A church congregation cheered as Lauren Boebert said she prays for Joe Biden's demise

Phantasmal said:
If you violate the law, you should lose your tax exemption, doesn’t matter if the church is rich or poor, black or white.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Like gun laws, failure to enforce certain key laws is causing problems.

The WSE JPP members claim to abide by the Constitution, but turn a blind eye toward the Equal Protection Clause or give only lip service.* That's dishonest behavior on their part.

IMO, most are smart enough to get around it through other means such as PACs. This is why Citizens United caused an explosion in the amount of money being shoveled into American politics.

Rulez iz rulez. They should be enforced. https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/churches-religious-organizations

https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-p...ion-by-section-501c3-tax-exempt-organizations
The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.
Click to expand...


*Speaking of lip service, is anyone taking bets how long Kevin will remain in office? I'm thinking he'll get a year despite his lip service to each and every Republican in Congress. Let's hope our government improves in 2025.
 
Last edited:
Frank Apisa said:
I do???

Here is what I said about the Old Testament:

My guess, for what it is worth, is that a very self-serving history (of sorts) of the early Hebrew people...a relatively unsophisticated, unknowledgeable, superstitious people who had many enemies in the areas where they lived. Their enemies worshiped barbarous, vengeful, wrathful, unforgiving, demanding, murderous, petty gods. And to protect themselves from those gods, they invented an especially barbarous, vengeful, wrathful, unforgiving, demanding, murderous, petty god...and worshiped it. The story seems to be a necessary mythology. The mythology served a needed purpose at that time and I can easily understand why the ancient Hebrews felt about it the way they did.

The fact that modern theists feel the way they do about it...is disappointing and disheartening.

How do you see that as condemning it?





I am trying to understand why people like you want to suppose Jesus was a liar...and why you do not worship the same god he did. What makes you think I am condemning Christians who reject the god Jesus worshiped...and who think Jesus was a liar.



See above.



What is imbecilic is for people like you to pretend to be "Christians", but who think Jesus lied...and who think the god he worshiped is not worthy of worship.
Click to expand...

Im not doing your word games.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Im not doing your word games.
Click to expand...

Good. You do not have the intellect for that kind of challenge...and attempting to do it would be a waste of time for both of us.

But keep in mind that what you call "word games"...most people with a functioning brain would call "refuting false accusations."

As a "for instance" you claimed that I "condemn the Old Testament."

I refuted that. And you called that refutation "word games."
 
Frank Apisa said:
Good. You do not have the intellect for that kind of challenge...and attempting to do it would be a waste of time for both of us.

But keep in mind that what you call "word games"...most people with a functioning brain would call "refuting false accusations."

As a "for instance" you claimed that I "condemn the Old Testament."

I refuted that. And you called that refutation "word games."
Click to expand...

you condemn the old testament yet also condemn christians who condemn it.

we all see that.

you deny your very own actions.

and that's dumb

you're dumber than a fuckstick.

your oppositional and defiant narcissism won't allow you to see that you actually agree with jesus.

and that puts your soul at risk.
 
AssHatZombie said:
you condemn the old testament yet also condemn christians who condemn it.

we all see that.

you deny your very own actions.

and that's dumb

you're dumber than a fuckstick.

your oppositional and defiant narcissism won't allow you to see that you actually agree with jesus.

and that puts your soul at risk.
Click to expand...

I did not condemn the Old Testament.

You are losing your grip on reality...although it was always tenuous, at best.

That puts your sanity at risk.
 
Frank Apisa said:
I did not condemn the Old Testament.

You are losing your grip on reality...although it was always tenuous, at best.

That puts your sanity at risk.
Click to expand...

how would you characterize your take on it?

can we say you don't believe it is actually spiritually legally binding, and is also not a superior moral take, but a form of regressive tribalism?

is this an accurate take on your take?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
yes....funny in the sense of absurd or bizarre......but at least it confirms your ignorance of Christianity.......
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that I know more about Christianity than you do. I'll repeat: You are the farthest thing from a Christian imaginable. The fact that you label yourself as a Christian is an abomination to Christ and the church.
 
AssHatZombie said:
you condemn the old testament yet also condemn christians who condemn it.

we all see that.

you deny your very own actions.

and that's dumb

you're dumber than a fuckstick.

your oppositional and defiant narcissism won't allow you to see that you actually agree with jesus.

and that puts your soul at risk.
Click to expand...

Another shitty asshole claiming the mantle of Christ. Jesus doesn't know you and wants nothing to do with you. You are a stain on humanity, and he knows that.
 
AssHatZombie said:
how would you characterize your take on it?

can we say you don't believe it is actually spiritually legally binding, and is also not a superior moral take, but a form of regressive tribalism?

is this an accurate take on your take?
Click to expand...

The Old Testament?

Are you thinking the Old Testament is spiritually legally binding...and is a superior moral take???

Are you fucking kidding me?

The teachings of the Old Testament WAS, back in its day, something considered necessary in order to protect the ancient Hebrews from the gods of their enemies.

IT WAS CONSIDERED NECESSARY...and I agree that a relatively unsophisticated, unknowledgeable, superstitious people (the ancient Hebrews) thought it to be just fine...and I can easily understand their feelings and fears.

All of this is what I said.

But if you think the teachings of Leviticus and Deuteronomy ARE, today, of superior morality...then you should be institutionalized.

It includes a necessary mythology (as with every primitive religion) which served its purpose.

I have no more problem with it...than I have with the myths and legends of Greece and Rome.

What are you getting at, AssHat?
 
Frank Apisa said:
The Old Testament?

Are you thinking the Old Testament is spiritually legally binding...and is a superior moral take???

Are you fucking kidding me?

The teachings of the Old Testament WAS, back in its day, something considered necessary in order to protect the ancient Hebrews from the gods of their enemies.

IT WAS CONSIDERED NECESSARY...and I agree that a relatively unsophisticated, unknowledgeable, superstitious people (the ancient Hebrews) thought it to be just fine...and I can easily understand their feelings and fears.

All of this is what I said.

But if you think the teachings of Leviticus and Deuteronomy ARE, today, of superior morality...then you should be institutionalized.

It includes a necessary mythology (as with every primitive religion) which served its purpose.

I have no more problem with it...than I have with the myths and legends of Greece and Rome.

What are you getting at, AssHat?
Click to expand...

(I would argue it wasn't strictly necessary.)

jesus agrees with you on all this.

or, you agree with jesus.

come to me.
:nolovejesus:

the infinite ingroup is morality. tribalism has only some aspects of morality.
 
Last edited:
AssHatZombie said:
(I would argue it wasn't strictly necessary.)

jesus agrees with you on all this.

or, you agree with jesus.

come to me.
:nolovejesus:

the infinite ingroup is morality. tribalism has only some aspects of morality.
Click to expand...

As I have said many, many times...Jesus had some great ideas about how humans should act and how they should conduct themselves with each other. I try to incorporate many of his teachings into my personal philosophy.

I wish more Christians would do the same.

Come to me!


th
 
Frank Apisa said:
As I have said many, many times...Jesus had some great ideas about how humans should act and how they should conduct themselves with each other. I try to incorporate many of his teachings into my personal philosophy.

I wish more Christians would do the same.

Come to me!


th
Click to expand...

are we really bickering over artwork?
 
AssHatZombie said:
are we really bickering over artwork?
Click to expand...

If we are bickering (no reason for us to do so)...we are not bickering over artwork. We are "bickering" over whether Jesus probably looked more like the rendering I offered...or the one you did.

It essentially is a blind guess about what a Jew of the early 1st Century looks like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top