hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,201
|
Post by hoya9797 on Apr 17, 2019 9:19:40 GMT -5
When I was 18, I didn't care. And, catholicism was completely irrelevant to my experience at GU. It may as well not have existed.
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,641
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Apr 17, 2019 9:56:26 GMT -5
Like many others, I didn’t attend GU because it was a Catholic school. I went because of the strong academic programs and opportunity to be in DC.
|
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,478 
|
Post by Elvado on Apr 17, 2019 10:24:10 GMT -5
When I was 18, I didn't care. And, catholicism was completely irrelevant to my experience at GU. It may as well not have existed. Fair enough. Thanks. |
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,478
|
Post by Elvado on Apr 17, 2019 10:26:06 GMT -5
Like many others, I didn’t attend GU because it was a Catholic school. I went because of the strong academic programs and opportunity to be in DC. Understood. |
|
sead43
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 796
|
Post by sead43 on Oct 30, 2019 13:08:29 GMT -5
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,730
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Oct 30, 2019 14:00:04 GMT -5
This makes perfect sense inside the Beltway but there are a lot of alumni out there who simply don't want to give their funds to a project such as this for all sorts of reasons. That having been said, it's a better choice than fees (which introduce all sorts of liabilities upon a non-profit) but it further assumes an obligation by the University proper when one did not exist. (Short answer: this is still squarely on the Jesuits, but Georgetown has assumed their expiation.) |
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,478
|
Post by Elvado on Oct 30, 2019 16:01:18 GMT -5
If this initiative is funded through designated, targeted giving by people who wish to do it-no harm no foul.
I will direct my money elsewhere like the soccer program but there is no harm in creating the vehicle here .
|
|
|
|
Post by HoyaRejuveNation85 on Nov 1, 2019 11:33:55 GMT -5
If it compels prospective donors to restrict their gifts at all levels, that's a big negative from a University's perspective as unrestricted funds are very important to meeting current priorities.
I agree with DFW that assuming the liability of the Society of Jesus when it was a principal, but not sole, beneficiary of some of the proceeds of funds of the slave sale is a questionable decision. Creating a permanent obligation is as well, especially if it affects future donors' behavior as Elvado suggests it might with him.
|
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,478
|
Post by Elvado on Nov 1, 2019 12:05:20 GMT -5
If it compels prospective donors to restrict their gifts at all levels, that's a big negative from a University's perspective as unrestricted funds are very important to meeting current priorities. I agree with DFW that assuming the liability of the Society of Jesus when it was a principal, but not sole, beneficiary of some of the proceeds of funds of the slave sale is a questionable decision. Creating a permanent obligation is as well, especially if it affects future donors' behavior as Elvado suggests it might with him. Just for clarity’s sake, my targeting of giving pre-exists this debate and is in no way a reaction to this plan. I think a vehicle crafted by the University that permits this issue to be raised via targeted donations by like minded people is actually quite a good idea. |
|
|
|
Post by HoyaRejuveNation85 on Nov 1, 2019 12:27:57 GMT -5
Got it, Elvado. I misunderstood your post as to you. It doesn't change the underlying point though, that the University, like any other charitable institution, prefers unrestricted gifts and therefore should be careful not to encourage people to restrict annual gifts. They do, however, prefer a gift to no gift.
|
|
