On 12/25/10 12:26 AM, Wayne B wrote:
On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 13:42:04 -0500,
wrote:

Because tax breaks for churches support religion. That is the answer you
have to get.

However they support all religions equally. The founding fathers of
this great country were religious men for the most part and thought
that support and respect for religion was a good thing as long as no
one religion was favored over another. That's a fairly easy concept
to grasp isn't it?

Not to worry - the holidays will be over soon and you can take off
that uncomfortable Scrooge costume you've been wearing, the one that
seems to get your undergarments all in a knot.

Meanwhile, tis the season to be jolly...


A good number of the founding fathers of this country were deists who
had no use for organized religion and very little respect for it. While
they may have believed in a creator, they didn't believe in the
supernatural or in the "holiness" of holy books.

Ever read the Sermon on the Mount? Ever get deep enough into it to read
this:

"But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast
shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father
which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly."

Kind of flies in the face of organized religion's ungodly number of
churches in this country, eh? I mean, if one is supposed to pray in
private, why so many churches?

The only christian in this newsgroup is Tim. He's the only one here, so
far as I can tell, who has taken to heart the teachings of his savior.
Whatever I may think of his *organized* religion, I have great respect
for the personal deeds he undertakes on behalf of others. Many of the
others who proclaim their christianity are CINO's whose statements here
put them in the category of totally self-centered, selfish, "I've got
mine, screw you" types, and they're certainly not what their savior had
in mind. I do find it fascinating that those who most loudly proclaim
their christianity are the far-righties who by their statements here
obviously don't give a damn about their fellow man and his/her sufferings.

Oh, and it isn't a matter of "Scrooge," Wayne. I don't have the
slightest issue with the private celebration of the birth of the guy
many believe is their savior.

Have a happy and safe holiday, Wayne.

On 12/25/10 8:41 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
Merry Christmas
****face, hope you choke in public and nobody stops to help..


Written like the "true christian" you are.

On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 06:47:15 -0500, Harryk
wrote:

Oh, and it isn't a matter of "Scrooge," Wayne. I don't have the
slightest issue with the private celebration of the birth of the guy
many believe is their savior.


No reason for anyone to celebrate privately as long as they aren't
doing it with public resources.

Have a happy and safe holiday, Wayne.

Thank you, and you are certainly right about Tim.

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

On 12/25/10 12:26 AM, Wayne B wrote:
On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 13:42:04 -0500,
wrote:

Because tax breaks for churches support religion. That is the answer you
have to get.

However they support all religions equally. The founding fathers of
this great country were religious men for the most part and thought
that support and respect for religion was a good thing as long as no
one religion was favored over another. That's a fairly easy concept
to grasp isn't it?

Not to worry - the holidays will be over soon and you can take off
that uncomfortable Scrooge costume you've been wearing, the one that
seems to get your undergarments all in a knot.

Meanwhile, tis the season to be jolly...


A good number of the founding fathers of this country were deists who
had no use for organized religion and very little respect for it. While
they may have believed in a creator, they didn't believe in the
supernatural or in the "holiness" of holy books.

Ever read the Sermon on the Mount? Ever get deep enough into it to read
this:

"But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast
shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father
which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly."

Kind of flies in the face of organized religion's ungodly number of
churches in this country, eh? I mean, if one is supposed to pray in
private, why so many churches?

The only christian in this newsgroup is Tim. He's the only one here, so
far as I can tell, who has taken to heart the teachings of his savior.
Whatever I may think of his *organized* religion, I have great respect
for the personal deeds he undertakes on behalf of others. Many of the
others who proclaim their christianity are CINO's whose statements here
put them in the category of totally self-centered, selfish, "I've got
mine, screw you" types, and they're certainly not what their savior had
in mind. I do find it fascinating that those who most loudly proclaim
their christianity are the far-righties who by their statements here
obviously don't give a damn about their fellow man and his/her sufferings.

Oh, and it isn't a matter of "Scrooge," Wayne. I don't have the
slightest issue with the private celebration of the birth of the guy
many believe is their savior.

Have a happy and safe holiday, Wayne.

LOL, Harry telling the story of his life.. I know Tim, I talk to him a
lot and although he doesn't get involved here, he does not live under a
rock.. I guarantee he won't make a peep when I pass along to you that he
thinks you are a ****ing asshole too, he rarely bothers with you as he
knows you are a hypocrite and a lying sack of crap.. Well, he didn't use
those exact words, but you get the picture.... Merry Christmas
****face, hope you choke in public and nobody stops to help..

The spoofer is going berserk for a reason. Maybe he got butt ****ed by a
gay priest or something when he was a kid.

On 12/25/2010 8:53 AM, Wayne B wrote:
On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 06:47:15 -0500,
wrote:

Oh, and it isn't a matter of "Scrooge," Wayne. I don't have the
slightest issue with the private celebration of the birth of the guy
many believe is their savior.


No reason for anyone to celebrate privately as long as they aren't
doing it with public resources.

Have a happy and safe holiday, Wayne.

Thank you, and you are certainly right about Tim.



Maybe by "private celebration," he meant without "doing it with public
resources."

On Dec 24, 12:31*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 10:24:09 -0500, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

Preliminary OK for Ark tax breaks
Lexington Herald-Leader
Dec 21, 2010

FRANKFORT ? A state tourism board gave preliminary approval Monday for a
religious theme park to apply for up to $37 million in state tax incentives.

The six-member board voted unanimously to give preliminary approval to
the Ark Encounter park in Grant County.

Why are you so afraid of links?

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/12/2...nter-park-get-
preliminary.html

You mean like this one...

http://dip****conservatives.com/musl...-terrifies-tea...

Of course and like you, that cite would have no bias now would it,
D'Plume?

On 12/25/10 11:59 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 13:42:04 -0500,
wrote:

On 12/24/10 12:59 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 11:47:43 -0500,
wrote:

On 12/24/10 11:43 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 10:18:37 -0500,
wrote:

Preliminary OK for Ark tax breaks

Churches always get tax breaks, even in Maryland.

Yes they do, and they shouldn't, and an amusement park is not a church.

I am not sure what you are upset about
Churches get tax breaks and businesses that create jobs get tax
breaks.

Would they give Sea World the same tax break?

That is the question you have to ask.

Because tax breaks for churches support religion. That is the answer you
have to get.

But tax breaks for churches have been in the law since we had taxes.
In fact it has been the case since Europe had taxes before the
pilgrims came here. I doubt it will change any time soon.
The real question is whether this is a church tax break or a business
tax break.
I agree, when churches go into business they should have to follow the
same rules businesses have to follow but I bet if Sea World was
coming, they would get a tax break too.


The fact that churches get breaks from taxes doesn't make the practice
right.

On 12/25/10 12:04 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 14:27:37 -0500,
wrote:

Hell, man, there are floods every year on many parts of the earth. Why
would I dispute that there were floods in "biblical" times? But a flood
that covered the entire earth for 40 days, and that a bloke named Noah
built the ark of the old testament and housed a pair of every creature
on earth?

It is a good thing Noah didn't have room for the dinosaurs or we would
be up to our ass in velociraptors.

What? But...didn't Noah and the dinosaurs live at the same time? Are you
telling me The Flintstones is not based upon real life situations at
that time?

On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 14:30:46 -0500, I am Tosk
wrote:


Good, and why not.. After all we are a Christian country.... Merry
Christmas all.


if only that were true