(August 21, 2015 at 2:34 am)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:The article points to the rise of a new Arianism...let me know what you think.

I think you're a shithead.

BTW, the Washington Times is a Moonie paper.  Fucking jesus will be disappointed in you.

I lived in DC at the time it was started, so I'm familiar with its ownership.

What do you think about author's assessment of the movement of our country toward more liberal positions?

(August 21, 2015 at 2:06 am)robvalue Wrote: I don't get the idea that religious businesses should be given tax exempt status in order to keep out of politics.

Doesn't cut it for me. The religious businesses should keep out of politics anyway. What other businesses have to be paid off in order to not explicitly preach against the government and try to get their own ideas made into law?

Giving specific "large enough" religions tax breaks amounts to the government sponsoring those religions, for no good reason, while refusing to do the same for very small ones.

As for charity work, the rules for tax exemption should be exactly the same. Are other charities allowed to overtly preach marketing messages with no relevance to the charity work they are providing?

Religion, as always, wants special treatment. I don't know if the tax exemption will ever be removed. Maybe one day, when religion has finally lost its hold. Right now, even the politicians who want it gone are probably aware of the mass shitstorm it would cause.

Churches don't have to pay taxes.  It's biblical.  But now we get the church workers whereas they also used to be exempt.

Ezra 7:24 ((ERV) = 24 I want you men to know that it is against the law to make the priests, Levites, singers, gatekeepers, Temple servants, and other workers in God’s Temple pay taxes. They don’t have to pay taxes, money to honor the king, or any customs fees. 

(August 19, 2015 at 7:24 pm)jiffy Wrote: I have a few questions regarding your perspectives on the church and Christianity..

**What are the big problems/issues you see in the Christian church today?

**Is your perspective of the former question from the inside (ie, your background was in church) or that of an outsider looking in? What took you away from church, if your background was church?

**What do you think about the person Jesus Christ? Is he real, historical person? Faked?

**What is the point or purpose in your life? What do you live for?

I'm especially interested in your responses to the first question!!

• 
  
• What took me away? Reason, and an unwillingness to swallow bullshit answers any longer.
  
• Doesn't matter.
  
• My own reasons, it's really all we have.
  

(August 20, 2015 at 9:39 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Does it ever occur to you that you are actually one of the least intellectually gifted members of this forum?

It should.

Uh, Randy. Now you got me.

But be careful - the Big Red Dog is digging in your backyard. The secular commies are out to get you.

(August 21, 2015 at 4:37 am)abaris Wrote:

(August 20, 2015 at 9:39 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Does it ever occur to you that you are actually one of the least intellectually gifted members of this forum?

It should.

Uh, Randy. Now you got me.

But be careful - the Big Red Dog is digging in your backyard. The secular commies are out to get you.

Gay secular commies, abaris. Gay hedonistic sodomite commies

Secularism is nothing to do with communism/socialism/atheism/anything that is not by definition what secularism is.

Many religious institutions would not be around today if it weren't for secularism protecting them (from other religions).

(August 21, 2015 at 6:11 am)Pandæmonium Wrote: Secularism is nothing to do with communism/socialism/atheism/anything that is not by definition what secularism is.

Many religious institutions would not be around today if it weren't for secularism protecting them (from other religions).

Tell that to the feeble minded who always look for the most simplistic explanations.

(August 21, 2015 at 6:15 am)abaris Wrote:

(August 21, 2015 at 6:11 am)Pandæmonium Wrote: Secularism is nothing to do with communism/socialism/atheism/anything that is not by definition what secularism is.

Many religious institutions would not be around today if it weren't for secularism protecting them (from other religions).

Tell that to the feeble minded who always look for the most simplistic explanations.

Much easier to call someone a communist than deconstruct the subject matter I guess.

(August 21, 2015 at 2:06 am)robvalue Wrote: I don't get the idea that religious businesses should be given tax exempt status in order to keep out of politics.

Doesn't cut it for me. The religious businesses should keep out of politics anyway. What other businesses have to be paid off in order to not explicitly preach against the government and try to get their own ideas made into law?

Giving specific "large enough" religions tax breaks amounts to the government sponsoring those religions, for no good reason, while refusing to do the same for very small ones.

As for charity work, the rules for tax exemption should be exactly the same. Are other charities allowed to overtly preach marketing messages with no relevance to the charity work they are providing?

Religion, as always, wants special treatment. I don't know if the tax exemption will ever be removed. Maybe one day, when religion has finally lost its hold. Right now, even the politicians who want it gone are probably aware of the mass shitstorm it would cause.

They have the tax exemption, and still they don't keep out of politics. The non-endorsement of political candidates is a meaningless stipulation when it is still they who have written the laws which have oppressed minorities, women, and all who disbelieve their cruel, asinine nonsense.

---

(August 21, 2015 at 2:18 am)Randy Carson Wrote:

(August 21, 2015 at 12:57 am)NoFaith2Burn4 Wrote: Your patron saint Peter was a murderous thug. So were the majority of his successor popes, up through the 20th Century.

I see.

Quote:You still haven't answered the question on what Lot did when a stranger came to his house, seeking asylum from a murderous mob. You haven't addressed that question because you know how inconveniently shameful downright despicable the behavior of the most holy man of his generation, who had the favor of his god truly was.

You asked in another thread, and I responded.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-35417-po...pid1027484

I asked that question along with four others in response to you taking the smug stance "Try me". If we are in a different thread now, it is only because you have carried this over accross threads. I will not click on your links, and you need to stop being a coward and print out your answer right hear, where the issue is addressed.

(August 21, 2015 at 3:01 am)Randy Carson Wrote: What do you think about author's assessment of the movement of our country toward more liberal positions?

The author makes the claim of the far left taking over the institutions. Hopefully you get the distinction between far left and what Americans tend to call liberal. The former claim is undiluted bullshit, since the USA never had a radical left to begin with. Not even a developed social democratic movment. The latter is true, insofar that, according to Gullup, the majority tends to support gay marriage or abortion.

But hopefully neither the author nor you are delusional enough to call that far left positions. Oh, wait a minute, the author obviously did.