CreateDebate


Debate Info

4
12
yes No
Debate Score:16
Arguments:22
Total Votes:17
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 yes (4)
 
 No (10)

Debate Creator

TheThinker(1850) pic



Are rich people obligated to donate to charity?

yes

Side Score: 4
VS.

No

Side Score: 12
0 points

In countries, such as the United States, in which there is not a fair distribution of the wealth, it is understood that there will be a need for charities to take the place government. This explains the number of extremely rich people who act as philanthropists who support charities, scientific research and other worthy causes each year. They take up the slack of unfair government. Before the development of twentieth century socialism, the moral obligation of the nobility to be generous to those around them was known noblesse oblige (nobility obligates).

Side: yes
Jace(4528) Disputed
1 point

What constitutes a fair distribution? And from whence comes this obligation anyways?

Side: No
2 points

You are not obligated to rob from the rich to give to the poor, so you don't have to do it. Envy is rottenness of the bones.

Side: No
2 points

Do moral obligations exist? Also, are we obliged to do what's morally right? (assuming things can be morally right) For now I'll answer no to the original question, because I don't see how moral obligations can exist. I'll wait for somebody to make an argument for their existence.

Side: No
1 point

Morality wasn't mentioned in the original question. One can be obliged in ways which are not moral in nature, such as having a legal or social obligation.

Side: No
1 point

No , they're certainly not .

The term " charity " is intersesting , I was always thought that to give charitably no one should know of your actions as it was merely an egotistical gesture to give this way ; interesting what Jesus says about giving charitably ; it's very well stated

Matthew 6:1-4 ESV / 324

“Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. "

Side: No
TzarPepe(297) Clarified
1 point

Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

Side: yes
Dermot(3644) Clarified
1 point

What are you trying to achieve here ? ................................

Side: yes
1 point

Hello T:

No......................................................

excon

Side: No

Obligated? Do you mean forced?

I would say Rich people should be generous with their money when helpng those who can not help themselves, but obligated to do so? No!

If they refuse to help those who can't help themselves, I would call them cheap, but by no way should it be forced on them. When we start penalizing those who succede in life, there will be fewer people willing to take all the risks, do all the hard work it took in getting rich while creating jobs.

Side: No
1 point

No, they certainly aren't. But I think regardless they will be judged for it. Will they care? Probably not.

Side: No
1 point

No one is obligated to donate to charity. That's why it is called charity.

Rich people ARE however obligated to pay taxes to contribute to the well being of the society they live in. Because their workers and service folks and public safety employees, and infrastructure, and even the military that keeps foreign powers from conquering or robbing them, all need enough resources to survive.

Side: No
1 point

I think the rich should donate money to charity but they don't have to, it's their money.

Side: No