On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 15:14:13 -0800 (PST), Jack
wrote:

On Jan 15, 5:54*pm, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:31:43 -0500, HK wrote:

Wonder where the stats came from. Sounds about right though. Libs are so
into themselves that nobody else matters. Perfect examples can be found
right here.

conservatives give their pittances to their churches. *most liberals
dont have churches. we believe in govt organziations to take care of
the poor rather than lettting them starve in the streets like the
right believes

What an idiot you are. Churches are some of the largest institutes
that take care of the destitute. Just one of thousands of examples:

http://www.olivergospelmission.org/

and churches basically are large machines for making money and bribing
politicians to prevent justice


You can be sure that it's conservatives and their donations that fund
this highly successful organization. After all, as you say, liberals
don't have a church and don't believe in taking care of their fellow
man themselves. They'd rather have some faceless government agency do
it for them.

i guess you've never head of the red cross.

you give your money to your useless churches we give ours to the
useful red cross

bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 15:14:13 -0800 (PST), Jack
wrote:

On Jan 15, 5:54 pm, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:31:43 -0500, HK wrote:

Wonder where the stats came from. Sounds about right though. Libs are so
into themselves that nobody else matters. Perfect examples can be found
right here.
conservatives give their pittances to their churches. most liberals
dont have churches. we believe in govt organziations to take care of
the poor rather than lettting them starve in the streets like the
right believes
What an idiot you are. Churches are some of the largest institutes
that take care of the destitute. Just one of thousands of examples:

http://www.olivergospelmission.org/

and churches basically are large machines for making money and bribing
politicians to prevent justice

You can be sure that it's conservatives and their donations that fund
this highly successful organization. After all, as you say, liberals
don't have a church and don't believe in taking care of their fellow
man themselves. They'd rather have some faceless government agency do
it for them.

i guess you've never head of the red cross.

you give your money to your useless churches we give ours to the
useful red cross

No one said you didn't give any money to charity, just that you give
very little of your money to any charity.

On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:51:39 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

bpuharic wrote:


you give your money to your useless churches we give ours to the
useful red cross

No one said you didn't give any money to charity, just that you give
very little of your money to any charity.

a church isnt a charity no matter how the right defines it. it's a
parasite

bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:51:39 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

bpuharic wrote:

you give your money to your useless churches we give ours to the
useful red cross

No one said you didn't give any money to charity, just that you give
very little of your money to any charity.

a church isnt a charity no matter how the right defines it. it's a
parasite



You do realize you are entertaining an ID spoofer...none of these Harry
Krause posts are from me. You might want to look at the headers.

On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 19:01:13 -0500, HK wrote:

bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:51:39 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

bpuharic wrote:

you give your money to your useless churches we give ours to the
useful red cross

No one said you didn't give any money to charity, just that you give
very little of your money to any charity.

a church isnt a charity no matter how the right defines it. it's a
parasite



You do realize you are entertaining an ID spoofer...none of these Harry
Krause posts are from me. You might want to look at the headers.

yeah i know. but it's so much fun bitchslapping the trolls

bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 19:01:13 -0500, HK wrote:

bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:51:39 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

bpuharic wrote:

you give your money to your useless churches we give ours to the
useful red cross

No one said you didn't give any money to charity, just that you give
very little of your money to any charity.
a church isnt a charity no matter how the right defines it. it's a
parasite


You do realize you are entertaining an ID spoofer...none of these Harry
Krause posts are from me. You might want to look at the headers.

yeah i know. but it's so much fun bitchslapping the trolls

Well, then, slap away.

bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 19:01:13 -0500, HK wrote:

bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:51:39 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

bpuharic wrote:

you give your money to your useless churches we give ours to the
useful red cross

No one said you didn't give any money to charity, just that you give
very little of your money to any charity.
a church isnt a charity no matter how the right defines it. it's a
parasite


You do realize you are entertaining an ID spoofer...none of these Harry
Krause posts are from me. You might want to look at the headers.

yeah i know. but it's so much fun bitchslapping the trolls

You couldn't bitch slap Donnie. You are a step below
Don

On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 19:14:05 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 19:01:13 -0500, HK wrote:

bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:51:39 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

bpuharic wrote:

you give your money to your useless churches we give ours to the
useful red cross

No one said you didn't give any money to charity, just that you give
very little of your money to any charity.
a church isnt a charity no matter how the right defines it. it's a
parasite


You do realize you are entertaining an ID spoofer...none of these Harry
Krause posts are from me. You might want to look at the headers.

yeah i know. but it's so much fun bitchslapping the trolls

You couldn't bitch slap Donnie. You are a step below
Don

put your tongue back in your mouth. here comes another slap...

On Jan 15, 6:46*pm, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 15:14:13 -0800 (PST), Jack
wrote:



On Jan 15, 5:54*pm, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:31:43 -0500, HK wrote:

Wonder where the stats came from. Sounds about right though. Libs are so
into themselves that nobody else matters. Perfect examples can be found
right here.

conservatives give their pittances to their churches. *most liberals
dont have churches. we believe in govt organziations to take care of
the poor rather than lettting them starve in the streets like the
right believes

What an idiot you are. *Churches are some of the largest institutes
that take care of the destitute. *Just one of thousands of examples:

http://www.olivergospelmission.org/

and churches basically are large machines for making money and bribing
politicians to prevent justice



You can be sure that it's conservatives and their donations that fund
this highly successful organization. *After all, as you say, liberals
don't have a church and don't believe in taking care of their fellow
man themselves. *They'd rather have some faceless government agency do
it for them.

i guess you've never head of the red cross.

you give your money to your useless churches we give ours to the
useful red cross

But just a post before this you wrote: "most liberals dont have
churches. we believe in govt organziations to take care of the
poor..."

Now you're holding up the Red Cross as your organization? You do
realize that the Red Cross isn't a government organization, right?
From their own website: "the Red Cross is an independent, volunteer-
led organization, financially supported by voluntary public
contributions and cost-reimbursement charges." NOT a government
organization.

So what is it, idiot? Government organzations like you first said, or
the Red Cross after you changed your story? You do realize that
conservatives and *churches* donate to the Red Cross, right? It's NOT
a liberal organization, idiot.

This has to be donnie. No one else can present as this stupid.

On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:19:44 -0800 (PST), Jack
wrote:

On Jan 15, 6:46*pm, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 15:14:13 -0800 (PST), Jack
wrote:


you give your money to your useless churches we give ours to the
useful red cross

But just a post before this you wrote: "most liberals dont have
churches. we believe in govt organziations to take care of the
poor..."

Now you're holding up the Red Cross as your organization? You do
realize that the Red Cross isn't a government organization, right?

uh...it's a charity. do you know what the thread is about?


So what is it, idiot? Government organzations like you first said, or
the Red Cross after you changed your story? You do realize that
conservatives and *churches* donate to the Red Cross, right? It's NOT
a liberal organization, idiot.

This has to be donnie. No one else can present as this stupid.

you guys think churches do something beside bribe politicians. we give
our money where it counts