Posted on 11/21/2006 6:00:09 PM PST by Dubya
Then they shouldn't have accepted the gift of a free house in Memphis and let someone who wanted to actually live in Memphis have it instead.
I know, I'm talking about the moral aspect. If these two misrepresented themselves, that's wrong & probably actionable... but in general, there would be nothing morally wrong with Katrina victims selling a house they were given.
If these two misrepresented themselves, that's wrong & probably actionable... but in general, there would be nothing morally wrong with Katrina victims selling a house they were given.
__________________
There most certainly is something morally wrong, when it's obvious the thug couple knew the intention was for them to live in the house and they knew they had no intentions of living in the house.
So in the future, don't give?
Is that your viewpoint?
Not that I disagree, just trying to clarify your position.
The church made a mistake alot of people do. They gave the people a fish and did not teach them how to fish. They should have helped them by providing housing not giving them housing. Any honest person would not have taken the free home. They would have said No. But if you could provide housing till I get back on my feet I will much appreciate it and will pay you back. Have them sign on the dotted line. I will repeat. No honest person would accept the gift.
Oooh...they ran the stop sign! LOL
ping
From this thread:
Church members said they feel their generosity was abused by scam artists. They are no longer even sure that the couple were left homeless by Katrina or that they were a couple at all.I know, "They came in humble like they really needed a new start, and our hearts went out to them," said Jean Phillips, a real estate agent and member of the Temple of Deliverance Church of God in Christ. "They actually begged for the home."
Learn to read.
Not at all. The title of this thread is "2 Unrepentant About Selling Katrina Gift", as though that's the problem. What they did wrong was not selling the house, it was (seemingly) soliciting it under false pretenses in the first place.
Big mistake. If they'd asked the recipients to at least put in something, they might've gotten worthy recipients.
if people don't have to work to get something,
it won't be appreciated,
no matter how good the Churches 'intentions' were.
I couldn't agree more. I started a housing prison ministry teaching accountabilitly but a local church thought I was being greedy by charging rent so they started one with free rent. CAN'T COMPETE AGAINST FREE RENT AND CHEAP GRACE. I'm closing down.
If they did lie the Church members have some of the responsibility.
Two thoughts come to mind. "be wise as serpents" and "silver and gold have I none but what I have......"
The revenge is the capital gains tax on a $88,000 profit! Their cost basis was zero, so the entire selling price will be taxed.
Could you come over and dice the onions for the stuffing. I like them diced very, very fine.
If they did lie the Church members have some of the responsibility. They should have verified before spending that much of the congregation's money.
Concur. But how much?
But either way, my point is that this was a selfless act.
You've made more points than that. (a) I haven't proved they lied and (b) the Church bears more responsibility than the couple.
And in that I am sure God is pleased.
Concur.
LOL, that's great, because God could only sic the devil on you. We're talking here about the IRS...
Concur, and it didn't have to be much either.
In the consulting business, a lot of people look for free work with a hazy promise of future business. Ask for a little. If they'll do that, then they're usually telling the truth about future cooperation. If not, you know they're blowing smoke up your arse.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.