A hip-hop artist donated 200,000 dollars to “No Kid Hungry” and the charity rejected the money. What are your thoughts on this?

“and they reject contributions from people who don’t share the same values as the charity.”

“The Brooklyn rapper had evaded jail time on previous charges, including child sex offences in 2015.”

I am going to have to side with the charity here…

Personally, I don’t understand the logic. Hypothetically if a convicted murderer, who happened to be a millionaire, decided to donate all of his money to various charities, why is that wrong?

Just like a politician taking money from corporate “donors” will make him beholden to those moneyed interests, at least in the eyes of any potential voters, a charity taking money from seemingly unrepentant criminals will taint the charity’s image.
If you want to stay practical, it will mean that other potential donors will refrain from giving money to that particular charity when they see that the charity takes money from child rapists, as that indicates that the charity is only in it for the money.

I am strongly convinced that the best way to donate money is always anonymously, with only a few exceptions to that basic stipulation.

MIT gave back Jeffrey Epstein’s donations,

Tiger Woods is a philanderer, but not a sex offender or a racist. Mel Gibson is a racist.

My thoughts-They are discriminating. They should be forced to take the money.

Their charity, their choice.

A pity it seems. A young criminal who wanted to help kids was rejected. He is still human isn’t he? Possibly still capable of remorse and a genuine sentiment to help some kids so they don’t end up like him. And the money was not gained through illegal activities. I think.

I think if it was my charity, I’d ask to speak with him before accepting or rejecting his donation. I’m thinking a ½ hour discussion at most. I would explain to him my side of the issue…the issue of having a criminal and child sex offender associated with the charity. It might be that he is in the process of trying to turn his life around and rejecting his donation out of hand would be a blow to that effort. It might be that he was only looking for fodder to use as a defense the next time he gets into trouble with the law. I’d want to see where he stood before making that choice. If he refused to meet, came with a wheelbarrow full of attitude, or was some other way a complete ass, I’d reject it. If he came willing to talk and listen and was genuinely trying to improve, I’d accept it.

He who pays the piper calls the tune. There is the danger of the charity altering its behavior in order to receive more such donations. By not accepting the money they remove the temptation.

Does the NAACP have an obligation to accept a gift from the KKK?

Does B’nai Brith have an obligation to accept a contribution from the White Power Storm Trooper group?

Should NARAL accept a a contribution from DARE?

Would Planned Parenthood be open to contributions from ‘Protect the Unborn’?

@josie: Are you serious?

The individual in question has a history of doing things solely to make himself look good, not because of any altruistic desire to improve the lives of others.

I can understand @seawulf575‘s approach, but it gets down to if you are trying to atone or demonstrate remorse, then you give the money anonymously, after you have explained yourself to the recipient.