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.

In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

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.

Sure it is.

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.

In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

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.

Why are you against jobs? Aren't union guys going to be building and
maintaining the amusement park?

On 12/24/10 2:05 PM, BAR wrote:
In articlexpmdnRVz56ThdInQnZ2dnUVZ_uKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

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.

Why are you against jobs? Aren't union guys going to be building and
maintaining the amusement park?

I thought, when I read your response, "Is he really *that*
simple-minded? Naw...he couldn't be."

On reflection, I think you are that simple-minded.

On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 13:42:04 -0500, Harryk
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...

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 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.

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 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.