Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You doubt my suitability as a pastor because I actually believe in property rights? LOL...ok.
I have said on this thread a few times that yes--they would do well to sell it and help the poor. If it were a western church i would absolutely hope they would do that.
Having said that, I question your suitability as an American citizen if you think it's your right to take what is not your's under the guise of humanity. You're not willing to give me your paycheck, but you're happy to tell others how to spend their money.
Shame on you.
I am not an American citizen and I don't think I would want to be one.
Anyway, the object makes a huge different. I am against taking the possessions of private people (which doesn't mean that I think it is good when they pile up stuff and we do have progressive taxation to reduce that, at least in theory). But a temple or church is not a private person.
I am paying way more taxes than I have to according to law, i.e. voluntarily out of generosity. So don't give me that paycheck crap...
To a certain extent this whole thing also highlights the flaws of Hinduism as a religion. Believers think they get favorable treatment by their gods when they give them material stuff in temples.
I am not an American citizen and I don't think I would want to be one.
Anyway, the object makes a huge different. I am against taking the possessions of private people (which doesn't mean that I think it is good when they pile up stuff and we do have progressive taxation to reduce that, at least in theory). But a temple or church is not a private person.
I am paying way more taxes than I have to according to law, i.e. voluntarily out of generosity. So don't give me that paycheck crap...
You do realize the temple is not government owned, right? I'm not in India, and honestly don't know "who" owns it...but I doubt it belongs to the public.
I have a hard time understanding how you or anyone can advocate for seizing and redistributing wealth, but don't want to be the first to donate your own paycheck. I call that selfish.
You do realize the temple is not government owned, right? I'm not in India, and honestly don't know "who" owns it...but I doubt it belongs to the public.
I have a hard time understanding how you or anyone can advocate for seizing and redistributing wealth, but don't want to be the first to donate your own paycheck. I call that selfish.
And I have a hard time understanding how you can not see the difference.
I need my very modest income to survive. Those temple guys don't need 20 billion dollars to survive, up until recently they did not even know they had that enormous treasure in their basement. Let those priests or whatever have their modest income and redistribute everything beyond that...
And I have a hard time understanding how you can not see the difference.
I need my very modest income to survive. Those temple guys don't need 20 billion dollars to survive, up until recently they did not even know they had that enormous treasure in their basement. Let those priests or whatever have their modest income and redistribute everything beyond that...
So the dollar amount is the determining factor? What if it was $5 B? Is that too much? $100 M? How much is too much?
You seem to be missing the point. It is irrelevant how much it is. What gives you the right to determine how someone else spends their money? Who are you to decide? It's not your money any more than your paycheck belongs to me.
So the dollar amount is the determining factor? What if it was $5 B? Is that too much? $100 M? How much is too much?
You seem to be missing the point. It is irrelevant how much it is. What gives you the right to determine how someone else spends their money? Who are you to decide? It's not your money any more than your paycheck belongs to me.
I don't care what SOMEONE does with their money, but a temple or church is not a person. And for the x. time, your payback analogy is screwed...
As I said the problem is basically the religion itself. People make their material sacrifices to gods, so for all secular people the question is who does the stuff actually belong to as there are no gods? Of course it does not belong to anyone working at the temple as they are not those gods.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course it does not belong to anyone working at the temple as they are not those gods.