Ending God's Tax Exempt Status

[9th Engineer]

You've really only argued one main point through this entire thread rk. Over and over again you've said that you want documented proof that a certain percentage of the money that a church receives goes to basic charity acts which contain absolutely no religious overtones.
I have no problem with you saying this, but unless you address the fact that there are other organizations that are not this rigorous with their paperwork yet are still considered tax exempt you are beating a dead horse. Condemn all, or condemn none.

Although it didn't come up directly I'm sure you would argue that saying a prayer before serving a free meal at a soup kitchen is subversive, with the final intent being to recruit new parishioners rather then providing the hungry with a much needed service.

I have stated that I want the criteria to apply to all.
If religious charity workers prays before serving fine, as long as they don't require it of those it feeds.

[Bullitt]

Personally, I'm a little more concerned with how the government is spending our tax dollars rather than where it does and doesn't come from.

[lumberjim]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

Whew, we just left the world huh?
I'm having a discussion.
If you want to turn it into something else, have at it, but it is just in your head.

it's in my head too.
You're an asshole. I say that in a state of perfect calm. And mean it.

Your block is broken.

[lumberjim]

::waiting for you to edit that into something entirely different::

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

I have never done any of those things.

The fuck you haven't, over and over like a hammer.

I give my opinion and look forward to discussions from both sides.
I do not, however, take those opinions personally like a little kid and misquote people to try to make myself look like something I'm not.

You not only misquote others you misquote yourself if it's convenient.

You are pitching a full-fledged fit and it is so damn funny I'm gonna' take a picture.
Are you kicking your feet?

No, but I'm going to be kicking yours from now on.

I thought the idea of the Cellar was to discuss things, to learn from our differences.
I have admitted when someone has shown flaws in my reasoning and changed my views in here more than once.

Not as often as you've changed your posts.

I thank them and look forward to it happening again.
Please, in here, do it for me, show me a reasoned, logical argument that disputes my stance point-by-point... lay it out so I cannot refute it with reason and I will tell you that you have helped me be a better person and a more educated person.

That's bullshit, YOU say, the millions of people that say they benefit from non-profit entities, like the Church, are wrong, because it can't be quantified to your satisfaction. You're arrogance is manifested in the hate you spew.

It is a great day for me when this happens!
Do it, not a threat or challenge I REALLY want it, always... I like change and to know that I am wrong.
But, what you are doing now is just sad.

It is you that is sad. A pathetic shell, eaten up by your own hate for everyone that won't toe your line, because they are somehow oppressing you. Newsflash, the world doesn't revolve around you and never will.

[manephelien]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

I have stated that I want the criteria to apply to all.
If religious charity workers prays before serving fine, as long as they don't require it of those it feeds.

Hear, hear.

That's why I'm a bit wary of any kind of charities based on religious ideologies. Tax exemptions are bad enough, but I find it even more disturbing when my taxes are going to subventions to religious organizations. Those who believe and can afford to pay should, but why should I?

[jester]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

Wrong, providing housing with ___% of our income can be shown, no opinion on the service needed.
A fact is a fact. Opinions are useless.

Thank you for telling me I'm wrong. Opinions might be useless, but like an asshole, everybody's got one.

[Cloud]

Disappointing devolution into mud slinging here.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

I have admitted when someone has shown flaws in my reasoning and changed my views in here more than once.

Cite.

You have repeatedly made this claim, but I am certain I've never seen it. Please link to just one post in the past year and a half where you have openly acknowledged you were wrong.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

You have repeatedly made this claim, but I am certain I've never seen it. Please link to just one post in the past year and a half where you have openly acknowledged you were wrong.

Do you always throw stones in glass houses?

Meanwhile, the general point from rkzenrage is accurate. There exist some serious and unanswered questions about these non-profits. Take the Catholic Church as example. An institution that must be heavy in wealth simply because of the number of buildings owned in Manhattan. A church that receives unknown amounts in donations, but as Tom Clancy noted in his book, did not even have funds to support their own priests in mainland China.

A charity organization that had to be subpoenaed in Philadelphia to release hundreds of priests the church listed in files as pedophiles - and only in that one diocese. rkzenrage raises good questions about the credibility of these non-profit organizations who seem to have so little money left for charity work.

Those who better worship god by giving to charity should donate instead to the Red Cross - or even better the Salvation Army.

If someone can defend the financial integrity of those institutions, then put forth the facts. Don't attack the questioner. The subject is religious institutions that even have massive funds to make political statements and commercials. 700 Club? That is a non-profit charity?

[elSicomoro]

They were separated at birth!

[tw]

Originally Posted by manephelien

That's why I'm a bit wary of any kind of charities based on religious ideologies.

Also suspect are posts that would blindly support or defend such 'charities'. Are they charities? For whom?

[Shawnee123]

Originally Posted by tw

Do you always throw stones in glass houses?

Meanwhile, the general point from rkzenrage is accurate.

Folks! Folks! Gather round. Hear ye, hear ye, the mighty, all-powerful tw has spoken! Let not there be dissension amongst ye dwellars, for the ways of the world have been shown to us all.