No, I maintain my initial premise. I’m now asking you if you agree that it must happen (at least with church associated orgs.), if gay marriage is the interracial marriage. This will be the first step.
Yes, or no?
[/quote]
No Sloth that STILL makes no sense. A church in Kentucky in 2011 banned an interracial couple and then overturned their own decision.
You claimed tax exempt status for churches MUST end. This is false, false, false, and has no historical precedence. If gay marriage is the new interracial marriage then tax exempt status doesn’t change because it DIDN’T change during the Civil Rights Movement. Do you see why?
No, I maintain my initial premise. I’m now asking you if you agree that it must happen (at least with church associated orgs.), if gay marriage is the interracial marriage. This will be the first step.
Yes, or no?
[/quote]
No Sloth that STILL makes no sense. A church in Kentucky in 2011 banned an interracial couple and then overturned their own decision.
You claimed tax exempt status for churches must end. This is false, false, false, and has no historical precedence. If gay marriage is the new interracial marriage then tax exempt status doesn’t change because it DIDN’T change during the Civil Rights Movement. Do you see why? [/quote]
It will happen because of the changing view on religious liberty. Not even actual long-standing/practiced orthodox doctrine, and exercise, is exempt from government oversight now.
But for now, I was asking here about Church ASSOCIATIONS, which absolutely have lost their status do to racial issues.
No, I maintain my initial premise. I’m now asking you if you agree that it must happen (at least with church associated orgs.), if gay marriage is the interracial marriage. This will be the first step.
Yes, or no?
[/quote]
No Sloth that STILL makes no sense. A church in Kentucky in 2011 banned an interracial couple and then overturned their own decision.
You claimed tax exempt status for churches must end. This is false, false, false, and has no historical precedence. If gay marriage is the new interracial marriage then tax exempt status doesn’t change because it DIDN’T change during the Civil Rights Movement. Do you see why? [/quote]
It will happen because of the changing view on religious liberty. Not even actual orthodox doctrine is exempt from government oversight now.
But for now, I was asking here about Church ASSOCIATIONS, which absolutely have lost their status do to racial issues.
[/quote]
So now you would like to change the debate to something that actually has happened and has a historical precedence unlike your initial premise which I had a problem with? Ok, as long as you are acknowledging that churches did NOT lose tax exempt during the Civil Rights movement and therefore to claim they MUST now is highly faulty logic and pure emotional response.
Will government overstep their bounds at times? Of course, it is government we are talking about. Does it make logical sense in 2014 to say tax exempt status for churches is done? Absolutely none. The near future? Not a chance. Somewhere down the road? If you say so, but you aren’t going to get me to use a crazy term like it MUST happen. No, actually it must not.
It’ll start with their organizations (schools, hospitals, etc.). Since many of these are survive on the margins, a good many will have to pull into their shell, forgo as much charitable outreach, and thus have less influence. If they they don’t have to shutter their doors permanently, that is. This will further weaken (as its intent will be) the standing of churches. Therefore, will weaken the ability of the church to defend its auto-tax exempt status.
See “Redskins/NFL” and congress, presently
[/quote]
I don’t follow. As long as the church follows the rules for tax exempt status the IRS will not revoke it.
Did I miss where Congress threatened to revoke the NFL’s status?
So now you would like to change the debate
[/quote]
False, it’s part of my case. You’re (we’re) free to keep debating the status of the church. Let’s not pretend a single word answer prevents as much.
[/quote]
Oh I’m sure it is part of a case that has no historical precedence and is largely based on a ton of assumptions all going the way you say they will.
Single word answer? It’s the BIGGEST part of what I quoted from you. I quoted you saying tax exempt status for churches is done. THAT is why I responded to you in the first place. I’ve spent the rest of the time explaining to you why it’s paranoia and not based on something rational that has happened and now you’re attempting to move the debate to something else so you can somehow prove a case that is based on a whole bunch of assumptions leading to a certain road.
Which not surprisingly sounds like faith and isn’t based on logic. So maybe my logical and rational brain won’t get it like it won’t get religion?
It’ll start with their organizations (schools, hospitals, etc.). Since many of these are survive on the margins, a good many will have to pull into their shell, forgo as much charitable outreach, and thus have less influence. If they they don’t have to shutter their doors permanently, that is. This will further weaken (as its intent will be) the standing of churches. Therefore, will weaken the ability of the church to defend its auto-tax exempt status.
See “Redskins/NFL” and congress, presently
[/quote]
I don’t follow. As long as the church follows the rules for tax exempt status the IRS will not revoke it.
Did I miss where Congress threatened to revoke the NFL’s status?[/quote]
You mean you don’t get why if homosexual marriage is the new interracial marriage then churches MUST lose their tax exempt status just like they did NOT when that happened?
[quote]H factor wrote:
Ok, as long as you are acknowledging that churches did NOT lose tax exempt during the Civil Rights movement[/quote]
I never said they did…I’m saying they will, now (not today).
False, it’s a conclusion based on how free exercise of moral conscience, based on legitimate and ancient orthodox belief, has been overturned.
Of course it makes sense. It makes as much sense as saying, even only 5 years ago, that a Christian photographer would be forced to attend homosexual weddings.
It must happen if the arguments are applied logically and consistently.
It’ll start with their organizations (schools, hospitals, etc.). Since many of these are survive on the margins, a good many will have to pull into their shell, forgo as much charitable outreach, and thus have less influence. If they they don’t have to shutter their doors permanently, that is. This will further weaken (as its intent will be) the standing of churches. Therefore, will weaken the ability of the church to defend its auto-tax exempt status.
See “Redskins/NFL” and congress, presently
[/quote]
I don’t follow. As long as the church follows the rules for tax exempt status the IRS will not revoke it.
Did I miss where Congress threatened to revoke the NFL’s status?[/quote]
So now you would like to change the debate
[/quote]
False, it’s part of my case. You’re (we’re) free to keep debating the status of the church. Let’s not pretend a single word answer prevents as much.
[/quote]
Oh I’m sure it is part of a case that has no historical precedence and is largely based on a ton of assumptions all going the way you say they will.
Single word answer? It’s the BIGGEST part of what I quoted from you. I quoted you saying tax exempt status for churches is done. THAT is why I responded to you in the first place. I’ve spent the rest of the time explaining to you why it’s paranoia and not based on something rational that has happened and now you’re attempting to move the debate to something else so you can somehow prove a case that is based on a whole bunch of assumptions leading to a certain road.
Which not surprisingly sounds like faith and isn’t based on logic. So maybe my logical and rational brain won’t get it like it won’t get religion? [/quote]
It must happen if the arguments are applied logically and consistently.
[/quote]
Not really. This is quite the leap considering how much of our government and private decisions feature hypocrisy so often and don’t apply things logically and consistently.
I mean Mitt Romney ran saying the government doesn’t create jobs and then said his plan was to increase spending on the government to create jobs.
This idea that logic and consistency needs to apply must be a new American idea. The vast majority of our goals and laws are constantly in conflict with one another. To treat this situation as something that MUST happen is illogical.
So now you would like to change the debate
[/quote]
False, it’s part of my case. You’re (we’re) free to keep debating the status of the church. Let’s not pretend a single word answer prevents as much.
[/quote]
Oh I’m sure it is part of a case that has no historical precedence and is largely based on a ton of assumptions all going the way you say they will.
Single word answer? It’s the BIGGEST part of what I quoted from you. I quoted you saying tax exempt status for churches is done. THAT is why I responded to you in the first place. I’ve spent the rest of the time explaining to you why it’s paranoia and not based on something rational that has happened and now you’re attempting to move the debate to something else so you can somehow prove a case that is based on a whole bunch of assumptions leading to a certain road.
Which not surprisingly sounds like faith and isn’t based on logic. So maybe my logical and rational brain won’t get it like it won’t get religion? [/quote]
You’re avoiding the question I asked.
I’ll answer.
Yes.
See, Bob Jones university. [/quote]
Bob Jones University led to churches losing tax exempt status? I must have missed that. Did you miss the church in Kentucky that banned an interracial couple from attending in 2011 which still had a tax exempt status? So if the government didn’t have places lose it over that now it must?
Again you’re making some big time leaps here. They were making the same ones in the 50’s and 60’s and I guess just because they were wrong doesn’t mean you will be when you use the exact same logic. It just means…we have a historical precedence of saying nah, that doesn’t have to happen.
Bob Jones University led to churches losing tax exempt status? I must have missed that. [/quote]
What?
This pertains to may question about Church/religious associated organization (schools, hospitals, etc.)
So, you at least agree they will?
[/quote]
In some cases challenges may happen and some things may happen. I have no way of predicting the future and neither do you. I think saying they WILL as in all of them definitely will is a pretty giant leap. It’s one you keep wanting to make, but it’s a pretty giant leap.
Do I see private schools and churches losing tax exempt status over gay people on the whole? No. And if so, not anytime in the near future. If you’d like to talk about 15 years from now go ahead, but you’re just predicting with emotion because of some recent events that have upset you. I don’t think a movement to get churches to lose tax exempt status is based on anything rational. Hospitals? No.
Again it didn’t happen with black people so it must with gays because they are the same is something I just don’t see how you keep coming to.
It’ll start with their organizations (schools, hospitals, etc.). Since many of these are survive on the margins, a good many will have to pull into their shell, forgo as much charitable outreach, and thus have less influence. If they they don’t have to shutter their doors permanently, that is. This will further weaken (as its intent will be) the standing of churches. Therefore, will weaken the ability of the church to defend its auto-tax exempt status.
See “Redskins/NFL” and congress, presently
[/quote]
I don’t follow. As long as the church follows the rules for tax exempt status the IRS will not revoke it.
Did I miss where Congress threatened to revoke the NFL’s status?[/quote]
In some cases challenges may happen and some things may happen. I have no way of predicting the future and neither do you.[/quote]
Well, with Church-related associations surely you must agree that LOGICALLY it should happen once it goes to court (we both know it will very soon be challenged like never before). If homosexual marriage= interracial marriage…Well, precedent is set by interracial marriage.
So…No brainer. Yes, they must lose their status.
It’ll start with their organizations (schools, hospitals, etc.). Since many of these are survive on the margins, a good many will have to pull into their shell, forgo as much charitable outreach, and thus have less influence. If they they don’t have to shutter their doors permanently, that is. This will further weaken (as its intent will be) the standing of churches. Therefore, will weaken the ability of the church to defend its auto-tax exempt status.
See “Redskins/NFL” and congress, presently
[/quote]
I don’t follow. As long as the church follows the rules for tax exempt status the IRS will not revoke it.
Did I miss where Congress threatened to revoke the NFL’s status?[/quote]
In some cases challenges may happen and some things may happen. I have no way of predicting the future and neither do you.[/quote]
Well, with Church-related associations surely you must agree that LOGICALLY it should happen once it goes to court (we both know it will very soon be challenged like never before). If homosexual marriage= interracial marriage…Well, precedent is set by interracial marriage.
So…No brainer. Yes, they must lose their status. [/quote]
Dude whatever. It MUST not happen. Did churches lose their status by refusing to ordain women? No. Churches don’t even have to marry people of their own FAITH if they don’t meet the qualifications. Westboro Baptist Church is tax exempt and is anti-U.S. and anti-gay and arguably exists almost solely to promote hatred.
You’re not being logical and I’m tired of trying to show it to you. You’re a reasonable guy, but in this case your paranoia and religious views are getting the best of you.
You’re CATHOLIC and you don’t get this? Catholics don’t even HAVE to marry people who have been divorced if they don’t follow the proper process and they are still tax exempt. Where you get these ideas that this MUST happen are beyond me, but I’m tired of telling you why you’re incorrect.
You have constantly been fed this slippery slope gay marriage stuff and you are eating it hook, line, and sinker. If gay marriage passes it is the end of religion as you know it is what you’ve been told. And they said the same thing with interracial marriage. And yet religion (and tax exempt status) still went on.
In some cases challenges may happen and some things may happen. I have no way of predicting the future and neither do you.[/quote]
Well, with Church-related associations surely you must agree that LOGICALLY it should happen once it goes to court (we both know it will very soon be challenged like never before). If homosexual marriage= interracial marriage…Well, precedent is set by interracial marriage.
So…No brainer. Yes, they must lose their status. [/quote]
Dude whatever. It MUST not happen. [/quote]
Specifically on church-related associations (which was being dealt with in the quote above), you have to agree if gay-marriage= interracial marriage. The precedent is set.
In some cases challenges may happen and some things may happen. I have no way of predicting the future and neither do you.[/quote]
Well, with Church-related associations surely you must agree that LOGICALLY it should happen once it goes to court (we both know it will very soon be challenged like never before). If homosexual marriage= interracial marriage…Well, precedent is set by interracial marriage.
So…No brainer. Yes, they must lose their status. [/quote]
Dude whatever. It MUST not happen. Did churches lose their status by refusing to ordain women? No. Churches don’t even have to marry people of their own FAITH if they don’t meet the qualifications. Westboro Baptist Church is tax exempt and is anti-U.S. and anti-gay and arguably exists almost solely to promote hatred.
You’re not being logical and I’m tired of trying to show it to you. You’re a reasonable guy, but in this case your paranoia and religious views are getting the best of you.
You’re CATHOLIC and you don’t get this? Catholics don’t even HAVE to marry people who have been divorced if they don’t follow the proper process and they are still tax exempt. Where you get these ideas that this MUST happen are beyond me, but I’m tired of telling you why you’re incorrect.
You have constantly been fed this slippery slope gay marriage stuff and you are eating it hook, line, and sinker. If gay marriage passes it is the end of religion as you know it is what you’ve been told. And they said the same thing with interracial marriage. And yet religion (and tax exempt status) still went on. [/quote]
Slipper slope stuff? Its been coming true piece by piece. Employment/business laws are already playing their part.