Should homosexual activity among consenting adults be criminalized? (Putin, interviews, weapons)
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.
A question then from a teen whose background is Religious / Conservative. What are your view[s] concerning the recent passage of President Trump's repeal of the Johnson Amendment through executive order and the effect upon future legislation concerning Church's right to support as well as endorse politicians sympathetic to moralistic stances against what is considered sexual immoral protections from the pulpit?
GOP unveils bill to allow political activity by churches
Though this hasn't been brought up, however since the poll asks views that edges toward a legislature stance I thought asking such a question is not off-topic but very much on topic especially important to those younger in the reading audience.
As a person who has worked for a not-for-profit, I can tell you that the Johnson amendment in practice did/does very little.
Any church leader can already say nearly anything s/he wants and without jeopardizing the church's tax-exempt status. S/he can rail against the government, against laws s/he doesn't like, and against specific people. S/he can have flyers printed up stating the church's position on the issues, and include the stances of various politicians on those issues. And then s/he can say "there's an election coming up, be sure to take the time to vote." What s/he can't do is say "therefore, vote for X and/or vote against Y". It takes an extraordinarily dumb church leader to accidentally cross that line.
Keep in mind that the Johnson amendment does not apply only to churches, it applies to all 501(c)3s. (But not necessarily to not-for-profits incorporated under other parts of the not-for-profit statute.) So getting rid of the Johnson amendment will also free up organizations such as 501(c)3s associated with Planned Parenthood and ACLU to electioneer w/out losing their 501(c)3 tax exemption.
Personally, I would like to see the Johnson amendment discarded in favor of something that is more limiting. Tax exemption is a great gift to any organization, and just as I don't see why my tax dollars should subsidize Pat Robertson, I don't see why Pat Robertson's tax dollars should subsidize Planned Parenthood.
As a person who has worked for a not-for-profit, I can tell you that the Johnson amendment in practice did/does very little.
Any church leader can already say nearly anything s/he wants and without jeopardizing the church's tax-exmpt status. S/he can rail against the government, against laws s/he doesn't like, and against specific people. S/he can have flyers printed up stating the church's position on the issues, and include the stances of various politicians on those issues. And then s/he can say "there's an election coming up, be sure to take the time to vote." What s/he can't do is say "therefore, vote for X and/or vote against Y". It takes an extraordinarily dumb church leader to accidentally cross that line.
Keep in mind that the Johnson amendment does not apply only to churches, it applies to all 501(c)3s. (But not necessarily to not-for-profits incorporated under other parts of the not-for-profit statute.) So getting rid of the Johnson amendment will also free up organizations such as 501(c)3s associated with Planned Parenthood and ACLU to electioneer w/out losing their 501(c)3 tax exemption.
Personally, I would like to see the Johnson amendment discarded in favor of something that is more limiting. Tax exemption is a great gift to any organization, and just as I don't see why my tax dollars should subsidize Pat Robertson, I don't see why Pat Robertson's tax dollars should subsidize Planned Parenthood.
Thank You for responding in a manner digestible for All... many youth are of an age that are trying to determine our own beliefs and philosophies. Such commentary is helpful.
Give it a rest with the whole "I know what you really want" BS.
You are absolutely clueless. You have no idea. You just keep claiming you know the evil desires of others.
Do you know who you sound like? You sound like some kkk member telling people blacks want to rape white women.
Give it a rest. We get it. You have some major issue with Christians and are dying to demonize them.
Honestly, this made me laugh, because it's so out there and has nothing to do with my post. If you can't square the things people say with what they support and really do, that's fine, just say so.
One of the long term goals of the Christian right is to make homosexuality a crime again.
Bryan Fischer, President of the Family Research Council and a hugely influential figure within evangelical circles said the following.
"Both of the cases that went to the United States Supreme Court that dealt with the issue of whether states should criminalize sodomy, and of course they still ought to be able to do it, every state in the union criminalized sodomy until 1962 and then forty nine states until 1972, then they began to fall like dominoes. But by the time of the founding until the late 20th Century, homosexual activity was a felony offense in the United States of America, there is no reason why it cannot be a criminal offense once again, absolutely none."
With this in mind, it makes sense out of otherwise nonsensical opposition to certain aspects of LGBT equality, like employment and housing protections. Their ultimate goal is to return homosexuality to being a punishable offense.
Regardless of your moral views on homosexuality, do you think it should be legal or should it be a criminal offense?
Honestly, this made me laugh, because it's so out there and has nothing to do with my post. If you can't square the things people say with what they support and really do, that's fine, just say so.
You pretend you know what Christians want regardless of what is clearly being stated by Christians on here.
There's nothing worse than a discriminated minority becoming the discriminator and then not recognizing the supreme irony of it all.
It's like a Jewish Nazi or a black slave owner.
You didn't read the second sentence I wrote. Comparing me or Trump to jeuden ratz or black slave owners is outrageous, and a perfect illustration of how the left simply dismisses and kills off anyone who doesn't fall into line. Like NAZIS!! How's that for IRONY!!
Status:
"Let this year be over..."
(set 13 days ago)
Location: Where my bills arrive
19,220 posts, read 17,066,032 times
Reputation: 15535
Reading the options of the poll they should have included the choice "Consenting adults can engage in a relationship as they choose" without any references to faith, supporting ones politics or condemning a person to eternal hell.
Last edited by VA Yankee; 06-03-2017 at 04:28 PM..
A few years ago, a good friend finally said she hoped I still wanted to be her friend. She was gay. She'd never done or said anything which would suggest it, and even if she had it wouldn't matter. Her mate was also a very nice woman. She and her other half had hidden the relationship for years. A few local friends knew, but most didn't. I just thought that was sad. Her dad had passed and she didn't want him to know. He was a minester and she didn't believe he could accept her as she really was. That is the only 'sin' here, that people who had found fufullment in love had to hide this part of her life at the cost of the rest of their family.
Our friends were still her friends after they openly acknowledged the relationship. We use to kid them that they acted like old married people. When they did marry, their old friends came to the wedding. I was invited but had moved, and we had no money for trips, but I got a gift I knew they'd love.
Fortunately, the vast majority has come to see relationships such as theirs as personal business, including if they choose to marry or 'live in sin'. Or do people who think same sex couples always will be mired in this 'sin' ever consider that maybe they'd like to make their link deeper and truer by using the same means different sex couples do by celebrating their union?
My only other feelings but joy for them was a bit of jealousy since their union outlasted two of mine and continues, even if one of mine really didn't end, just changed because we just pushed each others buttons and had our regular arguments, and we've ended up better friends.
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.
