If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Indy Channel)   Church puts up sign depicting two men being lynched, two slaves in shackles - with one word 'VOTE'. Not surprisingly, some people have a problem with this   (theindychannel.com) divider line 60
    More: Sad, Indianapolis, black community  
•       •       •

12019 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Sep 2012 at 12:10 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-09-13 12:47:47 AM
6 votes:
The IRS on Political Campaign Activity (PDF - p.7)

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all IRC section 501(c)(3) organizations, including churches and religious
organizations, are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise tax.

Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including the presentation of public forums and the publication of voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not constitute prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner. On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that: (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.


My interpretation of the billboard's message is that not so long ago in the US, blacks were denied the vote. Voting is such a precious thing that it is important to exercise your civic duty.
2012-09-13 12:12:24 AM
5 votes:
So you lose tax exempt status, right? I can only hope.
2012-09-13 12:37:29 AM
3 votes:

Slam1263: Yeah, 'cause the Republicans started the KKK, my Democrat party boss told me so.


No, it was conservatives that started the KKK. It's just that the same conservative mindset happens to be held in the Republican party today.
2012-09-13 12:37:03 AM
3 votes:
jso2897:

Let's not forget the REAL victims - white boys made uncomfortable by the truth.

This.

But it's still a church meddling in politics. If it's bad when white right-wing fundies do it then it's bad when black progressives do it.

Anyway it's not voting that ended slavery, it was the Civil War. And lynching was ended by the FBI, the same FBI that broke the Black Panthers. In all these cases these things happened because it was in the interest of the predominant sectors of the ruling classes, not the people of whatever color.

One retort to my "religion out of politics" stand is that voting and praying are of equal inefficacy. I have no answer to that.
2012-09-13 12:33:38 AM
3 votes:
But others said they believe the message is confusing and out of touch.

"Other pictures could have been put up, other words could have been said rather than have people think, 'I'm going get hung. I'm going to get lynched, if I don't vote,'" said Mary Bishop, who owns Mary's Seafood right across the street.


I have to agree with this. What message were they trying to send? I mean, I get what they think they probably meant...but there had to be an easier, clearer way to say it.
2012-09-13 12:33:27 AM
3 votes:
Using it to serve as a reminder that the african american community didn't always have the right to vote, and many perished fighting for that right. Kind of an off the beaten path approach to take to get there. Very effective to get people talking though.
2012-09-13 12:16:38 AM
3 votes:
"Take it down. This is 2012," he said. "You don't supposed to do the racial thing. I don't know what it means."

Take it down ... because I don't know what it means? Huh?
2012-09-13 09:20:03 AM
2 votes:
Churches can push issues, but they can't explicitly endorse candidates or parties unless they give up their tax-exempt status. If they are willing not to be tax exempt then they are completely free.

The sign could be better done especially in regards to helping the clueless understand it though I don't see anything wrong with the message per se. If blacks don't take the effort to vote and other groups do, then they will over time lose any rights that they have. Indeed the reason why they have rights today is because some of them did get involved. Does anyone have any doubt that if Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, etc. had not done what they had done that blacks would still be citizens in name only. They stood up to fire hoses, dogs, and to sadistic cops. The descendents of those who made their freedom possible are merely being asked to vote.
2012-09-13 07:04:54 AM
2 votes:
www.plfo.org

"The Internal Revenue Service began a push to educate tax-exempt organizations about regulations that govern their tax-exempt status after receiving numerous complaints about partisan preaching during the 2004 election. In a study of 132 tax-exempt organizations, many of them churches, nearly three quarters were found to have engaged in political campaigning to some degree. In 55 cases, the IRS issued a written advisory. In three, it recommended revoking tax-exempt status (none of the three cases involved churches). Many of the cases involved one-time violations or violations that could be addressed "short of revocation," said Steve Pyrek, director of communication for the Tax-Exempt Government Entities with the IRS."
(linky)
2012-09-13 06:53:00 AM
2 votes:

iaazathot: Slam1263: Yeah, 'cause the Republicans started the KKK, my Democrat party boss told me so.

No, it was conservatives that started the KKK. It's just that the same conservative mindset happens to be held in the Republican party today.


"Conservative" and "progressive" are only relative to the social environment you live in. Like how things are and don't want them to change? You are conservative. Want to change things? You are progressive. Saying that conservatives today want the same things as conservatives 120 years ago is mind bogglingly stupid.
2012-09-13 01:20:48 AM
2 votes:

Sleazy_as_Pie: jso2897: Sleazy_as_Pie: So you lose tax exempt status, right? I can only hope.

Since they are endorsing no candidate or party - yeah, you can only hope.
Well, you could shiat in the other hand, and see which gets full first.

To be fair, I don't think their point was wrong, regardless of how stupidly it was made. But they're still a church interjecting themselves into politics.

So yeah... Pay your taxes.


First, change the rules. If you did, a WHOLE lot of other, less offensively brown churches would have to pay taxes, too.
2012-09-13 01:11:09 AM
2 votes:

Easy Reader: Often I'm glad I'm so apathetic. Must be shiatty to go around all the time being angry at minor things so out of one's control.


On the contrary, I think a lot of people find anger invigorating. Anger and hatred connect to a sense of self-righteousness, and if there's any emotion the average person enjoys more than self-righteousness, I'm not sure what it is. Love, I suppose. But love is a lot harder to find and maintain for most people than self-righteousness. 

It also, in a way, gives one a sense of being in control. If bad things happen to you because bad people did bad things, then it's their fault, and punishing them should (at least in theory) cause the bad things to stop.

There's also a cultural element. Americans, more so than other other nationality, want to believe that every bad thing that happens is somebody's fault. I think it's again about wanting (somebody) to have control.
2012-09-13 12:52:39 AM
2 votes:

The Bestest: The One True TheDavid: So what person or party do you think most blacks who are moved to vote by that sign will chose to vote for?

Did you seriously just post that without the slightest hint of irony?


Have some sympathy. He's been victimized by being reminded that the privileges he enjoys were tortured out of somebody else's hide - and he isn't man enough to face the truth.
Somebody should take down that mean old sign that is oppressing him.
2012-09-13 12:50:25 AM
2 votes:

The One True TheDavid: So what person or party do you think most blacks who are moved to vote by that sign will chose to vote for?


Did you seriously just post that without the slightest hint of irony?
2012-09-13 12:46:50 AM
2 votes:

The Bestest: HotWingAgenda: jso2897: Sleazy_as_Pie: So you lose tax exempt status, right? I can only hope.

Since they are endorsing no candidate or party - yeah, you can only hope.
Well, you could shiat in the other hand, and see which gets full first.

It's a message from a religious faction to its constituency to vote in an upcoming election. That does cross the line to violating the establishment clause of the first amendment, especially since the government is subsidizing the property on which she posted the sign.

Uh no. If it encouraged voting for any specific issue, measure or person, that'd be one thing. It does not.


Correct. Churches hold voter registration drives all the time. I'm personally not comfortable with it, but it's not illegal.
2012-09-13 12:37:39 AM
2 votes:

Slam1263: Yeah, 'cause the Republicans started the KKK, my Democrat party boss told me so.


Farking Southern strategy, how does that work?

/GOP lost it's moral high ground when it came to race the moment they tried to court the "Southerner who was disgruntled with the Civil Rights Act" vote.
2012-09-13 12:35:36 AM
2 votes:

HotWingAgenda: jso2897: Sleazy_as_Pie: So you lose tax exempt status, right? I can only hope.

Since they are endorsing no candidate or party - yeah, you can only hope.
Well, you could shiat in the other hand, and see which gets full first.

It's a message from a religious faction to its constituency to vote in an upcoming election. That does cross the line to violating the establishment clause of the first amendment, especially since the government is subsidizing the property on which she posted the sign.


Uh no. If it encouraged voting for any specific issue, measure or person, that'd be one thing. It does not.
2012-09-13 12:33:45 AM
2 votes:
What's the problem here? Some woman across the street who sells pastries completely misses the point? That's the tragedy? I mean everything else was pretty cool.
2012-09-13 12:32:55 AM
2 votes:
Is it merely coincidence that no race was mentioned and that Joy Thornton's name was misspelled in the article causing first click googling to return no results. Chumming fresh water for sharks?

/ why yes, it is tinfoil. At least I bent the brim
2012-09-13 12:30:09 AM
2 votes:
Often I'm glad I'm so apathetic. Must be shiatty to go around all the time being angry at minor things so out of one's control.
2012-09-13 12:19:45 AM
2 votes:
Let's not forget the REAL victims - white boys made uncomfortable by the truth.
2012-09-13 05:56:21 PM
1 votes:

clyph: Itstoearly: Saying that conservatives today want the same things as conservatives 120 years ago is mind bogglingly stupid.

The Know-Nothings of Lincoln's era are pretty much indistinguishable from today's Tea Party.

To quote Abe: "As a nation, we began by declaring that 'all men are created equal.' We now practically read it 'all men are created equal, except Negroes.' When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except Negroes and foreigners and Catholics.'"

Substitute 'homosexuals' for 'Negros' and it's pretty much spot-on for the teabaggers, and the only reason they don't openly hate Negros (besides Obama) is because they can't get away with doing so openly. In 155 years the only thing that's changed is which minority group they hate the most.


Goddamnit, does that mean I should stop making these homos pick my cotton?

Yeah, spot-on analogy, asshole.
2012-09-13 08:04:45 AM
1 votes:

sporkme: The sign clearly intends for viewers to be inspired to vote for Obama


No.. no it doesn't.

WMittensRomney: [www.plfo.org image 300x216]


Not a violation.

JustGetItRight: An AME church I pass almost every day has a huge 'Vote Democratic' banner right in the front yard.


THAT would be a violation.
2012-09-13 06:39:41 AM
1 votes:

sporkme: The sign clearly intends for viewers to be inspired to vote for Obama


Wait... what? How the fark do you get THAT from what the sign shows?
2012-09-13 04:42:42 AM
1 votes:
I'm allowed to have two thoughts here.

White Congregation: This is incendiary, needs to be taken down, an apology offered, and at least one person in a leadership role let go.

Black Congregation: Shut up about something you can't understand.

I guess there's a third option too.

Korean/Hispanic/Other Congregation: I'm glad I only read English so I don't have to get involved.
2012-09-13 04:12:23 AM
1 votes:

HotWingAgenda: jso2897:IRS regulations are clear, and they don't care about those made-up rules you just pulled out of your ass.

fusillade762: Correct. Churches hold voter registration drives all the time. I'm personally not comfortable with it, but it's not illegal.

WMittensRomney: Or not.


I like these.

This is fun.

The Constitution can be fairly portrayed as a set of negative rights for the Government. It is not a list of things you, a church, or a company cannot do--it is a list of things the Government is forbidden to do to you. The Establishment Clause is so called because the government cannot "establish" or show preference for any religion. Only governments can violate constitutionally protected rights or liberties. It does not work the other way. Sorry.

What opponents of messages like this should cite, be they for Obama or against, is the 501c3 tax exemption, whereby a church could go right ahead and have a sign that violates the code BECAUSE IT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED FREE SPEECH but they would be required to pay some other taxes.

Let us not go to the IRS, it is a silly place.

The sign clearly intends for viewers to be inspired to vote for Obama. I won't be voting for him, but I also think it is fine for the supporters to show their asses in such a ridiculous way. I display libertarian messages in my business, and nobody cries about the separation of business and state, except for some union guys. I don't have any special tax exemptions, but like a church, I am not forcing the people who come through my doors to vote one way or the other.

I think that the tax exemption requirements on churches is the thing that teeters on the edge of the constitutional razor in that it is too restrictive. The government is reducing the capability of a group or individual to engage in political speech based on a religion test. I would be in favor of all churches being allowed the same speech rights as individuals.

But hell, I would also be in favor of deleting the IRS.

"This is slavery, not to speak one's thought."
― Euripides
 

I have eaten at that diner. I worked at a store right by there. I don't remember the food, but I worked in that area for a couple of months and I only ate there once, so it must not have been anything to write home about. I have not been buried in any of that other lady's caskets.
2012-09-13 04:01:57 AM
1 votes:

The One True TheDavid: ArcadianRefugee: Sleazy_as_Pie: But they're still a church interjecting themselves into politics.

Voting is civics, not politics.

Civics is not religion. Except in a religious dictatorship like Iran.


Perhaps, but "get out and vote!" is not 'interfering with politics' no matter how you slice it.

Skyred: really? there was a follow up comment no more than 5 down or so


Obv hadn't seen that, but point stands: there are enough crazies around to ensure some everywhere you look.
2012-09-13 03:40:20 AM
1 votes:
Other pictures could have been put up, other words could have been said rather than have people think, 'I'm going get hung. I'm going to get lynched, if I don't vote,'" said Mary Bishop, who owns Mary's Seafood right across the street.


Goddamn Mary Bishop, you are stupid a fark.
2012-09-13 03:38:08 AM
1 votes:

The One True TheDavid: But it's still a church meddling in politics. If it's bad when white right-wing fundies do it then it's bad when black progressives do it.


It's a church exhorting its members to civil participation. I'm a pretty secular guy, not a fan of the 10 Commandments posted on school walls and I've gotten into Thanksgiving/Christmas arguments for pointing out that "Under God" wasn't added to the Pledge until the 50s (it's hard to convince a Baby Boomer that "it's been that way for me entire life" doesn't mean it's an immutable law of nature), but I don't have a problem with this.


Maybe if you all had stopped going to church when they started parading around with aborted-fetus photos on placards 40 years ago they would've run out of money by now.
2012-09-13 03:29:12 AM
1 votes:

PreMortem: Okay, what party is wanting to do the enslaving and lynching?

Missing something here...


I ... I think it's actually kind of apolitical, or at least a-party-ly political. Just a preacher trying to remind (especially black) people of the struggles it took to have things like "the right to vote" and "representative government," and that you should damn well get up off your ass and go do it.
2012-09-13 02:50:40 AM
1 votes:

Slam1263: Yeah, 'cause the Republicans started the KKK, my Democrat party boss told me so.


Yet another person ignorant of the Southern Strategy.

In Lincolns day, the Republicans were the Progressives (AKA liberals). They didn't turn (fiscacally) conservative until Taft turned on his mentor and patron Teddy Roosevelt.

Southern democrats stopped being butthurt about losing a war to a Republican around the time a damnyankee papist Democrat got hisself elected president and started lettin' the n*ggers vote and shiat. Nixon and Goldwater capitalized on this new source of butthurt to get them to switch their allegiance and turn Republican. Reagan completed the trend by inviting the religious right into the "big tent'
2012-09-13 02:11:51 AM
1 votes:

The Bestest: HotWingAgenda: It's specifically aimed at a religious faction, if you had bothered reading the article or my post. It's also aimed at a particular ethnic minority, as admitted by the person who put it up.

Once again, it is not advocating any particular issue or candidate. It is not AT ALL telling people what to vote FOR.


Once again, it's that a CHURCH made a POLITICAL statement.

Regardless of what the statement was.

It's the flip side of "In God We Trust" on money.
2012-09-13 02:00:29 AM
1 votes:
Hanged not hung

/they said you was hung
//and they was right
2012-09-13 01:56:19 AM
1 votes:

jso2897: The Bestest: The One True TheDavid:

So what person or party do you think most blacks who are moved to vote by that sign will chose to vote for?

Did you seriously just post that without the slightest hint of irony?

Have some sympathy. He's been victimized by being reminded that the privileges he enjoys were tortured out of somebody else's hide - and he isn't man enough to face the truth.
Somebody should take down that mean old sign that is oppressing him.


You read me totally incorrectly. It's not that the sign is oppressing me: I agree with its sentiment, however harmless it might be. The problem I have is that it's on church property, in violation of the Establishment Clause.

This sign should be in a public park or school or in front of City Hall. Places, by the way, where the word "God' should never be invoked in an "official" way.

As for voting, I've already said I think it's as harmless as prayer.

Oh, ad I was once almost beaten up for saying that the South had a right to secede: the Civil War was an illegal aggression against the South, unconstititional until after the North won and the Radical Reconstructionists got control of Congress and passed the 13th, 14th and 15 Amendments.

The analogy I use is that going to war against the South for seceding was as wrong as pulling a gun on your wife because she wants to leave you: whether your wife had a good reason to leave you or not ain't the point, it's that she freely entered into a contract she is free to leave. And by pulling a gun on her you'd be showing her and everybody what a violent asshole you are and giving her a perfectly good reason to leave you.

This has nothing to do with slavery: the South did indeed secede to preserve slavery, slavery that was always wrong. Furthermore it took an unconstitutional and illegal civil war to end slavery, a result I can't argue with: it was a lesser evil than letting slavery continue.

This by the is where the analogy with marital breakup gets complicated: if your wife is leaving you to pimp your kids out to pedophiles then pulling a gun on her to stop her from taking them is less wrong than letting her take the kids with her. If you substitute "wife" for "Confederacy" and "kids" for "slaves" you might get my point.

I only wish that the South's insistence on preserving and spreading its "peculiar institution" had not pushed things to the point where the Civil War was necessary to end slavery -- and that the North had not let them keep pushing slavery on the rest of the country since the end of the Revolution.

The obvious post facto answer would have been for the antislavery forces in the North (and the South) to have stood up to the slaveowners decades before then, or better yet to have abolished slavery during our revolution from Britain.

It's too bad that the ante bellum "southern strategy" was to humor and "compromise" with the slave power until the chance for a peaceful solution was long gone. (You do know the history, right?)

Back to this thread: it's not blacks that oppress me, it's stupid people. And in today's America it's white people that, in quantity and quality, win the Stupidity Sweepstakes. Which is not to say that no black American can ever be stupid, only that it's not the stupidity of blacks that the USA is built on.

Like I said, in America the easiest way to cause a candidate to win is to tell white voters the other guy wants to benefit black Americans somehow. Even if whites will benefit more from the measure. Whites cut off our noses to spite the blacks: the anti-Obama crusade is a prime example of this. Regardless of what I think of the Obama team's policies (i.e. they're not socialist enough), it's not like they ever said "whites need not apply." 

But anyway.

Now that you've read this post you're going to start crowing that I said the USA should bring black slavery back, aren't you.
2012-09-13 01:46:31 AM
1 votes:
FTFA: Joyce Hise, the president of nearby Discount Casket Sales, said she connected with the message, which spurred her to register people to vote at her business.

That is a great name for a business and would make an awesome band name.
2012-09-13 01:43:44 AM
1 votes:

Sleazy_as_Pie: But they're still a church interjecting themselves into politics.


Voting is civics, not politics.
2012-09-13 01:32:58 AM
1 votes:
Since I got in early enough to start a few reply chains, I just wanna say I hadn't read the entire article before my initial post, (typical farker, I know).

I support their artisitic expression. And I agree with their point. And, honestly, I think more people should be exposed to this kind of ideas.

However (and I abdicate the argument that they shouldn't be tax exempt over this, my bad), I don't think most of the audience for public art (aka "the public") is smart enough to understand the point of this.

(Case in point, my own knee-jerk response to what I perceived to be knee-jerk race baiting (yes I was wrong))

((((parentheses, I can't stop using them. Worse than slashies)))))
2012-09-13 01:30:51 AM
1 votes:

CrispFlows: Using emotional appeal to cause action usually are not reliable, it's insulting since the argument implies that thinking should not be involved and the convincement is very short lived, especially once examined.

In other words, it backfires to unintended consequences.


On the contrary: emotional arguments work just dandy with certain type of personalities. A lot of people tend to make snap judgements and then employ strategic reasoning to justify their decisions. I also think you overestimate the number of people who *ever* examine their core beliefs in any meaningful way.


The One True TheDavid: it's the difference between friendly fascism and the raving scary kind, like Coke vs. Pepsi.


Wait... which is the scary kind? Coke or Pepsi? Where does Mountain Dew fall on the fascism spectrum?
2012-09-13 01:26:10 AM
1 votes:

CrispFlows: Skyred: You seem to think that religious influence on state is far more prominent than it actually is. I've been an active participant in numerous religious organizations and never once have they tried to influence my political opinions.

HA!

It's not what issue or who you vote for - it's WHOM that gets voted in. If religion has a dominant presence in the candidate's life, there is really no way to deny them their excessive authority since they are empowered to write such laws to their own conscience rather than the ones that are ideal to the constituents the official represents.


there absolutely is power to deny them that right. the very process of voting does that
2012-09-13 01:24:44 AM
1 votes:

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: Is there a Poe's law equivalent for tax exempt religious institutions?

I echo the earlier statements that I can't make heads or tails of this article. Is it that Romney will put "Y'all back in chains," or that Obama's economic policies will result in a hundred years of socialist slavery? I guess I should applaud the church for obeying the letter of the law, and not even hinting at which candidate is anti-slavery, but in general I'm just confused. Hopefully the pastor there is laughing his ass off at the trolling he pulled off.


It's obeying the spirit of the law too. It's making no allegorical relationship to any candidate or issue. It is reminding people that they have a right that was hard-fought for and taken for granted.
2012-09-13 01:22:24 AM
1 votes:

Skyred: You seem to think that religious influence on state is far more prominent than it actually is. I've been an active participant in numerous religious organizations and never once have they tried to influence my political opinions.


HA!

It's not what issue or who you vote for - it's WHOM that gets voted in. If religion has a dominant presence in the candidate's life, there is really no way to deny them their excessive authority since they are empowered to write such laws to their own conscience rather than the ones that are ideal to the constituents the official represents.
2012-09-13 01:16:00 AM
1 votes:

Sleazy_as_Pie: To be fair, I don't think their point was wrong, regardless of how stupidly it was made. But they're still a church interjecting themselves into politics.

So yeah... Pay your taxes.


Just telling people to vote is not political.
2012-09-13 01:08:20 AM
1 votes:

HotWingAgenda: It's specifically aimed at a religious faction, if you had bothered reading the article or my post. It's also aimed at a particular ethnic minority, as admitted by the person who put it up.


Once again, it is not advocating any particular issue or candidate. It is not AT ALL telling people what to vote FOR.
2012-09-13 01:05:26 AM
1 votes:

The One True TheDavid: What's to be ironic about? Look at electoral history: which of the two major parties usually wins the Black vote these days? Which Presidential candidate do you expect most Blacks to vote for?

Did you just fall off the turnip truck? Do you think Black Americans are stupid enough intentionally vote against their own interests?

Voting stupid is a White people's problem. All most of my fellow pale people have to hear is "Black people will be better off if you vote for the other guy." That they'll gain too is hardly the point.


OK, so encouraging people to vote, even if it is a specific group of people, despite not suggesting at all who/what to vote for, is political simply because that group tends to vote a certain way?
2012-09-13 01:02:15 AM
1 votes:

Skyred: No, it was conservatives that started the KKK. It's just that the same conservative mindset happens to be held in the Republican party today.

BS, I don't know a single republican that sides with KKK mentality.


Trent Lott implied pretty openly that he did.
2012-09-13 01:01:53 AM
1 votes:

skullkrusher: jso2897: Sleazy_as_Pie: So you lose tax exempt status, right? I can only hope.

Since they are endorsing no candidate or party - yeah, you can only hope.
Well, you could shiat in the other hand, and see which gets full first.

oooh, I think jso2897 figured out who they're supporting!


Why, the Illuminati, of course. Why else would I be supporting them?
i18.photobucket.com
2012-09-13 12:52:03 AM
1 votes:
Mrtraveler01:

/GOP lost it's moral high ground when it came to race the moment they tried to court the "Southerner who was disgruntled with the Civil Rights Act" vote.

This. That's when my father left "the party of Lincoln." Back in Baltimore in the '50s & '60s the Republicans at least sounded more liberal on race than the Democrats, a legacy of the Civil War and Reconstruction.

Thank Reagan's strategists for that change.
2012-09-13 12:51:52 AM
1 votes:

HotWingAgenda: jso2897: Sleazy_as_Pie: So you lose tax exempt status, right? I can only hope.

Since they are endorsing no candidate or party - yeah, you can only hope.
Well, you could shiat in the other hand, and see which gets full first.

It's a message from a religious faction to its constituency to vote in an upcoming election. That does cross the line to violating the establishment clause of the first amendment, especially since the government is subsidizing the property on which she posted the sign.


That's not how the establishment clause is currently interpreted. It might be how you want it to be interpreted (I sure do!), but it's not. In the U.S., fact, religious organizations have not only received tax exemptions, but Federal grants, said the Bush White House.

I assume you'll now join the campaign to ensure that the activities of the Family Resources Council is strictly monitored, creationism is banned in school texts, and the word 'God' is removed from anything that people are obligated to deal with, like, y'know, money, or the pledge of allegiance in public schools.

Or not.
2012-09-13 12:51:50 AM
1 votes:
"... Not surprisingly, some people have a problem with this"

Let me guess... white people?
2012-09-13 12:41:58 AM
1 votes:

lelio: "Take it down. This is 2012," he said. "You don't supposed to do the racial thing. I don't know what it means."

Take it down ... because I don't know what it means? Huh?


I wonder how many office beatings this article will produce when people start laughing at that slackjaw quote and the neighbors see that story on the monitor.
2012-09-13 12:40:38 AM
1 votes:

Skyred: iaazathot: Slam1263: Yeah, 'cause the Republicans started the KKK, my Democrat party boss told me so.

No, it was conservatives that started the KKK. It's just that the same conservative mindset happens to be held in the Republican party today.

BS, I don't know a single republican that sides with KKK mentality.


I kid, but on a serious note that represents very few people
2012-09-13 12:39:27 AM
1 votes:

HotWingAgenda: jso2897: Sleazy_as_Pie: So you lose tax exempt status, right? I can only hope.

Since they are endorsing no candidate or party - yeah, you can only hope.
Well, you could shiat in the other hand, and see which gets full first.

It's a message from a religious faction to its constituency to vote in an upcoming election. That does cross the line to violating the establishment clause of the first amendment, especially since the government is subsidizing the property on which she posted the sign.


No, it doesn't. Educate yourself. The IRS regulations are clear, and they don't care about those made-up rules you just pulled out of your ass.
2012-09-13 12:38:46 AM
1 votes:

iaazathot: Slam1263: Yeah, 'cause the Republicans started the KKK, my Democrat party boss told me so.

No, it was conservatives that started the KKK. It's just that the same conservative mindset happens to be held in the Republican party today.


BS, I don't know a single republican that sides with KKK mentality.
2012-09-13 12:33:29 AM
1 votes:

lelio: "Take it down. This is 2012," he said. "You don't supposed to do the racial thing. I don't know what it means."

Take it down ... because I don't know what it means? Huh?


He's white.


MaudlinMutantMollusk: Joyce Hise, the president of nearby Discount Casket Sales, said she connected with the message, which spurred her to register people to vote at her business.

wha?


She's black.

Not trying to make any particular point here.
2012-09-13 12:31:46 AM
1 votes:
Yeah, 'cause the Republicans started the KKK, my Democrat party boss told me so.
2012-09-13 12:31:25 AM
1 votes:

jso2897: Sleazy_as_Pie: So you lose tax exempt status, right? I can only hope.

Since they are endorsing no candidate or party - yeah, you can only hope.
Well, you could shiat in the other hand, and see which gets full first.


It's a message from a religious faction to its constituency to vote in an upcoming election. That does cross the line to violating the establishment clause of the first amendment, especially since the government is subsidizing the property on which she posted the sign.
2012-09-13 12:30:11 AM
1 votes:
People who have a problem with this are completely missing the point.
2012-09-13 12:24:02 AM
1 votes:

lelio: "Take it down. This is 2012," he said. "You don't supposed to do the racial thing. I don't know what it means."

Take it down ... because I don't know what it means? Huh?


He don't got to take it down.
2012-09-13 12:18:05 AM
1 votes:
Haha, wow! Talk about trying to get a reaction. I'm sure they have fair points and blah balh blah but, this is the work of shock value
2012-09-13 12:17:46 AM
1 votes:
No leftist boogeymen. Please carry on.
 
Displayed 60 of 60 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report