Hypocrite?

They don't have to read it - or even keep it!

I think bags is right - give to some other charity, having explained why you have done so.

I filled a shoebox for Christmas last year for the third world and was a bit concerned to discover that also included in my box would be a bible - I do not like the idea of the gift having strings attached. I knew it was a christian charity and had no problem with that (they do wonderful work); but the inclusion of a bible felt too evangelical/indocrinating to me.

If as you say the invitation said if you wanted to donate then an opportunity would be available. You didn't want to donate to that charity so what is the problem?

Just realised that sounds nosy, and perhaps you don't want to say. Sorry.

So what did you do in the end, absent?

To be completely fair, the wording on the invitation was politely expressed along the lines of if you would like to give to charity there will be a collection on the evening of the party. I don't think there was any presumption about giving a present; just a statement that he would prefer a donation to charity if you wanted to. I have no problem with the whole thing in principle; it was just unfortunate that the charity didn't meet with my approval and it was not named in advance.

bags as usual you have put into words exactly what I was trying to post but so much better.

Standing up for your principles is not making a mountain out of a molehill. Any good friends should understand and accept that. There is far too much pressure to do what is superficially polite without any consideration for principle, in my opinion.

Quite apart from anything else, it's presumptive, not to say a bit rude, to expect an automatic present anyway.

A better approach, I feel, is to say that IF anyone wants to give a present, p,ease could they make a donation to THEIR favourite charity. Then everyone is happy and no untoward pressure is put on anyone either.

It sounds a real rave absent. I can't imagine being asked for money like that actually at the party.
A thoughtful host would have put the suggestion on the invitation, and I would have been annoyed as much by the lack of consideration as the lack of choice of charity.
Come on! Are you going to tell us the name of the offending charity

You could have given a token amount and the rest of what you would have given to a charity of your choice. It seems more than a bit naff to do what your host did especially as seems to be the case, in such a public way that other people knew what everyone had given. Not a hypocrisy, though. Stupidity?

I hadn't thought of that. I might have done if I had known what the charity would be in advance, but when it was just anoiunced at the party itself, I didn't have much opportunity to think about it. Even so, would my refusal to fund a charity that is dear to my host's heart but a willingness to donate to one of my choosing look like criticism of him and arrogance on my part? Furthermore, I don't see him very often so either I would have had to discuss this rather uncomfortable matter actually at the party (bit party pooper), probably in front of other guests (many of whom I did not know) or telephoned or e-mailed later. Somehow that looks a bit like making a storm out of a molehill.

I agree with what others have said. Why would you give to something you disapprove of. Give to a charity you approve of and tell him discreetly later.

I would tell him I disapproved of that charity and why, and tell him which other I had chosen, if any.

I would have given it to a charity I approved of. And told him I had done so. (Nicely of course)

I agree with when. Give it to a charity that you believe in.

I would have kept quiet and given to a charity I felt ok about absent.