Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Orlando Sentinel)   One state considers undoing that whole separation of church and state thing   (orlandosentinel.com ) divider line 32
    More: Florida, Religion News Service, Central Florida, Cory Booker  
•       •       •

9964 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Aug 2013 at 8:09 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
2013-08-19 08:30:53 AM  
4 votes:
A commission of religious leaders has called for clarity in churches' ability to endorse candidates and issues from the without fear of losing their tax-exempt status.

Ok, here you go: once you start telling your parishioners who to vote for and what propositions to support, you're no longer a "church." You're a political organization and should have your tax-exempt status revoked immediately. This is something you and the IRS agreed to.
2013-08-19 08:10:02 AM  
4 votes:
These people would do well to remember that not only does the state need protected from the church, the church needs protected from the state.  Careful what you wish for, etc.
2013-08-19 08:30:22 AM  
3 votes:

Lucky LaRue: LOL - you all are gettin' trolled by subby.

The first sentence of the article is:  Religion News Service reporter Sarah Pulliam Bailey writes about a commission of religious leaders urging Congress to drop its ban -- in the name of free speech -- on preachers making political endorsements from the pulpit.

Try reading the article.  I find it helps with that annoying knee-jerk.


There IS NO ban.  It's just they have to pay taxes if they DO become political.  That seems plenty fair to me.
2013-08-19 08:23:40 AM  
3 votes:
Welcome to the Church of the First Republican, brothers and sisters. What a great day our Repubican leaders have made.

Please turn in your bible to Book of Reagan, First Term chapter 3. And he did see the tax rates for the rich cuteth and they did trickle down. Amen, brothers and sisters. Amen. And catsup shall be a vegetable for ever and a day. Amen.

And now time for our hymn. Please turn to Page 347 and sing along

Obama is wrong. he can't see the light
Even though he's exactly like George W
The man just can't see the light.

Though the national debt did fall
from 2001 to 2009
Obama's been spending crazily
and that's an impeachable crime


All together now

And that's an impeachable crime...

Okay. It's time to pass the plate. Everyone pony up 10% as is the custom. But if you make over $250,000, you get to cut 4% because you pay way too much for what you get. And if you make less that 40,000, pony up an extra 5% because you really don't pay your fail share.

Now go in peace and remember Commandment 3: If thou are opposed to it, complain loudly and with much blind rage. Change shall come in 8 years.
2013-08-19 01:27:15 PM  
2 votes:
God is too busy helping people score touchdowns to vote Republican.
2013-08-19 08:37:08 AM  
2 votes:
Nothing at all wrong with churches getting into the politics game. However, they should pay the admission fee like any other group/person has to.
2013-08-19 08:29:58 AM  
2 votes:
Which one of the 57 states is that?
2013-08-19 08:26:39 AM  
2 votes:
Alliance Defending Freedom

img202.imageshack.us
2013-08-19 08:23:28 AM  
2 votes:
Meh. Both are based upon the art of lying anyway.
2013-08-19 08:13:01 AM  
2 votes:
One state? Just one?
2013-08-20 05:38:39 PM  
1 vote:

hillary: That still doesn't make you right about separation.

YOU'RE WRONG, DAMMIT!!!! WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!!

I CURSE YOU!!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!


Heh. I think the problem is you just interpret it as an all or nothing thing, while I think most people are a lot looser in their interpretation of the phrase... You said before separation was a binary thing, like being pregnant or not, but it's really not, as most people use the term... If two kids are fighting and someone says to separate them, do you insist they haven't truly been separated unless at least one of them is fully encased in an impenetrable bunker with no possible way in or out? I think most people would say they're separated as long as they're merely located in a separate room or even on opposite sides of the same room... Even though they can still technically get to each other if they really tried, and even might be able to interact a bit even while separated... But, as long as they weren't within arm's reach of each other and beating each other to a pulp, I think most would say there is separation between them...

So, I think when most people talk about the separation of church and state, they aren't saying it's this absolute thing where there can be absolutely no interaction between the two at all... They just think there's some degree of separation there... They're not directly in bed together (or beating each other up)...
2013-08-19 08:53:21 PM  
1 vote:

RobSeace: hillary: So every time I read about this idea of seperation of church and state, I note the idiot tossing out the phrase. It does not exist in our constitution. Nor in the Bill of Rights, nor in any amendment. It appears in case law only. I was once told that the phrase did appear in the U.S.S.R.'s official ccommunist manifestos, but I never found out if that was an urban myth.

So seriously, stop using that phrase. You are only showing yourself to be an idiot.

You mean idiots like Thomas Jefferson describing the first amendment?


Of course. And he was a godless communist, too -- even before Karl Marx was born. But Hillary's actually right. Jefferson talked about a wall of separation, spelling the word correctly. He never said anything about seperation. And thus, I note the idiot who can't spell.
2013-08-19 04:00:07 PM  
1 vote:

Joe Blowme: So is Florida trying to make congress Congpass  law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof? Hmmm, interesting


Read the article.  Subtard didn't either.  The article was printed in a Florida paper but has jack-shiat to do with Florida.
2013-08-19 02:46:05 PM  
1 vote:

Clemkadidlefark: Such language is a violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution - the law of the land which states,"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech..."


Plain and simple:  You are wrong.  Any Church that does not want it's lucrative and preferential tax exempt status is free to reject it and engage in whatever political speech they wish.  They are not prohibited from the free exercise of religion, they are prohibited from having both tax-exempt status and the right to, as an organization, engage in politics (not that it has ever stopped them)
2013-08-19 01:07:22 PM  
1 vote:
How lacking is the education of our yoots.

How weak, the tea of secular arguments

How vapid the insular view they know nothing of

How thoroughly the men of our Revolutionary past would smack your ass around for being dumbassery gone wild

upload.wikimedia.org
"I hate Jesus Christ and despise His churches, because they're trying to keep me from getting elected .."

In 1954, Senator Lyndon B. Johnson, faced fierce re-election opposition from anti-leftist groups and conservative Christians.He successfully changed the IRS code, prohibiting non-profits and churches from endorsing or opposing political candidates.Such language is a violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution - the law of the land which states,"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech..." Johnson's IRS insertion was then, and is now, a violation of individual rights of freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion.Prior to this time, no restrictions on the free speech of church entities and their members existed.This is all condoned under a false view of Jefferson 's so-called "wall of separation" doctrine.
2013-08-19 10:37:16 AM  
1 vote:
Idiot  subby didn't even read his own article.
2013-08-19 10:14:37 AM  
1 vote:
The IRS will only get involved if the church leans Republican.
2013-08-19 09:24:34 AM  
1 vote:

Joe Blowme: gis Administrative cost as a % of "income" for red cross.

/not defending mega churches or any others, just sayin



Do you have similar figures for any mega-churches or televangelists? Kinda difficult to make a comparison with only one set of numbers.
2013-08-19 09:12:54 AM  
1 vote:
"The report shows that black churches have, for lack of a better word, gotten away with it for many years"

Heh.  "Well, the BLACKS are doing it, so we should be able to have all the white churches openly campaigning for the Republican party."
2013-08-19 08:42:44 AM  
1 vote:

swankywanky: Lady J: swankywanky: BUT....while we're on the topic, I would like to have some of these "megachurches" stop pretending they are houses of worship and start ponying up the taxes that they should be paying as businesses

but surely all that money they're not paying in tax they're giving to the poor, or doing good works with?

im not being disingenuous here (well maybe a bit)... im interested

they may in fact give money towards charitable efforts and the poor.  but I also know you don't build something like this without having a WHOLE LOT of scratch:

[commonsenseatheism.com image 500x309]


in fairness, them doing their god bothering in a nice venue benefits everyone involved, not just the church leaders. do those church leaders live in ridiculously fancy houses and own islands in the south sea though?
2013-08-19 08:42:29 AM  
1 vote:

d23: Lady J: but surely all that money they're not paying in tax they're giving to the poor, or doing good works with?

For a mega church, "good works" is defined as another private jet for the company... I mean church.


We've got a local Baptist church that has been in this generally nondescript brick and wood building for as long as I can remember (and even longer, I'm sure).  It's right across the street from them gay-lovin' Universalists, so they had to get the hell out of Dodge.  So, what they did was this:  they bought out the ice cream parlor at the top of a nearby hill (same street, just further up the road), plus the surrounding land, and built a megachurch, replete with a gymnasium and school.  It's right across the street from Crazy Wood-Carving Guy, who was forced by the town, at the urging of these good Christians, to remove all these 'eyesores' because they freaked out the straights.

So, now we have less art (although, a lot of it was pretty freaky, but that's not for me to judge) and a big megachurch at the top of a hill.

I hate this place, sometimes...
2013-08-19 08:42:08 AM  
1 vote:
You know what kind of countries don't separate politics and religion?  ones like Egypt.

Look how farking well that's going for them.
2013-08-19 08:39:12 AM  
1 vote:

Lady J: swankywanky: BUT....while we're on the topic, I would like to have some of these "megachurches" stop pretending they are houses of worship and start ponying up the taxes that they should be paying as businesses

but surely all that money they're not paying in tax they're giving to the poor, or doing good works with?

im not being disingenuous here (well maybe a bit)... im interested


they may in fact give money towards charitable efforts and the poor.  but I also know you don't build something like this without having a WHOLE LOT of scratch:

commonsenseatheism.com
2013-08-19 08:35:45 AM  
1 vote:

NutWrench: A commission of religious leaders has called for clarity in churches' ability to endorse candidates and issues from the without fear of losing their tax-exempt status.

Ok, here you go: once you start telling your parishioners who to vote for and what propositions to support, you're no longer a "church." You're a political organization and should have your tax-exempt status revoked immediately. This is something you and the IRS agreed to.


But if the IRS asks you things like "Are you telling the parishioners who to vote for?"  They are unfairly targeting Republican Churches.   Never mind, that as soon as you say Republican Church, you are proving that you are not being unfairly targeted.
2013-08-19 08:34:55 AM  
1 vote:
Tax them.
You want to lobby politics?
You pay the piper.
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-19 08:34:00 AM  
1 vote:

Lucky LaRue: LOL - you all are gettin' trolled by subby.

The first sentence of the article is:  Religion News Service reporter Sarah Pulliam Bailey writes about a commission of religious leaders urging Congress to drop its ban -- in the name of free speech -- on preachers making political endorsements from the pulpit.

Try reading the article.  I find it helps with that annoying knee-jerk.


I've read it.  It pretty clearly referred to the tax exempt status of churches and being able to endorse candidates without losing that status.
2013-08-19 08:24:18 AM  
1 vote:

Lady J: but surely all that money they're not paying in tax they're giving to the poor, or doing good works with?


For a mega church, "good works" is defined as another private jet for the company... I mean church.
2013-08-19 08:23:35 AM  
1 vote:
These people certainly don't understand what freedom of religion actually means.

http://jezebel.com/5923898/republican-horrified-to-discover-that-chr is tianity-is-not-the-only-religion

That's a story about a state senator going apeshiat because the money for religious schools she set up is going to dirty muzlims.
2013-08-19 08:14:55 AM  
1 vote:

nekom: These people would do well to remember that not only does the state need protected from the church, the church needs protected from the state.  Careful what you wish for, etc.


*protection

And people should protect themselves from both as much as they can.
2013-08-19 08:14:53 AM  
1 vote:
WTF is the "one state?" This was a syndicated column that appeared in a Florida newspaper and there's nothing going on in Florida that is remotely like what the headline alleges.
2013-08-19 08:02:26 AM  
1 vote:
thiswillnotendwell.jpg
2013-08-19 08:00:50 AM  
1 vote:
But not the Church's don't pay taxes part, because that would be wrong.
 
Displayed 32 of 32 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report