|
|
Post by Angie on Apr 16, 2017 12:21:36 GMT -5
Church-state separation is the main bee in my pretty floral bonnet, so I've been watching the proposed Johnson Amendment repeal attempts. It might end up included in a larger tax bill. Churches, of course, are framing this as a free speech issue, but I and a lot of other people see a much bigger problem, summed up nicely in this WaPo article: To be clear, I'm not in favor of ANY non-profit being able to channel funds to a political candidate. But churches are exempt from disclosing most of their finances - which means a candidate could essentially turn a friendly church into a money laundering station. The limits on campaign contributions could easily be sidestepped by donating the money to the church, which could then hand it over to a candidate - all without disclosing where the money originally came from. The Johnson Amendment is a hell of a lot more important than just whether or not pastors feel "muzzled" in the pulpit. (And, honestly, the IRS almost NEVER checks up on church compliance with the no-political-speech rule as it is - hell, some of the farthest-right churches send videos of their pastors flagrantly breaking this rule to the IRS to dare them to do something. They never do.) |
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Apr 16, 2017 17:08:01 GMT -5
The limits on campaign contributions could easily be sidestepped by donating the money to the church, which could then hand it over to a candidate - all without disclosing where the money originally came from. Not only that, but contributions to churches (deductible) who then contribute to political campaigns (nondeductible) would effectively make political contributions deductible. I came across an article the other day (article is a couple of months old) about how Trump wanted churches to be free to endorse political candidates, and I thought, well of course he does, some of them are his biggest fans. I thought nothing more of it really, until this thread. Side note, this is so frustrating to me, not only because of separation of church and state, but also because of the way some Christians (a few of whom I know/am related to) are downright fearful of "TEH MUSLIMS" (Terrorists! Sharia! Obama! Oh my!) infiltrating government and/or influencing policy with their terrible religion which, were they to succeed, we would all be forced to follow. But they can't see how they're wanting that very thing, only it's their religion. This may be the most hypocritical, ironic (and did I mention, frustrating) situation I have ever personally encountered. |
|
|
|
Post by Angie on Apr 18, 2017 14:57:41 GMT -5
Side note, this is so frustrating to me, not only because of separation of church and state, but also because of the way some Christians (a few of whom I know/am related to) are downright fearful of "TEH MUSLIMS" (Terrorists! Sharia! Obama! Oh my!) infiltrating government and/or influencing policy with their terrible religion which, were they to succeed, we would all be forced to follow. But they can't see how they're wanting that very thing, only it's their religion. This may be the most hypocritical, ironic (and did I mention, frustrating) situation I have ever personally encountered. Oh yeah - "religious freedom" only applies if the religion in question is Christianity. Couple of cases in point: Years ago, a school board in Texas ended up having a majority of Buddhists elected. They wanted to institute a Buddhist prayer at school board meetings, and the Christians in the community lost their damned minds - but they see no problem at all with the vast majority of school boards (and even local government meetings) opening with a Christian prayer. And then there was the kerfluffle in Hamtramck, MI over a Muslim community center broadcasting calls to prayer -- loudly -- every day. Other residents threw a hissy fit because, again, we can't have this kind of thing if it's in service of any religion but our own. (I'm actually inclined to agree that these calls to prayer would be freaking annoying as hell - but far fewer people agree with me if I add that I think Christmas carols in every effing store I visit from October through December is just as annoying.) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2017 15:21:24 GMT -5
1) the calls to prayer are kind of cool for the first day or so, and then they start to drive you batshit. -- Cass, who has traveled in Egypt and Jordan
B) Christmas music starts to drive you batshit by Halloween these days. -- Cass, who is a grinch
III) Trump has been annoying...always. -- Cass, who is a hater
|
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Apr 18, 2017 18:53:35 GMT -5
Oh yeah - "religious freedom" only applies if the religion in question is Christianity. Couple of cases in point: Years ago, a school board in Texas ended up having a majority of Buddhists elected. They wanted to institute a Buddhist prayer at school board meetings, and the Christians in the community lost their damned minds - but they see no problem at all with the vast majority of school boards (and even local government meetings) opening with a Christian prayer. And then there was the kerfluffle in Hamtramck, MI over a Muslim community center broadcasting calls to prayer -- loudly -- every day. Other residents threw a hissy fit because, again, we can't have this kind of thing if it's in service of any religion but our own. (I'm actually inclined to agree that these calls to prayer would be freaking annoying as hell - but far fewer people agree with me if I add that I think Christmas carols in every effing store I visit from October through December is just as annoying.) It is annoying. I amuse myself by noting how no one else seems to notice the irony of playing "Silent Night" and "Frosty the Snowman" back to back. |
|
