Study finds less religious states give less to charity

[cbayer]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2012-08-20/religion-charity-study/57159760/1?csp=34news


By Jay Lindsay, Associated Press Updated 36m ago

BOSTON – A new study on the generosity of Americans suggests that states with the least religious residents are also the stingiest about giving money to charity.


The study released Monday by the Chronicle of Philanthropy found that residents in states where religious participation is higher than the rest of the nation, particularly in the South, gave the greatest percentage of their discretionary income to charity.

The Northeast, with lower religious participation, was the least generous to charities, with the six New England states filling the last six slots among the 50 states.

The study also found that patterns of charitable giving are colored in political reds and blues.
Of the 10 least generous states, nine voted for Democrat Barack Obama for president in the last election. By contrast, of the 10 most generous states, eight voted for Republican John McCain.

more at link

[rrneck]

1. Could it be that blue stayes have

a more effective social safety net?

[cbayer]

4. No, but they have more religious groups and institutions.

That's the key, I think.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

30. exactly. These jerks include the moneys given to support that whole

church thingie. You take that out of the equation, and I bet that they are far more stingier than the rational thinking parts of the USA.

[cbayer]

32. I don't know if they are or aren't, but agree that this "study" does not

support it's conclusion.

[KarenS]

2. hmmm,,,, I see,,,,

this study is based on IRS data,,,,,
and charity means donations to churches too.

so I can make another conclusion based on these statements as well.

More Republicans claim charitable giving on their tax forms.

[cbayer]

5. Why would anyone not claim charitable giving on their tax form?

[KarenS]

8. I'm not saying they shouldn't but thestudy is claiming that church tithing is charitable giving,,,,

yes, legally. I personally don't consider donating money to a church 'charity'.

IMO that skews the numbers and allows others to make a faulty conclusion.
Tithing to a church is not the same as donating to a local food bank.

[cbayer]

10. On looking at this more closely, I think you are right.

While IRS records could separate out the charitable giving directly to a church and compare it to other kinds of charitable giving, it didn't appear to do that.

So I would assume this correlation is due to tithing or general church giving and little else.

[stopbush]

31. Bingo. Over 30% of charitable giving in the USA goes to religious institutions.

That $ comes from the religious.

It would be interesting to see what the statistics are if one removed religious contributions from the mix. I'd assume things would even out between those who give and those who "don't."

[Adsos Letter]

19. Good catch. n/t

[eqfan592]

20. Cuz tax forms suck?

Lol, I'll be honest here, and maybe this makes me a little stupid, but I've never claimed any of my charitable donations on my taxes, including the time and miles I wracked up when I was a Red Cross volunteer on a disaster action team. Just seemed like a pain in the butt to me. I really, REALLY hate doing taxes! Now my wife takes care of them, putting her accounting degree to work for both of us.

[cbayer]

21. I used to keep track of all that for itemized deductions, but gave it all up.

You are right, itemized deductions are a PITA.

And that brings up another flaw in this story. There is no way to collect data on charitable contributions from those that don't itemize if you rely solely on tax forms.

Overall, this whole *study* is looking pretty worthless.

[eqfan592]

23. Yeah, sounds like they did a study looking for a specific conclusion...

...so they conducted it using a methodology that would only produce said conclusion.

[cbayer]

25. Agree and it looks very transparent but will get lots of unquestioning press.

[eqfan592]

28. "Unquestioning press." Man do I ever hate unquestioning press.

And we have waaaaaaaaay to much of it here in the US.

[SecularMotion]

3. Of course this is the case if you consider tithing as donating to charity.

And it's no surprise that Utah would be considered the "most generous" because the Mormon church has some of the most strict requirements for tithing. These figures should be adjusted according to the percent of tithes that actually go to charity.

I found this excerpt interesting

Alan Wolfe, a political science professor at Boston College, said it's wrong to link a state's religious makeup with its generosity. People in less religious states are giving in a different way by being more willing to pay higher taxes so the government can equitably distribute superior benefits, Wolfe said. And the distribution is based purely on need, rather than religious affiliation or other variables, said Wolfe, also head of the college's Boisi Center for Religion and Public Life.

[cbayer]

11. I agree. I think the entire correlation is due to tithing.

[Bluenorthwest]

6. Is this part of the Mitt 'tithe to my church is charity to the community' tap dance?

Because tithe is not charity. I note most of this article wants to ignore tax rates, actual social safety nets and all actual results of actions in favor of conflating tithe with tax and charity.
To be clear, people 'tithe' to churches which use the funds to buy a jet for their preacher or a new Rolls. Calling that charity is in short a lie. The 'charity' is used to build huge Mega Churches and cathedrals, to pay huge salaries and legal fees for the errant 'saints'. 'Ministers' with homes like palaces, built on what some feel good about calling 'charity'.
Meanwhile the religious states constantly tear the social safety net to shreds....

[cbayer]

7. These are really good points and the article doesn't speak to them at all.

I am going to see if I can find an article with more detail and/or substance.

But if this primarily reflects tithing, then I agree with you that the findings are pretty useless.

[Bluenorthwest]

12. They are more than useless they are harmful lies.

"Religious States are more generous because they buy things for their church while they let the least among them starve, Non religious States are less generous because the preacher does not get a bite, they give it all to those in need without demanding they convert or anything!'
It is the results, not the propaganda that matters. The fruit on the tree names the tree.
Jesus said 'let your yes mean yes' and in my view, claiming generosity to the poor when the largess goes to the well off preacher man is not honest. Calling a tithe 'charity' is dishonest. Tithe is commanded by those faiths, it is not optional. The church I was raised in said charity was that which was given in addition to tithe, and not given to the church, for giving to the church is giving to one's self, as we make up the church. How is it charity to say 'let's build me a better sanctuary to sing in'? It's not. Not in any way.

[cbayer]

13. I can't find anything additional on this story that separates out

tithing in general from other kinds of giving or makes any attempt to break down what proportion of tithing is used for things other than maintenance of the church.

Without that kind of data, I agree that the findings are pretty worthless.

[MineralMan]

16. Would it not be better to look for such things before posting?

Bias is often easy enough to find in such "surveys." A good clue is when the survey doesn't include any details on its criteria. No details, no demonstration of a bias-free study. Once a biased survey is posted, it's being left up to those who read it to go and ferret out the bias. That seems unfair to me.

[cbayer]

17. I am perfectly capable of analyzing a story

And often post for discussion, not because I agree or think it is a good study.

Part of our job here is to challenge and debunk. This story is all over the Internet and many will take it at face value.

[eqfan592]

27. Yeah, the comments section of the story is truth enough in that.

This story and associated study, while completely full of it, is still damaging none-the-less, as it reinforces a certain stereotype while playing to the natural sense of superiority some feel when looking at those who are less religious than they are. I fear we will be seeing these "facts" sighted regularly by those interested in showing how "selfish" we atheists are. Just can't wait for FOX to pick up on it. Ugh...

[MineralMan]

9. Like Romney, most people consider donations to the religion

Last edited Mon Aug 20, 2012, 11:20 AM - Edit history (1)

they follow to be charitable donations, so that probably explains the difference. If donations only to secular charities were measured the difference would probably disappear or be reversed. That's my opinion, anyhow.

[trotsky]

14. Makes for better headlines, though...

to push the prejudiced idea that non-believers are less caring. Sad that I had to read it on DU.

[MineralMan]

15. It's a common theme in the Religion Group, as you know.

Whether done innocently or intentionally, the problem comes from the regularity of religion-biased surveys, etc. Such surveys are easy to find, so they get posted here. It's all grist for the mill, it seems. All that work wasted...it's a shame. And for what? Attempting to discredit non-believers? Silliness.

[rug]

18. Well, FFRF is a non-profit but I wouldn;t call it a charity.

I find it amusing that those who are quickest to take umbrage at the notion that atheism is organized are the quickest to take umbrage that those who belong to religious organizations use those same organizations to donate to charities.

[LiberalFighter]

22. The study is flawed

It is based on what is itemized. If one uses the standard deduction then it would not be reported. About 2/3 of filers take the standard deduction.

[KarenS]

24. Good point,,,,

I hadn't considered that either.

A lot of "studies" have an agenda that someone is seeking to support.
They make the results fit that agenda or they don't publish the study.

[cbayer]

26. Agree. I think the whole thing is deeply flawed, but it's going to be widely

distributed and swallowed whole.

[KarenS]

35. well,,,, the good news is that some of us now

have thought about it/talked about it and can challenge anyone talking like that headline is true.

Thanks for posting the article.

[pinto]

33. "About 2/3 of filers take the standard deduction." Good point.

As with many studies, on any issue, the details of the study itself reflect on the results.

[Zen Democrat]

29. This is what, according to income tax deductions?

The religious states have all these tithers giving 10% to their churches and this is considered "charity." I give to several charities and I've never claimed a dime of what I give as an income tax deduction. I think it's tacky to profit from charitable giving. That's just me.

[SDjack]

34. The study is flawed. I know many people, and myself,

who give cash to needy individuals but take no tax deductions. There is no way to measure that flow of cash.