Proposition 8 in California

[Texsox]

Church members are free to do as they please. The mechanism of the church itself is not.

 

Of course.

[Texsox]

Switching gears slightly, is the strategy of openly battling Churches and hurting their membership, going to help or hinder gay rights? When tens of millions of Christians feel their tax break is being threatened, will they cave in or fight back?

 

I see pros and cons. I hope the Sundance Festival is harmed by Hollywood's actions, plus Redford is a putz anyways and it would be nice to see his baby destroyed because of a boycott by Gay Rights groups.

[longshot7]

While the church itself did not funnel money to the Yes campaign, I'm not sure why it and all religious organizations shouldn't be taxed. I don't think purporting to be holy or godly should exempt any corporation (and that's what they are) from paying taxes, esp when we're in debt as bad as we are.

[StrangeSox]

While the church itself did not funnel money to the Yes campaign, I'm not sure why it and all religious organizations shouldn't be taxed. I don't think purporting to be holy or godly should exempt any corporation (and that's what they are) from paying taxes, esp when we're in debt as bad as we are.

 

There are many tax-exempt non-profit, non-religious groups out there. "Purporting to be holy or godly" isn't what gets them exempt.

 

If you remove that part of the tax code, you'd see many non-profits vanish pretty quickly.

[Rex Kickass]

Switching gears slightly, is the strategy of openly battling Churches and hurting their membership, going to help or hinder gay rights? When tens of millions of Christians feel their tax break is being threatened, will they cave in or fight back?

 

I see pros and cons. I hope the Sundance Festival is harmed by Hollywood's actions, plus Redford is a putz anyways and it would be nice to see his baby destroyed because of a boycott by Gay Rights groups.

 

I'm generally an advocate of turning the other cheek. But we aren't talking violence here. Sometimes I think the only way other people may possibly understand the effect of actions like this is if they were to suffer a similar loss of something.

 

The LDS apparatus wants to deny a section of people the right to share heath insurance, lose hospital visitation rights, and a number of other rights and responsibilities intrinsic to the bulk of their congregation. The apparatus is willing to assume the mantle of a political organization to do so. They should have to follow the law that other political organizations follow.

 

I'm sorry that you feel that religious organizations should be exempt from following tax laws, but the laws as they stand should be equally applied.

[EvilMonkey]

I'll bet the protests would never materialize if it were mosques, CAIR or LaRaza that had funneled lots of money in support of it.

[bmags]

OH PLEASE

[longshot7]

There are many tax-exempt non-profit, non-religious groups out there. "Purporting to be holy or godly" isn't what gets them exempt.

 

If you remove that part of the tax code, you'd see many non-profits vanish pretty quickly.

 

I guess I don't think that any organization should be tax-exempt. Make them all pay.

[Texsox]

I'm generally an advocate of turning the other cheek. But we aren't talking violence here. Sometimes I think the only way other people may possibly understand the effect of actions like this is if they were to suffer a similar loss of something.

 

The LDS apparatus wants to deny a section of people the right to share heath insurance, lose hospital visitation rights, and a number of other rights and responsibilities intrinsic to the bulk of their congregation. The apparatus is willing to assume the mantle of a political organization to do so. They should have to follow the law that other political organizations follow.

 

I'm sorry that you feel that religious organizations should be exempt from following tax laws, but the laws as they stand should be equally applied.

 

I thought this was a non partisan issue. Prop 8 did not appear as a Dem or a Rep on the ballot. Obama won California so this was not supported by Dems? And the LDS position seems rather conservative, so the Reps did not also? Show me the partisanship?

 

I am not a member of the LDS Church and have no idea why or why not the have their opinions. You believe it is over Health Insurance and other such issues, I suspect it is something else. But this is not about their beliefs. This is about an attack on Churches who place their beliefs in action. My local Church happens to support unions. Our Church staff are members of a union. I'm certain some conservatives would love to take away our exempt status. We campaign for a living wage, not just minimum wage. I'm certain some would fault us for that. We campaigned door to door for a sales tax increase to expand our community health clinics, some would take away our exemptions for that. We campaigned against the death penalty. Again, someone would want to take away our exemptions. We campaigned for single member districts instead of at-large for our city council, we wanted all of McAllen to be represented, not just the business and "rich" areas. Again, by your rational, we should have lost our exemptions. So this is a real issue for me, not some theoretical issue. I'm not some hypocrite that sits in Church and then does nothing. Words without deeds mean nothing.

 

So if you think you have to harm me to get what you want, then that is your decision. But that places us squarely on different sides on that issue and that is sad. I would find it hard to support groups who are trying to harm me.

[Rex Kickass]

I'll bet the protests would never materialize if it were mosques, CAIR or LaRaza that had funneled lots of money in support of it.

 

I think I would be just as pissed, thanks.

[Rex Kickass]

I thought this was a non partisan issue. Prop 8 did not appear as a Dem or a Rep on the ballot. Obama won California so this was not supported by Dems? And the LDS position seems rather conservative, so the Reps did not also? Show me the partisanship?

 

I am not a member of the LDS Church and have no idea why or why not the have their opinions. You believe it is over Health Insurance and other such issues, I suspect it is something else. But this is not about their beliefs. This is about an attack on Churches who place their beliefs in action. My local Church happens to support unions. Our Church staff are members of a union. I'm certain some conservatives would love to take away our exempt status. We campaign for a living wage, not just minimum wage. I'm certain some would fault us for that. We campaigned door to door for a sales tax increase to expand our community health clinics, some would take away our exemptions for that. We campaigned against the death penalty. Again, someone would want to take away our exemptions. We campaigned for single member districts instead of at-large for our city council, we wanted all of McAllen to be represented, not just the business and "rich" areas. Again, by your rational, we should have lost our exemptions. So this is a real issue for me, not some theoretical issue. I'm not some hypocrite that sits in Church and then does nothing. Words without deeds mean nothing.

 

So if you think you have to harm me to get what you want, then that is your decision. But that places us squarely on different sides on that issue and that is sad. I would find it hard to support groups who are trying to harm me.

 

Involving yourself as a political organization does not make you partisan. The Sierra Club is non-partisan. The ACLU (who I believe should also have their tax-exempt status revoked) is non-partisan. Prop 8 was about the rights and responsibilities of thousands of people in California. The LDS actively sought to remove those rights from Californians who were not involved with the LDS and did so to the extent that they violated the spirit if not the letter of their 501©3 status. I'm sorry that you can't understand why I might be a little upset about that.

 

About your church, did your church endorse from the pulpit? Did your church encourage its entire congregation to specifically do "everything they can" to ensure its passage or defeat? Was it a coordinated effort that was part of your church's hierarchy? If so, then yes they should lose their tax exempt status.

 

There are all sorts of avenues the LDS could have used to get to the same goals about this proposition. Instead they chose to do something different and violated their status.

 

You would find it hard to support groups who are trying to harm you? How do you think any gay person feels right now about the LDS? As a tax payer, by allowing tax-exempt status to stand, I am supporting the LDS. And they're trying to harm people like me.

[Texsox]

Involving yourself as a political organization does not make you partisan. The Sierra Club is non-partisan. The ACLU (who I believe should also have their tax-exempt status revoked) is non-partisan. Prop 8 was about the rights and responsibilities of thousands of people in California. The LDS actively sought to remove those rights from Californians who were not involved with the LDS and did so to the extent that they violated the spirit if not the letter of their 501©3 status. I'm sorry that you can't understand why I might be a little upset about that.

 

About your church, did your church endorse from the pulpit? Did your church encourage its entire congregation to specifically do "everything they can" to ensure its passage or defeat? Was it a coordinated effort that was part of your church's hierarchy? If so, then yes they should lose their tax exempt status.

 

There are all sorts of avenues the LDS could have used to get to the same goals about this proposition. Instead they chose to do something different and violated their status.

 

You would find it hard to support groups who are trying to harm you? How do you think any gay person feels right now about the LDS? As a tax payer, by allowing tax-exempt status to stand, I am supporting the LDS. And they're trying to harm people like me.

 

I understand you are upset at what they did. Hell, I'm upset. I hoped that California would lead the nation. But just because I do not believe what is said, I still will defend their right to say it.

 

In my Church, technically, it was during his homily, so he was generally behind the alter for part, roaming the stage for others. He'd mention it while playing hoops, he'd mention it when dropping into any Church function. He held up the petitions, he urged us to volunteer if our hearts agreed. I happen to believe that public health is a good thing. I believe that our goal should be jobs that pay a livable wage. I believe that districts made the most sense in McAllen, so I volunteered. So have the Catholic Church lose their exemption as well.

 

We did not campaign for a candidate. We campaigned for the propositions that were on the ballot. We got involved. That is what our nation is about. For those people that did not want to pay a livable wage, for those people that did not want health clinics, we were wrong.

 

OK, you had a group of individuals, all members of the LDS Church, against you. Go after them, which then is perceived as attacking other groups by proxy, and those groups rise to protect themselves. I believe once the gay community is seen as at war with Americans of faith, things will change.

[BigSqwert]

Bravo Keith Olbermann!

[Texsox]

Bravo Keith Olbermann!

 

 

So much better of an argument than hospital visits and such.

[BigSqwert]

The video:

 

[BigSqwert]

[Texsox]

The video:

 

The more I think about it, he's really not right here. Couples do not need the government to tell them they are in love, or to approve their love. They already know what is in their heart. It is, as Rex has pointed out, about the benefits and rights that we as a society offer the people who link up legally. A marriage or civil union certificate on the wall doesn't prove love. Men and Women that enter this agreement doi not have to be in love to receive the benefits. So while Obermann's essay is touching and poignant, it obscures the issue. This is about hospital visitations, filing jointly on a tax return, not being forced to testify against the other in a trial, automatic rights as a survivor, etc that other couples get. This is cold, hard, black and white, differences. that need to be made equal.

[BearSox]

Anyone see the protesters pretty much attack an old woman who was protesting against them? She had a big cross, the protesters ripped it out of her hands, and starting stomping on it.

 

Wow, real classy. I don't know if I am against gay marriage (and being gay in general) because I find it morally wrong or because of these idiots who do such stupid crap. Attacking an old lady, invading a catholic church, etc... of course though the MSM won't have much a problem with this.

Edited November 14, 2008 by BearSox

[kjshoe04]

I don't know if I am against gay marriage (and being gay in general) because I find it morally wrong or because of these idiots who do such stupid crap.

I definitely think that it goes both ways on the idiots doing stupid things front...

[southsider2k5]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081114/D94EEP9O2.html

 

White powder sent to Mormon temples in Utah, LA

Email this Story

 

Nov 13, 10:08 PM (ET)

 

LOS ANGELES (AP) - Letters containing a suspicious white powder were sent Thursday to Mormon temples in Los Angeles and Salt Lake City that were the sites of protests against the church's support of California's gay marriage ban.

 

The temple in the Westwood area of Los Angeles was evacuated before a hazardous materials crew determined the envelope's contents were not toxic, said FBI spokesman Jason Pack.

 

The temple in downtown Salt Lake City, where the church is based, received a similar envelope containing a white powder that spilled onto a clerk's hand.

 

The room was decontaminated and the envelope taken by the FBI for testing. The clerk showed no signs of illness, but the scare shut down a building at Temple Square for more than an hour, said Scott Freitag, a spokesman for the Salt Lake City Fire Department.

 

None of the writing on the envelope was threatening, and the church received no calls or messages related to the package, Freitag said.

 

Protests in recent days have targeted the Mormon church, which encouraged its members to fight the recently passed amendment banning gay marriage in California.

 

Authorities are looking into several theories on who sent the letters and why, Pack said.

 

Anthrax mailed as a white powder to Washington lawmakers and media outlets killed five people and sickened 17 just weeks after the attacks of September 11, 2001. Periodic hoaxes modeled on the anthrax mailings have popped up since then but usually prove harmless.

[YASNY]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081114/D94EEP9O2.html

 

Oh great. Now they are resorting to terrorism.

[StrangeSox]

Let's just hope it was nothing worse than a bad joke that is in seriously poor taste.

[NorthSideSox72]

Oh great. Now they are resorting to terrorism.

They?

 

I assume you mean the few crazies who did this.

 

[Balta1701]

They?

 

I assume you mean the few crazies who did this.

But, I can all but guarantee you that they pal around with Senator Obama.

[YASNY]

They?

 

I assume you mean the few crazies who did this.

 

Stop trying to twist my words. That's exactly what I meant.