But, we only want gay marriage....once we get that, then we will come after your churches....

[Skylar]

Such a dumb thread. Beto can not unilaterally over rule the first Amendment.

The first amendment isn't the basis of tax exempt status. The 14th is.

And his proposal would hit the 14th amendment like a bug on a windshield.

 

[MisterBeale]

Such a dumb thread. Beto can not unilaterally over rule the first Amendment.

The first amendment isn't the basis of tax exempt status. The 14th is.

And his proposal would hit the 14th amendment like a bug on a windshield.

No, actually, when it comes to religion, the 1st Amendment is. The 501c(3) laws are only in effect if a religious organization agrees to incorporate, if they do not agree to do so? They can be tax free and preach against miscegenation, homosexuality, pedophilia, slavery, bestiality, corruption, taxation of a man's labor, usury etc. and whatever other archaic loathsome antiquated practices they are so inclined to do. Even polygamy and animal sacrifice. Practicing some of these things OTH? That is another question that the Supreme Court has ruled on several of these issues. . . . The government and popular culture have taken over the sphere of popular mores, ethics and morality.

Bigots will always be free to be bigots, and be tax free. OTH, the state (Ceasar) holds out carrots to preach the politically correct socially acceptable national culture. That was the purpose of the left and the socialist GREAT SOCIETY laws. When we were founded as a nation, it used to be the job of the churches to check corruption, now, the state makes sure that this job is that of the 4th estate.

. . . and if the the 4th estate is corrupt? Well, then I guess our society and culture is just fucked.

I see they have brainwashed you.


https://www.amazon.com/Caesars-Grip-Peter-Kershaw/dp/1892166003?tag=usmb-20

501c3 Church Incorporate and Start a Church

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

[Politicallyinsane]

You that wish to take the rights of your follow Americans away because they're gay are against the very concept of freedom and the very idea of what indivual liberty is. That is the reality and you have no right to say you're for anyones human rights or freedom if you wish to force these people into silence and fearful for their life.

It isn't right and no free people should accept this utter disrespect towards their follow countrymen and women.

 

[Skylar]

Such a dumb thread. Beto can not unilaterally over rule the first Amendment.

The first amendment isn't the basis of tax exempt status. The 14th is.

And his proposal would hit the 14th amendment like a bug on a windshield.

No, actually, when it comes to religion, the 1st Amendment is. The 501c(3) laws are only in effect if a religious organization agrees to incorporate, if they do not agree to do so? They can be tax free and preach against miscegenation, homosexuality, pedophilia, slavery, bestiality, corruption, taxation of a man's labor, usury etc. and whatever other archaic loathsome antiquated practices they are so inclined to do. Even polygamy and animal sacrifice. Practicing some of these things OTH? That is another question that the Supreme Court has ruled on several of these issues. . . . The government and popular culture have taken over the sphere of popular mores, ethics and morality.

Bigots will always be free to be bigots, and be tax free. OTH, the state (Ceasar) holds out carrots to preach the politically correct socially acceptable national culture. That was the purpose of the left and the socialist GREAT SOCIETY laws. When we were founded as a nation, it used to be the job of the churches to check corruption, now, the state makes sure that this job is that of the 4th estate.

. . . and if the the 4th estate is corrupt? Well, then I guess our society and culture is just fucked.

I see they have brainwashed you.


https://www.amazon.com/Caesars-Grip-Peter-Kershaw/dp/1892166003?tag=usmb-20

501c3 Church Incorporate and Start a Church

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The courts haven't found that the taxation of churches is a 1st amendment violation or prohibiting the free excercise thereof. Instead, they've found that the revocation of tax free status is a violation of the 14th amendment due to the same status being offered to similar entities, like non-profits.

Tax exempt status for churches is a tradition and US policy. If government were willing to revoke tax exempt status more broadly, they could revoke it for churches as well.

 

[MisterBeale]

Such a dumb thread. Beto can not unilaterally over rule the first Amendment.

The first amendment isn't the basis of tax exempt status. The 14th is.

And his proposal would hit the 14th amendment like a bug on a windshield.

No, actually, when it comes to religion, the 1st Amendment is. The 501c(3) laws are only in effect if a religious organization agrees to incorporate, if they do not agree to do so? They can be tax free and preach against miscegenation, homosexuality, pedophilia, slavery, bestiality, corruption, taxation of a man's labor, usury etc. and whatever other archaic loathsome antiquated practices they are so inclined to do. Even polygamy and animal sacrifice. Practicing some of these things OTH? That is another question that the Supreme Court has ruled on several of these issues. . . . The government and popular culture have taken over the sphere of popular mores, ethics and morality.

Bigots will always be free to be bigots, and be tax free. OTH, the state (Ceasar) holds out carrots to preach the politically correct socially acceptable national culture. That was the purpose of the left and the socialist GREAT SOCIETY laws. When we were founded as a nation, it used to be the job of the churches to check corruption, now, the state makes sure that this job is that of the 4th estate.

. . . and if the the 4th estate is corrupt? Well, then I guess our society and culture is just fucked.

I see they have brainwashed you.


https://www.amazon.com/Caesars-Grip-Peter-Kershaw/dp/1892166003?tag=usmb-20

501c3 Church Incorporate and Start a Church

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The courts haven't found that the taxation of churches is a 1st amendment violation or prohibiting the free excercise thereof. Instead, they've found that the revocation of tax free status is a violation of the 14th amendment due to the same status being offered to similar entities, like non-profits.

Tax exempt status for churches is a tradition and US policy. If government were willing to revoke tax exempt status more broadly, they could revoke it for churches as well.

Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York - Wikipedia

 

[Skylar]

Such a dumb thread. Beto can not unilaterally over rule the first Amendment.

The first amendment isn't the basis of tax exempt status. The 14th is.

And his proposal would hit the 14th amendment like a bug on a windshield.

No, actually, when it comes to religion, the 1st Amendment is. The 501c(3) laws are only in effect if a religious organization agrees to incorporate, if they do not agree to do so? They can be tax free and preach against miscegenation, homosexuality, pedophilia, slavery, bestiality, corruption, taxation of a man's labor, usury etc. and whatever other archaic loathsome antiquated practices they are so inclined to do. Even polygamy and animal sacrifice. Practicing some of these things OTH? That is another question that the Supreme Court has ruled on several of these issues. . . . The government and popular culture have taken over the sphere of popular mores, ethics and morality.

Bigots will always be free to be bigots, and be tax free. OTH, the state (Ceasar) holds out carrots to preach the politically correct socially acceptable national culture. That was the purpose of the left and the socialist GREAT SOCIETY laws. When we were founded as a nation, it used to be the job of the churches to check corruption, now, the state makes sure that this job is that of the 4th estate.

. . . and if the the 4th estate is corrupt? Well, then I guess our society and culture is just fucked.

I see they have brainwashed you.


https://www.amazon.com/Caesars-Grip-Peter-Kershaw/dp/1892166003?tag=usmb-20

501c3 Church Incorporate and Start a Church

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The courts haven't found that the taxation of churches is a 1st amendment violation or prohibiting the free excercise thereof. Instead, they've found that the revocation of tax free status is a violation of the 14th amendment due to the same status being offered to similar entities, like non-profits.

Tax exempt status for churches is a tradition and US policy. If government were willing to revoke tax exempt status more broadly, they could revoke it for churches as well.

Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York - Wikipedia

A predictable, if poor choice to support your argument. Walz is was an establishment of religion case and had nothing to do with an affirmative right by churches to have tax exempt status.

Walz argued the tax exempt status for religion by the State meant that he indirectly had to make contributions to religious bodies. The court disagreed finding that the grant of a tax exemption was not sponsorship of the organizations.

No where in Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York did the court's find an affirmative right to tax exempt status for religion. Nor did the court find that any such revocation of tax exempt status would violate the 1st amendment.

Keep looking. Just make sure you have a comfortable chair.

 

[beagle9]

Thought the rules state that you can't accuse people of things like that whether directly or indirectly ?

Nope. It's an established historical fact that Mormonism was started by a Con Artist named Joseph Smith who had sex with multiple 14 year old girls.

List of Joseph Smith's wives - Wikipedia

At least six of his 34 wives were below the age of consent.

Yeah, but you spoke to a member as if he supports it ?

 

[JoeB131]

A lot of homosexuals try to recruit minors. Do "most"? I don't know, and neither do you.

But a lot do, and that's why experts highly recommend that "Boys Beware" (of homosexuality)

you have to go back to 1961 to find homophobic propaganda... you realize that's considered laughable today.

 

[JoeB131]

Yeah, but you spoke to a member as if he supports it ?

They all still think Joseph Smith was the "Prophet", God's true messenger.

The funny thing is, Mormons don't teach their kids this part of their history... that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were polygamists who had a bunch of child brides.

 

[SomeDudeUDunno]

The thing is that the state should not recognize any marriage performed by a church as legally binding.

You all want separation of church ans state in all things but you allow the state to give legal powers to a church.

Have a church ceremony if you want but the state should not recognize it

What difference does it make?

What difference does it make if public schools teach religion?

The first amendment states

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Tell what is giving a religion power to sanction any contract if it's not a law respecting a religious establishment?

No church, no religion, religious ceremony of any kind should be given any legal credence.

If they are acting as agents of the government then churches need to lose their tax free status

No church acts as agents of the government. By the way, plenty of churches reject tax free status already.

 

[Blues Man]

The thing is that the state should not recognize any marriage performed by a church as legally binding.

You all want separation of church ans state in all things but you allow the state to give legal powers to a church.

Have a church ceremony if you want but the state should not recognize it

What difference does it make?

What difference does it make if public schools teach religion?

The first amendment states

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Tell what is giving a religion power to sanction any contract if it's not a law respecting a religious establishment?

No church, no religion, religious ceremony of any kind should be given any legal credence.

If they are acting as agents of the government then churches need to lose their tax free status

No church acts as agents of the government. By the way, plenty of churches reject tax free status already.

When a person of the clergy states while performing a wedding ceremony, "By the power vested in me by the state of___________, I now pronounce you man and wife"

He is indeed acting as an agent of the state.

And no church should be given a pass on taxes anyway

 

[beagle9]

The thing is that the state should not recognize any marriage performed by a church as legally binding.

You all want separation of church ans state in all things but you allow the state to give legal powers to a church.

Have a church ceremony if you want but the state should not recognize it

What difference does it make?

What difference does it make if public schools teach religion?

The first amendment states

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Tell what is giving a religion power to sanction any contract if it's not a law respecting a religious establishment?

No church, no religion, religious ceremony of any kind should be given any legal credence.

If they are acting as agents of the government then churches need to lose their tax free status

No church acts as agents of the government. By the way, plenty of churches reject tax free status already.

When a person of the clergy states while performing a wedding ceremony, "By the power vested in me by the state of___________, I now pronounce you man and wife"

He is indeed acting as an agent of the state.

And no church should be given a pass on taxes anyway

That's only when the appointed justice is performing the ceremony on behalf of the city, county and/or state that is performing the ceremony, and not the clergy right ? The preacher says "by the power vested in me by almighty God" I now pronounce this couple husband and wife.

And yes charitible donations in which hold the Church up should always be tax exempt. Political issues are taken up by the Church only when those issues begin to negatively effect the Church and it's Church community.

 

[Blues Man]

The thing is that the state should not recognize any marriage performed by a church as legally binding.

You all want separation of church ans state in all things but you allow the state to give legal powers to a church.

Have a church ceremony if you want but the state should not recognize it

What difference does it make?

What difference does it make if public schools teach religion?

The first amendment states

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Tell what is giving a religion power to sanction any contract if it's not a law respecting a religious establishment?

No church, no religion, religious ceremony of any kind should be given any legal credence.

If they are acting as agents of the government then churches need to lose their tax free status

No church acts as agents of the government. By the way, plenty of churches reject tax free status already.

When a person of the clergy states while performing a wedding ceremony, "By the power vested in me by the state of___________, I now pronounce you man and wife"

He is indeed acting as an agent of the state.

And no church should be given a pass on taxes anyway

That's only when the appointed justice is performing the ceremony on behalf of the city, county and/or state that is performing the ceremony, and not the clergy right ? The preacher says "by the power vested in me by almighty God" I now pronounce this couple husband and wife.

And yes charitible donations in which hold the Church up should always be tax exempt. Political issues are taken up by the Church only when those issues begin to negatively effect the Church and it's Church community.

If the clergy is allowed to be vested with any power by the state then that church is acting as an agent of the government.

No religious ceremony should be given any legal recognition.