Charity, by definition, is a generous action to aid the less fortunate. Beyond the definition, there is no longer a debate about charity being a compelled act. If the desire to help out those less opportune than oneself isn't sincere, the true meaning of charity is no longer met.
Keeping this in mind, there are many people in life who will give to charity or perform charitable acts for all the wrong reasons. Maybe they are under pressure to convene a certain "quota" within their organization or are seeking the benefits of tax deductions. Both may provide the needy with some relief, but it can be compared to one being married to a rich spouse for their money. Sure, the ability to be provided for is there, but the true feelings that drive the union is null.
I have always found giving to charity or performing charitable acts with sincerity not only creates self-satisfaction and a sense of feeling useful in life, but the amount of time or funds given increases. If a person is convince of the cause they are supporting, they will not only give, but attempt to persuade others to give to it as well. In the end, a chain of goodwill is developed and those truly in need benefit far more from those wanting to give from the heart instead of from the beneficial legal standpoint.
Using one's position within a company or using one's religious beliefs to prey upon for donating to charity, while being unmoral in my opinion, should not be permitted by law. Every time I hear "A good Christian would give to this cause" or "The department wants to be the top donator for this charity" I get ill. My personal opinion is that charity is a personal decision much like voting. Each person must follow their own conscious and not be influenced by others to do something they really have no internal desire to do.
In a recent issue of Fundraising Success magazine, there was a list of nine reasons why people give to charity. They were hope, association, friends, sadness, making a difference, love, dreams, faith and guilt. This list reflects fairly accurately the fine line between truly wanting to participate in charity and being forced into it. A reflection on how society has lost vision of the true meaning of giving.
Charitable organizations are also somewhat at fault here. How many times have you heard the line "For a mere dollar a day you can save the life of someone?" Why not outline the differences the charity is making in the lives of the people being saved and convince the person through genuine data of reaching into their conscious and their hearts to give instead of attempting to shame them into being cheapskates if they can't give a dollar a day?
There was a time, I can remember with shame, immediately after the 9/11 attacks when the company I was working for at that moment sent out a memo directing all the workers to put down how much of their next paycheck they were going to donate to the victims of that tragedy. The game plan of the company was to get an overall dollar figure of what their employees were going to donate and have the company president make a photo opportunity presentation of the check on behalf of the company to the charitable organization that had solicited the funds. The company sent out a sign sheet with everyone's name on it in an attempt to shame everyone into donating on behalf of the company. If you put down a zero value, your name would be seen by everyone else and comments would be made of how "unpatriotic" the individual was for not giving in a time of national tragedy. Needless to say, this peer pressure attempt to raise funds to give the company a "caring" image was met with much resistance and, in the end, the company backed off and permitted people to give privately. But, the incident still is engraved in my mind of how easy it is to be forcibly compelled to participate in charity. Sadly, morals and generosity are never the correct factors to use in these situations.