| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Harold Burton
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2008 7:59 am Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of L |
 |
|
In article
<92f30008-2ee4-4cca-aeb9-c816b86e8dc7@v13g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
"Owner and Trainer of bobandcarole (a.k.a. Nomen Nescio, et al.)"
<tugehits@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Nov 15, 12:42 am, awthraw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Nov 14, 2:55 pm, Emerson Wainwright <emersonwainwri...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Same-sex marriage is available in a number of countries and
jurisdictions.
A number of countries??
Yes. Are you REALLY unaware???????? Seriously???? You can't be
serious. Can you????
Same-sex marriage with ALL rights of heterosexual marriage, is FULLY
legal in the following COUNTRIES:
+ Canada (Yep!)
|
So move there.
<http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid988092926?bctid=18428564
10> |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
palindrome
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 3:15 pm Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of L |
|
|
On Nov 15, 5:08 pm, No One <no...@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
| Quote: | hyperbola <bolahype...@gmail.com> writes:
On Nov 13, 8:50 pm, Guillaume Ier de Normandie
guillaumedenorman...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Sign the petition here:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/review-the-501c3-status-of-the-churc....
The LDS church contributed a significant amount of money
Can you show me where LDS inc contributed even a penny?
What they contributed (apparently) was fundraising - getting members
to make large donations to the "yes on eight" campaign, and the
fair market value of that is substantial.
|
So LDS inc contributed not a penny, and the very first
thing on the petition is a lie, and probably deceived
people into signing it ... |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Poison
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 7:25 pm Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of L |
|
|
On Nov 13, 7:27 pm, "michael ellis" <dvd...@bak.rr.com> wrote:
| Quote: | I won't sign a petition. That I don't believe in. I voted for yes on 8.
And damn proud of it. Why do you want to petition against a church
that stands against a lifestyle most of us feels is wrong? I'm a
heterosexual
and goddamn proud of it. Gays and lesbians should be thankful for
having the title of civil rights..instead having nothing. Guillaume Ier de
Normandie..you're a fool. Posting a petition most of us won't sign..because
we feel gay marriage is wrong and is basically for man and woman.
Can gays be happy with civil rights? If they're not happy with that. Too
goddamn bad. Marriage has ALWAYS BEEN for man and woman.
Guillaume Ier de Normandie..you're pathedic.
"Guillaume Ier de Normandie" <guillaumedenorman...@yahoo.com> wrote in
messagenews:a3ac65d6-3f83-449c-9e4f-acb4cfbf01e8@i20g2000prf.googlegroups..com...
Sign the petition here:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/review-the-501c3-status-of-the-churc...
The LDS church contributed a significant amount of money and effort to
endorse PROP 8 in California via its network of church, media, and
community outlets enshrining discrimination under the law for
thousands of Californians and their families.
"In general, no organization, including a church, may qualify for IRC
section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is
attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying)."
See:http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf
|
You sicken me...that you think you deserve rights that others do
not...that you think you can burn the Constitution in the name of
"family". |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Emerson Wainwright
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:41 pm Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of L |
|
|
On Nov 17, 10:15 am, palindrome <palindrm...@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Nov 15, 5:08 pm, No One <no...@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
hyperbola <bolahype...@gmail.com> writes:
On Nov 13, 8:50 pm, Guillaume Ier de Normandie
guillaumedenorman...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Sign the petition here:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/review-the-501c3-status-of-the-churc....
The LDS church contributed a significant amount of money
Can you show me where LDS inc contributed even a penny?
What they contributed (apparently) was fundraising - getting members
to make large donations to the "yes on eight" campaign, and the
fair market value of that is substantial.
So LDS inc contributed not a penny,
|
Liar.
http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_10842051
| Quote: | and the very first
thing on the petition is a lie,
|
Liar. http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_10842051
| Quote: | and probably deceived
people into signing it ...
|
Liar. http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_10842051 |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Emerson Wainwright
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:20 pm Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of L |
|
|
On Nov 15, 11:53 pm, awthraw...@gmail.com wrote:
| Quote: | On Nov 15, 7:38 pm, Enos Penvy <enospe...@ymail.com> wrote:
Ummm... well, if you ever watch the news or read a paper or
newsmagazine.... I mean, you don't think these things weren't
mentioned, do you?
You are obsessed with the gay's getting married factor worldwide.
|
If keeping up with current events by watching the news, reading
newspapers' front pages, and gleaning information from the front pages
of sites such as Yahoo and MSNBC is an "obsession", then guilty as
charged.
One must wonder just how deep your head is buried to have missed this
information.
Quite obviously! We shall never again assume that you have any clue
as to what goes on in the world.
| Quote: | So of course your world goes in a circular funnel sucked into
that vortex. If I heard about it, it does not register,
|
Interesting. Then why is it such a huge deal to you now?
| Quote: | Gay marriage
worldwide holds my interest as much as that.
|
Then you'll explain to you why suddenly it's such a huge issue for
you.
| Quote: | Well, calling me stupid is just an ad hom. Yet another fallacy. You
can't provide evidence for your statement, so you call ME stupid for
not knowing what you yourself cannot prove!
Actually you are stupid
|
Hey, *I'M* not the one who didn't know gay marriage was legal in many
places. That be YOU, Madam!
| Quote: | if you are unable to apprehend how men are
different than women
|
And where did I say that I didn't apprehend this? Hmmm? I mean,
being gay, wouldn't I *have* to know the difference?
| Quote: | and how that would be a huge factor in the
raising of children.
|
You have yet to produce any evidence as to the hugeness of this
factor. Many children grow up with only one parent. Indeed, due to
the new law in Arkansas, many children will grow up with ZERO parents
-- they will spend their childhoods in group homes.
So is your interest REALLY in the children? I should think not. Not
if you think group homes are preferable to stable family homes.
Additionally, what of the gay couples who wish to marry but who do NOT
want children? I, for example, do not want children. Your argument
doesn't really work, then, with those of us who choose to remain
childless.
| Quote: | Well, sorry, but we can't guarantee that even in STRAIGHT marriages
now, can we?
That defense does not rise to the level of an adequate affirmative
argument for your faulty cause.
|
But it does.
| Quote: | Namely, the failure of a family to
provide the ideal does not argue for two men or two women providing
what is biologically or psychologically inferior at its face for a
child.
|
You're claiming prima facie biological and psychological inferiority.
Something that is prima facie can EASILY be shown.
So SHOW us.
| Quote: | Touching a hot stove is one thing. Your analogy is lost because it
makes no sense. You sound like a kook.
I'm in sync with what nature has provided for the continuation of
human life.
|
You're not even "in sync" with major events that occur around you!
| Quote: | That might sound kookie to you,
|
Indeed it does, because you're basically saying that if same-sex
marriage is allowed, the human species will cease to exist.
Which is hilariously ridiculous.
| Quote: | but that's because you
have an aberent familial view based on your sexual wiring.
|
Not quite. See, I grew up in a family with a mother and father, and
one brother. That is a family. I'm quite sure that you would not
think my "familial view" is "aberrant" with respect to that rather
typical American family.
However, having a broader mind than you do, I also consider the
neighbor girl, whose parents were divorced, to have grown up in a
family. She lived with her mother and sister. Her father remarried
(indeed, the woman he married is the reason for the divorce in the
first place) immediately. So, she had two families, including her
step-sisters. Her mother remarried later.
She has been married for 25 years and has three kids, two in college
right now, one graduating next year with a degree in engineering, and
the other engaged in pre-med studies.
| Quote: | In your
case it has driven you to think only about yourself instead of what is
important to families and society.
|
What I'm saying is that allowing same-sex marriage will not
significantly alter the fabric of families and society, except for
including legal rights to those couples and families who are not
allowed them.
If you're so pro-family, then you should be FOR more families who have
legal recognition and protections.
You do understand, don't you, that these families exist even without
same-sex marriage, don't you? They just don't have legal
protections. And that includes legal protections for any children
involved.
Are you anti-child? You're using children as a shield to advance your
own bigotry, and you would have children be denied rights, including
rights of inheritance, because ... WHY, exactly?
| Quote: | Post your proof. Just saying "It's obvious" does nothing in an
argument, except make me laugh at you.
Your ignorance is not my responsibility.
|
I see. Well, I posted proof for you when you requested it.
Your refusal to do so simply proves to us that you're lying through
your teeth.
Lying is immoral.
You lie.
Therefore, you are immoral.
:-))
| Quote: | Children do best with one man one woman.
Cite, please.
You try to insert so-called science as a gambit.
|
Oh, yeah. DAMN that science!! Man, if it disproves what YOU think,
the science is bullshit.
You really are a piece of work, ya know that? LOL!!!!!
| Quote: | As if the onus is on
me and those who support what is natural to prove to you who desires
what is unnatural.
|
Men are not capable of doing anything "unnatural".
| Quote: | The onus is not on us.
|
But it is. You claim something, the burden of proof lies with you.
| Quote: | After you find a cite, then tell us what we do about the heteros who
don't stay married even though they've got kids.
Pointing to a situation that is less than ideal does not raise your
desire to the status of ideal.
|
Oh, my. So you're going to define "ideal" for us. Ward and June
Cleaver, right?
I think you would better spend your efforts on trying to get divorce
outlawed, since you insist that having two parents is always best for
children.
If you're fighting for the children, then you really need to focus on
the straights, not the gays.
Clean up your own backyard before you start judging mine to be
unkempt.
| Quote: | "No equivalent substitute" also applies to man-man and woman-woman
relationships, so your premise is dismissed.
Those are less than ideal in terms of society needs for the
continuation of society.
|
Society will continue when gay marriage is legal. We have proof of
this. I've already cited for you. Neither Spain nor Canada has
ceased to exist. No children have died as a result of same-sex
marriage. The lands have not fallen into the ocean.
Your doomsaying is negated by proof. That must make you feel like an
idiot.
| Quote: | As such, the state recognizes the need to
support one-man one-woman marriages
|
We're not asking them to stop recognizing those marriages.
| Quote: | while it does not recognize the
same societal need for recognizing man-man or woman-woman marriages.
|
"Need"?
Honey, let me explain something to you. If marriage were a "need",
once again, you'd be better spending your time trying to get straights
to stay married, to be married before having children, etc.
That's a hetero issue, not a gay one. Again, clean up your own
backyard. You're blaming things on the gays that really are the fault
of the heteros.
| Quote: | No I don't want you to wait 100 years...I'm telling you no for now and
forever.
Ah, so you lied.
You're lying by accusing me of lying.
|
Nope. You claimed that gay marriage hasn't been around long enough to
do a study on your perceived harm to the children. You later said
that even 100 years would not be enough time.
So you lied.
| Quote: | Nice try. Lies don't work in arguments very well, and now that you've
admitted to presenting a lie, your entire argument goes down the
tubes. FWOOSH!!! Right into the sewer.
You've just condemned your own argument by falsely accusing me of
lying.
|
Everyone sees that you've purposely misrepresented your intentions,
which makes you a liar.
| Quote: | You fear being manipulated by scientific studies?
So-called scientific studies
|
"So-called"? LOL!\
| Quote: | the primary and most fertile place for
utter bullshit.
|
I see. Well, I can see some good in that for you. You must save lots
of money on doctor bills.
| Quote: | This is especially true when one thinks there needs to
be study about the relative merits of homosexual parenting to
heterosexual parenting.
|
Well, ummm.... *I* don't think such a study needs to be done! YOU
do! Because you need some "proof". Otherwise, you're just blowing
wind out of your ass.
| Quote: | It would achieve nothing but cruelty to subject a child or many
children to a study such as that.
|
How so, honey? There are already children in gay-run households. How
is seeing how they're doing going to harm them?
| Quote: | Honey, that says SO MUCH about you that I'm not even going to start.
Your hysteria might be cute on Broadway...
|
I'm QUITE sure you've never been to Broadway. QUITE sure.
| Quote: | You're using children as a shield to protect yourself from something
you don't want.
That's revolting.
What is revolting is for an adult to be so self absorbed as you are
that you would put your selfish desires ahead of children.
|
My selfish desires? I don't want kids. There are already kids in gay-
run households. There have ALWAYS been kids in gay-run households.
Giving them some legal rights by allowing same-sex marriage would HELP
the kids. YOU are the one who wants to deny them RIGHTS!
| Quote: | Children are resilient. There HAVE been studies done, and you won't
cite them because THE STUDY RESULTS CONTRADICT what you're trying to
say here!
Oh, that is too funny! Studies from the most radical places in
America, the pro-gay pro-left pro-communist world of the university
social studies programs across America. These sorts of studies mean
less than nothing. They merely put numbers to prejudice.
|
Ah. So, no science. Let's just use opinion.
What a loooooooon!
You're useless. How is it that you don't throw yourself
| Quote: |
Loser.
I'm a loser??
|
Yes.
| Quote: | You keep getting shut out by normal people who keep
adding amendments to define marriage as something that can only be
done by one man and one woman.
|
I've presented you with cites to prove this to be untrue, and you are
lying again.
Don't you ever tire of telling untruths? Isn't that against your
religion or something?
| Quote: | To normal human beings, you are the consistent loser, because you
refuse to accept reality of biology.
|
I have no problem with biology. Why do you keep inserting the word
"biology" into your argument, without ever further discussing what the
fuck you're talking about? What is it about BIOLOGY that affects your
argument? Did you take a course in high school?
| Quote: | Um, did *I* do those things?
Back at you...Have I taught children to hate? No.
|
Well... we don't know that. What you're saying here is evidence of
your own hatred, and surely the children you come in contact with pick
up on that. And that's bad for children.
| Quote: | But you were
perfectly willing to make that unsupported claim. Maybe you are the
hater.
|
I hate people who can't present logical arguments, yet insist on
arguing anyway.
| Quote: | No.
Next!!
You've falsely called me a liar and a loser,
|
I called you a liar because you've lied here. I'll admit that calling
you a "loser" is a judgment call. So far, nothing negates that
judgment, however. So I'm prone to stick with that belief (just as
you stick with the belief that gay marriage will sound the death knell
for the human species).
| Quote: | but you don't see
yourself as a hater...
|
Sure I do. I just told you. I hate people who can't present logical
arguments.
| Quote: | isn't that the way it always is..the actual
hater blames everyone else.
|
Well, I'm not in your shoes. If lots of people are telling you that
you're hateful, perhaps it's time to have a look at that, don't ya
think? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Ramon F Herrera
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:53 pm Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of L |
|
|
On Nov 16, 12:38 am, john p <john.ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | There are many churches on earth and in the US. Some even pay taxes
voluntarily, others by force. It isn't against the law for a church to
pay taxes.
|
John:
If what you say is true -and I have no reason to doubt- then the
situation is worse than I imagined. Governments in civilized churches
should treat money coming from churches as if it came from Satan
himself.
How would you like it if the Muslims Churches of America made hefty
tax contributions?
In Venezuela, one of the only forces keeping the chavista regime from
taking all freedoms are the churches (some 90%++ are Catholic down
there). The priests frequently criticize the abusive government. When
getting criticism from unions or students, an old tactic of
governments all over is to create a new government-friendly unions or
student organizations. The current Venezuelan regime reasoned that if
the technique works for workers and students, it should work for
religious organizations as well. Since Chavez couldn't find any
sympathetic church to which give lots of money, he simply created his
own church which bears the word "revolutionary" somewhere.
Nothing prevents such chavista church from opening operations in the
USA. How would you feel about that church being (voluntarily or not)
taxed? Would you merrily accept their most than generous
contributions? Hey, they are just paying for their share!
What I meant in the previous message is that churches by definition
are not based on Earth: they may have offices in the planet, but their
top boss is far away, outside the Milky Way. The Venezuelan's
Ambassador boss is not GWB, it is someone who lives in Caracas.
Therefore, diplomats are not taxed. The same logic applies to
representatives for the various extraterrestrial bodies.
-Ramon |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Ramon F Herrera
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:26 pm Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of L |
|
|
On Nov 17, 6:08 pm, The Master <tar...@nospam.sdf.lonestar.org.nospam>
wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Ramon F Herrera wrote:
How would you like it if the Muslim Churches of America made hefty
tax contributions?
I personally would feel no different then Muslim Americans making hefty
tax "contributions" by way of forced income taxes. The theology of the
church should make as much difference as the theology of the tax payer,
wouldn't you agree?
In Venezuela, one of the only forces keeping the chavista regime from
taking all freedoms are the churches (some 90%++ are Catholic down
there). The priests frequently criticize the abusive government.
Then the priests are not running a theology, but a political action group..
|
What if people were being tortured and killed by the regime (in fact,
some are being). Should the church remain silent? Would you wait
until there is blood on the streets to take some action.
John mentioned how important was the activism of churches during the
civil rights struggle. Would you object to that, too?
Are you aware of the church's activism to save Jewish children from
the Nazis?
Do you think a single person would show up at church in Venezuela (*)
if all they hear is inspirational hymns from heaven? A priest must
have one foot in heaven, but the other one is down here.
The fact is this: if you have no father, the mother must replace him,
and viceversa. If the government is failing you in egregious ways (not
like in the USA, we are 99% Ok here), it is the obligation of Mother
Church to come and console you. Nature abhors a vacuum.
-Ramon
(*) or any country where the basic freedoms and rights are
dysfunctional. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
No One
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:42 am Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of L |
|
|
Emerson Wainwright <emersonwainwright@hotmail.com> writes:
| Quote: | On Nov 17, 10:15Â am, palindrome <palindrm...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 15, 5:08Â pm, No One <no...@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
hyperbola <bolahype...@gmail.com> writes:
On Nov 13, 8:50Â pm, Guillaume Ier de Normandie
guillaumedenorman...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Sign the petition here:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/review-the-501c3-status-of-the-churc...
The LDS church contributed a significant amount of money
Can you show me where LDS inc contributed even a penny?
What they contributed (apparently) was fundraising - getting members
to make large donations to the "yes on eight" campaign, and the
fair market value of that is substantial.
So LDS inc contributed not a penny,
Liar.
http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_10842051
|
.... which says that they contributed a mere $2,078.97, which actually
covered the travel expenses of "several Utah-based church leaders" in
an "in-kind donation". It sounds like no cash went into the "Yes on
Eight" campaign from the Mormon Church.
The real contribution was not that piddly amount, but the Mormon
Church managing to get its members to contribute over 40 percent
of the total funds for the "No on Eight" campaign.
BTW, before calling the guy a liar, you should keep in mind that
this $2078.97 donation is not easy to find in the media - its
so small that it got hardly any attention. Your URL is the first
one I've seen, and the contribution was dated Oct 25 (and it
might have taken a while for it to show up in a database). My
guess is that he didn't know about it - I didn't until today. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
The Master
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 5:08 am Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of L |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Ramon F Herrera wrote:
| Quote: | How would you like it if the Muslims Churches of America made hefty
tax contributions?
|
I personally would feel no different then Muslim Americans making hefty
tax "contributions" by way of forced income taxes. The theology of the
church should make as much difference as the theology of the tax payer,
wouldn't you agree?
| Quote: | In Venezuela, one of the only forces keeping the chavista regime from
taking all freedoms are the churches (some 90%++ are Catholic down
there). The priests frequently criticize the abusive government.
|
Then the priests are not running a theology, but a political action group.
Laws are used to control the population by fear of earthly punishments,
while religion is used to control the population by fear of eternal
punishments. Both use intimidation and fear to control the people, to
force them to behave within the confines of "acceptable" activity.
While the Church "stands in the way" of the government, it's by virture of
the fact that the Church wants to force it's own will upon the people
instead. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Mike
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 1:02 pm Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of L |
|
|
On Nov 15, 7:59 pm, Emerson Wainwright <emersonwainwri...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | On Nov 15, 6:29 pm, Mike <mgcul...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 14, 12:23 pm, Emerson Wainwright <scot...@walla.com> wrote:
On Nov 14, 11:21 am, unsurreality_2...@yahoo.com wrote:
-------------------snip
I'm heterosexual. Married to a woman (man and wife). But I simply
don't feel the need to ban others doing what they want - as long as it
doesn't hurt others.
So, how does it hurt you...PERSONALLY?
It doesn't. We've asked REPEATEDLY, since this issue became a hot
topic, HOW allowing same-sex marriage could POSSIBLY negatively affect
straight marriages.
Who has argued that gay marriage personally hurts him or her?
The people who said that allowing same-sex marriage would hurt the
institution of marriage.
Who argued that they were personally hurt by gay marriage? What are
their names?
Get real.
|
Noted. No one has ever argued that gay marriage hurt them
personally.
Why argue it?
| Quote: | One can still have a principled stand against gay marriage.
I don't see how.
|
Of course you don't see how. Anyone who does not see eye to eye with
you on gay marriage is a hate-filled bigot, in your view.
| Quote: |
There are
long-range legal and cultural ramifications,
Cite?
|
Let's say that the default definition of marriage is changed from the
union of men and women so that it also includes the union of men and
men and women and women. Suppose gay marriage is instituted and is
made equal to heterosexual marriage on the basis of civil rights,
which seems to be what the pro marriage forces want.
If a churches refuses to perform gay marriage ceremonies, what then?
Will they then be guilty of discrimination? Will they have lawsuits
filed against them and be forced to either perform the requested
ceremonies, pay millions in damages, or close their doors?
Will all adoption agencies have to consider that gay couples are
absolutely no different than heterosexual couples for the purposes of
placing children, regardless of that agency's religious affiliation?
These questions have to be answered. From what I've seen, those
who've commented on behalf of gay marriage would be ecstatic at the
above prospects. Their mouths water at the mere thought of the
Mormon church losing its tax-exempt status.
Also pertinent is what happens when gay couples move to another state
that does not recognize gay marriage. As more and more same sex
couples inevitably transfer to other states, isn't the next step in
the agenda to take up litigation against those states?
| Quote: | not the least is the fact
that for most people gay marriage is oxymoronic
Cite "most gay people".
|
?
| Quote: | And then also provide us with how even if it
were "oxymoronic" for "most" gay people (that includes lesbians, ya
know), the ones who want to be married should be denied marriage
simply because they are not part of what you claim is the vast
majority.
|
I know you must be frustrated, and there is no answer that I or anyone
else can give you that you will accept. It's like the spoiled,
petulant child denied permission to do something he wants to do,
whining repeatedly, "But why can't I?"
| Quote: | and undefinable, like
division by zero.
Something tells me you're not a mathematician, so spare us the
numbers.
|
No, but I managed to pass college calculus. Trust me, division by
zero is undefined; therefore, it's as likely a metaphor as any to
apply to the concept of gay marriage.
| Quote: |
Let me ask you this: how are gay couples personally being hurt by not
having a certificate?
They are denied the rights as a couple that opposite-sex couples get
automatically and for free upon marriage.
|
From what I understand, domestic partnership extends most of what
marriage does. Gays have been given lots of space lately, but they
never seem to be satisfied with it.
The way you talk, you seem to think that that all societies, past and
present, set out to conspire against gays and be mean to them. They
simply went with what was natural - the attraction of men and women
for each other, and the need for that to happen for the next
generation to come into being.
Note that Jesus didn't say, "And if a man looks upon a man with lust
in his heart, then he has already committed adultery with him in his
heart." Nor did he say, "If a man divorces his husband for any reason
other than adultery, then he has caused him to commit adultery."
Was Jesus Christ therefore homophobic and bigoted? Were all the
peoples and cultures of the past homophobic and bigoted because gay
marriage wasn't the norm?
There is a broad, underlying assumption and base of experience about
human sexuality, marriage, and the family. Homosexuals and lesbians,
of course, have always been around, but never had the temerity before
to demand that society stretch the age-old assumption of marriage from
the traditional male-female arrangement to male-male and female-
female.
| Quote: |
Why is that of such overwhelming, absolute
importance right now, worth starting a culture war over?
Oh, my. It really DOES scare you.
|
Now it's time for you to get real.
| Quote: |
Listen, you'll survive. The people in Canada, Spain, the Netherlands,
South Africa, Belgium, Massachusetts, Connecticut and California have
survived -- without detriment -- this scary "culture war".
|
Putting the flaming hyperbole aside, it doesn't matter. In all the
places you mentioned, gay marriage has only been around since 2001 or
later. In Canada, at least one pastor was threatened with fines and
jail time. His crime? Writing letters to the editor criticizing
homosexuality and the use of tax dollars to promote homosexual
activism. I don't expect it to end at that, as the PC vigilantes look
high and low for more thoughtcrime offenders
I don't care to have crap like that happen here. You keep saying,
"How does gay marriage personally and directly hurt you?" I'm a
stakeholder in this society and I care about what goes on in it.
| Quote: | The
nations and states did not fall into the sea, did not burn down,
children didn't suddenly start dying... all of your kind's slippery
slopes have never come to pass.
Live your lives and prosper.
Give me equal rights.
|
You mean of course, have the whole of society bend over backwards some
more to bestow on you some fantasy right that says gay marriage is on
par with what we have always known marriage to be.
| Quote: |
You've gotten some good concessions from
society over the last few decades and it's good that you did, but
don't try to force society to do something it doesn't want to do.
You actually think that allowing same-sex marriage will FORCE people
to marry members of the same sex?
What a loooooooon!
|
Do try to follow the conversation, will you? I'm clearly speaking
about the militant gay community trying to force society to institute
gay marriage. Got it now?
| Quote: |
You
will definitely have some push back. You said to hell with democracy
when people voted against gay marriage twice, and that's troubling in
itself.
Are you saying that using the judicial system isn't democratic? Is
THAT what you're saying?
|
It's certainly the least democratic -- 4 of 3 appointed judges, beyond
reach, overruling the most democratic means we have, the ballot
proposition.
| Quote: |
Gonna snip the rest unread. I've given you enough to think about for
now.
|
I can understand that you would rather not deal with it, there is
probably more there than you can handle.
| Quote: |
//snip//- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text - |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
palindrome
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 4:08 pm Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of L |
|
|
On Nov 17, 3:42 pm, No One <no...@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Emerson Wainwright <emersonwainwri...@hotmail.com> writes:
On Nov 17, 10:15 am, palindrome <palindrm...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 15, 5:08 pm, No One <no...@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
hyperbola <bolahype...@gmail.com> writes:
On Nov 13, 8:50 pm, Guillaume Ier de Normandie
guillaumedenorman...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Sign the petition here:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/review-the-501c3-status-of-the-churc...
The LDS church contributed a significant amount of money
Can you show me where LDS inc contributed even a penny?
What they contributed (apparently) was fundraising - getting members
to make large donations to the "yes on eight" campaign, and the
fair market value of that is substantial.
So LDS inc contributed not a penny,
Liar.
http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_10842051
... which says that they contributed a mere $2,078.97, which actually
covered the travel expenses of "several Utah-based church leaders" in
an "in-kind donation". It sounds like no cash went into the "Yes on
Eight" campaign from the Mormon Church.
|
I was unaware of any donation from LDS inc, it was done without my
knowledge if done.
| Quote: |
The real contribution was not that piddly amount, but the Mormon
Church managing to get its members to contribute over 40 percent
of the total funds for the "No on Eight" campaign.
BTW, before calling the guy a liar, you should keep in mind that
this $2078.97 donation is not easy to find in the media - its
so small that it got hardly any attention. Your URL is the first
one I've seen, and the contribution was dated Oct 25 (and it
might have taken a while for it to show up in a database). My
guess is that he didn't know about it - I didn't until today.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text - |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Ramon F Herrera
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 4:34 pm Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of L |
|
|
On Nov 18, 11:11 am, The Master
<tar...@nospam.sdf.lonestar.org.nospam> wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Ramon F Herrera wrote:
In Venezuela, one of the only forces keeping the chavista regime from
taking all freedoms are the churches (some 90%++ are Catholic down
there). The priests frequently criticize the abusive government.
Then the priests are not running a theology, but a political action group.
What if people were being tortured and killed by the regime (in fact,
some are being). Should the church remain silent? Would you wait
until there is blood on the streets to take some action.
If you want to justify the vocal outrage of one religion (Catholics), why
do you oppose the same vocalness in another religion (Muslims)?
My point was not to say "tuff shit" on the Catholics, but rather "tuff
shit" on you when it comes to Muslim churched.
|
You have misinterpreted my position. In short, churches should have
voice but no vote. Having said that, good luck in drawing the line; I
wouldn't want to be in a lawmaker's shoes, who would have to call King
Solomon.
All churches in the USA have given their official support to the
plight of the undocumented immigrants, and I applaud them for that.
In my other position it is much easier to draw the line: when it comes
to money the government must not request NOR accept a single red penny
from them: nothing, zip, nada.
Due respect, but anyone asking for churches to be taxed is a total
idiot, and I guarantee that such person has never held any position of
power, and is clueless about the nature of power.
-Ramon |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
The Master
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:11 pm Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of L |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Ramon F Herrera wrote:
| Quote: | In Venezuela, one of the only forces keeping the chavista regime from
taking all freedoms are the churches (some 90%++ are Catholic down
there). The priests frequently criticize the abusive government.
Then the priests are not running a theology, but a political action group.
What if people were being tortured and killed by the regime (in fact,
some are being). Should the church remain silent? Would you wait
until there is blood on the streets to take some action.
|
If you want to justify the vocal outrage of one religion (Catholics), why
do you oppose the same vocalness in another religion (Muslims)?
My point was not to say "tuff shit" on the Catholics, but rather "tuff
shit" on you when it comes to Muslim churched. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Scotius
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 28, 2008 4:47 am Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 18:50:00 -0800 (PST), Guillaume Ier de Normandie
<guillaumedenormandie@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Sign the petition here:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/review-the-501c3-status-of-the-church-of-latter-day-saints-the-mormons
The LDS church contributed a significant amount of money and effort to
endorse PROP 8 in California via its network of church, media, and
community outlets enshrining discrimination under the law for
thousands of Californians and their families.
"In general, no organization, including a church, may qualify for IRC
section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is
attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying)."
See: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf
|
From the point of view of most people, the issue of gay
marriage, while discussed politically, is not itself a political
issue. Therefore the status of any religious organization clearly
cannot be affected by it's involvement in such an issue. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Colonel Jake
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 28, 2008 9:27 am Post subject: Re: PETITION: Review the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of |
|
|
"Scotius" <yodasbud@mnsi.net> wrote in message
news:op8ui4lajv2bogdflj9s6mkchhr17o3tdd@4ax.com...
: On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 18:50:00 -0800 (PST), Guillaume Ier de Normandie
: <guillaumedenormandie@yahoo.com> wrote:
:
: >Sign the petition here:
: >
:
| Quote: | http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/review-the-501c3-status-of-the-churc
h-of-latter-day-saints-the-mormons |
: >
: >The LDS church contributed a significant amount of money and effort
to
: >endorse PROP 8 in California via its network of church, media, and
: >community outlets enshrining discrimination under the law for
: >thousands of Californians and their families.
: >
: >"In general, no organization, including a church, may qualify for
IRC
: >section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is
: >attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying)."
: >
: >See: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf
:
: From the point of view of most people, the issue of gay
: marriage, while discussed politically, is not itself a political
: issue. Therefore the status of any religious organization clearly
: cannot be affected by it's involvement in such an issue.
Didnt teh "Lesbians and Queers?,"
"Already lose a battle against teh Boyscouts of America!!! (which
teh Boyscouts also have an non-profit organization 501(c)),....,
where as an Court ruling was, that teh Boyscouts of America are
their own entity, and they can have whatever and whoever they so
choose, to lead their group?!?!?!,...., well, its teh same thing
here?!?!?!,...., The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints,
can run their affairs of teh church any darn way they so choose,
no matter what any 'Faggot or Butched Biatch,' has to say about
any of it!!! (or simply? this aint arent tharent America)..."
And you can bet?,
"The Church will up and go literally, away from teh USA?!?!?!
(piece by piece (branch by branch (ward building by ward
building(temple by temple)))),..., if teh Courts dont protect its
Charter!!! (just like that (gone, along with all its goOd
citizenship))..."
So any?,
"FAGGoT, Lesbian or queer out there?!?!?!,...., you need to
realize, you're going to lose again!!! (badly)..."
(and even Bashed (possibly beyond recognition)) |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
