The Watering Hole

I think they need to pick their battles better.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090718/pl_mcclatchy/3274259

Yes, it should say "In the Flying Spaghetti Monster We Trust."  :D

I don't think God would approve of the governments actions.

How about....."The government is the Devil". ;D

In Odin we trust

I wonder if they put "In Arnie We Trust" on the California IOU's...  ::)

Separation of church and state....plain and simple.  You need to get it through your head that this is a DEMOcracy not a THEOcracy.

Interesting how Lungren (a total moron) asserts that "In God We Trust" is our "national motto".  Historically, if you wanted to call something our national motto, it would more likely be E Pluribus Unum, "from many one."  It is true that "In God We Trust" was officially deemed our "national motto" in 1956--at the height of McCarthyism--but E pluribus was on our money in the late 1700's...  

What money?  We don't have money!  All we have are Reserve Notes, the Federal implementation of an IOU...

I just think that being Atheist doesn't require a battle with religion. Or the religious, or religious sentences.

I think this guy is sort of a loon to use HIS belief, or lack of, to battle religion.

I consider being Atheist as sort of a middle of the road type of belief. Not a natural reason to battle religion. If a person doesn't believe in God then why fight a battle with some belief that has no merit to him and doesn't harm him or his lack of belief in a God? Why should it matter if things are written on walls and shit? Wouldn't the more important battle be with the book stores that sell bibles or the churches that give bible's to his children?

Religion isn't a threat to me. I see no reason to fight with people that believe. It simply doesn't matter. The only thing that would matter to me is religion affecting my children. As in a school giving my child bible lessons or something like that. I like debating it hear and talking about it, it's fun. But to really take some type stand against religion like this guy is doing is wild to me.

Our government is so fucked up right now. Why not take on something that may help fix it. Who cares about this shit? It's nothing.  

Hookbender — Jul 20, 2009I just think that being Atheist doesn't require a battle with religion. Or the religious, or religious sentences.

I think this guy is sort of a loon to use HIS belief, or lack of, to battle religion.

I consider being Atheist as sort of a middle of the road type of belief. Not a natural reason to battle religion. If a person doesn't believe in God then why fight a battle with some belief that has no merit to him and doesn't harm him or his lack of belief in a God? Why should it matter if things are written on walls and shit? Wouldn't the more important battle be with the book stores that sell bibles or the churches that give bible's to his children?

Religion isn't a threat to me. I see no reason to fight with people that believe. It simply doesn't matter. The only thing that would matter to me is religion affecting my children. As in a school giving my child bible lessons or something like that. I like debating it hear and talking about it, it's fun. But to really take some type stand against religion like this guy is doing is wild to me.

Our government is so fucked up right now. Why not take on something that may help fix it. Who cares about this shit? It's nothing.  

The problem is that when your law makers start making their decision with religion in the back of their mind and then making THEIR particular religious beliefs the shit while excluding everyone elses.....you start getting in to big issues.  

Why don't they put up "In Allah We Trust"?  That's the point the Atheist guy is making.  IF you let one you have to let them all.  IF you stop one you stop them all.  It's not like he's trying to get Atheist propaganda up there.  It needs to be ABSENT of religion or immersed in all thoughts.  

I agree with you Fender. But we can't control people's thoughts. If their religious, if their not religious, it will effect their decision making to some extent whether it's said aloud or kept hidden. I'd rather know that a person is religious or not as apposed to him feeling the need to hide his personal thoughts on religion.

I think it's an attempt to force people to be quiet about religion. Not a fight for right and wrong.

Hookbender — Jul 21, 2009I agree with you Fender. But we can't control people's thoughts. If their religious, if their not religious, it will effect their decision making to some extent whether it's said aloud or kept hidden. I'd rather know that a person is religious or not as apposed to him feeling the need to hide his personal thoughts on religion.

I think it's an attempt to force people to be quiet about religion. Not a fight for right and wrong.

Except that most religions WANT to control people's thoughts...

First, spell the word right - it's "Atheists"

Second, liberty and equality cannot truly exist if any aspect of government is religious.

We could argue semantics, and say that we can have different meanings for "God", but the fact is, the intent of the phrase "In God We Trust" as our national motto was always to stick it to the godless commies. "E Pluribus Unum" was pretty much universally considered the national motto until the 50s, but never made official. Same with the pledge of allegiance - both got some "God" in the 50s. And in the pledge, they added it between "one nation" and "indivisible" - with that act, they doomed the country to be divisible on the God question. And with taking "In God We Trust" as a national motto, it ignored the important message of unity and coming together represented by "E Pluribus Unum"

The FFRF is a great organization, and I hope they're successful. I'm tired of being marginalized because I'm okay with saying "I don't know, but I don't see any reason to" on the "Do you believe in God?" question.

Tripper

Hookbender — Jul 21, 2009I agree with you Fender. But we can't control people's thoughts. If their religious, if their not religious, it will effect their decision making to some extent whether it's said aloud or kept hidden. I'd rather know that a person is religious or not as apposed to him feeling the need to hide his personal thoughts on religion.

People lie. Religion is best kept to yourself, because it's a belief system that shows you lack intellectual rigor at least in one area of thought. It's too bad more people don't see that.

I think it's an attempt to force people to be quiet about religion. Not a fight for right and wrong.

Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit. You need to go to the FFRF's site and read about them. They're not trying to silence anyone. Just doing their constitutional duty to keep it out of government and keep OUR money from paying for religious crap.

Tripper

Tripper — Jul 22, 2009[quote author=Hookbender link=1248031183/0#10 date=1248199428]I agree with you Fender. But we can't control people's thoughts. If their religious, if their not religious, it will effect their decision making to some extent whether it's said aloud or kept hidden. I'd rather know that a person is religious or not as apposed to him feeling the need to hide his personal thoughts on religion.

People lie. Religion is best kept to yourself, because it's a belief system that shows you lack intellectual rigor at least in one area of thought. It's too bad more people don't see that.

I think it's an attempt to force people to be quiet about religion. Not a fight for right and wrong.

Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit. You need to go to the FFRF's site and read about them. They're not trying to silence anyone. Just doing their constitutional duty to keep it out of government and keep OUR money for paying for religious crap.

Tripper

First, it's your, not you. If your gonna spell correctly, use the correct form of the word.

Second, I'm sure you only show intellectual rigor in all areas of thought 100% of the time, right? I don't think being religious shows anything at all.

But OUR money does pay for religious crap. Churches are exempt from paying taxes. That would be the battle that needs to be taken on. If, your concerned about money, that is.

Hookbender — Jul 21, 2009I agree with you Fender. But we can't control people's thoughts. If their religious, if their not religious, it will effect their decision making to some extent whether it's said aloud or kept hidden. I'd rather know that a person is religious or not as apposed to him feeling the need to hide his personal thoughts on religion.

I think it's an attempt to force people to be quiet about religion. Not a fight for right and wrong.

FYI - It's "they're" not "their."  Just thought I'd butt in since you're into spelling correctness.  ;) :D ;D

I'm not into spelling correctness. Ever. And I prove it with almost every post. ;D ;D

Hookbender — Jul 22, 2009[quote author=Tripper link=1248031183/0#13 date=1248226065][quote author=Hookbender link=1248031183/0#10 date=1248199428]I agree with you Fender. But we can't control people's thoughts. If their religious, if their not religious, it will effect their decision making to some extent whether it's said aloud or kept hidden. I'd rather know that a person is religious or not as apposed to him feeling the need to hide his personal thoughts on religion.

People lie. Religion is best kept to yourself, because it's a belief system that shows you lack intellectual rigor at least in one area of thought. It's too bad more people don't see that.

I think it's an attempt to force people to be quiet about religion. Not a fight for right and wrong.

Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit. You need to go to the FFRF's site and read about them. They're not trying to silence anyone. Just doing their constitutional duty to keep it out of government and keep OUR money for paying for religious crap.

Tripper

First, it's your, not you. If your gonna spell correctly, use the correct form of the word.

Second, I'm sure you only show intellectual rigor in all areas of thought 100% of the time, right? I don't think being religious shows anything at all.

But OUR money does pay for religious crap. Churches are exempt from paying taxes. That would be the battle that needs to be taken on. If, your concerned about money, that is.

Our money pays for religious crap because we have government officials that are religious and let it bleed through.  If you'd help them get the idea that government and religion don't mix.....they'd not be spending our money on their religious shit.

And if you had government officials that were atheists, that would bleed through....although in a good way. ;D

And if you had gay government officials that would bleed through.

ETC, ETC.

Hookbender — Jul 22, 2009[quote author=Tripper link=1248031183/0#13 date=1248226065][quote author=Hookbender link=1248031183/0#10 date=1248199428]I agree with you Fender. But we can't control people's thoughts. If their religious, if their not religious, it will effect their decision making to some extent whether it's said aloud or kept hidden. I'd rather know that a person is religious or not as apposed to him feeling the need to hide his personal thoughts on religion.

People lie. Religion is best kept to yourself, because it's a belief system that shows you lack intellectual rigor at least in one area of thought. It's too bad more people don't see that.


First, it's your, not you. If your gonna spell correctly, use the correct form of the word.
You prove that YOU lack intellectual rigor by trying to correct something that was already correct!
I said "it shows you lack intellectual rigor", not "it shows you lack of intellectual rigor" (which would make the "you" wrong). You really want to try to fight that fight with me? ;)

Second, I'm sure you only show intellectual rigor in all areas of thought 100% of the time, right? I don't think being religious shows anything at all.

At least I try. Many people, and most who are religious, DO NOT. It's against their religion to question.

But OUR money does pay for religious crap. Churches are exempt from paying taxes. That would be the battle that needs to be taken on. If, your concerned about money, that is.

I am, but that's not the fight here, though, is it? Nice straw man...set him out in the field for the crows.

Tripper

Tripper — Jul 24, 2009[quote author=Hookbender link=1248031183/0#14 date=1248256332][quote author=Tripper link=1248031183/0#13 date=1248226065][quote author=Hookbender link=1248031183/0#10 date=1248199428]I agree with you Fender. But we can't control people's thoughts. If their religious, if their not religious, it will effect their decision making to some extent whether it's said aloud or kept hidden. I'd rather know that a person is religious or not as apposed to him feeling the need to hide his personal thoughts on religion.

People lie. Religion is best kept to yourself, because it's a belief system that shows you lack intellectual rigor at least in one area of thought. It's too bad more people don't see that.


First, it's your, not you. If your gonna spell correctly, use the correct form of the word.
You prove that YOU lack intellectual rigor by trying to correct something that was already correct!
I said "it shows you lack intellectual rigor", not "it shows you lack of intellectual rigor" (which would make the "you" wrong). You really want to try to fight that fight with me? ;)

Second, I'm sure you only show intellectual rigor in all areas of thought 100% of the time, right? I don't think being religious shows anything at all.

At least I try. Many people, and most who are religious, DO NOT. It's against their religion to question.

But OUR money does pay for religious crap. Churches are exempt from paying taxes. That would be the battle that needs to be taken on. If, your concerned about money, that is.

I am, but that's not the fight here, though, is it? Nice straw man...set him out in the field for the crows.

Tripper

I take things the way I want to and you were unclear in your post or sentence. ;D And no, I don't want to fight that fight with you, or anyone else. ;D

So you think people that are religious don't question anything outside of their religion? Wow. I thought their were smart people who were religious also.

I think it is partly the fight. If your liberal you want or expect rich folk to pay the bulk of taxes. Or, at least their fair share....which would be a majority. A church is basically a business, some very large. So to accept churches  not paying their fair share and other businesses paying out the ass is at least unfair and just plain wrong. There isn't any reason that a church shouldn't help maintain the road it's on or near. I think if this guy wants a fair justifiable and lagit fight, this would be much better. And, it would help out with all the money we owe right now. If we can put our kids in the situation to have to pay all this money back, we can add the churches to that also.  

Hookbender — Jul 25, 2009[quote author=Tripper link=1248031183/0#19 date=1248477615][quote author=Hookbender link=1248031183/0#14 date=1248256332][quote author=Tripper link=1248031183/0#13 date=1248226065][quote author=Hookbender link=1248031183/0#10 date=1248199428]I agree with you Fender. But we can't control people's thoughts. If their religious, if their not religious, it will effect their decision making to some extent whether it's said aloud or kept hidden. I'd rather know that a person is religious or not as apposed to him feeling the need to hide his personal thoughts on religion.

People lie. Religion is best kept to yourself, because it's a belief system that shows you lack intellectual rigor at least in one area of thought. It's too bad more people don't see that.


First, it's your, not you. If your gonna spell correctly, use the correct form of the word.
You prove that YOU lack intellectual rigor by trying to correct something that was already correct!
I said "it shows you lack intellectual rigor", not "it shows you lack of intellectual rigor" (which would make the "you" wrong). You really want to try to fight that fight with me? ;)

Second, I'm sure you only show intellectual rigor in all areas of thought 100% of the time, right? I don't think being religious shows anything at all.

At least I try. Many people, and most who are religious, DO NOT. It's against their religion to question.

But OUR money does pay for religious crap. Churches are exempt from paying taxes. That would be the battle that needs to be taken on. If, your concerned about money, that is.

I am, but that's not the fight here, though, is it? Nice straw man...set him out in the field for the crows.

Tripper

I take things the way I want to and you were unclear in your post or sentence. ;D And no, I don't want to fight that fight with you, or anyone else. ;D

So you think people that are religious don't question anything outside of their religion? Wow. I thought their were smart people who were religious also.

I think it is partly the fight. If your liberal you want or expect rich folk to pay the bulk of taxes. Or, at least their fair share....which would be a majority. A church is basically a business, some very large. So to accept churches  not paying their fair share and other businesses paying out the ass is at least unfair and just plain wrong. There isn't any reason that a church shouldn't help maintain the road it's on or near. I think if this guy wants a fair justifiable and lagit fight, this would be much better. And, it would help out with all the money we owe right now. If we can put our kids in the situation to have to pay all this money back, we can add the churches to that also.  

As an atheist I completely disagree with your statement about churches paying taxes.  

Why?  In a way it's like asking a charity to pay taxes.  Why the fuck would you do that?  Most churches, not the ones you see on TV, but most churches do use their funds for the good of mankind.  While I can see that you see the taxing potential of churches I don't think it's fair game to tax them.  

Would you want something like St. Judes or the Shriners paying taxes on the donations they get?  Would you want Second Harvest payign taxes on it's donations?  No you want that money to go straight to the people that it was intended to help.  While I understand there are preachers that line their pockets with "god's money", not all of them do.  

Religion is a man made product. If your church is advertising on T.V. to sell their product, religion, or their church to get more money, then they should be taxed in some way. A shit load of money is spent to build extremely nice churches, buy more land, etc. Not just help folks. Some portion of what churches do does need to be taxed. If the money is used to help people, I agree with you. But the preachers salary needs to be taxed, for example. The house he lives in needs to be taxed. They can pay tax on the vehicles they purchase. If their cash flow is used to pay salaries, tax it. Shit like that....fair stuff. Some of these preachers spend thousands of dollars on suits and clothes, that money needs to be taxed before it's spent. Like a $2000 suit....no need for shit like that. That is excessive bullshit.

Hookbender — Jul 27, 2009Religion is a man made product. If your church is advertising on T.V. to sell their product, religion, or their church to get more money, then they should be taxed in some way. A shit load of money is spent to build extremely nice churches, buy more land, etc. Not just help folks. Some portion of what churches do does need to be taxed. If the money is used to help people, I agree with you. But the preachers salary needs to be taxed, for example. The house he lives in needs to be taxed. They can pay tax on the vehicles they purchase. If their cash flow is used to pay salaries, tax it. Shit like that....fair stuff. Some of these preachers spend thousands of dollars on suits and clothes, that money needs to be taxed before it's spent. Like a $2000 suit....no need for shit like that. That is excessive bullshit.

As I have already stated.....SOME preachers get into excess.  It's certainly not the majority.  OR in any case you haven't presented any info that supports your position that even the majority do it.

I'm not sure if parishes are taxed and here is the thing.....the preacher lives there but the church owns it.  Think about this....you're a preacher.  You make a livable living.  Last year you were living in a 2 bedroom tiny tiny house because you lived in a poor area.  Then Next year you make a similar living....but the church bought a 4 bedroom house that is 3-4 times the value of the house you had last time.  You probably couldn't afford the taxes.  But the church would pay those taxes any...not the preacher.....though there are no taxes on those types of things.  

As far as cars go....I think it depends on the situation.  IF the preacher buys it with his own money he pays taxes.  If the church buys it for him...then it's not his car and as the church owns it they don't pay taxes.  Most preachers I know move every couple of years and it would be impractical to have the church buy a guy a car to use only to have him move......with what car he can't take the churches car they need it for the new guy.  So unless it's a bus or a van fo rthe church I'd bet most preachers pay the taxes on the car.

Here's the funny thing you don't realize.....you DON'T want the churches paying taxes.  Because then we get into situations where we are telling churches what to do with their money.  This can get really sticky and trick.  What if they run a school?  Trust me....you DON'T want that situation of a government sticking it's nose in church business.  It get really ugly legally really fast on several different levels.

Now flip the script.....what you also don't want is the churches telling the government what to do....and now we've come full circle as to why this guy doesn't want the government funding church related shit.

But how much money does a church spend on charity? Percentage wise? Do we know? I don't think so. Why? Because churches aren't responsible to anyone. So we really don't know.

And why does government give churches special treatment? Their are other lagit businesses that do charity work that have to pay taxes, right? And is this really separation of church and state?

Their are preachers that build huge fortunes off preaching. Land, etc.

If the church spends money helping people, let them report that with evidence to government and let them be exempt from taxes on that amount. The end.

Hookbender — Jul 27, 2009But how much money does a church spend on charity? Percentage wise? Do we know? I don't think so. Why? Because churches aren't responsible to anyone. So we really don't know.

And why does government give churches special treatment? Their are other lagit businesses that do charity work that have to pay taxes, right? And is this really separation of church and state?

Their are preachers that build huge fortunes off preaching. Land, etc.

If the church spends money helping people, let them report that with evidence to government and let them be exempt from taxes on that amount. The end.

Wrongo.....ALL businesses are given TAX BREAKS on charitiable work.  IF you are a doctor and you do pro-bono work....you get a tax break.  IF you as a taxpayer make contributions to a charity....YOU keep the reciept and turn it in a for a tax credit or break.

Churches are given this treatment because ultimately it is easier to deal with.  government shouldn't have it's mits in religion.  It just shouldn't.  Unfortunately the churches have found ways to generate revenue in large sums and have the luxury of not payign taxes on it.  Oh well.  

Think about it.....if you are a church....would you want your tax money paying for abortions?  Would you want your tax money paying for gambling (like we do at state levels), would you want your money paying for public schooling?  Hell no.  Why?  It would be in complete conflict with your personal beliefs.  The government is for all people.  Religion is for the people that want religion.  There is a big difference between those ideas.

PLus of all the things you are bitching about there are tax shelters that big businesses create.  My wife works for Fruit of the Loom.  The corperate offices are right here in Bowling Green.  The funny thing is that it's not an American company TECHNICALLY it runs out of the Caman (sp) Islands.  Why?  To escape tax burdens of the US government business tax model.  

I think they spend about 30% on hair gel alone! ;)

First..how much money is given to charity, percentage wise? How much goes to personal gain? How much money is put into public markets and what % do they make on that money as a church....tax free? And, is that fair and just?

Second, the government has it's hand in religion by giving them exemption from taxes.

Third...churches aren't given a TAX BREAK....they are EXEMPT from them. Exempt. Look that up if necessary.

I think they do get a jail break for porking small children though. I wonder if the parents of the child has to pay tax on the untaxed money they receive in a lawsuit in one of these cases?

Hookbender — Jul 28, 2009First..how much money is given to charity, percentage wise? How much goes to personal gain? How much money is put into public markets and what % do they make on that money as a church....tax free? And, is that fair and just?

Second, the government has it's hand in religion by giving them exemption from taxes.

Third...churches aren't given a TAX BREAK....they are EXEMPT from them. Exempt. Look that up if necessary.

I think they do get a jail break for porking small children though. I wonder if the parents of the child has to pay tax on the untaxed money they receive in a lawsuit in one of these cases?

Strawman at best.

First off a church has operation expenses like anything else.  The have to pay the preacher down to the cleaning lady.  IF you have a secretary that's probably around $70,000 in salaries for the year.  There is a parsonage and a church that have heating, cooling, electricity, water.  That's probably a nice small chunk of change too.

What pays for those things.  Something as fucking unreliable as TITHING.  Some people give more than the need to.  Some people give exactly what they should and some people don't give regularly or at all.  Some people don't make it to service every week!.

So let's take a nice small church.  Your average American church.  Hell probably half of the years tithings pay for the preacher and any folks that work at the church like a secretary and custodians.  So there isn't THAT much left and what is left goes to causes the church deems fit to give to.

Churches have programs that support mission work.  Plane tickets ain't cheap!  The have programs to feed starving people in the community....that costs money.  

Your average church couldn't afford paying taxes also!  It's your mega churches that make the crazy money and are global.  What you want to tax all the churches and break most of them and stick us with JUST the mega churches?!?!?!  It's those guys in the $5,000 suits.  If a minister walks in with a $5,000 suit paid for by church money in your AVERAGE church he'd be burned at the stake.  

your argument is silly and without merit.

Tell that to Joel, Mr. Jakes, etc.

They wear very high dollar suits. Hell, when I worked for a clothing store, we had a majority of the preachers in town. Hattiesburg, Ms. It was nothing for a common preacher to come in every 2 months or so and buy 3 or 4 suits, ties, shirts, socks, shoes etc. Would you like to know the average tab....around 3 to $4500 bucks. They'd buy $100 to $150 dollar ties for fucks sake. Some would order special made suits for around 2 to $2500 dollars each. You wouldn't believe the money these guys spend and the churches they come from. Small to medium size at best.

Your excusing churches, not defending them. It's a very lagit argument for churches to be taxed in some way and has been debated for years. I think now is the time. In a fair way, if thats possible.

Maybe, even though these are Atheist sites, their will be a few good reason we should tax churches. Just pay attention to the reasoning here. I know what these sites are.


http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/tax-the-churches.html

http://www.taxthechurches.org/

Churches, or religion, is also very involved in the election processes. look how the candidates target the religious votes in hopes of promoting their religious views of government. To say government isn't involved in religion, and religion with government, is just silly.

Now this is is funny - from http://www.taxthechurches.org/  

Because it is easily and routinely abused. Consider the proliferation of phony churches as a tax dodge. An IRS attorney cites a brothel "church," where sisterly love is offered to male parishioners in exchange for donations.

Well government helps out needy folk or poor people and they should. But churches aren't needy or poor. They should be taxed accordingly. Government doesn't need to help out Jakes, Joel, the 700 club, or any other church. If a church can't afford to operate on the current tax system, shut the fucker down. Who cares? If the church can't operate and sustain itself, how the fuck can it help people? It can't. It has no money to tax. ;D Therefore none to give or help or operate. ;D Probably has a suck ass preacher too.

It's a shitty excuse to say a church shouldn't be taxed because it helps people. God damn, I held the door open for a old lady yesterday, I shouldn't be taxed. ;D

And what if I have a group of idiots who believe in the pink unicorn? Can our group be tax exempt if we help out a few in need too?

Sure, they help people--to convert to their religion.  Any monies spent on proselytizing should be taxed.  Also, there's no reason a church shouldn't pay property taxes.  Everyone pays property taxes. I mean, if there's a fire in your church, public money pays for that fire to be put out.  Public money pays for the road that gets people to and from your church.  No reason you can't help pay for that shit.

Exactly Charger. :)

Hookbender — Jul 25, 2009[quote author=Tripper link=1248031183/0#19 date=1248477615][quote author=Hookbender link=1248031183/0#14 date=1248256332][quote author=Tripper link=1248031183/0#13 date=1248226065][quote author=Hookbender link=1248031183/0#10 date=1248199428]I agree with you Fender. But we can't control people's thoughts. If their religious, if their not religious, it will effect their decision making to some extent whether it's said aloud or kept hidden. I'd rather know that a person is religious or not as apposed to him feeling the need to hide his personal thoughts on religion.

People lie. Religion is best kept to yourself, because it's a belief system that shows you lack intellectual rigor at least in one area of thought. It's too bad more people don't see that.


First, it's your, not you. If your gonna spell correctly, use the correct form of the word.
You prove that YOU lack intellectual rigor by trying to correct something that was already correct!
I said "it shows you lack intellectual rigor", not "it shows you lack of intellectual rigor" (which would make the "you" wrong). You really want to try to fight that fight with me? ;)

Second, I'm sure you only show intellectual rigor in all areas of thought 100% of the time, right? I don't think being religious shows anything at all.

At least I try. Many people, and most who are religious, DO NOT. It's against their religion to question.

But OUR money does pay for religious crap. Churches are exempt from paying taxes. That would be the battle that needs to be taken on. If, your concerned about money, that is.

I am, but that's not the fight here, though, is it? Nice straw man...set him out in the field for the crows.

Tripper

I take things the way I want to and you were unclear in your post or sentence. ;D And no, I don't want to fight that fight with you, or anyone else. ;D
I wasn't unclear AT ALL. You didn't read the words I wrote correctly. That's not on me, my friend. :)

So you think people that are religious don't question anything outside of their religion? Wow. I thought their were smart people who were religious also.

I didn't mean to imply that. In this case, I should have been more clear. My point was that people who are truly, devoutly religious are not supposed to question. I shouldn't have said they don't, because many do. But most do not question certain things for fear of eternal damnation. It all depends on how devout they are.

I think it is partly the fight. If your liberal you want or expect rich folk to pay the bulk of taxes. Or, at least their fair share....which would be a majority.

In my perspective, if I were a wealthy man, I would have no problem paying a higher percentage of taxes than someone who doesn't have my resources, because I know that my added contribution helps those who can't contribute as much who work at least as hard as I do (or more, most likely - how many guys with money you know really WORK work? Most sit on their ass all day). That's a me perspective. It surprises me when people are very greedy or self-serving and don't want to pay taxes.

A church is basically a business, some very large. So to accept churches  not paying their fair share and other businesses paying out the ass is at least unfair and just plain wrong. There isn't any reason that a church shouldn't help maintain the road it's on or near. I think if this guy wants a fair justifiable and lagit fight, this would be much better. And, it would help out with all the money we owe right now. If we can put our kids in the situation to have to pay all this money back, we can add the churches to that also.

No more free rides for those who live in fantasyland...I'm with you there.

Now if we can only figure out a way to get tax money out of organized crime and drug cartels... :)
Tripper

our money should say

"IN ZAPPA WE TRUST"

Fenderbender — Jul 27, 2009
As I have already stated.....SOME preachers get into excess.  It's certainly not the majority.  OR in any case you haven't presented any info that supports your position that even the majority do it.

then why do I see preachers driving BMW's all the time around here?

religion = amway

fingers — Jul 19, 2009In Odin we trust

I didn't know Odin was gay  :o

The — Aug 10, 2009[quote author=Fenderbender link=1248031183/0#23 date=1248717820]
As I have already stated.....SOME preachers get into excess.  It's certainly not the majority.  OR in any case you haven't presented any info that supports your position that even the majority do it.

then why do I see preachers driving BMW's all the time around here?

religion = amway

Well, to be fair, you can't come to a conclusion on preachers wealth based on what you see "here". Wherever here is.

And since preachers are exempt from taxes, I haven't seen any evidence that says preachers don't live on the edge of immorality on this issue. Or churches, whatever. I think that discounts the prove a negative thing.