Roberts Warns Churches Could Lose Tax-Exempt Status For Opposing Gay Marriage

originally posted by: Dfairlite

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
The right to bear arms, and the right to due process weren't constitutional until added via amendments either.

LOL you know the constitution wasn't ratified before the bill of rights (first 10 amendments) were added right? Those are as much a part of the constitution as the rest of it. In fact, if they weren't in there the constitution wouldn't have ever been ratified. To say that they weren't constitutional shows quite a bit of ignorance.

LEARN

Your own link confirms this but the constitution was ratified in 1789, the Bill of Rights was added in Dec of 1791.

originally posted by: imitator

originally posted by: boymonkey74
But religions have a problem at the moment and in 20 years if they don't catch up and review their books and get with the times they will start to die.

WTF are you talking about?
Christianity is over 2000 years old, what are they going to catch up on lol?

I'm all for gay marriage, but to force it on a religion that's against it is pure evil..... someone in the gooberment has issues....

How can Christianity be over 2,000 years old? The time of Jesus was around 30 AD, and we're only at 2015.

Laws are different everywhere.

I did the books for 5 years for a congregation, filed the taxes too, to keep the tax exception you had to spend a certain amount of money relative to the money you took in, so if you took in 100K you had to spend 80K you were allowed a 20% reserve. People seem to think congregations are rolling in the money, and some might be. But the ones I have been in, get just enough money to maintain the building, and buy some group meals at times. These Christians also helped during a period of disaster, and they were helping in area's where it didn't matter your beliefs or morals, they just wanted to help their fellow humans in a time of need, Jesus spoke about that.

There is a real attitude of intolerance to an issue some seem to think they know about, when they really don't.

Don't brand all Christianity with the charlatans and swindlers of the 20th century. Some were and some are, but not all.

By their fruit you will know them Jesus said.

a reply to: ketsuko


I think this is the federal governments way of saying

"If you wont treat gay couples fairly then you will not be treated fairly"

And for once I cant argue with the government on this one.

According to these semitic religions we are all born in sin. So marrying a straight couple is just as blasphemous. So why is the gay guy shunned more than the drunk or the wife beater that gets married in the church ?

It all comes down to indifference in the form of hate and hate using the holy book as an excuse to fit it's narrative.

a reply to: Profusion

That would end the separation of church and state. We could easily move towards a church state at that point where churches play a direct role in the funding and election of local and state officials. It wouldn't take long before churches played a direct role in the Federal government, similar to how the Catholic Church still has massive control in Italy.

Yes, it would cost them money, but would actually increase their power by 10 fold.

a reply to: Shiloh7

Religion does not divide people at all.
People use religion for their own agenda to divide the people.

Not a religious thing to do.. but people do it and fall for it easily enough.

originally posted by: DarthFazer
a reply to: ketsuko


I think this is the federal governments way of saying

"If you wont treat gay couples fairly then you will not be treated fairly"

And for once I cant argue with the government on this one.

According to these semitic religions we are all born in sin. So marrying a straight couple is just as blasphemous. So why is the gay guy shunned more than the drunk or the wife beater that gets married in the church ?

It all comes down to indifference in the form of hate and hate using the holy book as an excuse to fit it's narrative.

And that is not the role of the federal government. In fact, it was just that type of government that the original colonists rebelled against. It was just that type of federal government that was what the COTUS and the Bill of Rights were ratified to protect the citizens from.

After all, if the government now gets to enforce its own version of morality on everyone, then the morality of the government really relies on the personal opinions of the people who are running it and not any laws of the land. In other words, we no longer have a nation of laws, but a nation of lawlessness and we might as well accept that we are indeed a tyranny. So while you might be all for it now, think about how you might like it if another set of people were running the government and deemed their version of morality and fairness to be the new "law of the land."

I understand that is hard for people because you have a hard time imagining things could ever change against you, but they can and they do.

originally posted by: RobinB022
a reply to: Shiloh7

Religion does not divide people at all.
People use religion for their own agenda to divide the people.

Not a religious thing to do.. but people do it and fall for it easily enough.

Yes, consider if one of the progressive sects that believe that no one is saved unless we are all saved were to get into power started buying their way into running the show.

a reply to: ketsuko

I normally don't comment only to say "good comment", but yours is an exceptionally good comment!

originally posted by: DarthFazer
a reply to: beezzer


That is not what I am saying. I am saying churches should not be exempt nor corporations heck they are practicaly the same thing.


They can go on worshipping a ancient comic book and believing in a zombie for all I care. Stan Lee writes more convincing stories. It is comical in that they the zealots contradict themselves continuously in going against the teachings of their own Jesus. There is no reason Religious institutions should get special treatment in the first place. Nobody is encroaching on such silly beliefs , they have a option still. Being made to pay taxes is not forcing the Church to marry gay couples. They can go on discriminating while paying uncle sam.

So you DON'T think the 1st Amendment should be abolished.

You just feel that churches should be punished for not believing the same as yourself.

originally posted by: Phototropic
I would dance with even more joy than I did today if religious institutions lost their tax exempt status. Like, you would have never seen the likes of such boogieing.

Celebrating destroying other people's faith? Yeah...your a great person.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
a reply to: beezzer

We need to be free to do what we want! Marry who we want! it doesnt matter

And we will repress your religious rights as much as it takes so that we have our rights! (or your a muslim church)

In the name of the constitution!

And diversity! (as long as you think like we do)

Lets review that for a second. "We need to be free to do what we want". Just you? What about the other people that have different views than you? I guess they can just go to hell because you don't like what they do...and won't let them "be free to do what they want".

You want to "marry who we want". They want to NOT have to marry some people. So you can marry who you want but they have to "marry" people they don't want to? HYPOCRITE!!!

You hate that you may be kept from doing "what you want" but will fight fire with fire and "repress their religious rights"? You consider that equality? You consider that being nice.

And about the Constitution that I'm sure you only mention because it makes you sound like you care about equality...when you spell it with a lower case "c". But the Constitution says "freedom of religion" yet you will "repress their religious rights"?

And finally, all the gay people that wanted everyone to stay out of their business held a parade in London, with a flag...covered in dildos and butt plugs...because they don't want anyone in their business.

CNN

Yup...you are all a bunch of wonderful people that don't have an ounce of hate within you and don't want people getting into your personal business. BS!!!!!

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Religion wants to legislate different classes of humans with gays on the bottom. I haven't heard gays do anything close. The latest decision from Supreme Court stated that it's not very nice of religion. As for gays pressing churches to marry them is just churches playing up their self-obsessed importance.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

religious rights are yesterday's news.

It's okay now to hate and suppress religious liberties and freedoms as seen by some on this site.

And if they are anywhere near a representation of a segment of society then I don't see much hope for anyone's freedoms or liberties.

Look at it as religious freedoms as the canary in the coal mine.

originally posted by: combinatorics
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Religion wants to legislate different classes of humans with gays on the bottom. I haven't heard gays do anything close. The latest decision from Supreme Court stated that it's not very nice of religion. As for gays pressing churches to marry them is just churches playing up their self-obsessed importance.

Translation...nothing to see here. Look away, look away. My point was this...the individual I was addressing is a complete hypocrite who wishes bad things upon people just because they are different. These people didn't write the religion they practice, they follow what they believe is the word of God. And this person wants to hurt them for following their God.

It is back to what I've said all along...many of them don't want equal rights, they want special rights. No right for you to dislike me but I can dislike you all I want.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

religious rights are yesterday's news.

It's okay now to hate and suppress religious liberties and freedoms as seen by some on this site.

And if they are anywhere near a representation of a segment of society then I don't see much hope for anyone's freedoms or liberties.

Look at it as religious freedoms as the canary in the coal mine.

Well...I guess at least we can laugh that all these "righteous" and "we only want fairness" people have become the monsters they have hated for so long. Too bad there isn't some kind of law against hate crimes.

originally posted by: combinatorics
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Religion wants to legislate different classes of humans with gays on the bottom. I haven't heard gays do anything close. The latest decision from Supreme Court stated that it's not very nice of religion. As for gays pressing churches to marry them is just churches playing up their self-obsessed importance.

So this is the first I've heard that what goes on inside the church is "legislating."

Last I checked, no one said, "Let's rewrite the Bible so that gays are left out." In fact, if anyone has rewritten the Bible to suit themselves and their agenda lately are the LGBT activists.

But, hey, they can take their Queen James version and go form their churches and preach the Gospel according how they would prefer it be.

originally posted by: ketsuko

So this is the first I've heard that what goes on inside the church is "legislating."

Last I checked, no one said, "Let's rewrite the Bible so that gays are left out." In fact, if anyone has rewritten the Bible to suit themselves and their agenda lately are the LGBT activists.

But, hey, they can take their Queen James version and go form their churches and preach the Gospel according how they would prefer it be.

Right. I guess you don't remember the religiously motivated Defense of Marriage Act(ludicrous name) which it took the Supreme Court to K.O. it into oblivion. Religions permeates politics.

Sounds like "Blackmail" to me, totally against our constitution!!!! a reply to: Profusion

originally posted by: DarthFazer
Good

Churches should not get tax breaks any more than corporations anyway.

Actually, the idea that anyone should be required to pay taxes in a country where the government just plain doesn't give a # about them is ridiculous.

The only kind of financial system that's really fair is voluntary. Which is to say if people like their government and they like it's policies and they feel good about what's going on, they make voluntary donations to the government. If the government is screwing them, they just stop paying for it until something changes.

OK. That would be pretty complicated and I'm sure there are ways it could backfire but it couldn't be any worse than it is now.