Gawd Should Stop Livin' On the Dadgum Dole, RRRRRGH!

[cornographic]

I'm not making less than Bernie.

 

I'm making ~30% more.

 

But I pay more than 300% more in federal taxes.

 

Again, does that seem rational to you?

 

And I'm not the only one who is asked to subsidize the behavior of wealthier people by carrying a much larger burden of the taxes left over after said wealthier people get their breaks. It happens across the income stratosphere, and most disturbingly among the lower portion of the middle class.

Well, I'm not a tax guy, k, but if you are making ~$270K/yr as a single person, you're supposed to be paying 33% Fed income tax, which seems to be about in the range of what you are paying.

 

As to Bernie, again, you'd have to ask him or his acc't or someone else on here who is a tax guy. He's obviously working the deductions angle.

[zoogs]

Can we trust someone who's taking advantage of tax loopholes to change the system?

 

If so -- and I think we should be able to, though one could claim a conflict of interest -- then I think the same applies as far as not vilifying Wall Street, or those with Wall Street ties. I can see how Bernie can manage a long Senate career in Vermont like he has, and it's neat -- but any mainstream politician is going to have had to play the realities of campaigning for the positions they sought.

[cornographic]

Can we trust someone who's taking advantage of tax loopholes to change the system?

 

If so -- and I think we should be able to, though one could claim a conflict of interest -- then I think the same applies as far as not vilifying Wall Street, or those with Wall Street ties. I can see how Bernie can manage a long Senate career in Vermont like he has, and it's neat -- but any mainstream politician is going to have had to play the realities of campaigning for the positions they sought.

 

So many questions, so few answers....

[cm husker]

 

I'm not making less than Bernie.

 

I'm making ~30% more.

 

But I pay more than 300% more in federal taxes.

 

Again, does that seem rational to you?

 

And I'm not the only one who is asked to subsidize the behavior of wealthier people by carrying a much larger burden of the taxes left over after said wealthier people get their breaks. It happens across the income stratosphere, and most disturbingly among the lower portion of the middle class.

Well, I'm not a tax guy, k, but if you are making ~$270K/yr as a single person, you're supposed to be paying 33% Fed income tax, which seems to be about in the range of what you are paying.

 

As to Bernie, again, you'd have to ask him or his acc't or someone else on here who is a tax guy. He's obviously working the deductions angle.

 

 

Do you understand the difference between a marginal and effective tax rate?

 

 

And I know exactly how he's doing it and it's all legal.

 

My question is, should that be the way the system is set up? Is the solution to keep the deductions but raise the rates? That seems very misguided and unfair.

[Scratchtown]

 

I'm not making less than Bernie.

 

I'm making ~30% more.

 

But I pay more than 300% more in federal taxes.

 

Again, does that seem rational to you?

 

And I'm not the only one who is asked to subsidize the behavior of wealthier people by carrying a much larger burden of the taxes left over after said wealthier people get their breaks. It happens across the income stratosphere, and most disturbingly among the lower portion of the middle class.

Well, I'm not a tax guy, k, but if you are making ~$270K/yr as a single person, you're supposed to be paying 33% Fed income tax, which seems to be about in the range of what you are paying.

 

As to Bernie, again, you'd have to ask him or his acc't or someone else on here who is a tax guy. He's obviously working the deductions angle.

 

This is kind of true but it struck me funny because, to be nit picky, you're ACTUALLY only paying 33% on anything you make that's over $190,150 and less than $413,350

 

 

[cornographic]

 

 

I'm not making less than Bernie.

 

I'm making ~30% more.

 

But I pay more than 300% more in federal taxes.

 

Again, does that seem rational to you?

 

And I'm not the only one who is asked to subsidize the behavior of wealthier people by carrying a much larger burden of the taxes left over after said wealthier people get their breaks. It happens across the income stratosphere, and most disturbingly among the lower portion of the middle class.

Well, I'm not a tax guy, k, but if you are making ~$270K/yr as a single person, you're supposed to be paying 33% Fed income tax, which seems to be about in the range of what you are paying.

 

As to Bernie, again, you'd have to ask him or his acc't or someone else on here who is a tax guy. He's obviously working the deductions angle.

 

This is kind of true but it struck me funny because, to be nit picky, you're ACTUALLY only paying 33% on anything you make that's over $190,150 and less than $413,350

 

 

 

Yeah, seems like a wide range bracket.

[TGHusker]

 

 

 

Corn has gone over the top loco on this one My only comment is this thought: Maybe the church (universal church not a particular denomination) should be paid for all of its social services it has provided the community at large without strings attached for the past say 20 centuries. Schools, universities, hospitals, food pantries, soup kitchens, drug intervention programs, moral education, family crisis services, funeral and grieving care, disaster relief, counseling, a place for voting, community centers, mercy ministries of all kinds, helping the poor around the world, not to mention the socialization/culturalization role the church has in society etc and etc. I don't know of too many atheist or agnostic organizations starting these kinds of community outreaches.

Yes corn and anyone else (including believers) can go the cheap route and call out charlatans & prosperity gospel teachers wt mega homes etc - but that isn't the church. Sometimes people bring up the huge cathedrals as an unneeded expenditure (and I for one am a more practical guy - lets spend the money on helping people and not a building- make the building as functional as possible) however, in centuries past these building were built to teach about the glory of God - to reflect his awesomeness. Most had built into stories from history and the Bible as a means of teaching. Architecture, like many other disciplines were to be conducted as a means of showing God's greatness. I think in the modern times we've gone more practical but that is how it was back then.

 

Corn later says in a post that he isn't talking about the small local church but the large mega churches. However, one needs to look to 'economies of scale' in that discussion. While I think the small church provides the much needed 'fellowship' that we all need (Huskerboard provides a kind of fellowship also) the large church due to their size are able to pull together resources to help with huge disaster relief programs, drug programs, schools etc - the things I mentioned above. Just because it is mega, doesn't mean it is bad (I don't attend a mega church by the way but I have plenty in Tulsa that I'm familiar with). One mega church in Tulsa for example has a large community, outreach center in North Tulsa - poor part of town. Mostly African Americans live in that area. This center provides free dental, medical clinics, food and clothing pantries, (I've taught a job skills class there before), car care clinic, etc, etc. So again painting wt a broad brush never accomplishes anything good. I'll stand wt anyone against the Charlatans but I'll defend the church when broad strokes like this are made. Name any large institution that is free of charlatans - I bet Corn's socialistic loving gov't has one or two - you think??

 

Let's go wt John Lennon's song Imagine. Imagine the world wtout religion - immediately the agonistics and atheists jump on the 'war' issue. But imagine it without true religion - Biblical religion of caring for your fellow man. Go back 2000 years and Imagine the world without all of the services to mankind that the church has provided as a force of good.

 

BTW - The Invoice for "Services Rendered" would be much higher than any 'tax liability'.

Your hatred for those who don't share your outlook is noted but there are many charitable/aid organizations that provide help around the world that are not faith-based. Imagine trying to help your fellow man because its the right thing to do rather than for getting a gold star from your deity.

 

You are way off base. None of that was said wt hatred. It was to point out the obvious - churches were doing good well before govt got involved in redistribution policies.- and wtout the need of a gold star- good grief - you have zero understanding of faith based compassion I didn't say there aren't any non-church based charitable organizations - that isn't the topic of both the thread or my post. And your last statement is wayyyyyy over the top. Your hatred for the church appears to be showing through your post. It is hard for you to acknowledge the good that the churches do because of your bias against them instead you go way off to left field.

 

I don't hate any church...unlike you who made it obvious that 'true religion is bible-based'. Instead I don't care for the arrogant religious person who takes shots at those that don't share his faith because he is insecure about it.

 

And its not hard for me to acknowledge when a church does good, which is why I applauded how religion can get its followers to rally for a cause. But types like you can't see that because they are blinded by petty hatred for that what is different. Its unfortunate that you can't understand that many people do good works without needing religion or a God to guide/force them.

 

You are way off base - I don't harbor any hatred and I fully acknowledge that non-religious, non-church based organizations and individuals do good work. I also didn't say true religion was Bible base - Christian Churches are but other religions are not. And other religions can do good works as well. That wasn't the subject however- you moving the ball so you can fix blame and label (hatred) anyone who wants to defend the church non-tax status. Keep your focus on the subject matter instead of rabbit trails that are falsely assumed. The subject of this thread was taxing churches and I'm only responding that churches provide a service to the community that far exceeds the benefit of taxing them. And taxing them would diminishes the funds to carry on those activities. So stop the hate name calling - it gets you know where. I have no 'petty' hatred for what is different. Check your own heart as it appears you think I'm different in my views - thus labeling as blinded by petty hatred when you know nothing of me. That seems pretty blinded to me. I've done a lot of volunteer work wt a lot of people far different than I - race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.

[TGHusker]

 

Corn has gone over the top loco on this one My only comment is this thought: Maybe the church (universal church not a particular denomination) should be paid for all of its social services it has provided the community at large without strings attached for the past say 20 centuries. Schools, universities, hospitals, food pantries, soup kitchens, drug intervention programs, moral education, family crisis services, funeral and grieving care, disaster relief, counseling, a place for voting, community centers, mercy ministries of all kinds, helping the poor around the world, not to mention the socialization/culturalization role the church has in society etc and etc. I don't know of too many atheist or agnostic organizations starting these kinds of community outreaches.

Yes corn and anyone else (including believers) can go the cheap route and call out charlatans & prosperity gospel teachers wt mega homes etc - but that isn't the church. Sometimes people bring up the huge cathedrals as an unneeded expenditure (and I for one am a more practical guy - lets spend the money on helping people and not a building- make the building as functional as possible) however, in centuries past these building were built to teach about the glory of God - to reflect his awesomeness. Most had built into stories from history and the Bible as a means of teaching. Architecture, like many other disciplines were to be conducted as a means of showing God's greatness. I think in the modern times we've gone more practical but that is how it was back then.

 

Corn later says in a post that he isn't talking about the small local church but the large mega churches. However, one needs to look to 'economies of scale' in that discussion. While I think the small church provides the much needed 'fellowship' that we all need (Huskerboard provides a kind of fellowship also) the large church due to their size are able to pull together resources to help with huge disaster relief programs, drug programs, schools etc - the things I mentioned above. Just because it is mega, doesn't mean it is bad (I don't attend a mega church by the way but I have plenty in Tulsa that I'm familiar with). One mega church in Tulsa for example has a large community, outreach center in North Tulsa - poor part of town. Mostly African Americans live in that area. This center provides free dental, medical clinics, food and clothing pantries, (I've taught a job skills class there before), car care clinic, etc, etc. So again painting wt a broad brush never accomplishes anything good. I'll stand wt anyone against the Charlatans but I'll defend the church when broad strokes like this are made. Name any large institution that is free of charlatans - I bet Corn's socialistic loving gov't has one or two - you think??

 

Let's go wt John Lennon's song Imagine. Imagine the world wtout religion - immediately the agonistics and atheists jump on the 'war' issue. But imagine it without true religion - Biblical religion of caring for your fellow man. Go back 2000 years and Imagine the world without all of the services to mankind that the church has provided as a force of good.

 

BTW - The Invoice for "Services Rendered" would be much higher than any 'tax liability'.

Somebody has to go over the top, otherwise sh#t gets boring.

 

You make some good points. Guess what, a person doesn't need Gawd or religion or any philosophy to act upon his/her natural, inborn altruism. But, I guess alotta folk need a reason. And, I take all the charitable aspects of religious organizations to heart, all good stuff, albeit thrifty, but something's better than nothing. Mother Teresa's Calcutta "hospitals" were basically a death sentence for any who were unfortunate to be picked up off the street by her nuns. They were horrible, unkempt places, where dying people were basically lying around dying with little to no treatment. Mother Teresa was too busy hob nobbing like Hillary Clinton with the rich and famous and powerful, living large and collecting huge $ for her "foundation", little, of which, she spent @ her hospitals. And what has relgion ever done to confront the cause of poverty and suffering inhernet in the capitalistic system in the 1st place? Basically nothing, but thank Jesus we now have a socialist Pope who actually seems to be walking the talk.

 

But let's mention some of the horror part and parcel to religious institutions, shall we? How about all the millions upon millions of people that have been killed over the centuries in the name of religion, that is, one religion fighting another? They don't like to talk about that @ church. So, evidently, there's a trade off with religion. Crusades, ring a bell? Holocaust? Sunni/Shia/ISIS? George Dubya claimed to hear voices from Jesus telling him he should "smote Sadam". Guess, what, the US population is still paying for Dubyas f'ing "voices". Well, no need to go on here, you get the picture.

 

Anyway, as to elaborate architecture of the ornate variety, that's some fabulous stuff, I wish they built cathedrals like that in modern times--not enough master masons anymore, I spose, plus they take 100 yrs or more to construct, the old fashioned way. But they could be utilized as art museums and/or concert halls--some of the best acoustics--or huge buffet halls. Well, that's what the Spanish anarchists/socialists used em for when they took over Barcelona/Catelonia back in the day. Which reminds me, how is it that the Catholic Church owns one of the largest and most valuable art collections on the planet? Why did the Catholic Church help so many Nazis escape, are the 2 related? Things that make ya go, "hmmmm...."

 

Anyway, I still think the various religions should be taxed and stop livin' on the social dole: at least tax their property. I refer back to the Carlin quote above ^^^^^.

 

Corn - I guess I agree wt that 1st statement my friend.

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

Corn has gone over the top loco on this one My only comment is this thought: Maybe the church (universal church not a particular denomination) should be paid for all of its social services it has provided the community at large without strings attached for the past say 20 centuries. Schools, universities, hospitals, food pantries, soup kitchens, drug intervention programs, moral education, family crisis services, funeral and grieving care, disaster relief, counseling, a place for voting, community centers, mercy ministries of all kinds, helping the poor around the world, not to mention the socialization/culturalization role the church has in society etc and etc. I don't know of too many atheist or agnostic organizations starting these kinds of community outreaches.

Yes corn and anyone else (including believers) can go the cheap route and call out charlatans & prosperity gospel teachers wt mega homes etc - but that isn't the church. Sometimes people bring up the huge cathedrals as an unneeded expenditure (and I for one am a more practical guy - lets spend the money on helping people and not a building- make the building as functional as possible) however, in centuries past these building were built to teach about the glory of God - to reflect his awesomeness. Most had built into stories from history and the Bible as a means of teaching. Architecture, like many other disciplines were to be conducted as a means of showing God's greatness. I think in the modern times we've gone more practical but that is how it was back then.

 

Corn later says in a post that he isn't talking about the small local church but the large mega churches. However, one needs to look to 'economies of scale' in that discussion. While I think the small church provides the much needed 'fellowship' that we all need (Huskerboard provides a kind of fellowship also) the large church due to their size are able to pull together resources to help with huge disaster relief programs, drug programs, schools etc - the things I mentioned above. Just because it is mega, doesn't mean it is bad (I don't attend a mega church by the way but I have plenty in Tulsa that I'm familiar with). One mega church in Tulsa for example has a large community, outreach center in North Tulsa - poor part of town. Mostly African Americans live in that area. This center provides free dental, medical clinics, food and clothing pantries, (I've taught a job skills class there before), car care clinic, etc, etc. So again painting wt a broad brush never accomplishes anything good. I'll stand wt anyone against the Charlatans but I'll defend the church when broad strokes like this are made. Name any large institution that is free of charlatans - I bet Corn's socialistic loving gov't has one or two - you think??

 

Let's go wt John Lennon's song Imagine. Imagine the world wtout religion - immediately the agonistics and atheists jump on the 'war' issue. But imagine it without true religion - Biblical religion of caring for your fellow man. Go back 2000 years and Imagine the world without all of the services to mankind that the church has provided as a force of good.

 

BTW - The Invoice for "Services Rendered" would be much higher than any 'tax liability'.

Your hatred for those who don't share your outlook is noted but there are many charitable/aid organizations that provide help around the world that are not faith-based. Imagine trying to help your fellow man because its the right thing to do rather than for getting a gold star from your deity.

 

You are way off base. None of that was said wt hatred. It was to point out the obvious - churches were doing good well before govt got involved in redistribution policies.- and wtout the need of a gold star- good grief - you have zero understanding of faith based compassion I didn't say there aren't any non-church based charitable organizations - that isn't the topic of both the thread or my post. And your last statement is wayyyyyy over the top. Your hatred for the church appears to be showing through your post. It is hard for you to acknowledge the good that the churches do because of your bias against them instead you go way off to left field.

 

I don't hate any church...unlike you who made it obvious that 'true religion is bible-based'. Instead I don't care for the arrogant religious person who takes shots at those that don't share his faith because he is insecure about it.

 

And its not hard for me to acknowledge when a church does good, which is why I applauded how religion can get its followers to rally for a cause. But types like you can't see that because they are blinded by petty hatred for that what is different. Its unfortunate that you can't understand that many people do good works without needing religion or a God to guide/force them.

 

You are way off base - I don't harbor any hatred and I fully acknowledge that non-religious, non-church based organizations and individuals do good work. I also didn't say true religion was Bible base - Christian Churches are but other religions are not. And other religions can do good works as well. That wasn't the subject however- you moving the ball so you can fix blame and label (hatred) anyone who wants to defend the church non-tax status. Keep your focus on the subject matter instead of rabbit trails that are falsely assumed. The subject of this thread was taxing churches and I'm only responding that churches provide a service to the community that far exceeds the benefit of taxing them. And taxing them would diminishes the funds to carry on those activities. So stop the hate name calling - it gets you know where. I have no 'petty' hatred for what is different. Check your own heart as it appears you think I'm different in my views - thus labeling as blinded by petty hatred when you know nothing of me. That seems pretty blinded to me. I've done a lot of volunteer work wt a lot of people far different than I - race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.

 

Speaking of benefits, a famous guy once said that, "religion is the opiate of the masses..." Do you see this as a benefit?

[TGHusker]

 

 

 

 

 

Corn has gone over the top loco on this one My only comment is this thought: Maybe the church (universal church not a particular denomination) should be paid for all of its social services it has provided the community at large without strings attached for the past say 20 centuries. Schools, universities, hospitals, food pantries, soup kitchens, drug intervention programs, moral education, family crisis services, funeral and grieving care, disaster relief, counseling, a place for voting, community centers, mercy ministries of all kinds, helping the poor around the world, not to mention the socialization/culturalization role the church has in society etc and etc. I don't know of too many atheist or agnostic organizations starting these kinds of community outreaches.

Yes corn and anyone else (including believers) can go the cheap route and call out charlatans & prosperity gospel teachers wt mega homes etc - but that isn't the church. Sometimes people bring up the huge cathedrals as an unneeded expenditure (and I for one am a more practical guy - lets spend the money on helping people and not a building- make the building as functional as possible) however, in centuries past these building were built to teach about the glory of God - to reflect his awesomeness. Most had built into stories from history and the Bible as a means of teaching. Architecture, like many other disciplines were to be conducted as a means of showing God's greatness. I think in the modern times we've gone more practical but that is how it was back then.

 

Corn later says in a post that he isn't talking about the small local church but the large mega churches. However, one needs to look to 'economies of scale' in that discussion. While I think the small church provides the much needed 'fellowship' that we all need (Huskerboard provides a kind of fellowship also) the large church due to their size are able to pull together resources to help with huge disaster relief programs, drug programs, schools etc - the things I mentioned above. Just because it is mega, doesn't mean it is bad (I don't attend a mega church by the way but I have plenty in Tulsa that I'm familiar with). One mega church in Tulsa for example has a large community, outreach center in North Tulsa - poor part of town. Mostly African Americans live in that area. This center provides free dental, medical clinics, food and clothing pantries, (I've taught a job skills class there before), car care clinic, etc, etc. So again painting wt a broad brush never accomplishes anything good. I'll stand wt anyone against the Charlatans but I'll defend the church when broad strokes like this are made. Name any large institution that is free of charlatans - I bet Corn's socialistic loving gov't has one or two - you think??

 

Let's go wt John Lennon's song Imagine. Imagine the world wtout religion - immediately the agonistics and atheists jump on the 'war' issue. But imagine it without true religion - Biblical religion of caring for your fellow man. Go back 2000 years and Imagine the world without all of the services to mankind that the church has provided as a force of good.

 

BTW - The Invoice for "Services Rendered" would be much higher than any 'tax liability'.

Your hatred for those who don't share your outlook is noted but there are many charitable/aid organizations that provide help around the world that are not faith-based. Imagine trying to help your fellow man because its the right thing to do rather than for getting a gold star from your deity.

 

You are way off base. None of that was said wt hatred. It was to point out the obvious - churches were doing good well before govt got involved in redistribution policies.- and wtout the need of a gold star- good grief - you have zero understanding of faith based compassion I didn't say there aren't any non-church based charitable organizations - that isn't the topic of both the thread or my post. And your last statement is wayyyyyy over the top. Your hatred for the church appears to be showing through your post. It is hard for you to acknowledge the good that the churches do because of your bias against them instead you go way off to left field.

 

I don't hate any church...unlike you who made it obvious that 'true religion is bible-based'. Instead I don't care for the arrogant religious person who takes shots at those that don't share his faith because he is insecure about it.

 

And its not hard for me to acknowledge when a church does good, which is why I applauded how religion can get its followers to rally for a cause. But types like you can't see that because they are blinded by petty hatred for that what is different. Its unfortunate that you can't understand that many people do good works without needing religion or a God to guide/force them.

 

You are way off base - I don't harbor any hatred and I fully acknowledge that non-religious, non-church based organizations and individuals do good work. I also didn't say true religion was Bible base - Christian Churches are but other religions are not. And other religions can do good works as well. That wasn't the subject however- you moving the ball so you can fix blame and label (hatred) anyone who wants to defend the church non-tax status. Keep your focus on the subject matter instead of rabbit trails that are falsely assumed. The subject of this thread was taxing churches and I'm only responding that churches provide a service to the community that far exceeds the benefit of taxing them. And taxing them would diminishes the funds to carry on those activities. So stop the hate name calling - it gets you know where. I have no 'petty' hatred for what is different. Check your own heart as it appears you think I'm different in my views - thus labeling as blinded by petty hatred when you know nothing of me. That seems pretty blinded to me. I've done a lot of volunteer work wt a lot of people far different than I - race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.

 

Speaking of benefits, a famous guy once said that, "religion is the opiate of the masses..." Do you see this as a benefit?

 

You mean The famous guy who's communist ideology lead to the slaughter of untold millions last century? Ok we won't get anywhere wt this discussion but finger point. These discussions evolve into shouting over each other and I don't have the time or desire to do so. It isn't my job to change your views and visa versa and throwing insults around like Moesker does is childish. Not playing that game. Have fun wt the rest of the thread.

[C N Red]

 

 

These 3 posts tell me all I need to know about you.

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Corn has gone over the top loco on this one My only comment is this thought: Maybe the church (universal church not a particular denomination) should be paid for all of its social services it has provided the community at large without strings attached for the past say 20 centuries. Schools, universities, hospitals, food pantries, soup kitchens, drug intervention programs, moral education, family crisis services, funeral and grieving care, disaster relief, counseling, a place for voting, community centers, mercy ministries of all kinds, helping the poor around the world, not to mention the socialization/culturalization role the church has in society etc and etc. I don't know of too many atheist or agnostic organizations starting these kinds of community outreaches.

Yes corn and anyone else (including believers) can go the cheap route and call out charlatans & prosperity gospel teachers wt mega homes etc - but that isn't the church. Sometimes people bring up the huge cathedrals as an unneeded expenditure (and I for one am a more practical guy - lets spend the money on helping people and not a building- make the building as functional as possible) however, in centuries past these building were built to teach about the glory of God - to reflect his awesomeness. Most had built into stories from history and the Bible as a means of teaching. Architecture, like many other disciplines were to be conducted as a means of showing God's greatness. I think in the modern times we've gone more practical but that is how it was back then.

 

Corn later says in a post that he isn't talking about the small local church but the large mega churches. However, one needs to look to 'economies of scale' in that discussion. While I think the small church provides the much needed 'fellowship' that we all need (Huskerboard provides a kind of fellowship also) the large church due to their size are able to pull together resources to help with huge disaster relief programs, drug programs, schools etc - the things I mentioned above. Just because it is mega, doesn't mean it is bad (I don't attend a mega church by the way but I have plenty in Tulsa that I'm familiar with). One mega church in Tulsa for example has a large community, outreach center in North Tulsa - poor part of town. Mostly African Americans live in that area. This center provides free dental, medical clinics, food and clothing pantries, (I've taught a job skills class there before), car care clinic, etc, etc. So again painting wt a broad brush never accomplishes anything good. I'll stand wt anyone against the Charlatans but I'll defend the church when broad strokes like this are made. Name any large institution that is free of charlatans - I bet Corn's socialistic loving gov't has one or two - you think??

 

Let's go wt John Lennon's song Imagine. Imagine the world wtout religion - immediately the agonistics and atheists jump on the 'war' issue. But imagine it without true religion - Biblical religion of caring for your fellow man. Go back 2000 years and Imagine the world without all of the services to mankind that the church has provided as a force of good.

 

BTW - The Invoice for "Services Rendered" would be much higher than any 'tax liability'.

Your hatred for those who don't share your outlook is noted but there are many charitable/aid organizations that provide help around the world that are not faith-based. Imagine trying to help your fellow man because its the right thing to do rather than for getting a gold star from your deity.

 

You are way off base. None of that was said wt hatred. It was to point out the obvious - churches were doing good well before govt got involved in redistribution policies.- and wtout the need of a gold star- good grief - you have zero understanding of faith based compassion I didn't say there aren't any non-church based charitable organizations - that isn't the topic of both the thread or my post. And your last statement is wayyyyyy over the top. Your hatred for the church appears to be showing through your post. It is hard for you to acknowledge the good that the churches do because of your bias against them instead you go way off to left field.

 

I don't hate any church...unlike you who made it obvious that 'true religion is bible-based'. Instead I don't care for the arrogant religious person who takes shots at those that don't share his faith because he is insecure about it.

 

And its not hard for me to acknowledge when a church does good, which is why I applauded how religion can get its followers to rally for a cause. But types like you can't see that because they are blinded by petty hatred for that what is different. Its unfortunate that you can't understand that many people do good works without needing religion or a God to guide/force them.

 

You are way off base - I don't harbor any hatred and I fully acknowledge that non-religious, non-church based organizations and individuals do good work. I also didn't say true religion was Bible base - Christian Churches are but other religions are not. And other religions can do good works as well. That wasn't the subject however- you moving the ball so you can fix blame and label (hatred) anyone who wants to defend the church non-tax status. Keep your focus on the subject matter instead of rabbit trails that are falsely assumed. The subject of this thread was taxing churches and I'm only responding that churches provide a service to the community that far exceeds the benefit of taxing them. And taxing them would diminishes the funds to carry on those activities. So stop the hate name calling - it gets you know where. I have no 'petty' hatred for what is different. Check your own heart as it appears you think I'm different in my views - thus labeling as blinded by petty hatred when you know nothing of me. That seems pretty blinded to me. I've done a lot of volunteer work wt a lot of people far different than I - race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.

 

Speaking of benefits, a famous guy once said that, "religion is the opiate of the masses..." Do you see this as a benefit?

 

You mean The famous guy who's communist ideology lead to the slaughter of untold millions last century? Ok we won't get anywhere wt this discussion but finger point. These discussions evolve into shouting over each other and I don't have the time or desire to do so. It isn't my job to change your views and visa versa and throwing insults around like Moesker does is childish. Not playing that game. Have fun wt the rest of the thread.

 

Yeah, well you're wrong, neither Marx nor his philosophy slaughtered anybody, dictators did/do, capitalists did/do, fascists did/do. Marxism is essentially a critique of capitalism, but you'd have to read Marx to know that. But I don't have time to go into that for the millionth time.

 

Sure, various religious groups, at their best, do do valuable charitable work, w/o which, many folks in the capitalist system would go unserved and perhaps die. However, religions are also responsible for a great deal of mental abuse, especially of the young, just ask anybody who has escaped their religion.

 

But the main point is, the religions have never done anything to question or contradict or expose the inherent causes of poverty that exist in the capitalistic system in the 1st place. And, the religions keep in place a hierarchical, theocratic ruling class of sorts. So, in that respect, Marx was right, religion helps keep the masses from throwing off their chains and overturning the exploitive system. They just keep "praying". That's what that's about. If and when religions fully embrace the cause of the masses, then they will actually be of full value.

 

Pope Francis is perhaps the 1st Pope ever who is actually contradicting capitalism--good for him.

[cornographic]

 

 

 

These 3 posts tell me all I need to know about you.

 

Ok, I give up, what would that be?

[funhusker]

IMHO..as a Christian.

 

If a Church is operated the way I feel comfortable with and not out to seek profit, they wouldn't have to pay taxes because every cent of "profit" would go to a charity of somesort.

 

I understand that that is a simplistic view of income taxes and Churches, but I think laws could easily be written to tax "for profit" Churches. And yes, taking offering to expand your sound system is "for profit" in my book or to give the minister a private jet....

[Moesker]

IMHO..as a Christian.

 

If a Church is operated the way I feel comfortable with and not out to seek profit, they wouldn't have to pay taxes because every cent of "profit" would go to a charity of somesort.

 

I understand that that is a simplistic view of income taxes and Churches, but I think laws could easily be written to tax "for profit" Churches. And yes, taking offering to expand your sound system is "for profit" in my book or to give the minister a private jet....

You get it.