I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
frrst, first frist ever
I'm surprised they didn't have a vote option for "More like Jesus".
I'd just like to state for the record that I, Christian, have no affiliation with www.Christianet.com or anything remotely resembling it.
Also,
Bars, Mitch
daver9, why such a douchebag?
I'm very disappointed there was no question in regard to:
"More likely to encourage virgin sacrifices"
It would have given me a chance to not choose Kerry across the board.
If there is a Heaven and a Hell and Jerry winds up in Heaven, then I'd rather spend eternity in Hell myself.
Do you hear me God? Because, I truly do mean every word of it!
Gee, just think how much trouble we could all save ourselves if we didn't give tax exemptions to any religious groups! Then, Jerry could endorse whichever douchebag jebuz would endorse and we wouldn't have to pay for it.
NYT story says:
The ownership of the Web site is hard to determine.
"whois" search is not hard to do:
falwell.com is [ 64.4.114.27 ]
Liberty Alliance
141 Oakdale Cir Suite C
Lynchburg VA 24502
US
Domain Name: FALWELL.COM
Administrative Contact-
Jerry Falwell: webmaster@falwell.com
Jerry Falwell Ministries
1971 University Blvd
Lynchburg VA 24502
US
Phone- 434-582-2950
Fax- 434-582-2625
Technical Contact-
Jerry Falwell: webmaster@falwell.com
Jerry Falwell Ministries
1971 University Blvd
Lynchburg VA 24502
US
Phone- 434-582-2950
Fax- 434-582-2625
Record update date: 2003-06-11 14: 56: 00
Record create date: 1998-10-12
Record expires on: 2004-10-11
Database last updated on: 2004-07-16 13: 44: 32 EST
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.TRBC.ORG
NS2.TRBC.ORG
NYT story says:
In the interview, Mr. Falwell said that the site was owned by his lobbying group, not by Jerry Falwell Ministries.
The domain registrant indeed is listed as the lobbying group Liberty Alliance but a fellow by the name of "Jerry Falwell" who is affiliated with "Jerry Falwell Ministries" is the administrative and technical contact.
Gee, tough dots to connect.
I'd call this a good start, since many churches have never played by the "no political endorsements for non-profits" rule. And maybe someone can figure out how to get the Catholic church's status yanked because of all those pedophile priests.
'Cause I have a hunch that if churches had to pay taxes, a lot of W's deficit would vaporize over night.
As they say, vote early, vote often.
Seems the only protection this site has agains people voting multiple times is prayer.
A vote for Jerry Falwell is a vote for Osama
No. It's an immoral fuck without a shread of decency or morality in his entire body who chooses to endorse Bush.
Take that for what it's worth.
And yes, I mean that very strongly. Falwell's crowd are a whole bunch of people that hide behind the bible because they really have NO sense of right or wrong...and guess what. They do that on purpose.
In fact, that's the entire purpose of that book as it was revised. I know that's not a popular statement, but it's true. It has the goody stuff to keep the peasents/peons in line, and the blood and greed to make the people in power happy.
"daver9, why such a douchebag?
tomaig | Email | Homepage | 07.16.04 - 1:47 pm | #"
(a cholostomy bag calling a douchebag a a bag)
Actually, the mixing of contributions is far more likely to get the IRS' attention.
"A page on the site for donations by credit card is also labeled "Jerry Falwell Ministries," with no information about the tax status of the donations.
In the interview, Mr. Falwell said that the site was owned by his lobbying group, not by Jerry Falwell Ministries. He said the label on the site referred generically to the many ministries he runs. When a visitor makes a donation through the site, he said, the donor can use a "comments" box to direct it to a specific organization, or his organization directs it "where it is needed."
The IRS ought to REALLY like that.
Well, I guess I cheated because I, a non-Christian, voted on the poll. Kerry down the line is obviously the candidate more in line with me on issues of faith, though. And more in line with the Christian faith.
If we can "anti-freep" this poll, it would be so cool!
I'm voting as many times as I can to make up for the votes that were stolen in 2000.
And no, I will not get over it.
I've been against religious tax exemption for a long time. I mean, what's the point? If my religion is important enough to me, I should have no hesistation to pay property taxes on the church/synagogue/mosque; payroll taxes for the priests; etc. etc. What purpose do these parasites serve that makes them special?
No tax exemptions would really separate the truly religious from the hangers-on (hanger-ons?).
OT: Do others continue to have difficulty reaching Kevin Drum's Political Animal blog? I can only get thru sporadically...been that way for almost a week now.
My fingers smell like butthole.
further,
http://www.chillingeffects.org/p...cgi?
NoticeID=29
indicates Falwell's lawyers sent a cease-and-desist letter in 2001 to someone who tried using the domain name jerryfalwell.com. The letter does say Liberty Alliance is the "licensee" and owner of falwell.com. IANAL so I'm not going to try to guess about the legal significance of the content of that letter regarding the question of who "owns" the Falwell Ministries site.
HOWEVER, it appears the cease-and-desist worked because now http://www.jerryfalwell.com takes us to the same Jerry Falwell Ministries site as falwell.com.
AND, interestingly, a whois on jerryfalwell.com returns:
Jerry Falwell Ministries
1971 University Blvd
Lynchburg, VA 24502
US
Domain Name: JERRYFALWELL.COM
Administrative Contact:
Jerry Falwell webmaster@falwell.com
Jerry Falwell Ministries
1971 University Blvd
Lynchburg, VA 24502
US
Phone: 434-582-2950
Fax: 434-582-2625
Technical Contact:
Jerry Falwell webmaster@falwell.com
Jerry Falwell Ministries
1971 University Blvd
Lynchburg, VA 24502
US
Phone: 434-582-2950
Fax: 434-582-2625
Record updated on 2004-02-28 06:55:05
Record created on 2001-03-06
Record expires on 2005-03-06
Database last updated on 2004-07-16 13:57:48 EST
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.TRBC.ORG
NS2.TRBC.ORG
Note that this time the registrant is not Liberty Alliance but Jerry Falwell Ministries.
It would be lovely if we could unfreep this poll, but they'll probably blame skewed numbres on Floridian-level ballot design, or on the general level of idiocy of their membership.
To make the vote really interesting make sure to indicate that you're from a solid red state.
just another faith based initiative, so suck it down!!
Besides, seperation of church and state is a constitutional myth, and its a myth on its way out the door.
"In an interview yesterday, Mr. Falwell said that an affiliated tax-exempt lobbying organization, not his religious organization, Jerry Falwell Ministries, had paid for the e-mail message and the Web site. Mr. Falwell also argued that his comments constituted only his personal view, and not an endorsement by his lobbying organization, Liberty Alliance."
Translation: We can break the law because we filed the right paperwork.
Just another squirrel, running to and fro...
Cho's full of shit. I spent the entire day at the march, from early morning to late afternoon.
There were more cameras than people. Video and still.
It goes to the heart of the point that every leftist is obsessed with being persecuted or a martyr for a cause.
Cho should explain more fully what she was doing and where.
The notion that a special security detail was summoned because the dwarf was considered a threat is laughable....
so after you vote, you get this message:
Thank you for taking our Presidential Poll. The results will be posted in a few weeks.
Why?
So they can change results they don't like?
So the monks can transcribe each voting result by hand?
There's no reason not to have instant results. Methinks they will censor any unfavorable results of the poll.
'Cause I have a hunch that if churches had to pay taxes, a lot of W's deficit would vaporize over night.
TW
No, it would just mean more tax cuts.
bj - how is the religious exemption different from any other non-profit's exemption?
If they are different, they shouldn't be. The establishment clause, the way it is written, seems to me that it would prevent Congress from recognizing religious establishments (though that is really just 18th century bizarre writing style at work). So our tax laws ought not to distinguish religious orgs from any other org. Of course, it is certainly fair to treat non-profit / charitable organizations differently - so non-profit churches, etc., should and would still get some sort of break under a sensible, constitutionally valid tax system.
gee David you're a day too late. Why are you posting on Cho here?
I think you have inadvertently shown your true motivation for posting here... you're desperate for attention.
Would you like to email me so that we can discuss our many shared interests. We have much in common in this liberal wasteland.
Coffee perhaps?
HMMM. Martha Stewart gets five months. That's about one month for every ten thousand. So if they give Kenny boy the equivalent. Let's see. 35 billion divided by 10,000, divided by 12, carry the one, give him a million years off for ratting out Dumbya and Dick and that's about...
...When does the sun go Nova?
It must take a stout fundie heart
To put up with a Falwell fart.
Everyone knows now
He's a slop-fed sow
Who should hang in a fucking meat mart.
I'm referring, of course, to you David.
I'm intrigued.
"Gee, tough dots to connect.
yoyoyoyoyo"
"Well, we're not inviting YOU to any more of our parties!"
(Damn good job, there, yoyo! Holy crap, the media is useless.)
Perhaps I didn't honor the spirit of the poll, but I did actually choose Bush for two of the categories. The questions: Which candidate would you choose to implement/take care of (forget the exact wording): internet porn; faith-based initiatives.
I have no doubt that Bush would do a better job on both of those issues -- except that I don't care that either of those issues are addressed through the government.
On everything else -- Kerry all the way -- even relying on faith for making decisions. (I tend to believe Kerry's faith will come from reason & thought, unlike W.) Faith in facts, discourse, reason, and policy.
Yep. The same two. Running to and fro.
OT but not really... Conason segment on AA Franken show is not to be missed...
Hilarious
I'm referring, of course, to you David.
I'm intrigued.
Thug | Email | Homepage | 07.16.04 - 2:15 pm | #
Troll love!
Thug, sure click on my email. I must admit I find your name a little off-putting. Does this mean you're into he rough stuff?
Still I Would like to compare notes, regarding your own payment structure. I get pad by the word. How about you?
AU is a liberal group? I'm no liberal, but I'm a proud member of AU. I think they're pretty non-partisan.
A vote for Jerry Falwell is a vote for Osama
Vote quote
A Jeri Ryan vote is a vote for Obama
Jaysus. Welcome to Atrios's Love Shack. 
You know, in my yard I have a lot of oak trees and my neighbor has a lot of oak trees in her yard. And we're always wondering whether there are really around 1,000 squirrels burying acorns in our lawns or if there's really only about 3 squirrels but they run around so fast and jump so quickly from limb to limb and bury so many acorns that we only think there are really 1,000.
And when all these trolls show up, I wonder the same thing.
From the NYT: Despite the urgency of his calls to "get serious about re-electing President Bush,'' Mr. Falwell said the lobbying organization "doesn't support candidates or endorse them.''
Now, when I am sitting in a car with a flat tire, and I tell the owner/driver to 'get serious about fixing the flat,' I KNOW that I am supporting the notion, and endorsing it most strongly. That Falwell doesn't realize this is ludicrous. In fact, seeing as I accept that he is a fairly intelligent man, I consider it fraudulent and a lie, plain and simple.
Quoth the Falwell: "I support him on Sunday mornings from the pulpit where it doesn't cost the church or anybody anything. I make it very clear, just like at most African-American churches and many liberal churches, that as a tax-paying citizen I vote. And I tell people who I vote for."
He says it doesn't cost the church or anybody anything. That is BULLSHIT. Any tax-exempt organization is given a pass on paying certain taxes. That much is certain. That much is plain and clear. That slack must be taken up elsewhere by others who DO pay taxes--individuals and businesses ALIKE. Therefore, anything his ministry enjoys, such as street-cleaning, sidewalk repairs, police and fire services, is being paid for by others, and not the 'ministry.'
To claim it costs no one anything is complete, unadulterated, 100% pure COWFLOP. Every time Falwell, or any other 'minister' advocates in favor of a specific politician, he or she is able to so pontificate because he or she isn't out trying to raise funds to pay a tax bill. WE ARE PAYING HIM TO DO THIS, and that ain't right.
Mad props to Barry Lynn, and to anyone else brave enough to stand up against such flagrant abuses of the tax laws.
GOB, I just have to say, you're on a roll today.
Best. Day. On. Blog. Ever.
A.
Just remember that when the trolls and their ilk show up and try to derail a topic, that means that they're really pissed off about the subject.
And the way to make their lil' heads explode is to talk about that subject even more.
Yeah, Jerry, Bush is "pro-life," all right. As long as that life doesn't happen to be Iraqi. Why does fundies' concern for life stop at birth?
Pro-life, pro-family values. Let's see:
- Pro-torture
- Pro-war
- Anti-health care for the poor and working class
- Anti-funding public education
- Pro-scamming old people for the benefit of pharmaceutical cronies
- Pro-businesses that cheat shareholders, employees and customers while lavishly rewarding their top execs
- Anti-woods and woodland creatures (also desert creatures, lake creatures, sea creatures, etc.)
- Pro-air, land and water pollution
Yup, those are the values I always imagined Jesus held. [/sarcasm]
I say "More power to the CHURCHES!" If they want to give up their tax-exempt status, go for it. Here in Memphis (like so many other places) there are some mega-rich, extremely conservative churches. I'd love to see those hate-filled pricks who claim to be God's people be forced to cough up some of their stunning revenue to uncle Sam. Last week 10,000 "Christians" met at Bellevue Baptist (a church so large it has to be seen to be believed) to rally round the Defense of Marriage act... take away their tax-exempt status and let's see how long the lights stay on in their palace.
I vote we dub this sort of thing "Relagion." It's a combination of "religion" and "contagion", since it seems to be contaminating our politics...
You have to remember that Jerry didn't point the finger of 9/11 at Al Qaeda...
No, he blamed it all on assfucking.
He's a mental giant I tell you.
Falwell fears a federal audit more than he fears Satan. He'd wear "I Love Kerry" boxer shorts and endorse hot man-on-turtle sex from the pulpit if anyone threated his sweet, sweet tax exemption.
Well, David, I'm into homeless person-lit dinners, long walks along the industrial sludge dump and mouth-breathing. Likes include: lighting my farts, pulling the wings off flies and the films of Leni Riefenstahl. Dislikes include: people who tell the truth and hobbits.
I'm paid a flat fee of 666 free sins per 1,000 posts, redeemable at the Pearly Gates.
attaturk,
And he blamed the Pagans, who I thought was a biker gang.
"Coffee perhaps?"
Thug, sounds great. I'll be here tonight at midnight. Bring your favorite bare-back accessories!
HTML
Bellevue Baptist: Six Flags over Jesus. If you're ever driving west into Memphis on I-40 (or east out of Memphis, of course) it's the humongoid hulk of a building that's next to those three crosses that are kinda hard to miss (talk about conspicuous diplays of faith). It's really more of a country club than a church.
Another reason that it would be a good idea to lose the tax exemption is that then the government won't have to spend time monitoring religious speech and deciding what is or isn't a political endorsement. The First Amendment protects religion from government as much as it protects government from religion.
How come when I click all the "Kerry" buttons on the poll, it won't take it, but when I do all the "Bush" buttons, it thanks me for my vote?
This is a beta version of what we can expect in November, right?
You probably didn't choose your state. I voted the straight Kerry ticket, and they thanked me for my vote.
Although I'll bet that they will have "lost all of their records" between now and the time it takes to reveal the results....
wow, thanks, A.
Hope you like bears, Dave!
Carpbasman and PeskyFly - my gramma goes to Bellevue Baptist! Ugh, I should have known. Actually saw a copy of The Clinton Chronicles at her house a few xmasses ago.
Funny, I don't know what made me look at Christianet's "terms of use," but I got a good laugh when the final term of use was "Bottom line, be Christ-like."
heh.
Carpbasman
So you know Bellevue? Ah, those lovely zillion-foot crosses. To be honest, I kind of like the crosses. It sort of reminds me of the roadside shrines families erect on the spot where a loved one died in a car wreck----if they were exposed to Gamma rays and made very, very angry.
Inside Bellevue looks more like some luxury hotel chain--- "Grandiosity on the cheap"--- than any church I've ever been in. The pastor Adrian Rodgers has worked to keep women out of the ministry (and in their proper place), and is a known homo-hater. Tax that monument to hate-in-the-name-of-god, and erase the federal deficit.
Carpbasman
So you know Bellevue? Ah, those lovely zillion-foot crosses. To be honest, I kind of like the crosses. It sort of reminds me of the roadside shrines families erect on the spot where a loved one died in a car wreck----if they were exposed to Gamma rays and made very, very angry.
Inside Bellevue looks more like some luxury hotel chain--- "Grandiosity on the cheap"--- than any church I've ever been in. The pastor Adrian Rodgers has worked to keep women out of the ministry (and in their proper place), and is a known homo-hater. Tax that monument to hate-in-the-name-of-god, and erase the federal deficit.
Sorry for the double-post. Sometimes my fingers stutter.
I think there is a logical dilemma for Falwell with the failure of the gay marriage amendment. It isn't pretty for him.
Sorry about what Blogger has done to my margins
"No democracy can allow religious people to impose their own view of perfection on others, because this invites cruelty and arrogance that are foreign to every faith."
George W. Christ, 4/4/04
magic1--- rescue your Granny! Quick, before she's old and set in her ways.
Dear ChristianNet:
Some day you will move me almost to the verge of irritation by your chuckle-headed Goddamned fashion of requiring a Goddamned Terms of Use before allowing a vote on your Goddamned polls.
I hope everyone has an opportunity to "The Hunting of the President".
"Rev" Falwell makes an appearance regarding "The Clinton Chronicles," claiming that he never made those horrible accusations against Clinton *personally*.
I, *personally*, saw on several occasions what amounted to his infomercials hawking this tape. He appeared throughout the entire program, providing ominous sounding commentary between the clips from the video.
For awhile, after it had been completely discredited, he claimed he had never actually seen the tape--he said he was asked to provide the narration for the ads, but he didn't know what was on it.
Rev. Falwell.
Flannery O'Connor herself couldn't of thought of a better name for a corrupt and morally bankrupt preacher.
Redeem the Vote should also lose it's tax exempt status. They are
actively campaigning for Bush while
registering (targeting) evangelical Christian youth.
Hey, yoyoyoyoyo,
You ARE going to send that paper trail to some inspired network or major market daily reporters, aren't you? They'll have no excuse if you shove it right in front of their silly faces.
Oy, vey, to think we're doing remedial ed for reporters.
Redeem the Vote should also lose it's tax exempt status. They are
actively campaigning for Bush while
registering (targeting) evangelical Christian youth.
Well, Pesky, Bellevue is one of the many reasons that I seldom leave the loop. That and the horribly channelized traffic consisting of women and teenagers in SUVs talking on cellphones. And the civic planning hell that is Cordova. And the Bowden homes. And the interminable chain restaraunts. And. . .
I've been researching plenty of these odd faith-based initiative programs and the administration's calls to churches to recruit, etc. (I'm a law clerk for the ACLU this summer) and one thing I've found is that the IRS is very, very unforgiving to any religious organization that endorses a candidate or party.
And the IRS has got a close eye on the Catholic and Baptist churches right now. The Catholics are more practiced at this and know never to go beyond stating their view of an issue (that just happens to coincide with a party platform). The Baptists are a little less practiced and don't seem to have the same self control with this stuff--they'll get into trouble before too long.
"I've been against religious tax exemption for a long time. I mean, what's the point?"
If you start taxing churches, you can't object to their direct involvement in politics, ie the American ideal of "no taxation w/o representation" would mean if Cardinal O'Malley cuts his check to the IRS* he would be free to dally in politics to his heart's content, including using public money for religious projects (since you just shot a big gaping hole in the wall of seperation "faith-based" just became the new DC manta.). Taking their money isn't something you do in a vaccuum with no side effects; the churches would be able to plug straight into the political process without restraint.
Start taxing them, and I can pretty much assure you the SBC will simply insert Leviticus verbatim into federal law (providing the Opus Dei ijits aren't busy getting Papal bulls in there first - and they have a SCOTUS operative in the government already). Better to forgo the $$$ and beat down the egregious idiots who step over the line than just hand them the keys to the kingdom.
* And you wouldn't tax The Catholic Church in toto; each diocese is financially independent, so you would only get the taxes from each particular diocese (and considering the progressive nature of taxes, even the total booty from all the dioceses would be significantly less than the tax burden of a theoretical all-Church haul). Likewise, the SBC is officially a debating club for a bunch of independent (and often small) churches. Again, you would be taxing First Baptist of Two Egg and its numerous brethern, not the organization as a whole. The IRS windfall would be a great deal less than you expect, and they would still get full access to government.
Carpbasman,
As a pioneer of Uptown (I've been here since it was Greenlaw for gosh sakes)It's a miracle if I get east of Cleveland. I almost went to Bellevue's hate-in last Sunday though, just to see the furor. I've been to a number of their theatricals---because they are beyond belief. They make Phantom of the Opera look like some play Judy and Micky might put on in a barn. They could build a tower to heaven with the money they rake in.
Americans United is an equal-opportunity offender. They will not only take on the Religious Right, but churches that invite Democratic candidates who speak from church pulpits. A perusal of their website, au.org will show this.
ObComment: Jerry Falwell deserves to be smacked upside the head for this. Unfortunately, the IRS grinds exceedingly slow and fine on issues like this.
"the churches would be able to plug straight into the political process without restraint."
Bwaaaaaaaaaahahahahah.
Because now, they're staying out of the political process. And we don't get their tax money.
I say, tax them and let them support whoever they want.
He says it doesn't cost the church or anybody anything. That is BULLSHIT. Any tax-exempt organization is given a pass on paying certain taxes. That much is certain. That much is plain and clear. That slack must be taken up elsewhere by others who DO pay taxes--individuals and businesses ALIKE. Therefore, anything his ministry enjoys, such as street-cleaning, sidewalk repairs, police and fire services, is being paid for by others, and not the 'ministry.'
Most states have more restrictive laws on property tax exemption, for this precise purpose. So, just because they are a "tax-exempt" nonprofit, that doesn't mean they don't pay for all these services.
Exemptions for non-profits (religious or not) generally are much more restricted in purpose for those kind of taxes than the federal income tax exemption.
The Catholics are more practiced at this and know never to go beyond stating their view of an issue (that just happens to coincide with a party platform).
Also, the Catholic view of a particular issue may correspond with a party platform, but the whole of Catholic social teaching doesn't correspond to any particular party platform, and the structure of the Catholic Church makes it very unlikely that it would act consistently for one party.
Phalamir -- I certainly understand your point but I was making the overly cynical point that they've wormed their way into the political process anyway, so at least let's make'em pay for it....
"the structure of the Catholic Church makes it very unlikely that it would act consistently for one party"
Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahhahaha!
A tower to heaven indeed. I'm suprised the access roads weren't paved in gold.
Never personally been in the place myself.
Most of my life is spent between Goodlet and Cleveland, with occasional forays downtown and the older parts of East Memphis.
I hope the IRS eviscerates that fat bastard.
All the teevee yapping heads that invite Falwell onto their shows to "debate" about anything should be ashamed of themselves for giving that sad excuse for a waste of skin any sort of platform to dispense his idiocy.
Falwell should take the advice that Big Time Dick gave to Senator Leahy.
Isn't it time to remove tax-exempt status from all religious organizations? Since it is becoming harder to separate church actions from state, lets tax them all. And while we’re at it, what about all of the right wing pseudo-think tanks that blossomed over the past twenty years. By taxing all those motherfuckers we could erase the deficit.
At 3:35 p.m., the link to the poll took me directly to the "Thank you for taking our Presidential Poll. The results will be posted..." page. Looks like they had to take the poll down.
Bwaaaaaaa-
ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
(Isn't this more fun that discussing substantive points)
So by Jerry's logic if I had a lobbying firm that worked on my behalf or based on my opinions, but which did not operate out of my home or any of my personal properties, yet it chose to plan and carryout a murder, I would not be responsible if it was my opinion the person in question should be murdered?
Get real jerry. This is no more ethical than Bill Clinton trying to juggle his way around the question by querying us to answer what the definition of 'is' is.
These fascists won't take away his tax exempt status. He's a republican and everything they do is moral and legal in the eyes of other republicans as long as it hurts liberals and democrats.
MYOB'
.
Judith,
The same thing happened to me. The link took me to a results page rather than the poll page while going to the home page didn't seem to have a link to any polls that might include the one in question.
MYOB'
.
And you wouldn't tax The Catholic Church in toto; each diocese is financially independent, so you would only get the taxes from each particular diocese (and considering the progressive nature of taxes, even the total booty from all the dioceses would be significantly less than the tax burden of a theoretical all-Church haul). Likewise, the SBC is officially a debating club for a bunch of independent (and often small) churches. Again, you would be taxing First Baptist of Two Egg and its numerous brethern, not the organization as a whole. The IRS windfall would be a great deal less than you expect, and they would still get full access to government.
A point worth repeating.
Those of you who think all churches are behemoths awash in money and busy diddling in the political arena are clearly clueless as to: (A) how many churches there are in this country (B) how few of them give a damn about politics, or want to hear it mentioned from the pulpit (C) have enough money to pay their pastor and their bills, much less pay taxes.
Churches are not taxed precisely because it would put most of them out of business (I know, I know, three cheers for that, sez the Peanut Gallery). What most of you apparently see are the "mega-churches," the ones that buy up the billboard space, suck up the attention, and generally make you think they're the only game in town.
There are several such in Houston. Collectively, their memberships don't amount to the number of students enrolled in UT-Austin. And this in the 4th largest city in the country. With so many churches, you almost trip over 'em.
And even the biggest churches here, from what I can tell, don't really spend much time telling people to vote GOP or Dem, or Green, or at all.
Challenging Falwell's tax-exempt status is fine by me. He wants to run with the big dogs, he can pay the price. But for every church you want to blame for the neocons (or whatever), remember how many, much smaller churches, made the Civil Rights struggle possible.
And then remember, before you say that was then, this is now, how slowly, very slowly, churches change, if at all.
Gidget Commando or anyone else, feel free to relay the results of my "whois" and Google searches to the NYT reporter or anyone else. For reasons I care not to try to explain, I'm not in a position to do so myself except anonymously, and I suspect that incoming email from anonymous people don't get taken very seriously by newspeople (and i must say i can't blame them for that).
All I did was the most rudimentary whois and Google searches on falwell.com and then jerryfalwell.com. Took about two minutes. Here's one whois search engine: http://www.networksolutions.com/...ois/
index.jhtml for anyone wishing to replicate my results.
So by Jerry's logic if I had a lobbying firm that worked on my behalf or based on my opinions, but which did not operate out of my home or any of my personal properties, yet it chose to plan and carryout a murder, I would not be responsible if it was my opinion the person in question should be murdered?
No, by Jerry's logic, a person can be involved in a tax exempt non-profit and a separate lobbying organization that operates under different provisions of the law, and the former organization can't lose its tax exempt status because of the actions of the other organization, even if the same person leads both.
And he's right.
The issue of which organization actually operates the website, though, is less clearly in his favor. But he's not making the argument you make.
"Presidential Poll is Now Closed
Thank you for your participation.
The results will be posted in a few weeks."
Yeah, right.
Mr Jeffers point is well made. I am on the Vestry of our church, an Episcopal church that is one of the few buildings that survived Sherman's sweep through our town. Paying our rector a salary that is nowhere near enough for the hours he puts in, paying our part-time secretary, and upkeep of the historic building leaves barely anything to use for humanitarian work. I have never heard any message from our rector that could be construed as political (although he could have been slamming Bush when he discussed the commandment against bearing false witness). Taxation would kill our church, thus closing the county's only food bank and a preschool used by many working single mothers.
The mega-churches are an abomination, but they are also an aberration. Taxation would destroy thousands of apolitical churches serving their communities, often in ways our lean, mean government has abdicated.
As for Falwell, fuck him. He doesn't speak for me. After all, I'm a Christian and he's just a pretender.
On thing, and please, I'm all for taxing the fuck out of these "churches", all of them.
But let's be realistic. As soon as that little piece of legilation passes who do you think will be paying the absolute least amount of tax? Has anyone looked at what corporate taxes are versus payroll taxes?
The principle is right on but until we find a way to elect representatives that little more than paid shills for some interest, we're just blowing smoke.
Judith: same thing happened to me, I was very disappointed that I could not register my opinion.
I failed to mention that church is a largely volunteer organization. Tax it, and most people will volunteer not to support it.
And there goes the tax windfall some of you seem to expect.
There would also go many worthy causes, like food pantries and soup kitchens and various charitable outlets.
But let's not let that get in the way of complaining ignorantly.
And there goes the tax windfall some of you seem to expect.
There would also go many worthy causes, like food pantries and soup kitchens and various charitable outlets.
This doesn't have to be a slippery slope.
The rules are in place, and religious tax-exempt organizations are forbidden from endorsing candidates. If the rules are never enforced because of some perception that it will make all religious organizations vulnerable, then the rules are meaningless.
bj, Hectate,
I agree that churches do particapte in politics to a certain extent, but they still have to dance around the edges due to the fact that the IRS can revoke their tax-exempt status if they go too far. They make a lot of noise, but ultimately they can't endorse parties or candidates for races or do campaign work.
You take their money and they go from idiots standing on the edges screaming to full-contact players. Theoretically, the Pope (and I mean some future holder of the the office not just JPII "The Semi-Lucid Zombie") could then threaten excommunication to any Cathloic politican who didn't bow to his wishes.* On a more probable note, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, the SBC, etc could go to a politician and bluntly promise the guy all their followers' votes (and a healthy cut in the tithes) in exchange for the Gileadization of the US.
More importantly, since the wall of seperation is gone, there wouldn't be anything to stop the Gileadization of the US. And, unfortunately, the Great Unwashed Voting Masses will go along with the early stages because it will seem so benign - hell, the GUVM went along with shredding the BoR, so they would probably sit by and allow for full-scale Jeebus-theocracy.
Personally, I prefer to forgo the money and let them slide around the edges of the law (they waste a goodly amount of time, effort, and money playing Sneaky Pete; you really want that energy turned to doing serious shit?), while keeping IRS sanctions to club any of the fuckers who seriously try anything (kinda like my parents knew I got away with small stuff but let it slide so they could save up and seriously hose me when I did something really bad). And I'm cynical enough I expect those assholes to try something big if they get a chance, so I want a club to beat the fuckers into the dirt when they do; you effectively want to disarm in exchange for a little cash.
* And I mean he could go on national TV, make the demand, and then publically throw any dissenters overboard. To you that might not seem so bad, but there are many Catholics who really do look to him for leadership and as long as he wasn't straying from Church doctrine would be willing to go along rather than blithely toss their Church membership away.
This doesn't have to be a slippery slope.
I think Robert was responding to many people here saying that all churches should lost their tax exempt status entirely, regardless of individual political activity or lack thereof.
Robert M.
It is you who seem to be moaning ignorantly--- If you don't want to lose your status, stay out of politics. It's really that simple. If all those charities go away because you just had to endorse etc. who is to blame? Churches get special privlidges. If they abuse them they have to be taken away. Collateral damage isn't the issue. The wound would be self-inflicted anyway.
Theoretically, the Pope (and I mean some future holder of the the office not just JPII "The Semi-Lucid Zombie") could then threaten excommunication to any Cathloic politican who didn't bow to his wishes.
Theoretically. Practically, probably not; even for open schism the Church doesn't do that now, mostly, not because it lacks authority to, but because it tends to just make the disobedience deeper.
And I mean he could go on national TV, make the demand, and then publically throw any dissenters overboard. To you that might not seem so bad, but there are many Catholics who really do look to him for leadership and as long as he wasn't straying from Church doctrine would be willing to go along rather than blithely toss their Church membership away.
Pronounced excommunication for dissent from prudential positions of the heirarchy rather than fundamental doctrine is straying from Church doctrine.
cmdicely
You may be right. Nonetheless, rules are rules. You play by them or you lose. And it drives me nuts when people remind us of all the good things churches do (and many really do good things)---- as if it were an excuse for misbehavior.
Nonetheless, rules are rules. You play by them or you lose.
I don't think anyone here has argued that churches that disobey the rules shouldn't lose their status.
Nonetheless, rules are rules. You play by them or you lose.
I don't think anyone here has argued that churches that disobey the rules shouldn't lose their status.
Robert M.
I missed an earlier post where you call out the folks who want to "run with the big dogs." So I got your last post a bit out of context. Sorry for the bitchy comment. I too agree that taxing all churches is a bad idea. But the Wal-Mart megachurch--- and media ministries must be dealt with somehow.
the poll is now "closed" (for repairs?). Must not have known how else to handle a bunch of pro-Kerry visitors.
Some parishes, by the way, pay about what the taxes would be as a donation to the local community. Seems fair, to them, to pay for the services they use.
The check goes to the same place a tax check would, but is entirely voluntary.
where is god?
They have a wonderful test about who will go to hell. I had no idea it was so hard to avoid. Might as well give up now and enjoy youself...
but will this wiped the cheesy smile of jesse's face?
It always bothers me when results of a poll will be available "in a few weeks."
Yeah--right after we change the outcome to something we like better.
In two posts today you brag about refusing to link to Limbaugh and falwell... why? One of the values of the blog is the source info... so we can see for ourselves.
I'm grown up enough to avoid whatever temptation you feel Rush or Falwell will provide... and adult enough to feel irked that you refuse the link. I agree these guys are both bigots and demegogs, but I'm not afraid of them, nor should you be.
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
