Ron Paul on Gay Marriage

[Danke]

Being tax-exempt does not exactly equate to being "subsidized by the State".

If churches are considered to be subsidized by the State, then it would follow that anyone who paid less taxes than another was also "subsidized", along with tax protestors, etc.

Now, the reason I think the churches should turn down this tax exempt thing, is because by signing up for this, the church has opened the door for the government to dictate to them. I personally don't think it's worth it.

Many churches are not incorporated. But I would like to see all churches give up their 501(c)(3) incorporation. They don't need it anyway to be tax free.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1869604

Yes, churches have been hoodwinked into organizing as a corporation that can be regulated [501 (c) (3)].

"Sec.508(c) of the Internal Revenue Code provides that churches are not required to apply for recognition of section 501(c)(3) status in order to be exempt from federal taxation or to receive tax deductible contributions ..

"Churches are automatically exempt from Federal income tax. That contributions to churches are deductible by donors under section 170 of the Code."

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

After all of the posts from befranklin...you are still stuck on this non existant "separation of church and state" nonsense. grab a clue...what you want is the demise of Christianity in the USA...and an immoral socity...we will continue to fight that. tones

Stuff from Ben Franklin? Was it during the Constitutional Convention? Is it in the Congressional register like most of the statements I got from Madison are? Is stuff from Franklin alone enough to counter all the statements from Madison, Washington and Jefferson?

Grab a clue.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

I don't know that a demise of institutional Christianity would lead to an "immoral society". Another option would be that Christians would study the gospels-gnostic and canonized-and discover it for themselves instead of being spoon fed. America is unique in that it at one time emphasized personal freedom, so it can't really be exactly compared to previous nations. (IMHO) Some churches operate on a shoestring budget in schools and public buildings. It's possible that churches could do better if they weren't subsidized by the State.

Just some thoughts, FWIW.

TTYL, Tones. ~hugs~

I know it is hard for you guys to accept, but there are a lot of people in this country who are moral who don't even attend church, and plenty of people who are not christian at all who are also still moral.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

Being tax-exempt does not exactly equate to being "subsidized by the State".

If churches are considered to be subsidized by the State, then it would follow that anyone who paid less taxes than another was also "subsidized", along with tax protestors, etc.

Now, the reason I think the churches should turn down this tax exempt thing, is because by signing up for this, the church has opened the door for the government to dictate to them. I personally don't think it's worth it.


I do see a few here being "spoon fed", but it's not the Christians whom you like to bash so much.

I wouldn't be so anxious if I were you to shove Christianity and Christians out the door. Aw heck, why not, America and those in it deserve the fate that has been plotted for them by the one-worlders. You will have a religion. It will be the state and the secular Humanism created years ago by the socialists whom you claim to hate. But, so many don't seem to realize that they are falling right into the hands of those same people. w/e. I'm tired of fighting this BS.

Nobody said anything about shoving Christians out the door. Ron Paul is a Christian. He still respects equal rights and Libertarian ideals.

The "Christians" who are a problem are the ones who feel it is their moral obligation to force their religion's concepts of morality onto other people. At that point, they become a tool for tyranny.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

After all of the posts from befranklin...you are still stuck on this non existant "separation of church and state" nonsense. grab a clue...what you want is the demise of Christianity in the USA...and an immoral socity...we will continue to fight that. tones

So if I don't let you pass laws based on you religion, your religion will die? So when you violate the first amendment you are trying to do so to save your religion? Because somehow, more people will come to love Jesus if you make his ideas into law rather then just following them yourself and inspiring others by your example?

People will not love Jesus for you forcing them to. They will if there is merit in that lifestyle, if it is rewarding and spiritually uplifting. When people claiming to be Christians do things like those idiots protesting military funerals claiming that all deaths in Iraq are a gift from God because of our tolerance of homosexuals, THOSE people are the real danger to your religion. Those people get a lot more press then the ones living a Christ-like lifestyle and striving to love instead of hate.

The state is not a tool for strengthening your religion. If people only lived by Christian morality because it was illegal not to, you have not saved a single soul with your actions. Not one.

 

[LibertyEagle]

People will not love Jesus for you forcing them to. They will if there is merit in that lifestyle, if it is rewarding and spiritually uplifting. When people claiming to be Christians do things like those idiots protesting military funerals claiming that all deaths in Iraq are a gift from God because of our tolerance of homosexuals, THOSE people are the real danger to your religion. Those people get a lot more press then the ones living a Christ-like lifestyle and striving to love instead of hate.

Neil, doesn't the same thing apply to gays? Just as with some of the whacked out people calling themselves Christians, some of the more militant gays are the ones who get the limelight and press. And it is in large part their actions such as the recent destruction of churches, that really scares the daylights out of people.

The state is not a tool for strengthening your religion.

True. But it's ok for gays to use the state for their own cause?

If people only lived by Christian morality because it was illegal not to, you have not saved a single soul with your actions. Not one.

Agreed.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Nobody said anything about shoving Christians out the door. Ron Paul is a Christian. He still respects equal rights and Libertarian ideals.

You must not have been reading much on the forum lately, because apparently it's the in thing to bash Christians.

The "Christians" who are a problem are the ones who feel it is their moral obligation to force their religion's concepts of morality onto other people. At that point, they become a tool for tyranny.

It's not the Christians per se, who are the main problem. Yes, some have been propagandized, but no more than some others I have seen around here.

When exactly did we turn from knowing that the primary culprits were the Fabian socialists and the Trotsky-loving neoconservatives? These are the one-worlders and neither of these are Christian, by the way.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

Neil, doesn't the same thing apply to gays? Just as with some of the whacked out people calling themselves Christians, some of the more militant gays are the ones who get the limelight and press. And it is in large part their actions such as the recent destruction of churches, that really scares the daylights out of people.


True. But it's ok for gays to use the state for their own cause?


Agreed.

Gays didn't pen Proposition 8.

Also, there is a big difference between lobbying to have right to do something, and lobbying to take away the rights of someone else to do something.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

You must not have been reading much on the forum lately, because apparently it's the in thing to bash Christians.


It's not the Christians per se, who are the main problem. Yes, some have been propagandized, but no more than some others I have seen around here.

When exactly did we turn from knowing that the primary culprits were the Fabian socialists and the Trotsky-loving neoconservatives? These are the one-worlders and neither of these are Christian, by the way.

I don't know how you would perceive it as a direct attack on Christianity itself. I just complimented the only person here who I think is actually coming from the real Christian perspective. I will bash anyone of ANY religion who thinks it's right for them to seek to use the state to enforce their ideas of morality.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Well Neil, I wasn't specifically talking about you; I was referring to the many comments all over the board these days, bashing Christians and blaming them for all our ills.

As far as morality and the state is concerned --- I'm not so sure it is so cut and dried as what you say. For example, we have laws against murder. That's a moral issue, is it not, and I would imagine you would agree with having that law. But yeah, I don't want the state involved in marriage at all. Nor education, nor much of anything else for that matter. To me, it's all about whether your choice of actions infringes on the liberty of someone else. If it doesn't, it's none of their business what you do.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

Well Neil, I wasn't specifically talking about you; I was referring to the many comments all over the board these days, bashing Christians and blaming them for all our ills.

As far as morality and the state is concerned --- I'm not so sure it is so cut and dried as what you say. For example, we have laws against murder. That's a moral issue, is it not, and I would imagine you would agree with having that law. But yeah, I don't want the state involved in marriage at all. Nor education, nor much of anything else for that matter. To me, it's all about whether your choice of actions infringes on the liberty of someone else. If it doesn't, it's none of their business what you do.

Murder is forbidden in most cultures, Christian and non Christian. Most issues of law can be settled with logic. It is obviously wrong to allow someone to murder someone.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Murder is forbidden in most cultures, Christian and non Christian. Most issues of law can be settled with logic. It is obviously wrong to allow someone to murder someone.

It's still morality though. That's the point. You are making a moral decision that it is wrong to murder someone and don't seem to have a problem with government enforcing that morality.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

It's still morality though. That's the point. You are making a moral decision that it is wrong to murder someone and don't seem to have a problem with government enforcing that morality.

Yes, and I still think murder is wrong.

And I am not Christian. Hence, you do not need Christianity to be moral.

 

[tonesforjonesbones]

WEll sorry to tell ya this...the usa has been a predominately Christian nation since it's inception..and our morals and values have affected everyone..you get it vicariously. unfortunately...the agenda to destroy the country and take it over..has demoralized this nation..and that , dude, is pure communism. tones

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

WEll sorry to tell ya this...the usa has been a predominately Christian nation since it's inception..and our morals and values have affected everyone..you get it vicariously. unfortunately...the agenda to destroy the country and take it over..has demoralized this nation..and that , dude, is pure communism. tones

The commies are coming to get us. Hey man haven't you been watching? We don't freak out over the commies anymore. Now it's the terrorists! We don't invade people's privacy and make up scary stories about commies anymore, it's those evil terrorists!

There are many cultures who still thought murder was wrong before Christianity ever showed up. But that's really the point.

What is the point, is that regardless of whatever influence you think your religion has had, it doesn't give your religion some special authority over the Constitution or the people who live here who are not Christian.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

There are many cultures who still thought murder was wrong before Christianity ever showed up. But that's really the point.

What is the point, is that regardless of whatever influence you think your religion has had, it doesn't give your religion some special authority over the Constitution or the people who live here who are not Christian.

You don't have to believe in gravity either, in order for it to have an effect on you, or for you to selectively admit to certain of its effects. But it remains true whether one acknowledges its universality or not. The attempt to deny the influence of Christianity on the founding of this country likewise does not rebut the fact of its influence. Nor does the attempt to deny the existence of divine judgment succeed in whiting out that entire historic Christian doctrine. In the name of advocating your designer 'love only' version of the faith as the only correct one, you have been pretty relentless in diluting it from the possibility of having any cognitive truth. It's like saying one loves Ron Paul's views, but only if we dispose of all that constitutional stuff.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

You don't have to believe in gravity either, in order for it to have an effect on you, or for you to selectively admit to certain of its effects. But it remains true whether one acknowledges its universality or not. The attempt to deny the influence of Christianity on the founding of this country likewise does not rebut the fact of its influence. Nor does the attempt to deny the existence of divine judgment succeed in whiting out that entire historic Christian doctrine. In the name of advocating your designer 'love only' version of the faith as the only correct one, you have been pretty relentless in diluting it from the possibility of having any cognitive truth. It's like saying one loves Ron Paul's views, but only if we dispose of all that constitutional stuff.

Gravity can be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. In fact, let me prove it right now. *drops pen on floor*. I believe it is fully your right to believe that there is an unprovable force that you call the Christian God. However, there is no way to prove any "divine influence" on anything.

There was Christian influence on the Constitution. It came in the form of the founding fathers seeing what was going on around them in the Christian community, violence, and outright murder, and deciding they did not want any laws regarding religion. Ever.

In order to practice your absurd and tyrannical theocracy, we would have to dispose of all that Constitutional stuff.

 

[LibertyEagle]

The commies are coming to get us. Hey man haven't you been watching? We don't freak out over the commies anymore. Now it's the terrorists! We don't invade people's privacy and make up scary stories about commies anymore, it's those evil terrorists!

There are many cultures who still thought murder was wrong before Christianity ever showed up. But that's really the point.

What is the point, is that regardless of whatever influence you think your religion has had, it doesn't give your religion some special authority over the Constitution or the people who live here who are not Christian.

Are you implying that Communism did not exist? Actually it still does, it just goes by a different name.

 

[tonesforjonesbones]

Liberty..I find a lot of people say that "the commies are coming the commies are coming" when I mention communism at work. you can call it socialism, marxism, fabianism, leninism..social democracy...it still boils down to communism. I guess they will laugh and giggle all the way to the dutch ovens.

I just spoke to Michael Badnarik on the phone today...and he said we have about 12 months to secure our liberty..or it's going to be gone. I'm working with him on coming to our town for an event. This is no game and no joke. We are in emminant danger. Tones

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Liberty..I find a lot of people say that "the commies are coming the commies are coming" when I mention communism at work. you can call it socialism, marxism, fabianism, leninism..social democracy...it still boils down to communism. I guess they will laugh and giggle all the way to the dutch ovens.

I just spoke to Michael Badnarik on the phone today...and he said we have about 12 months to secure our liberty..or it's going to be gone. I'm working with him on coming to our town for an event. This is no game and no joke. We are in emminant danger. Tones

If I can help, let me know via PM. ~hugs~