All Hail The Lords Of Capital
http://tinyurl.com/5cs8rq

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) has a promotional video for "Free Day Away" that violates all the same regulations that the Pentagon Inspector General found had been violated by the officers who appeared in the Campus Crusade for Christ Christian Embassy video. It's actually a video of the promotional video being shown at another church.

There's a link to this "Free Day Away" video at the end of a piece I wrote about it last week:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-rodda/who-will-guard-the-guards_b_11...

MRFF's lawsuit plaintiff Jeremy Hall did his basic training at Fort Leonard Wood, so he was subjected to this program -- a program that is so bad that MRFF has received over 300 individual complaints about it since 2005, and is, of course, including it in the lawsuit.

Attila the Appeaser, No Stomach for Kristol @ 5:

Why does Joe Lieberman hate the USA? The feeling is mutual.

Joey's trying to sew up the terrorist vote for McLame. He's worried that Hussein Obama will beat him to the punch!

Televangelist's family reaps lavish lifestyle serving God. And it's all tax free.

http://sandiego.cox.net/cci/newsnational/national?_mode=view&_state=maxi...

mudshark @ 9:

Che's Lounge @ 8:

Televangelist's family reaps lavish lifestyle serving God. And it's all tax free.

http://sandiego.cox.net/cci/newsnational/national?_mode=view&_state=maximized&view=article&id=D9265F500&_action=validatearticle

The IRS should tax the church's . All of them.

The IRS rules are written to favor these mega churches. The more money they make, the more friends in D.C they can buy.

mudshark @ 9:

Che's Lounge @ 8:

Televangelist's family reaps lavish lifestyle serving God. And it's all tax free.

http://sandiego.cox.net/cci/newsnational/national?_mode=view&_state=maximized&view=article&id=D9265F500&_action=validatearticle

The IRS should tax the church's . All of them.

You know I've said in the past that most of the small churches in this country that spend their money on doing good with no strings attached treat their tax exempt status correctly. The big guys, like Copeland, Dobson, Hagee and their minions, are the ones who are doing the abusing. I'm no fan of Grassley or any republican, but I was glad to see him take this on and knew he would eventually be chastised for it. And so it happens.
You may find it ironic, though, that last night at church we seriously began discussing giving up our 503(c) status. My pastor and a couple of others have been doing some research into what our end of the bargain is and found some interesting facts. First, there is a big double standard. Churches or their representatives are not allowed to endorse political candidates. I think we've seen that violated many times on the republican side. and now we're seeing the dems join up. Endorsement of candidates or campaigning from the pulpit is grounds for having 503(c) status revoked. Engaging in actions considered to be dissent or conflicting with the decisions and actions of the government are grounds for 503(c) review. In other words, if a large body of members from a church decide to organize a war protest, that congregation can lose their tax exemption. If a minister calls out the government for their war crimes, even if he does so on his own time off church property, that church can lose their 503(c). We've found that many small churches have already. Under the Shrub-in-Chief and his administration, tax exempt status is one way that has been used to keep groups of people quiet. I imagine that Methodist minister is looking at more trouble than just getting arrested. They're not stupid enough to go after the whole Methodist organization - they'll only go after one small church and the nationwide body won't bother to spend the legal fees to help them. The whole thing will then go pretty much unnoticed.

It looks like we're opting out. We still believe that there needs to be separation of church and state, but if our 503(c) is muzzling us if we decide to speak out the loss of our freedom of speech isn't worth the small amount of money we've saved.

Che's Lounge @ 8:

Televangelist's family reaps lavish lifestyle serving God. And it's all tax free.

http://sandiego.cox.net/cci/newsnational/national?_mode=view&_state=maximized&view=article&id=D9265F500&_action=validatearticle

Yeah. But, he's OUR terrorist. He's one of the "good" guys. Clearly, not an "evil doer".

PZ Myers has now proven himself to be a real dick.

This comment concerns the content of P.Z. Myers' post.

I am the author of the post McCain's Catholic Problem, one of the posts linked hereto above. As such, I am Catholic who is a proud liberal who wishes never to impose my religious beliefs on others. As Thomas Jefferson once said, "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God."

But with that said, Dr. Myers has also insulted me, first in aligning me with anti-Semites and then for needlessly ridiculing my religious beliefs. And as readers of my Talk to Action posts know, I am the farthest thing from a Donohue type of Catholic. I find Myers to be almost as strident and insulting to others as Bill Donohue. P.Z. Myers is free to believe and say that the Host is "a cracker," but in earnest, what good does it do to endlessly repeat his with such arrogant nastiness?

Nothing.

All P.Z.'s nastiness does is give ammunition to the enemies of liberalism -- secular or religious. Sometimes valor is indeed the better part of discretion.

The body is God's temple. Every body ought to be automatically exempt if makeshift churches can operate tax free.

Gretchen @ 17:

CAlI @ 15:

mudshark @ 13:

Gretchen@12
Thank You for your response. You made your point very well. This is the thing that really ticks me off. All the political posturing and a tax exempt status. I would have no problem with religious organizations if they paid taxes. They could say/ do whatever they want. IF they paid taxes. You hit the nail on the head Gretchen. By paying taxes, that would free them up to say whatever they want. Be it endorsing or protesting.
Thanks again Gretchen.

Yeah well if you want a seperation of Church and State then they must be kept seperate.

So a group of Christians has no right to protest or speak out against the war crimes committed by our government? Even if they are paying taxes? Just because they're Christian?

I'm not sure of your point here.

I take it your asking me Gretchen. So I'll throw in my 2 cents worth.
1st, People have the right to do what ever they want. But if their acting under the umbrella of a religious organization which is tax exempt. Then they have given up that right. If the organization wishes to be politically active. Then they have to pay taxes. At which time they can do what ever they want. Again this applies to working under the umbrella of said religious org's.
The individual, regardless of religious affiliation is free to do what ever they want. But once the Organization(religious) steps in
it becomes a separation of church and state issue.
This would exclude Preachers, Ministers and any other head of a church. They are clearly affiliated with Church's and their status.
People have the right to do what ever they wish as private citizens. But once they come under the heading of any type of organization. That's different,especially when they're granted a tax exempt status. They should not be able to preach politics from the pulpit. If they want to do so, pay up.

mudshark @ 22:

Gretchen @ 17:

CAlI @ 15:

mudshark @ 13:

Yeah well if you want a seperation of Church and State then they must be kept seperate.

So a group of Christians has no right to protest or speak out against the war crimes committed by our government? Even if they are paying taxes? Just because they're Christian?

I'm not sure of your point here.

I take it your asking me Gretchen. So I'll throw in my 2 cents worth.
1st, People have the right to do what ever they want. But if their acting under the umbrella of a religious organization which is tax exempt. Then they have given up that right. If the organization wishes to be politically active. Then they have to pay taxes. At which time they can do what ever they want. Again this applies to working under the umbrella of said religious org's.
The individual, regardless of religious affiliation is free to do what ever they want. But once the Organization(religious) steps in
it becomes a separation of church and state issue.
This would exclude Preachers, Ministers and any other head of a church. They are clearly affiliated with Church's and their status.
People have the right to do what ever they wish as private citizens. But once they come under the heading of any type of organization. That's different,especially when they're granted a tax exempt status. They should not be able to preach politics from the pulpit. If they want to do so, pay up.

Nope Muddy, you and I are in total agreement. My church sees the problem in this way - as Christians we are supposed to speak out against injustice and act for the poor and powerless. We are also a 503(c) organization that prevents us from speaking out against the government; to do so would violate the laws concerning 503(c). Breaking the law is something we're not supposed to do as Christians. So now we're stuck in the middle. The best thing to do is to give up the 503(c) so we can speak our minds and call it like it is without breaking the law. I guess breaking the law bothers us a lot more than it bothers Rev. Copeland.
It was the comment after yours about separation that has me confused.

Gretchen @ 24:

mudshark @ 22:

Gretchen @ 17:

CAlI @ 15:
So a group of Christians has no right to protest or speak out against the war crimes committed by our government? Even if they are paying taxes? Just because they're Christian?

I'm not sure of your point here.

I take it your asking me Gretchen. So I'll throw in my 2 cents worth.
1st, People have the right to do what ever they want. But if their acting under the umbrella of a religious organization which is tax exempt. Then they have given up that right. If the organization wishes to be politically active. Then they have to pay taxes. At which time they can do what ever they want. Again this applies to working under the umbrella of said religious org's.
The individual, regardless of religious affiliation is free to do what ever they want. But once the Organization(religious) steps in
it becomes a separation of church and state issue.
This would exclude Preachers, Ministers and any other head of a church. They are clearly affiliated with Church's and their status.
People have the right to do what ever they wish as private citizens. But once they come under the heading of any type of organization. That's different,especially when they're granted a tax exempt status. They should not be able to preach politics from the pulpit. If they want to do so, pay up.

Nope Muddy, you and I are in total agreement. My church sees the problem in this way - as Christians we are supposed to speak out against injustice and act for the poor and powerless. We are also a 503(c) organization that prevents us from speaking out against the government; to do so would violate the laws concerning 503(c). Breaking the law is something we're not supposed to do as Christians. So now we're stuck in the middle. The best thing to do is to give up the 503(c) so we can speak our minds and call it like it is without breaking the law. I guess breaking the law bothers us a lot more than it bothers Rev. Copeland.
It was the comment after yours about separation that has me confused.

My understanding of the subject is that under English rule people were forced to pay taxes to some Churchs even if they weren't members and other Churchs were forced to pay taxes to the government just for existing.

Hence when the founders wrote the bill of rights they wanted to prevent bith from taking place.

CAlI @ 23:

Frank Cocozzelli @ 18:

This comment concerns the content of P.Z. Myers' post.

I am the author of the post McCain's Catholic Problem, one of the posts linked hereto above. As such, I am Catholic who is a proud liberal who wishes never to impose my religious beliefs on others. As Thomas Jefferson once said, "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God."

But with that said, Dr. Myers has also insulted me, first in aligning me with anti-Semites and then for needlessly ridiculing my religious beliefs. And as readers of my Talk to Action posts know, I am the farthest thing from a Donohue type of Catholic. I find Myers to be almost as strident and insulting to others as Bill Donohue. P.Z. Myers is free to believe and say that the Host is "a cracker," but in earnest, what good does it do to endlessly repeat his with such arrogant nastiness?

Nothing.

All P.Z.'s nastiness does is give ammunition to the enemies of liberalism -- secular or religious. Sometimes valor is indeed the better part of discretion.

"All P.Z.'s nastiness does is give ammunition to the enemies of liberalism"

Oh he gave them ammo alright.

Yeah, and I got the damn cliche wrong; It's "discretion is the better part of valor."

Oh, the sins of dyslexia and poor proofreading!

Re: the consortiumnews piece - Is it really possible for a U.S. President to issue a pardon for himself? And should it be?
OK, I think (hope) we can all agree on the answer to that second question ...