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 are of course speaking about great society programs.
They have caused lots of grief.
In case you have not noticed, LBJ is dead, as are the Great Society and war on poverty (whose result resembled the result of the wars on communism, crime, inflation, drugs, cancer, terrorism,and the "moral equivalent of war" on foreign oil dependency.)
Quote:
Before the great society programs blacks were Republicans with two parent households 85+% of the time.
Blacks went from the GOP to the Dems in the '30s as a result of Hoover neglecting blacks and FDR getting black votes. Black support of Republicans increased somewhat in the '50s but post-Ike decreased rapidly.
No fault divorce laws are more responsible for destroying marriage than anything else and they came around in the Nixon Administration.
I'm not defending LBJ as I think he was a war criminal who epitomized the "welfare-warfare state" but I think you're thoroughly confused here as to what destroyed marriage. If you cared about marriage instead of focusing on gays you should focus on making divorce harder to get.
In 1954, Congress approved an amendment by Sen. Lyndon Johnson to prohibit 501(c)(3) organizations, which includes charities and churches, from engaging in any political campaign activity. To the extent Congress has revisited the ban over the years, it has in fact strengthened the ban. The most recent change came in 1987 when Congress amended the language to clarify that the prohibition also applies to statements opposing candidates.
Currently, the law prohibits political campaign activity by charities and churches by defining a 501(c)(3) organization as one "which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office."
If the Bishop speaks on his own that is one thing but he was speaking on behalf of his Tax Exempt organization against the POTUS during an election year about campaign issues. So while as an individual he does have the right when representing an organization enjoying tax exempt status and federal funding he needs to shut his trap.
If the Bishop speaks on his own that is one thing but he was speaking on behalf of his Tax Exempt organization against the POTUS during an election year about campaign issues. So while as an individual he does have the right when representing an organization enjoying tax exempt status and federal funding he needs to shut his trap.
If the Bishop speaks on his own that is one thing but he was speaking on behalf of his Tax Exempt organization against the POTUS during an election year about campaign issues. So while as an individual he does have the right when representing an organization enjoying tax exempt status and federal funding he needs to shut his trap.
Christianity teaches this is a sin, so for a Catholic to come out and condemn the President for devaluating marriage would be part of the job and expected. The tax exempt is regarding the practice of religion and Christianity does not approve of gay anything really.
Yeah, that's what we need... A representative of an organization found to be repeatedly covering up the abuse, torture and sexual molestation of young children, responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands in Africa, and recently discovered to have kidnapped numerous children in Spain over a roughly 50 year time period to tell us about things that undermine society.
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.