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.
The idea of taxing churches is just another way to attack Christianity. Leftist cockroaches figure they can shut down thousands of churches by taxing them. The goal is not revenue, it is really an effort to persecute Christians and prevent the spread of the good news about Jesus. They truly hate Christianity and this suggestion of taxing churches is proof.
The fact that this thread exists and how many people have no problem with this is a testament to how serious our problems are in this nation. When these people take power (and they will as they soon will have numerical superiority) they will take our freedoms, they will assault Christianity and Christian values. We must prepare to use all means necessary to stop them, the enemy must be defeated. The atheist SJW vermin cannot be allowed to remake America to their liking.
Typical over-the-top rhetoric here but interesting you single out Christianity as the sole victim...
This is an intellectual discussion about whether assessing taxes on CHURCHES is right or wrong and why. Supposed to be anyway.
This is NOT a thread about any one religion vs another or an invitation to start spouting religious dogma, regardless the religion.
“When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.” -- source of this quote a subject of debate, but something often warned about!
1) Yeah yeah...I belong in conversion therapy torture because "praying the gay away" supposedly works? I tried that twice. I'm done. Believe it's sin all you want but you have to share this country with LGBT Americans.
2) I'm sick of having your twisted version of Christianity rammed down my throat by law. Fundamentalist evangelicals are not the only people who exist in this country yet you people think you own it. I want my children, if I ever have them, to be taught science in science classes. I think scientists have more authority on things like climate than a bronze-age book of myths written by goat herders. Same goes for psychology. You people are also extremely selective about your "values" that you want to force on everyone. You have no problem with a President who pays off porn-stars and speaks about women in very demeaning ways but you go apecrap if somebody dares to wish you a Happy Holidays or if a sitcom character comes out as gay.
3) Voting Republican gets you theocratic fascism. You may think it's "American" because its wrapped in a flag and waving a cross, but what you people are advocating for is religious rule, not too different from what they have in the Middle East. I'm willing to go as far as to say modern Republicans would be far happier in Iran than here. Iran has the policies they like, they just use a different holy book.
I think I might have triggered some lefties. Nothing some time with crayons in the ole safe space won’t fix right?
What you lefties don’t understand is how radical your ideas are. Thirty years ago most people still went to church, they believed what the Bible said, and hardly anyone would consider gay marriage or cross dress men being in women’s bathrooms as anything remotely possible. Homosexuality was a marginalized behavior that most believed needed to be kept in private (in the closet). The idea that Christianity itself would be attacked would have shocked Americans and instantly would have been linked to the kind of atheism practiced by the godless communists.
The idea that we would implement socialism in this country was unthinkable back then, THAT is what our soviet enemies did.
Most believed the changes of the civil rights era made the playing field level but would never have allowed minority activists to dictate what they said, which flags to display or what historical figures should have statues and which should not. Political correctness would have been considered Orwellian and downright un American.
The America of pre 1990 would have agreed with the sentiments I stated above by a large majority, both democrat and Republican. Christianity and Capitalism were believed to be core values of this nation as was the liberties outlined in the bill of rights. You radical leftists are demanding it all be upended, your new America will replace ours and we were just NAZIs, racists and bigots who need to go away. We are not going away, the election of Trump and a republican congress proved that. When you gain the numerical advantage we will still stand in your way. Most of us were taught that the kind of socialism and tyranny y’all propose is worthy of armed rebellion. Maybe that is what we need anyway, a chance to cleanse this nation and take out the trash.
More confirmation bias in spades! You want to go on about all else going on 30 years ago? ALL the good, bad and ugly?
50 years ago? 100 years ago?
We've made progress, no doubt, but all too slowly and we've still got a LONG way to go all considered...
I did slightly misread you, but that doesn't alter my premise that when churches (or any other charity), does actual charity in the community (prothlezing doesn't count), then that work should be credited against any potential tax burden.
I live in a very small community and we have two churches here. The United Church's pastor is always involved in community events, they planted a 3 acre parcel of berries, and ask that those who pick them to contribute to their church. I, as an avowed atheist, do, as I see it as a true community service, and I know the work she (the pastor) does as a volunteer. That church I would gladly give the property tax exemption.
The other is a Free Evangelical church. It has more members, but I have never seen them ever involved in anything but their own activities. I have never seen their pastor at any community event other than the harvest supper. That church I would not exempt from property taxes, as it does not give back in any way.
Do you see the difference?
No, I'm not that intelligent! /s
You might be surprised what the E-Free church is actually doing. Here's what they're doing in my community: https://calvarybible.com/outreach/ Outreach – Boulder (Boulder, CO)
Lunches for homeless, poor, and needy men and women; Safehouse (for battered women); Emergency Family Food Assistance (my church also participates in that, a secular non-profit that gets a lot of donations from churches); International Student hospitality at the U of CO; The Lost Boys of Sudan, supporting Sudanese refugees in Denver and Boulder; Men of Action
Men of Calvary Bible Church coming together to help the single mothers and widows of the community; Operation Christmas Child-Filling shoe boxes with toys, candy, and hygiene products for kids in need all over the world (something DH and I also have done); and now some you probably wouldn't like: Compassion Child Sponsorship-Opportunities for families to personally sponsor children who live in extreme poverty, and help them find new life in Jesus (though I think this involves more than just taking them to church); Marisol Health-Offering support before, during, and after unexpected pregnancies as well as office help and mentoring; and Wynwood Senior Living-Bringing the Gospel and love of Jesus Christ to those who are in assisted living. Help lead a Sunday worship service at the Wynwood for our elderly neighbors that are unable to attend a local church service. This latter may "just" be for the residents, but it's helping!
Plus, at their other "campus" Outreach – Erie
Some of the same plus tutoring at a local middle school; connecting families in Erie, CO with resources to fill basic needs; a youth ranch, and "Safe Families for Children is an organization that mobilizes the church to come alongside families going through a crisis by caring for children while the parents find themselves temporarily unable do so for reasons such as homelessness, incarceration, hospital stays, or treatment programs. We're seeking host families who are willing to open their homes to children to provide supplemental care and coaches who are willing to offer support while the parents get back on their feet. "
Just because you don't see it happening doesn't mean it's not.
Just like I don't know what goes on in a coal mine, people who don't go to church don't know what goes on in a church, and shouldn't ass*u*me so much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FKD19124
your well aware that there was no need to go after the churches until the last 30+ years because liberals need more money to create more govt. bureaucracy to keep the people down.
Oh, there's been talk about taxing churches for decades. I remember our pastor talking about that in the 1960s.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
This is a "delicate" subject, and my comments are not meant to suggest religious people don't help other people other than out of the goodness of their heart, without recruiting new church members the goal, but where those efforts and goals may or may not be a part is not always so easy to distinguish.
For example, most people know that Al Qaeda was famous for recruiting by helping locals with medicine, food, shelter, protection, under the guise of what Allah wished. To what extent that was/is true for them or their recruits is a personal matter, but no doubt the most devout felt they were acting according to God's wishes with no ulterior motives.
These sorts of stories all through history involve that same sort of "delicate" dynamic. What the Spanish missionaries did too, same story. The Spanish Mission system and all they did "for" the Indians, according to God's will. Not the best of happy endings for many of those Indians anyway. Same story with the missionaries only doing good work for the natives in Hawaii...
All strictly for the sake of doing good? No doubt true in the hearts and minds of most religious folks signing up for the mission, but whether the idea is strictly that as far as the religious leadership is concerned. Sometimes I really have to wonder, especially when a member of the LDS church will tout how their religion is the fastest growing. I have to wonder about the manner in which gaining more members is achieved. That's all...
"But" and "all" are some of the most abused words on message boards. "I'm not antivaccine but. . . " is usually followed by a raging anti-vax screed; "All I want is X" is usually followed by the entire alphabet.
Comparing churches today with the Spanish Missionaries of the 1500s is pretty disingenuous.
Hey, Bubba, I'm not a leftist cockroach. I'm a conservative atheist. I value governments that are wise with their taxes, and not giving breaks to religious groups, you know, like Muslims, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh oh yeah, and them Christians, is a concept whose time has come.
Why should MY atheist tax dollars support your belief in an imaginary entity?
Now get off the persecution bandwagon. You don't KNOW persecution. Just ask the Muslim Palestinians in the Middle East, or the atheist woman in Saudi Arabia, or the Kurd in Iran or Iraq.
Special pleader!
Hear hear! (mostly)...
Bubba be out of line, no doubt.
And just for the record, I'm a liberal, in no way a cockroach, and I too "value governments that are wise with their taxes!"
I used to invoke that quote, but you really should let be known those words come from someone else...
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken
Mencken was pretty strongly against religion in general, and representative democracy, and a few other things not okay with me. Though many a comment in these threads reminds me of how true that observation tends to be, I stopped using the quote when I found out a bit more about Menchen I don't like...
I attributed it to Mencken in post #347. You quoted from post #348! I thought people could follow along for one post. Silly me.
Whatever you think of Mencken, and I don't know that much about him, he's right on that; simple, clear and wrong.
That's what Christian means in the Trump era. Christian = angry bully who wishes that we lived in a theocracy where everyone is forced to play their part and where everyone knows their place in the patriarchal order and gleefully submits to Christian authority. A society where gays are in the closet (if they come out they are imprisoned or executed), women are forced to stay in the kitchen and submit to their husbands, everyone goes to church on Sunday and if they don't they are ostracized from society, and dark-skinned people are forced to stay on their side of the tracks, out of site and out of mind. That's the society conservatives want.
Evangelical Christians OWN Trump. He's their President. He's President because of them. He's President because of their anger and rage about the fact that people in America don't have to obey their every whim by law yet. They consider that freedom; freedom to submit to the authority of the church. I consider that tyranny.
And today's headline news seems to suggest what Trump meant by "draining the swamp" was to drain the old one and create a new even dirtier murkier swamp he could claim he made all on his own.
"Unpresidented" as Trump once foolishly tweeted in typical Trump fashion, but I think we're getting off topic now, and time for me to sign off...
Trump ain’t my favorite, his immoral life is not acceptable to me. I would have preferred a real conservative President. Is Trump better than Hillary? Yes. Will he be better than the far left candidate the leftist who have taken over the Democratic Party will put forth, yea I am sure he will be.
Funny how some people can see white where other people see black. How the world turns...
Hillary was more the "known quantity" compared to how we all had to speculate about Trump with no public service record to consider. I wasn't a big fan of Hillary, but she concerned me nothing like my worst fears about Trump that, sadly, appear to be coming true.
If anything might cause a centrist to consider leaning toward the left, I think it's the reality beginning to emerge as Trump continues in office, and the Republicans who are now being held captive by this weird acceptance of the unacceptable, too afraid to speak their minds about Trump because they are unethical political weaklings. Nothing but politics above country, at new embarrassing levels!
And today's headline news seems to suggest what Trump meant by "draining the swamp" was to drain the old one and create a new even dirtier murkier swamp he could claim he made all on his own.
"Unpresidented" as Trump once foolishly tweeted in typical Trump fashion, but I think we're getting off topic now, and time for me to sign off...
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
Funny how some people can see white where other people see black. How the world turns...
Hillary was more the "known quantity" compared to how we all had to speculate about Trump with no public service record to consider. I wasn't a big fan of Hillary, but she concerned me nothing like my worst fears about Trump that, sadly, appear to be coming true.
If anything might cause a centrist to consider leaning toward the left, I think it's the reality beginning to emerge as Trump continues in office, and the Republicans who are now being held captive by this weird acceptance of the unacceptable, too afraid to speak their minds about Trump because they are unethical political weaklings. Nothing but politics above country, at new embarrassing levels!
"But" and "all" are some of the most abused words on message boards. "I'm not antivaccine but. . . " is usually followed by a raging anti-vax screed; "All I want is X" is usually followed by the entire alphabet.
Comparing churches today with the Spanish Missionaries of the 1500s is pretty disingenuous.
The words you are going on about can be applied in many ways, both good and bad, BUT my effort is simply to make myself understood. That's ALL, if you get my meaning...? I don't think you do...
I'm not being "disingenuous" in any case, unless now we're going to call history disingenuous as well.
We all know that "history tends to repeat itself," and we also all know we're still dealing with religious problems today that go back centuries. That's all, but again I think we're veering a bit off topic, and I've really got to get on with more productive endeavors...
PS: Junipero Serra lived from 1713 to 1784. Not sure how we got to the 1500s, but true this history goes back a long time and even further back, to the beginning, up until today.
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.
