So what does VBOT think ....

[C5Nate]

Originally Posted by BuckyThreadkiller

It is soooo good to have you posting again.

Driven any other cars under water recently?

[Cybercowboy]

Where the hell is my free wine?

[Iron Chef]

Originally Posted by BuckyThreadkiller

It is soooo good to have you posting again.

Amen to that!

[Iron Chef]

Originally Posted by Cybercowboy

Where the hell is my free wine?

I dunno...where the hell is my free homemade pastrami on homemade rye bread with Russian dressing???

(you thought I forgot about that huh? )

[BuckyThreadkiller]

Originally Posted by Iron Chef

I dunno...where the hell is my free homemade pastrami on homemade rye bread with Russian dressing???

(you thought I forgot about that huh? )

No kraut? You can't make a decent Reuben without kraut.

[Cybercowboy]

Originally Posted by Iron Chef

I dunno...where the hell is my free homemade pastrami on homemade rye bread with Russian dressing???

(you thought I forgot about that huh? )

If you ever made it up this way, I'd, uh, make some.

With kraut!

[Iron Chef]

I got yer Kraut...

[Sea Six]

Originally Posted by 69camfrk

First I would like to go ahead and say that I'm conservative. But in that regard, I think the gov't should stay out of peoples lives. Forcing a business or institution to provide anydamnthing for an employee is not the governments concern. Maybe ol girl is a slut, hell, I don't care, but if you want ANYTHING screwed up, and I mean ANYTHING, let the gov't run it and or be involved with it in some way. I personally got sick of Rush's yap years ago. As far as I'm concerned, he is part of the problem, not the solution.

Sounds to me you are a right-leaning libertarian.

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

Originally Posted by BuckyThreadkiller

Don't take it out of context. Are you asking the Church to provide you with means to break church doctrine? And do it at no cost to you?

Breaking God's law is a sin and everyone sins. He knows that and provides for it. That doesn't make you a hypocrite, it makes you human. And the argument isn't about that at all.

Look, I'm no theologian or a goody two shoes. This is fundamental vacation bible school stuff. The Church has rules and they aren't in business helping people break them.

I understood your original post. I'm no bible thumper, HELL no. But some of the church bashing ruffles my feathers a little. But that's my problem, nobody else's.

[Butterfly71]

Originally Posted by C5Nate

Driven any other cars under water recently?

:-P :-P :-P

Nope MTP bought me a boat

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by TxAg

Bucky you articulate what, IMHO, many of us are thinking quite well.

I will say the only "rule" I've ever seen a church help break is gluttony. Dang pot-luck lunches/dinners.

I'm guessing the organized cover up of the rape of tens of thousands of little boys escaped you.

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by BuckyThreadkiller

Help me understand this Phil.

The government NOT taking donated money from an entity means they are subsidizing that entity?

Either I completely misunderstand your point or that is the most bassakward thing I've read in a long time.

Yes, a tax break is a subsidy.

Federal and state governments provide huge benefits to all churches in the form of income and sales exemptions and as well as substantial grants.

We all pay higher taxes because the churches pay none.

We also simply give them money. The Department of Health and Human Services and other government agencies has given the Catholic Church billions of dollars.

And to get back to the idea that all of this was the belief of the founding fathers, that is simply incorrect. Tax exempt status for religions is not in the Constitution. A court made this determination.

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by TxAg

Take your hate and bigotry of religion somewhere else.

You said "the only "rule" I've ever seen a church help break is gluttony". How is stating facts of very recent history "hate and bigotry"?

[Iron Chef]

Originally Posted by TxAg

Take your hate and bigotry of religion somewhere else.

I think it's time to take this thread somewhere else...

[BuckyThreadkiller]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Yes, a tax break is a subsidy.

Federal and state governments provide huge benefits to all churches in the form of income and sales exemptions and as well as substantial grants.

We all pay higher taxes because the churches pay none.

We also simply give them money. The Department of Health and Human Services and other government agencies has given the Catholic Church billions of dollars.

And to get back to the idea that all of this was the belief of the founding fathers, that is simply incorrect. Tax exempt status for religions is not in the Constitution. A court made this determination.

For a tax break to be a subsidy is to imply that the money is the government's in the first place and that is completely backwards. If I earn a dollar and then only pay 20 cents in tax rather than 30, I haven't been given a subsidy. I've simply kept more of my money.

The money flows from the people to the government, not the other way around. Donations aren't earned income so they aren't taxable for any charity.

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by BuckyThreadkiller

For a tax break to be a subsidy is to imply that the money is the government's in the first place and that is completely backwards. If I earn a dollar and then only pay 20 cents in tax rather than 30, I haven't been given a subsidy. I've simply kept more of my money.

The money flows from the people to the government, not the other way around. Donations aren't earned income so they aren't taxable for any charity.

Sorry, that's not how I see it. If you have two businesses - and the church is certainly a business - and one pays taxes while the other does not, the one not paying taxes is receiving a subsidy.

There is nothing in the constitution that states religous institutions can not be taxed. That is a decision courts have made. It's also been revoked when the government decided they didn't like what a religous group was doing. Bob Jones University is a good example, the government revoked their tax exempt status when they refused to let black students go to school there. So you can see, what the government "gives", they can also take away.

[Stangkiller]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Sorry, that's not how I see it. If you have two businesses - and the church is certainly a business - and one pays taxes while the other does not, the one not paying taxes is receiving a subsidy.

There is nothing in the constitution that states religous institutions can not be taxed. That is a decision courts have made. It's also been revoked when the government decided they didn't like what a religous group was doing. Bob Jones University is a good example, the government revoked their tax exempt status when they refused to let black students go to school there. So you can see, what the government "gives", they can also take away.

A religious college was selling a service. A church on a sunday morning doesn't sell anything, but when they do sell things, that income certainly can and should be taxed. But a donation to a church should NOT be taxed.

The question is whether or not the donor should receive a tax deduction for it. That may be another story.

[RedLS1GTO]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Yeah, this phenom is strictly a Liberal thing.

I don't seem to remember everyone up in arms when the media, celebrities, and EVERYBODY blasted Bush. Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a c*nt as directly and blatantly as it could get and yet it barely made news. John Boehner and Eric Cantor were just called "demons" by a REPRESENTATIVE and it made minimal news.

Yet... on the other hand, a talk show host calls a college student a slut and it is headline news for a week straight and the PRESIDENT gets involved??

You really don't see the disparity in this? GMAFB


Can you even imagine what would happen if it was reversed and Rush called Michelle Obama a c*nt??

What if John Boehner called Maxine Waters a "demon"??

Can you imagine the response if Fox News analysts started calling Obama a "bumbling idiot" or anything like was said about Bush on CNN??

[BuckyThreadkiller]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Sorry, that's not how I see it. If you have two businesses - and the church is certainly a business - and one pays taxes while the other does not, the one not paying taxes is receiving a subsidy.

There is nothing in the constitution that states religous institutions can not be taxed. That is a decision courts have made. It's also been revoked when the government decided they didn't like what a religous group was doing. Bob Jones University is a good example, the government revoked their tax exempt status when they refused to let black students go to school there. So you can see, what the government "gives", they can also take away.

There's also nothing in the Constitution that says they should be taxed. The constitution doesn't set tax policy, it tells Congress to do that.

And Churches most certainly aren't businesses. They do not operate for profit, they produce no products.

[Torqaholic]

Originally Posted by Iron Chef

...She said the cost of contraceptives COULD cost up to $3000 per year. The reality is that on average, it’s somewhere between $10 and $100 per month...

Another liberal lying thru their teeth? Who woulda thunk it?