If you make your home in Texas, you can’t escape them. They are everywhere these days, hurriedly promising bounty to all within range of their voices. Even their printed matter is filled with pledges of greater public funding. The Democrat contenders for the Oval Office will GIVE everyone healthcare. They will GIVE everyone a meaningful education. They will GIVE those who are about to lose their homes, protection. They will GIVE those on the border and across the nation security. They will GIVE the illegal alien his or her unearned path to citizenship.
The only thing wrong with all these wonderful gifts is they are not the property of political office seekers to pass out as if they were door prizes. What they want to give away is not theirs. It is a redistribution of every hard working American’s wealth.
The reality is, those who march on the secular left, while parroting compassion and reaching out to the poor and underserved with grandiose monetary rewards, rarely give anything from their own personal treasuries. They speak of change and hope, but what they really mean is they hope to give their followers your change…along with the folding money from your wallets.
Where do people find their values? For me, I guess it was spending many years wearing the Eagle, Globe and Anchor of the Marine Corps. It was my family. It was obtaining college degrees after I learned the difference between education and indoctrination. It was dedicating my post-military years to laboring in the non-profit sector. But, most of all, those important life molding values came from the church.
Coming from such a background also makes me to look upon political candidates with great suspicion and causes me to develop particular distain for those who trumpet a socialist agenda. These same politicos also anger me because they treat the public purse as if it were their own private piggy bank.
I wonder why a political party that is blatant in socialistic pronouncements can’t be honest about the party name. Those who advocate socialism should be proud of their heritage and not hide it behind the title of Democrat. Because their agenda is liberal and left, why do they hide this fact and label themselves Progressive? Most of all, when they claim to be loving and giving and caring about those who are less fortunate, why do they not display these feelings with the generous giving of themselves and their bounty?
This final thought actually brings me to the heart of this commentary. When defined by the left, conservatives, particularly religious conservatives are always portrayed as uncaring people who lack generosity. These observations are far from factual. According to Dr. Arthur C. Brooks of Syracuse University, religious conservatives are among the most caring and giving people in America.
In his book, “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatives” Dr. Brooks finds that “religious conservatives are far more charitable than secular liberals, and that those who support the idea that government should redistribute income are among the least likely to dig into their own wallets to help others.”
The professor, who is politically independent, claims that religious people gave about three and a half times as much each year as secular people. Their giving rate was $2,210 for each $642 given by those who never attended a religious service. Even when giving to their church or temple was subtracted, and giving to religion based charitable organizations were set aside, Brooks found that the religious conservatives still gave $88 a year more to non religious charities than secular people. His research also noted that when viewing the giving trends of the twenty-five most generous states, the greatest charitable totals came from 24 states, which we would call Red, or conservative.
What else did Brooks find? When he started his research, the professor of economics assumed those who favor a larger role for government and a greater redistribution of wealth would also be the most generous to charities. He found just the opposite was true. He says, “In essence, for many Americans, political opinions are a substitute for personal checks.”
He found that conservative and religious people are more likely than liberal donors to give to charities such as colleges and hospitals. His data shows that religious people, on average give 54% more per year than secular people to human welfare charities.
When he looked at religious working poor, he found that in households of equivalent income, those who had jobs gave three times more than the households of welfare recipients. He further noted that the very act of receiving welfare seemed to make the recipients more liberal – “and hence less likely to give.”
Other findings included registered Republicans were seven percentage points higher in charitable giving than registered Democrats.
Conservative Americans were more likely to give blood each year and did so more often. If liberals and moderates gave at the same level, our blood supply would almost double.
Though most of the data in his research dates back several years, up to 2004, most observers find the various liberal vs. conservative giving trends remain relevant today. For example young liberal Americans, those under 30, are perhaps the most vocally dissatisfied political body in the country. They are also one of the least generous groups noted by the study. The young secular liberals belong to one-third fewer organizations in their communities. They are 12% less likely to give to charities and one third less likely to give blood. Young liberals were also significantly less likely than young conservatives to express a willingness to make sacrifices for their loved ones.
People who live in conservative states volunteer more than people who live in liberal states. Data from 2003 revealed that in the top conservative states people were 51% more likely to volunteer than in the bottom five liberal states. The conservatives also volunteered an average of 12% more hours. They were twice as likely to volunteer for religious organizations and more than twice as likely to volunteer their time to help the poor. “Can it be”, says Brooks, “that charitable givers are the most tolerant people in America, expressing warm feelings toward every minority group in the land – including union members, feminists, and homosexuals?” How can this be, “if these charitable givers are also disproportionately right-wing?”
About the only statement of defense liberals can offer would be that religious conservatives have more money to use for charitable purposes. This argument falls short of the mark when collected data reveals that secular liberal households have incomes that average 6% higher than their religious conservative counterparts.
The final word from Dr. Brooks should dispel forever the myth that those who practice conservative politics care little for their fellow Americans. He says, “There is not one measurably significant way I have ever found in which religious people are not more charitable than nonreligious people. The fact is if it weren’t for religious people in your community, even the PTA would shut down.”