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.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
I'm sorry...the opinions of the busybodies at the FFRF are not the basis by which we judge the constitutionality of something. I have no reason to believe they understand what the Constitution says on the issue of religion and 1st Amendmnet rights.
That may be, but the Supreme Court does, the FFRF constitutional lawyers do, and as such they do an outstanding job at educating public bodies that are transgressing on that. Most of their interventions don't go to court, because.... the public bodies who are transgressing quickly realize after checking with their own lawyers, that they were in the wrong.
And then there are the few who willfully keep on avoiding the law. Unfortunately, they cost their rate and taxpayers money when they end up in court, invariably losing.
You should be supportive of groups that support and demand that Constitution be followed. You know, like the FFRF and the NRA.
That may be, but the Supreme Court does, the FFRF constitutional lawyers do,
You're making the assumption that the busybodies at the FFRF and the SCOTUS are in agreement with each other and the Constitution. That has not always been the case.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
You're making the assumption that the busybodies at the FFRF and the SCOTUS are in agreement with each other and the Constitution. That has not always been the case.
I'm saying that the FFRF understands what the Constitution is, how SCOTUS rulings affect that, and will pursue those public bodies that are not quite up to speed yet, or those that willfully ignore the constitutional law separating church and state.
Think of the FFRF as being for the 1st Amendment exactly as what the NRA is for the 2nd.
I'm saying that the FFRF understands what the Constitution is, how SCOTUS rulings affect that, and will pursue those public bodies that are not quite up to speed yet, or those that willfully ignore the constitutional law separating church and state.
Think of the FFRF as being for the 1st Amendment exactly as what the NRA is for the 2nd.
And I'm saying that the busybodies at the FFRF do not know the Constitution, and they do not understand how the SCOTUS should rule, and they are NOT experts on the 1st Ammendment. They are busybodies without lives that can't leave well enough alone. Why? I don't know...maybe mommy and daddy didn't love them enough when they were young.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
And I'm saying that the busybodies at the FFRF do not know the Constitution, and they do not understand how the SCOTUS should rule, and they are NOT experts on the 1st Ammendment. They are busybodies without lives that can't leave well enough alone. Why? I don't know...maybe mommy and daddy didn't love them enough when they were young.
Any group that wins over 90% of their law suits must have some understanding of the laws involved. But about that attempted pejorative, "busybodies", which you have used a few times now.
Why would you call them that? Is that because of their lobbying removing the parsonage allowance? That makes it personal, right? They are as much, and seeing by the court cases they have won, experts on the 1st Amendment as the NRA is on the 2nd. They are as much an expert on the 1st Amendment as the Southern Baptist Conference is. The court wins speak for themselves. The ones they have lost clarify the issue for everyone, whether one likes the result or not.
They are as American as it can get. Dan Barker is as much a patriot as Wayne LaPierre is.
Now, about that parsonage exemption. How would you justify this one from parishioners money (Crefo Dollar's one in this case):
And inside:
Or this one (Chris Oyakhilome is the man behind Believers’ Loveworld Ministries, a.k.a Christ Embassy)
And we all know who Joel Olsteen is:
This is the stuff FFRF is against. Are you for it?
They are not a poor organization, they took in $109 million dollars last year, paid out $51 million in salaries and another $17 million in staff training and events.
Any group that wins over 90% of their law suits must have some understanding of the laws involved. But about that attempted pejorative, "busybodies", which you have used a few times now.
They win the cases because the US, and the SCOTUS, are growing increasingly progressive in recent decades. It has nothing to do with being right.
I call them busybodies because they just can't stand to live and let live. No one is harmed by most of the nonsense they protest. No one really cares. They make issues where there are none.
Quote:
Why would you call them that? Is that because of their lobbying removing the parsonage allowance? That makes it personal, right?
I claimed a housing allowance this year. I hadn't heard that they had supposedly gotten rid of anything like that.
But that is a great example of busybody activity. No one is harmed by me taking a housing allowance. But instead of just living and let live.....the busybodies display the attitude that if they can't get it, no one should. It's not as if my housing allowance actually affects the amount of money they pay in taxes -- our government is going to spend what they want to spend regardless of amount of revenue, and they are going to tax what they want regardless of how much they spend. No one is saying that if we give a pastor $2000 in a housing allowance that Bob, his neighbor, must make it up.
Quote:
They are as much, and seeing by the court cases they have won, experts on the 1st Amendment as the NRA is on the 2nd. They are as much an expert on the 1st Amendment as the Southern Baptist Conference is. The court wins speak for themselves. The ones they have lost clarify the issue for everyone, whether one likes the result or not.
Yay. The NRA doesn't speak for me. Why even bring that up? I honestly don't care. Nor am I Southern Baptist.
Quote:
They are as American as it can get. Dan Barker is as much a patriot as Wayne LaPierre is.
OK? I still think Barker is a busybody who ought to worry about his own life rather than the monument that has sat for 40 years in a park in a small town in Nebraska.
As for your pics of Creflo Dollar's estate? I honestly don't care. He's a shyster that is fleecing innocent people. I don't support the guy and don't much appreciate him. But I don't credit Barker for pointing it out. There's a huge difference between crooks like him and the average joe that just wants to live life. But Barker and his busybody brigade can't seem to figure that out. For some reason they think they got a bad experience from religion and they want to make sure no one else can benefit from it.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
They win the cases because the US, and the SCOTUS, are growing increasingly progressive in recent decades. It has nothing to do with being right.
One does not have to agree with SCOTUS decisions, but it still makes it the law and the constitutional law of the land. That is the US system. Don't like it? Get a new constitutional law passed or change the constitution. There is a process in place for that. They are called amendments. And they have a high bar required to be implemented, which has proven a good concept.
Quote:
I call them busybodies because they just can't stand to live and let live. No one is harmed by most of the nonsense they protest. No one really cares. They make issues where there are none.
Their issues are when public bodies or 503 groups do not follow the law or constitution. I would have thought as a pastor that would be of primary concern, after your spiritual believes. Isn't there something about rendering on to Ceasar, etc?
Quote:
I claimed a housing allowance this year. I hadn't heard that they had supposedly gotten rid of anything like that.
You're probably going to hate the FFRF for this, but they are continuing to question the constitutionality of the parsonage allowance.
What do I think personally? I agree with the FFRF, but I would modify my agreement IF religious organizations were required to file full disclosure, just like other non-profits. Then I could well be convinced that there be a means test for those churches and pastors as to when a parsonage allowance is reasonable. As example, in your particular case, I think a case well could be made that it is, as the church can only pay you so much, and if it happened to have a house, then it should be provided. As you get an allowance, should that be taxable? Again, in your particular case probably not. In Joel Olsteen's case, absolutely. The question becomes, where is the cutoff line. Perhaps it should be based on anything over a States or County's average income?
Quote:
But that is a great example of busybody activity. No one is harmed by me taking a housing allowance. But instead of just living and let live.....the busybodies display the attitude that if they can't get it, no one should. It's not as if my housing allowance actually affects the amount of money they pay in taxes -- our government is going to spend what they want to spend regardless of amount of revenue, and they are going to tax what they want regardless of how much they spend. No one is saying that if we give a pastor $2000 in a housing allowance that Bob, his neighbor, must make it up.
When one part of society does not pay its fair share, another part has to make up the burden. Churches don't pay property taxes, so all other taxpayers need to make up for that. Why should Christians and atheists have to pay for the infrastructure use that a Mosque, Synagogue or a Temple use?
Quote:
Yay. The NRA doesn't speak for me. Why even bring that up? I honestly don't care. Nor am I Southern Baptist.
My point was illustrative. Gun owners have the NRA that is the primary champion of the 1st amendment, and freethinkers, humanists and atheists have the FFRF to champion the 2nd.
Quote:
OK? I still think Barker is a busybody who ought to worry about his own life rather than the monument that has sat for 40 years in a park in a small town in Nebraska.
Either it is legal or it is not. If not, it should not be there. You support the concept of law and order do you not? Or do you pick and choose which laws should be followed and which not?
Quote:
As for your pics of Creflo Dollar's estate? I honestly don't care. He's a shyster that is fleecing innocent people. I don't support the guy and don't much appreciate him. But I don't credit Barker for pointing it out. There's a huge difference between crooks like him and the average joe that just wants to live life. But Barker and his busybody brigade can't seem to figure that out. For some reason they think they got a bad experience from religion and they want to make sure no one else can benefit from it.
There are too many questionable characters operating as a religion. L.Ron Hubbard once said, if you really want to get rich, start a religion. Religious bodies are doing a poor job of screening these types of people, as so many of my threads indicate. It is almost a daily occurrence that once again a person connected closely with some religion transgresses the law or ethics AND is discovered.
If religions don't clean up their own mess, other groups, individuals and society will enact laws and regulations that will require them to, and they well may not like the result.
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.
