Conservatism – The ideology that keeps on giving

Here’s a story by Nicholas Kristof that confirms what myself and other conservatives have been saying for years:  conservatives are more generous than liberals. The article analyzes quantitative research conducted by Arthur Brooks, presented in his book ‘Who Really Cares.’  Before you liberals try and discredit the research, please note:  Arthur Brooks is a liberal.  His results disproved his political beliefs:

“When I started doing research on charity, I expected to find that political liberals — who, I believed, genuinely cared more about others than conservatives did — would turn out to be the most privately charitable people. So when my early findings led me to the opposite conclusion, I assumed I had made some sort of technical error. I re-ran analyses. I got new data. Nothing worked. In the end, I had no option but to change my views.”

Here are a few of the highlights from the article:

• Conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals.
• Red states are the most likely to give to nonprofits, while Northeastern states are least likely to do so.
• If donations to all religious organizations are excluded, liberals give slightly more to charity than conservatives do.
• If measuring by the percentage of income given, conservatives are more generous than liberals even to secular causes.
• If liberals and moderates gave blood as often as conservatives, the American blood supply would increase by 45 percent.

Liberals dominate issues such as poverty and international aide…well, at least rhetorically.  They successfully paint conservatives as selfish, tight-fisted, capitalist pigs.  However, this statistical evidence dispels these two notions:  liberals are not nearly as charitable as they want you to think, and conservatives are not cold-hearted in the slightest.

Liberals are bleeding hearts; unfortunately their wallets are not as generous as their mouths. They will likely continue to dominate the rhetoric on the issue, keeping it in their platform and as part of their talking points.  Why?  Because conservatives give out of the abundance of their hearts.  We do not give to score political points or for PR.  We give because we care.   We do not give in order to receive, we give because it is right.  Liberals talk about government benevolence and increasing social programs, but conservatives give their own money–not someone else’s.

How about you, liberals?  Time to put your money where your mouths are.

6th-Grader Penalized for Mentioning Jesus in a Christmas Poem

“The best Christmas ever is when everyone is there. It is when everyone is laughing here and there. That is the Christmas I want to share. Christmas is about Jesus’ birth. About peace on Earth. This is what Christmas is about. It is when He lay in a manger. And the three wise men come to see. That’s what it means to me.”

This poem, entitled, “A Great Christmas,” was penned by eleven-year-old Andrew White for an assignment given to his 6th-grade class.  Offended?  Maybe you should be…at least that’s the opinion of Andrew’s teacher, Latasha Atkins.

From the Liberty Counsel:

Hattiesburg, MS – Eleven-year-old Andrew White wrote a poem about Christmas but received a deduction for writing about Jesus. His teacher, Latasha Atkins, insisted that mentioning Jesus was not allowed and asked him to write a new poem.

Andrew and his classmates were assigned a creative expression paper for the Winter Writer’s Board as part of his sixth-grade language class at Thames Elementary School in the Hattiesburg Public School District. He could choose among three topics, and he chose to write a poem about “what Christmas means to me.” After turning in his rough draft, Atkins circled the word “Jesus” and deducted one point from his grade. The teacher explained to Andrew that he was not allowed to mention Jesus at school and would need to rewrite the poem for his final draft without using the word “Jesus.” He attempted to rewrite the paper according to the teacher’s instructions.

Andrew’s parents discovered what happened because Andrew was late turning in the final draft and was notified by the teacher. Atkins sent an email to Andrew’s mother explaining the situation. In her email, she specifically stated: “He and another child did a poem about Christ. I know we can’t discuss these type [sic] of things in school so I asked the two of them to do another poem of their choice.” Andrew’s parents encouraged him to use his original poem as his final draft.

…Principal Carrie Hornsby sided with Andrew and his parents, changing his grade to a 100 and conceding that there was nothing improper in using Jesus’ name. Hornsby had each teacher send out a letter for all the parents to read regarding religious expression at school. The letter clearly explains that religious expression is permitted under federal guidelines. However, despite promises that these papers would be posted on the Winter Writer’s Board for all to see, Atkins has refused to post any of the papers from the class.

Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law commented: “Some educators need education that the story of Christmas is not banned from public schools. I am relieved that the situation was resolved by the principal but horrified that a sixth-grader was told by his teacher, ‘we can’t discuss these types of things in school.’ I don’t understand why some people don’t get it. Christmas is a state and federal holiday. Schools are closed to celebrate this holiday. Obviously, Christmas is constitutional.”

Yet another great example of how the whole “separation of church and state” fabrication is so easily taken out of context and used against Christians (and their eleven-year-old kids).  Go get ‘em Andrew!