More of my family's repugnant display of faith

[Handprint]

He sent out mass messages on fb. He didn't even have to pay taxes.

Then, like a moron, he waved it around on the internet making ridiculous, disgusting remarks about how good god is TO HIM.

Meanwhile, in Haiti-

http://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/a...645286.php

FUCK THAT IDIOT. Acknowledgement of goodness DENIED.

Charities have to pay taxes?

yes the money might make less people eat dirt cookies.

Okay lets suppose he was in it just for the profit. Even that, even with that motive 75% of what he collected (earned) went to Haiti so less people have to eat dirt cookies.

---

Why would you want to blow up someone that gave 75% of the money he earned to people in a earthquake ravaged area of the world?

A thief robs a dozen stores. Upon being caught, the magistrate learns that the thief gave the property he didn't want to charity, leaving only 25% to himself.

His argument is that "he did more good than harm."

Why does the judge not agree?

This reminds me of Robin Hood for some reason...


Also I see the wording in here that says "the thief gave the property he didn't want to charity", this is not analogous to the situation in this thread for money is money, and property can come in varying conditions and qualities of construction. Whereas even a rumpled paper bill is still worth a dollar.

To answer your question of Why the judge does not agree, it's because stealing is stealing and stealing is against the law. By this logic Robin Hood would go to jail.

Then again I think Robin Hood gave all his money to the poor, but where did he get the money to buy his tights!?

Was the cousin allowed under the Charity to take 25% of the profit? Did he inform the people he asked for money that he would receive 25%?


Conclusion: Robin Hood is evil.