million dollar audio visual system.

Sipping Starbucks coffee and below average quality musicians belting out Z88.3 jams are actually secrets buried in the Vatican vaults they don't want you to know about.

 

[Crazyhole]

I'm not sure why any non-christian would care about this.

Also not sure why churches are held to account by some people on the % of their money going to charity but not the govt

Also not sure how people can have an opinion on a church that they don't attend or give money to regarding how they expand their outreach and what kind of staff it takes to do so.

Also not sure why the value of giving is held to account when it's a personal decision based on a person's faith. It isn't mandatory. It's based on the idea of giving back. If that means paying my secretary 2 bucks more an hour to be generous or paying for a pastors salary the intent is the same.

 

[UCFWayne]

Who is hating on churches?

the people that regularly hate on religion have shown up in this thread like i knew they would

 

[sk8knight]

I'm not sure why any non-christian would care about this.

Also not sure why churches are held to account by some people on the % of their money going to charity but not the govt

Also not sure how people can have an opinion on a church that they don't attend or give money to regarding how they expand their outreach and what kind of staff it takes to do so.

Also not sure why the value of giving is held to account when it's a personal decision based on a person's faith. It isn't mandatory. It's based on the idea of giving back. If that means paying my secretary 2 bucks more an hour to be generous or paying for a pastors salary the intent is the same.

You know why this is driving Ninja crazy. He doesn’t see the value in religion and church and he sees those entities as stealing from the organizations that he and the government deem as righteous.

He is also implying that people who donate to make churches more comfortable, hip, or attractive to potential members are stupid and those donations are wrongheaded or evil.

Meanwhile, I’m sure he has no problem with people donating to UCFAA so they can build a snazzier training facility or stadium or lazy river or whatever the hell else they will build to try to attract young athletes.

 

[NinjaKnight]

You know why this is driving Ninja crazy. He doesn’t see the value in religion and church and he sees those entities as stealing from the organizations that he and the government deem as righteous.

He is also implying that people who donate to make churches more comfortable, hip, or attractive to potential members are stupid and those donations are wrongheaded or evil.

Meanwhile, I’m sure he has no problem with people donating to UCFAA so they can build a snazzier training facility or stadium or lazy river or whatever the hell else they will build to try to attract young athletes.

Yeah so this is 100% bullshit. I'm just saying that its not a charity. People obviously can donate all they want to whatever cause they want. I will make fun of you for being a massive vibrating hypocrite if you call yourself a Christian and your pastor has a jet airplane, because you absolutely 100% are a hypocrite.

 

[Crazyhole]

You know why this is driving Ninja crazy. He doesn’t see the value in religion and church and he sees those entities as stealing from the organizations that he and the government deem as righteous.

He is also implying that people who donate to make churches more comfortable, hip, or attractive to potential members are stupid and those donations are wrongheaded or evil.

Meanwhile, I’m sure he has no problem with people donating to UCFAA so they can build a snazzier training facility or stadium or lazy river or whatever the hell else they will build to try to attract young athletes.

I can agree with some of that. It seems to me that the holy spirit sells itself and doesn't need fancy buildings or productions. It may help to bring people in to hear the gospel so I'm fine with it but I also hate the idea of a church being a social place for personal interaction. It seems contrived to me. It doesn't seem like a person with an open heart looking for salvation is going to be swayed because of comfortable seating, a coffee bar, or a rock band playing with the hymns. It probably helps get people in the doors and that's good as long as it isn't the sole motivation for going.

As far as the private jet, I think its despicable and undermines pretty much everything that Paul said. A humble and righteous existence probably goes way further as an example than having a jet.

Would this preacher demand being crucified upside down like Peter because he doesn't feel worthy of dying like christ? I doubt it. Obviously he has a lot of pride and is focused on worldly things.

 

[NinjaKnight]

As far as the private jet, I think its despicable and undermines pretty much everything that Paul said. A humble and righteous existence probably goes way further as an example than having a jet.

huh, sounds like exactly what I just said. I take it a step farther, any massive building that has a built in coffee bar and multiple stages would cause Jesus to start flipping tables again. There is zero "spiritual need" for anything more than what they had back in the bible times.

 

[UCFKnight85]

You know why this is driving Ninja crazy. He doesn’t see the value in religion and church and he sees those entities as stealing from the organizations that he and the government deem as righteous.

He is also implying that people who donate to make churches more comfortable, hip, or attractive to potential members are stupid and those donations are wrongheaded or evil.

Meanwhile, I’m sure he has no problem with people donating to UCFAA so they can build a snazzier training facility or stadium or lazy river or whatever the hell else they will build to try to attract young athletes.

The lunatic leftie, atheist socialists in this country think there's no bigger problem with America than 90 year old Betty Sue putting $1 in the collection basket every Sunday at Mass.

That income should be TAXED and redistributed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!