It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Time to allow Politics from the Pulpit openly as the Left does it anyway

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Yes,

Time for the BS to stop. Allow churches to openly preach what they want.

Since it is OK to actually promote "The Iran Deal" from the Pulpit.... why not?

thehill.com...

Sharpton calls for black churches to lobby on Iran deal



“I am calling on ministers in black churches nationwide to go to their pulpits Sunday and have their parishioners call their senators and congressmen to vote yes on the Iran nuclear plan,” he said Friday.



Know what is funny.. If one of these Southern Mega-Churches was doing exactly the opposite the Left would be calling to punish them by yanking their 501.
edit on 16-8-2015 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



+5 more 
posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

Sure, let churches say what they want.

Just don't take "my taxdollars" to pay for it.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:33 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

personally, religion and politics are two seperate entitys, and never the twain should meet.

it is nice to see Al sharpton has his BFF obamas back though and bringing an iran deal into the church...lol



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: infolurker

Sure, let churches say what they want.

Just don't take "my taxdollars" to pay for it.



then dont work...quit your job



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:38 AM
link   
Another great example of selective delinquent tax enforcement.

Sharpton owes the taxpayers big money as it is.

Now he wants to use the tax exempt status for political reasons.

Where is Lois Lerner NOW?



+6 more 
posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: infolurker

Sure, let churches say what they want.

Just don't take "my taxdollars" to pay for it.



then dont work...quit your job


I could have sworn you were arguing about how your "taxdollars" were being spent recently.

Good for the goose, not good for the gander?



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: infolurker

Sure, let churches say what they want.

Just don't take "my taxdollars" to pay for it.



then dont work...quit your job


EXACTLY and look at the crap you gave me for it, yet here you are using the EXACT same argument....gotta love hypocrisy huh?

I could have sworn you were arguing about how your "taxdollars" were being spent recently.

Good for the goose, not good for the gander?




posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Wait ... don't Republicans and Tea Partiers LOVE tax evasion???

I would think you guys would love Sharpton! He's against paying taxes too!

Again. Let's take the 501 status from any group that conducts political propagandizing.

But, now, wait a minute ... how does the "freedom of religion" feed into this thing?

Don't you guys believe that churches should be able to say whatever they want???

This seems contradictory.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: kellyjay

You're way off topic, but:

Do you understand the concept of irony?

Do you understand the use of quotation marks in English?

Review both concepts, and get back to me.

On topic: Are you in favor of the State dictating what a church can preach?

Are you in favor of tax breaks for political action groups masquerading as churches?

(Still having trouble with the quote function I see. Hint: your stuff goes on the outside of the "".)
edit on 10Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:48:41 -050015p102015866 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: kellyjay

You're way off topic, but:

Do you understand the concept of irony?

Do you understand the use of quotation marks in English?

Review both concepts, and get back to me.

On topic: Are you in favor of the State dictating what a church can preach?

Are you in favor of tax breaks for political action groups masquerading as churches?

(Still having trouble with the quote function I see. Hint: your stuff goes on the outside of the
.)

I just find it hilarious and hypocritical, that you chastised me for saying i didnt want my taxes funding abortions, then you use the exact same argument regarding churches

honestly i could care less what churches preach, i do however think that politics and religion shouldnt merge as per my intitial response to this thread.

Im in favour for tax breaks for non profit organisations


edit on 02/08/2015 by kellyjay because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I do like Sharpton.

Where did I say I hated him?

Are you thought policing again today, or are you trying to convince yourself of something nobody else can figure out?

I'm pointing out the government failure.



#goalposts
#tangents
#herkyjerky



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: xuenchen

Don't you guys believe that churches should be able to say whatever they want???


Only the churches they agree with.

Yes....... The hypocrisy runs deep with these people.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: kellyjay

You can't take a simple hint can you. Okay, I'll make it as plain as I can: notice that in my post, I noted "my taxdollars."

Why do I draw emphasis to the words "my taxdollars" do you think? I'll be glad to break it down: it means I don't believe that "my taxdollars" is a real or valid concept either in this case or any other, but I'm ironically using the same irrational terminology that so many wingers, like yourself, use to point out the absurdity of the general claim, i.e. ironically.

I'm sure you find many things hilarious and hypocritical, for example, I find people who claim to be one thing and are obviously another thing are the very definition of hypocritical ... don't you?

So, if politics and religion "shouldn't merge" are you in favor of the government penalizing churches that do so?



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Another great example of selective delinquent tax enforcement.

Sharpton owes the taxpayers big money as it is.

Now he wants to use the tax exempt status for political reasons.

Where is Lois Lerner NOW?




Another great example is the Evangelical Christian churches that constantly tell their parishioners to contact their representatives and tell them support anything Israel wants like killing the Iran deal. Both churches that preach support or kill the deal should have their tax free status stripped from them.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Where did I say that you personally hated Sharpton?

Feel free to quote me.

#puttingwordsinmymouth
#usingsalinskyonceagain



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Any churches that allow this should lose their tax-exempt status immediately.

They should then be further investigated to see how long they've been doing this and pay their back taxes too.

That'll nip it right quick.

ETA: Eer...time to allow? Wow. If you think the "right" hasn't been doing politics from the pulpit forever, you haven't been to a church down South and need to get your head outta the sand.
edit on 8/16/2015 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 11:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: kellyjay

You can't take a simple hint can you. Okay, I'll make it as plain as I can: notice that in my post, I noted "my taxdollars."

Why do I draw emphasis to the words "my taxdollars" do you think? I'll be glad to break it down: it means I don't believe that "my taxdollars" is a real or valid concept either in this case or any other, but I'm ironically using the same irrational terminology that so many wingers, like yourself, use to point out the absurdity of the general claim, i.e. ironically.

I'm sure you find many things hilarious and hypocritical, for example, I find people who claim to be one thing and are obviously another thing are the very definition of hypocritical ... don't you?

So, if politics and religion "shouldn't merge" are you in favor of the government penalizing churches that do so?






Why do I draw emphasis to the words "my taxdollars" do you think? I'll be glad to break it down: it means I don't believe that "my taxdollars" is a real or valid concept either in this case or any other, but I'm ironically using the same irrational terminology that so many wingers, like yourself, use to point out the absurdity of the general claim, i.e. ironically.



Uhuh...except in my case my taxes do actually fund abortions, as our taxes directly fund the taxpayer owned NHS here in the UK ...but please dont let that small fact get in your way when trying to be a pedant.





I'm sure you find many things hilarious and hypocritical, for example, I find people who claim to be one thing and are obviously another thing are the very definition of hypocritical ... don't you?


Indeed, but ive yet to stumble upon anyone like that on here....




So, if politics and religion "shouldn't merge" are you in favor of the government penalizing churches that do so


Yes, im totally in favour of penalizing the churches that urge those to vote on the iran deal at sharptons behest.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: kellyjay

You obviously want to talk about me rather than the issues.

Your taxes don't fund anything except government revenues.

You're using a fairly common misunderstanding or an intentional conceit.

Perhaps you should look harder.

So, you're in favor of penalizing churches that disobey your political agenda? Yeah, see, you may remember that little thing we have over here called "freedom of religion."

We don't look positively on the State controlling churches for political reasons, in general.

How do you feel about the UK system, with a State church? I'd think you'd be a bit more familiar or aware or concerned with that issue ... being from living now in Scotland and all.
edit on 11Sun, 16 Aug 2015 11:15:24 -050015p112015866 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: kellyjay

You obviously want to talk about me rather than the issues.

Your taxes don't fund anything except government revenues.

You're using a fairly common misunderstanding or an intentional conceit.

Perhaps you should look harder.

So, you're in favor of penalizing churches that disobey your political agenda? Yeah, see, you may remember that little thing we have over here called "freedom of religion."

We don't look positively on the State controlling churches for political reasons, in general.

How do you feel about the UK system, with a State church? I'd think you'd be a bit more familiar with that ... being from Scotland and all.






You obviously want to talk about me rather than the issues


Actually i dont find you interesting enough to waste my time.




Your taxes don't fund anything except government revenues


Educate yourself www.nhs.uk... particularly the funding part




So, you're in favor of penalizing churches that disobey your political agenda? Yeah, see, you may remember that little thing we have over here called "freedom of religion."

We don't look positively on the State controlling churches for political reasons, in general.

How do you feel about the UK system, with a State church? I'd think you'd be a bit more familiar with that ... being from Scotland and all


I already made it clear that politics and religion shouldnt merge, do you need me to say it in another way? considering you keep asking me?

I dont feel anything about the UK system...the UK is a secular country, and im atheist so i dont care

anything else you want to know or are you done?
edit on 02/08/2015 by kellyjay because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker



Know what is funny.. If one of these Southern Mega-Churches was doing exactly the opposite the Left would be calling to punish them by yanking their 501.


They do and have been for decades. The Left has been calling for revocation of tax exemption of churches because of it, for equally as long.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join