Our Lady of Perpetual Exemption Church: Televangelists

originally posted by: boymonkey74
Just got a monkey onesy for my attire for the new Church.
If I get people to come and pray in my house I can apply for it to be a religious building and I will not have to pay council tax

.
I hope I get a free bus pass also.

Anyone can become a minister and start their own church, apply for tax exemption non profit status, establish your chosen sacraments and ......I'll leave that up to your imagination!




www.themonastery.org...

a reply to: beezzer

Punish them for success? No. But if you're a Christian as you say you are, Beezer, then how can you approve of charlatans bastardizing Christianity exclusively for their own personal gain? And even if you say you don't approve of them outright, you're clearly in favor of turning a blind eye.

Your previous example of a woman you knew, sending thousands to her "Nigerian boyfriend." Should you have told her that it was a scam, crushing her dreams and her perceptions? Absolutely! A true friend would save their friend from a scam costing thousands of dollars. That's standard in my circle of friends, and anyone who failed to point something like this out would be no friend at all.

You're far, far off the mark on this one, Beezer.

originally posted by: mulder85
a reply to: beezzer

Punish them for success? No. But if you're a Christian as you say you are, Beezer, then how can you approve of charlatans bastardizing Christianity exclusively for their own personal gain? And even if you say you don't approve of them outright, you're clearly in favor of turning a blind eye.

I don't approve. But what they do isn't against the law. Should my morality trump theirs? If people are donating money and receiving what they consider is something of value, then what law would you consider to stop this?

Your previous example of a woman you knew, sending thousands to her "Nigerian boyfriend." Should you have told her that it was a scam, crushing her dreams and her perceptions? Absolutely! A true friend would save their friend from a scam costing thousands of dollars. That's standard in my circle of friends, and anyone who failed to point something like this out would be no friend at all.

You're far, far off the mark on this one, Beezer.

Many of us told her. We were kind and supportive. But people will do what they want to do.

We could only be there for her when she realised the truth.

So you did tell her. That's the opposite of what you said earlier. Good on you, regardless.

originally posted by: beezzer
I don't approve. But what they do isn't against the law. Should my morality trump theirs? If people are donating money and receiving what they consider is something of value, then what law would you consider to stop this?

Can we not say that something is wrong - really, really wrong, in this case - without it being against the law? Should good Christians be severely punished financially just for being naive and desperate?

originally posted by: mulder85
So you did tell her. That's the opposite of what you said earlier. Good on you, regardless.

Actually, I said I never mocked her.

Can we not say that something is wrong - really, really wrong, in this case - without it being against the law?

Shout it from the mountaintops for all I care. I say abortion is wrong all the time, even though it is not against the law.

Should good Christians be severely punished financially just for being naive and desperate?

You are saying they are being punished. Not them. They feel that they are receiving blessings or salvation. Or whatever. It's their money.

They should be free to do with it as they please.

Unless you're implying that a controlling central authority should have the right to dictate what they do with their own money.

a reply to: olaru12

Wondering the legality of that here in the UK.

I remember in high school having to ride the school bus to school while the Baptist preachers kid drove a new "vette".....

Non profit myass....

one of the many reasons I don't trust organized religion and most religious people...underneath all that piety and holier than thou attitude lies a self serving agenda that has little, if any relationship to saving souls.

a reply to: beezzer

Why do online discussion forums even exist, then, if the measure of whether something is right or wrong is determined by the laws on the books now? You conservatives and your excessive fear of "central authorities," which in this case manifests as a straw man argument. Nobody is saying that televangelism should be illegal, and certainly donating money to them shouldn't be illegal, just that televangelists are assholes. Can we agree on this at least? Or do you think they're good Christians who happened to figured out a way to make lots of money without breaking laws, end of story?

a reply to: mulder85

Nope.

They're assholes.

Just my "opinion", however.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: mulder85

Nope.

They're assholes.

Just my "opinion", however.

They seem to be the opposite of what I've read and heard about Jesus.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I know that not all Christians are like the televangelists, but I really dislike people like Tilton. It takes a special type of scum to convince a cancer patient to spend their health care money on you rather than on saving their life. The only conclusion I'm left with is that because their God seems to tolerate these types of people, it's actually ok with their God should he exist.

Some part of me actually wishes God is real though because I'm sure there would be some sort of horrific and ironic afterlife in store for these "people", if you can even call them that.

originally posted by: beezzer
We'll just have to agree to disagree.

I see this as another opportunity to insult religion.

It's not insulting religion, it's insulting people who use a religion to harm others.

Televangelists are scum, but that doesn't mean all Christians are scum.
ISIS is scum, but that doesn't mean all Muslims are scum.
The Myanmar government is scum, but that doesn't mean all Buddhists are scum.

I'll say it right now, Jesus if he was anything like the various books claim, would be the very first person to stand up against people like Tilton, why some Christians think denouncing people like him is an attack on their religion I have no idea.

originally posted by: beezzer
They aren't fooling anyone.

And people still send them money.

They are free to do so.

Let 'em.

Yes, they are fooling people. Did you watch the John Oliver video? The part where the woman is preaching to cancer patients to send her the money and gain Gods favor rather than use that money to buy potentially lifesaving medication? She says, you can use the money to buy poison that might kill you along with the cancer, or you can send that seed to God, watch it grow, and he will cure your cancer if you seed enough.

At some point you have to draw a line, when people are sending you their money rather than buying medication, I'm pretty comfortable with saying that's an appropriate line to draw. People like that are downright evil.

originally posted by: Aazadan


At some point you have to draw a line, when people are sending you their money rather than buying medication, I'm pretty comfortable with saying that's an appropriate line to draw. People like that are downright evil.

You can't order people not to spend their money. You just can't.

Is it wrong? Hell, I could probably name a dozen things that are just as bad that people spend their money on.

But I cannot deny people the freedom to be stupid.

No-one can. Or should.

originally posted by: beezzer
You can't order people not to spend their money. You just can't.

Why not? We say you can't buy certain drugs, you want to prevent people from spending their money on abortions, most people want to tell the mentally ill they can't buy a gun. What's the difference here?

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: beezzer
You can't order people not to spend their money. You just can't.

Why not? We say you can't buy certain drugs, you want to prevent people from spending their money on abortions, most people want to tell the mentally ill they can't buy a gun. What's the difference here?

So since you are smarter than me, you get to decide what I get to spend my money on?

Nope.

I'll take Freedom for 500, Alex.

a reply to: beezzer

beez...even if what they are doing is not technically "against the law" - the fact remains that they are con artists, telling blatant lies to innocent people. And state legislation notwithstanding, is what they are doing not "immoral"?

originally posted by: beezzer
So since you are smarter than me, you get to decide what I get to spend my money on?

No, but certain products which are claimed to hold no value are not allowed to be put on the market, this is especially true in medicine (supplement industry aside). Faith is to many people a form of medicine, if they're going to sell it, which is exactly what they're doing shouldn't they need to prove they're providing value? What medicinal benefit is there in a terminally ill woman signing her life savings over to one of these people?

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: beezzer

beez...even if what they are doing is not technically "against the law" - the fact remains that they are con artists, telling blatant lies to innocent people. And state legislation notwithstanding, is what they are doing not "immoral"?

Is it immoral?

Sure.

But if we're going to legislate "morality" you may want to hold onto your hat, 'cause you may not like the ride.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: beezzer
So since you are smarter than me, you get to decide what I get to spend my money on?

No, but certain products which are claimed to hold no value are not allowed to be put on the market, this is especially true in medicine (supplement industry aside). Faith is to many people a form of medicine, if they're going to sell it, which is exactly what they're doing shouldn't they need to prove they're providing value? What medicinal benefit is there in a terminally ill woman signing her life savings over to one of these people?

Faith is not a tangeable that you can put into a bucket and take to market.

If people are selling, it's only because people are buying.

Freedom.

originally posted by: beezzer
Faith is not a tangeable that you can put into a bucket and take to market.

If people are selling, it's only because people are buying.

Freedom.

Sure it is, you even argued as much in a prior post that people are essentially purchasing what brings them peace of mind, and that they should have the economic freedom to do so. We have an FDA that outlaws that precise practice with medications, why does church get a pass here when the experience of both is entirely psychological?