XPost: alt.politics.economics, alt.politics.usa.constitution, al
.fan.rush-limbaugh
XPost: alt.law-enforcement, alt.prisons, alt.revisionism
XPost: alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy, alt.politics.immigration
XPost: alt.true-crime, talk.politics.guns, misc.survivalism
XPost: soc.culture.usa, alt.survival
From: LaLaLaLaLaLa@philhendrie.con
On 11/24/2014 10:29 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
> On 11/24/2014 12:27 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>> On 11/24/2014 9:24 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>>> On 11/24/2014 12:07 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>> On 11/24/2014 9:05 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>>>>> On 11/24/2014 10:39 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/24/2014 6:01 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/23/2014 4:37 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2014 12:30 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/22/2014 6:51 PM, Yoorghis@Jurgis.net wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 17:29:54 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/22/2014 8:13 AM, wien9alsergrund@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> ..... As I keep repeating, clergy should not meddle in
>>>>>>>>>>>> politics if
>>>>>>>>>>>> they don't want politicians to meddle in religion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The first amendment doesn't ban clergy from doing
>>>>>>>>>>> anything.... it
>>>>>>>>>>> bans
>>>>>>>>>>> *CONGRESS* from making any laws.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Except congress CAN make laws that apply and are enforced
>>>>>>>>>> against a
>>>>>>>>>> LARGE variety of things related to speech, you moron
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Clergy CAN advocate in sermons----but CAN lose tax exempt status
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Congress cannot bar them from speaking---they CAN bar them from
>>>>>>>>>> speaking without being taxed
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> SEE?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Feel better now?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They tax people to stop smoking or to force them to buy ObamaCare
>>>>>>>>> insurance so taxing people to force Religion
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Isn't happening.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Except as coercion and that is also NOT constitutional when it
>>>>>>> comes to
>>>>>>> government passing laws on religion,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is no taxation on people "to force religion." This is what I
>>>>>> mean
>>>>>> about you being too stupid and too unhinged for this. You just start
>>>>>> stringing words together thinking you're sounding smart, but they
>>>>>> always
>>>>>> give you away as a complete fucking moron.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ["There is no taxation on people "to force religion.""]
>>>>>
>>>>> An example is ObamaCare that is a tax and
>>>>
>>>> It is not a tax "to force religion." That was just some bit of bullshit
>>>> that sounded good to your semi-literate, poorly educated, lunatic-fringe
>>>> ears, but it's bullshit.
>>>
>>> And yet it forced people to pay for things for other people that's
>>> against the religious tenets and beliefs of the people paying that tax.
>>
>> Not the issue. You said it was a tax "to force religion." That doesn't
>> even mean anything. It's just the rabid raving of a lunatic-fringer.
>> You really are too stupid for this.
>>
>>
>
> Yes it forced religion
It didn't "force religion" to do anything.
> If a lack of commerce can be taxed like ObamaCare.
That's not a sentence, and even if it were, it's empty bullshit - "lack
of commerce" is not being taxed.
> Then a lack ofReligion is equal to a religion.
No. That's just bullshit. The statement itself is false - lack of
"Religion" [sic] is not equal to a religion - and whatever the fuck it
is you think you're saying, it does not follow from your prior statement.
--
"America's abundance was not created by public sacrifices to 'the common
good,' but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own
personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes."
Ayn Rand
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
