2 unrepentant about selling Katrina gift

[nanandjim]

This is definitely a case of what is legally right vs. what is morally right.

This couple has earned a lifetime of bad karma.

I totally agree; and I am a definite believer in what goes around comes around. It's people like this who ruin it for people who are truly in need.

ETA: I feel that the home was given in good faith. You then expect that the family will become part of the community and give back to that community, not sell the home, make a profit and move elsewhere. It's call win-win. It didn't turn out in this case.

 

[windovervocalcords]

I agree - was thinking the same thing - they wanted to give someone a house - they did - but the couple wanted to move back to NO - so they sold the house, made a little profit - what's the big deal???

I wonder where this house was for $75,000......... do they even sell houses that cheap anymore???

This sounds like the mistake that Christians (and those of us in other faith traditions or just good people) make sometimes in charity. Expecting gratitude or a payoff for generosity--(the couple sticking around the community and attending their Church, for example).

True generosity is giving for the delight in offering, expecting nothing in return.

What seems hurt in this case is pride. The Church has pride in its giving or they would not feel ripped off. They could have sympathetic joy, that the couple made a profit, which means the merit the Church goers have in their giving was multiplied.

What goes around, comes around. The Church is missing an opportunity to increase their prosperity by regretting the gift and making a distinction between the "worthy and the unworthy."

The potential benefit to this Church, and its congregation, by this generosity lesson is profound.

We are coming up to Thanksgiving. One of my favorites holidays, an opportunity to be grateful to everyone and every life experience.

Everything we recieve is based ultimately on the kindness of someone else.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

May you all create the causes and conditions to increase merit and virtue so that all may be truly happy and free of suffering.

 

[Karole28]

I totally agree; and I am a definite believer in what goes around comes around. It's people like this who ruin it for people who are truly in need.

ETA: I feel that the home was given in good faith. You then expect that the family will become part of the community and give back to that community, not sell the home, make a profit and move elsewhere. It's call win-win. It didn't turn out in this case.

Amen Nan. Now this good church is going to have to consider the legal ramifications before they do another good deed. Because a couple of people are taking advantage of their gracious spirit.

This "homeless" woman actually stated that she "didn't like" the neighborhood this house was located in.

For anyone to think that the church was looking for gratitude or some kind of twisted sense of superiority over this, truly need to reflect on what's in their own hearts.

The church made a statement that they're not going to stop giving to those in need, they'll just have to get a lawyer to preside over all of the legal agreements that will need to be signed/notarized and sworn over, the next time.

Here's a link to an interview with these fine folks:
Click

 

[windovervocalcords]

By recollecting on generosity, the aim is to develop a mindset in which giving freely is a natural part of what we do.We give what we can and without thought of gain in return.

In fact, we learn to go through life assuming that giving will be a natural part of how we interact with others - to live is to give, as it were.

Not only do we give freely but we rejoice in giving. We delight in relinquishing what we have. Since we have to give it all up when we die anyway, it is good practice for dying peacefully.

Generosity, therefore, is a pathway to happiness and joy.
Those who give becomes ever more intent on generosity, the preference is for non-greed, they act in conformity with loving-kindness, they are fearless. They have great happiness and gladness....They are headed for a happy destiny.

 

[Karole28]

WOD, yeah ok, whatever. Did you watch the video?

 

[birdlover]

The begged for a house to live in, it sounds like, then never lived in it. Even saying they didn't even like the area.
Even if it was legal, they took advantage of the church's generosity, which isn't cool.

I agree. If the couple didn't like the area, they should have declined the gift and request the house go to a family that would appreciate it.
I see their behaviour and attitude in all this as a moral issue, IMO.

 

[windovervocalcords]

I agree. If the couple didn't like the area, they should have declined the gift and request the house go to a family that would appreciate it.
I see their behaviour and attitude in all this as a moral issue, IMO.

Why are moral issues always about someone else's poor morality?

I thought the point of all moral teaching is to train one's own mind/heart, speech and behavior.

If this is true, then the focus could be on helping the congregation to not feel like victims in this situation, but to help them delight in their pure motivation in giving. They can delight that they understand and are able to practice ethics.

They could pray they are always able to practice generosity without bias. And to trust that all experiences are grist for the mill.

All we can do is focus on what we have control over--ourselves. We can focus on what is wholly positive and we can pray that if it is true that the couple had every intention of stealing--that they quickly wake up and benefit from practicing ethical conduct.

There is more than one way to look at this experience and benefit.

One is to focus on the "wrongs" and be angry, another is to use it as an opportunity to grow more radiant in positive qualities.

 

[Karole28]

Why are moral issues always about someone else's poor morality?

I thought the point of all moral teaching is to train one's own mind/heart, speech and behavior.

Well, you just made the argument to throw out all child molestation laws.
(taken to this logical conclusion)

 

[windovervocalcords]

Well, you just made the argument to throw out all child molestation laws.
(taken to this logical conclusion)

birdlover and I are talking about morality, ethics, not law, not crime prevention.

 

[Karole28]

birdlover and I are talking about morality, ethics, not law, not crime prevention.

Oh. I thought you were hedging around the "who are we to judge others' morality" point.

 

[windovervocalcords]

Oh. I thought you were hedging around the "who are we to judge others' morality" point.

I am talking about what leads to happiness and prosperity and the growth opportunity this congregation has at this time.

Happiness depends on the strengthening of skillful qualities and the weakening of unskillful qualities within, and not ultimately on conditions outside of ourselves.

Generosity opens the heart and loosens the often unconscious constriction of narrow self-interest. Practicing generosity leads to happiness because of this opening and because it helps lessen feelings of isolation and fosters feelings of connection - in this case to the whole human family and to the Earth.

When the qualities of open-heartedness and connection are nurtured within us, we realize a more profound and reliable sense of well-being and joy.

Having concern for others more than ourselves leads to happiness. Rejoicing in virtue leads to an absence of jealousy and an increased ability to benefit others. Practicing generosity, without concern for gain or the "worthiness" of the reciever, leads to increased prosperity and wealth.

 

[Karole28]

I am talking about what leads to happiness and prosperity.

Having concern for others more than oneself leads to happiness. Rejoicing in virtue leads to an absence of jealousy and an increased ability to benefit others. Practicing generosity, without concern for gain or the "worthiness" of the reciever, leads to increased prosperity and wealth.

Oh, I guess when you wrote: "Why are moral issues always about someone else's poor morality?", I got confused as to where you were going.


============================================

Your judging of the church's motives also seem a tad odd, in my opinion. I don't understand the animosity for a group of people extending a gift to 1 of 50 families who were needy enough to qualify for it, and then being bemused by the fact that the couple insulted the "area it was located in" and profited from their generosity.


But hey, that's just me.

 

[JBean]

This is indeed an interesting situation.

As a home builder, we now prohibit investors from buying into our tracts and then flipping them.
So, we have all buyers sign that they will not sell for *advertiser censored* amount of time and if they do, we must participate in the profits.

The church should have done something similar. Otherwise, if there were no strings attached to the gift, it was theirs to do with what they wanted.
I think they are schmucks, but they have the right to be schmucks.

Warning....Devil's advocate
Do any of you think there is a "time limit" that they should have lived in the house before they could sell it? Do you think they should have lived there forever? 2 years? When could they sell?

 

[windovervocalcords]

Oh, I guess when you wrote: "Why are moral issues always about someone else's poor morality?", I got confused as to where you were going.


============================================

Your judging of the church's motives also seem a tad odd, in my opinion. I don't understand the animosity for a group of people extending a gift to 1 of 50 families who were needy enough to qualify for it, and then being bemused by the fact that the couple insulted the "area it was located in" and profited from their generosity.


But hey, that's just me.

I have no animosity at all for this generous Church. None at all. I am not judging them. I am pointing out a missed opportunity--that's all.

They do not have to feel like victims. They can feel more empowered by turning the situation around on its head and going deeper in their understanding of generosity and compassion.

They can increase the radiance of their positive qualities.

 

[Karole28]

This is indeed an interesting situation.

As a home builder, we now prohibit investors from buying into our tracts and then flipping them.
So, we have all buyers sign that they will not sell for *advertiser censored* amount of time and if they do, we must participate in the profits.

Good point indeed. I wonder if there is a home owner's association in this neighborhood? And, if so, if they had any caveats that would bear on this.

The church should have done something similar. Otherwise, if there were no strings attached to the gift, it was theirs to do with what they wanted.
I think they are schumcks, but they have the right to be schmucks.

Well, I think the church has determined that they dropped the ball, legally speaking. I just think it's a shame that a gift should have to have an attorney's involvement on any level.

You know, family given a trampoline, child is hurt on trampoline, giver is now liable. It's just a sad sad state.

Warning....Devil's advocate
Do any of you think there is a "time limit" that they should have lived in the house before they could sell it? Do you think they should have lived there forever? 2 years? When could they sell?

I think the church was thinking that the community was welcoming these "destitute" people and they would respond in kind.

You make another good point, how long would be long enough? Again, it'd be interesting to know if the HOA (if it exists here) would have a say on that.

It would've been nice to see the couple live there long enough to save their own money to buy a place in N.O. and then pass it on to another needy family (determined by the church).

 

[Karole28]

They do not have to feel like victims. They can feel more empowered by turning the situation around on its head and going deeper in their understanding of generosity and compassion.

They can increase the radiance of their positive qualities.

Ok, well if you study karma, you know that doing things for the sake of "increasing the radiance of their positive qualities" doesn't win you karma points.

It's doing for the sake of others.

And, now hundreds of people who were involved in this, or who've heard and read about it, will think twice before helping someone out.

 

[windovervocalcords]

Ok, well if you study karma, you know that doing things for the sake of "increasing the radiance of their positive qualities" doesn't win you karma points.

It's doing for the sake of others.

And, now hundreds of people who were involved in this, or who've heard and read about it, will think twice before helping someone out.

Only those who give conditionally will reconsider their giving.

 

[Karole28]

Only those who give conditionally will reconsider their giving.

Or those who start ligitimately doubting the neediness of the receivers.

 

[JBean]

Good point indeed. I wonder if there is a home owner's association in this neighborhood? And, if so, if they had any caveats that would bear on this.



Well, I think the church has determined that they dropped the ball, legally speaking. I just think it's a shame that a gift should have to have an attorney's involvement on any level.

You know, family given a trampoline, child is hurt on trampoline, giver is now liable. It's just a sad sad state.



I think the church was thinking that the community was welcoming these "destitute" people and they would respond in kind.

You make another good point, how long would be long enough? Again, it'd be interesting to know if the HOA (if it exists here) would have a say on that.

It would've been nice to see the couple live there long enough to save their own money to buy a place in N.O. and then pass it on to another needy family (determined by the church).

I agree down the line Karole. I think these people could have and should have handled this whole thing differently. We can always hope the people will respond in kind or "pay it forward" but we all also know it just doesn't always work that way.
I know that I already am very careful about donating money and find myself doing a lot of homework before I let up a dime.

 

[windovervocalcords]

Or those who start ligitimately doubting the neediness of the receivers.

The Church thoroughly screened all the applicants with extensive interviewing.

If it turns out there is room for improvement in the Church's screening process for future candidates of charity, the Church has benefited again.