On 10/16/13, 8:37 PM, Tim wrote:
On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 6:44:21 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 10/16/13, 7:05 AM, Tim wrote:

On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 5:35:43 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:

On 10/16/13, 1:31 AM, Tim wrote:



On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 8:50:59 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:







This is what us rightie-Christian-fundies do. If people are hungry we feed them regardless of who they are.















And you know, it seems that nobody accuses us of 'shoving' religion down their throats especially when they have their mouths full.























No religion accompanying the meals, eh?







I didn't say that. you did.







- - -







You're proselytizing the hungry, eh?



You didn't read the article.





Sure I did. My question stands.

And my answer is... 'no'

Now the point I'm making is I'd like to know why the furloughed gov't employees aren't flocking to the gov't programs for food? Because they're not available? or maybe it takes too long and too much red tape for assistance? When people are hungry they need fed. That's what churches do. feed people. Body first and soul second.

Prov. 22:9 Happy is the generous man, the one who feeds the poor.

James 2:14- 17 Dear brothers, what's the use of saying that you have faith and are Christians if you aren't proving it by helping others? Will that kind of faith save anyone? If you have a friend who is in need of food and clothing, and you say to him, "Well, good-bye and God bless you; stay warm and eat hearty," and then don't give him clothes or food, what good does that do? So you see, it isn't enough just to have faith. You must also do good to prove that you have it. Faith that doesn't show itself by good works is no faith at all--it is dead and useless.

I'm sure you'll try to find some spiritual trade-offs for food and clothing in there, Harry But there aren't any. So, now that you've read my questions, they stand as well.


Most food banks are not operated by government agencies. So long as
religion isn't piled on the plate with the food, I tip my hat to
religious organizations that feed the hungry.

On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 8:18:49 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 10/16/13, 8:37 PM, Tim wrote:

On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 6:44:21 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:

On 10/16/13, 7:05 AM, Tim wrote:



On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 5:35:43 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:



On 10/16/13, 1:31 AM, Tim wrote:







On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 8:50:59 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:















This is what us rightie-Christian-fundies do. If people are hungry we feed them regardless of who they are.































And you know, it seems that nobody accuses us of 'shoving' religion down their throats especially when they have their mouths full.















































No religion accompanying the meals, eh?















I didn't say that. you did.















- - -















You're proselytizing the hungry, eh?







You didn't read the article.











Sure I did. My question stands.



And my answer is... 'no'



Now the point I'm making is I'd like to know why the furloughed gov't employees aren't flocking to the gov't programs for food? Because they're not available? or maybe it takes too long and too much red tape for assistance? When people are hungry they need fed. That's what churches do. feed people. Body first and soul second.



Prov. 22:9 Happy is the generous man, the one who feeds the poor.



James 2:14- 17 Dear brothers, what's the use of saying that you have faith and are Christians if you aren't proving it by helping others? Will that kind of faith save anyone? If you have a friend who is in need of food and clothing, and you say to him, "Well, good-bye and God bless you; stay warm and eat hearty," and then don't give him clothes or food, what good does that do? So you see, it isn't enough just to have faith. You must also do good to prove that you have it. Faith that doesn't show itself by good works is no faith at all--it is dead and useless.



I'm sure you'll try to find some spiritual trade-offs for food and clothing in there, Harry But there aren't any. So, now that you've read my questions, they stand as well.





Most food banks are not operated by government agencies.

Well then, why not?



So long as

religion isn't piled on the plate with the food, I tip my hat to

religious organizations that feed the hungry.

You mean in the same way that if a church or religious institution is to be used as a polling place they should cover up any crosses or icons?

On 10/16/13, 9:36 PM, Tim wrote:
On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 8:18:49 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 10/16/13, 8:37 PM, Tim wrote:

On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 6:44:21 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:

On 10/16/13, 7:05 AM, Tim wrote:



On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 5:35:43 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:



On 10/16/13, 1:31 AM, Tim wrote:







On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 8:50:59 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:















This is what us rightie-Christian-fundies do. If people are hungry we feed them regardless of who they are.































And you know, it seems that nobody accuses us of 'shoving' religion down their throats especially when they have their mouths full.















































No religion accompanying the meals, eh?















I didn't say that. you did.















- - -















You're proselytizing the hungry, eh?







You didn't read the article.











Sure I did. My question stands.



And my answer is... 'no'



Now the point I'm making is I'd like to know why the furloughed gov't employees aren't flocking to the gov't programs for food? Because they're not available? or maybe it takes too long and too much red tape for assistance? When people are hungry they need fed. That's what churches do. feed people. Body first and soul second.



Prov. 22:9 Happy is the generous man, the one who feeds the poor.



James 2:14- 17 Dear brothers, what's the use of saying that you have faith and are Christians if you aren't proving it by helping others? Will that kind of faith save anyone? If you have a friend who is in need of food and clothing, and you say to him, "Well, good-bye and God bless you; stay warm and eat hearty," and then don't give him clothes or food, what good does that do? So you see, it isn't enough just to have faith. You must also do good to prove that you have it. Faith that doesn't show itself by good works is no faith at all--it is dead and useless.



I'm sure you'll try to find some spiritual trade-offs for food and clothing in there, Harry But there aren't any. So, now that you've read my questions, they stand as well.





Most food banks are not operated by government agencies.

Well then, why not?



So long as

religion isn't piled on the plate with the food, I tip my hat to

religious organizations that feed the hungry.

You mean in the same way that if a church or religious institution is to be used as a polling place they should cover up any crosses or icons?



I am absolutely opposed to any religious building being used as a
polling place, and I fought against that in Florida.

On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 9:03:45 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 10/16/13, 9:36 PM, Tim wrote:

On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 8:18:49 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:

On 10/16/13, 8:37 PM, Tim wrote:



On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 6:44:21 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:



On 10/16/13, 7:05 AM, Tim wrote:







On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 5:35:43 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:







On 10/16/13, 1:31 AM, Tim wrote:















On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 8:50:59 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:































This is what us rightie-Christian-fundies do. If people are hungry we feed them regardless of who they are.































































And you know, it seems that nobody accuses us of 'shoving' religion down their throats especially when they have their mouths full.































































































No religion accompanying the meals, eh?































I didn't say that. you did.































- - -































You're proselytizing the hungry, eh?















You didn't read the article.























Sure I did. My question stands.







And my answer is... 'no'







Now the point I'm making is I'd like to know why the furloughed gov't employees aren't flocking to the gov't programs for food? Because they're not available? or maybe it takes too long and too much red tape for assistance? When people are hungry they need fed. That's what churches do. feed people. Body first and soul second.







Prov. 22:9 Happy is the generous man, the one who feeds the poor.







James 2:14- 17 Dear brothers, what's the use of saying that you have faith and are Christians if you aren't proving it by helping others? Will that kind of faith save anyone? If you have a friend who is in need of food and clothing, and you say to him, "Well, good-bye and God bless you; stay warm and eat hearty," and then don't give him clothes or food, what good does that do? So you see, it isn't enough just to have faith. You must also do good to prove that you have it. Faith that doesn't show itself by good works is no faith at all--it is dead and useless.







I'm sure you'll try to find some spiritual trade-offs for food and clothing in there, Harry But there aren't any. So, now that you've read my questions, they stand as well.











Most food banks are not operated by government agencies.



Well then, why not?







So long as



religion isn't piled on the plate with the food, I tip my hat to



religious organizations that feed the hungry.



You mean in the same way that if a church or religious institution is to be used as a polling place they should cover up any crosses or icons?







I am absolutely opposed to any religious building being used as a

polling place, and I fought against that in Florida.

Now that's being a champion of a cause, I guess. So why should church's and religious institutions are 'dangerous' then why should they be allowed to feed and cloth those who are without? That is the governments job, isn't it?

BTW, my questions still stand.

On 10/16/13, 10:39 PM, Tim wrote:
On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 9:03:45 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 10/16/13, 9:36 PM, Tim wrote:




You mean in the same way that if a church or religious institution is to be used as a polling place they should cover up any crosses or icons?







I am absolutely opposed to any religious building being used as a

polling place, and I fought against that in Florida.

Now that's being a champion of a cause, I guess. So why should church's and religious institutions are 'dangerous' then why should they be allowed to feed and cloth those who are without? That is the governments job, isn't it?

BTW, my questions still stand.


I didn't say religious polling places were "dangerous," you did. But I
do believe they are completely inappropriate as polling places for
several reasons, including my feeling that voting at a church is a
violation of the Second Amendment.

On 10/17/2013 7:42 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 10/16/13, 10:39 PM, Tim wrote:
On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 9:03:45 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 10/16/13, 9:36 PM, Tim wrote:




You mean in the same way that if a church or religious institution
is to be used as a polling place they should cover up any crosses or
icons?







I am absolutely opposed to any religious building being used as a

polling place, and I fought against that in Florida.

Now that's being a champion of a cause, I guess. So why should
church's and religious institutions are 'dangerous' then why should
they be allowed to feed and cloth those who are without? That is the
governments job, isn't it?

BTW, my questions still stand.


I didn't say religious polling places were "dangerous," you did. But I
do believe they are completely inappropriate as polling places for
several reasons, including my feeling that voting at a church is a
violation of the Second Amendment.

Oh poo poo Harry. You have no problem violating things, fer instance IRS
rules, the trust of those with whom you do business, etc.

On Thursday, October 17, 2013 7:42:46 AM UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote:

I didn't say religious polling places were "dangerous," you did. But I

do believe they are completely inappropriate as polling places for

several reasons, including my feeling that voting at a church is a

violation of the Second Amendment.

Krause telling us what is " inappropriate"...too much ****.

**** off Krause...go squeeze your pustules, you ****ing slug.

On Thursday, October 17, 2013 6:42:46 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:

I didn't say religious polling places were "dangerous," you did. But I

do believe they are completely inappropriate as polling places for

several reasons, including my feeling that voting at a church is a

violation of the Second Amendment.

In other words.."Dangerous"

On 10/17/13, 6:11 PM, Tim wrote:
On Thursday, October 17, 2013 6:42:46 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:

I didn't say religious polling places were "dangerous," you did. But I

do believe they are completely inappropriate as polling places for

several reasons, including my feeling that voting at a church is a

violation of the Second Amendment.

In other words.."Dangerous"


Why are you looking for "other words" when I provided the exact word:
*inappropriate* ?

Why are you equating the word "inappropriate" with the word "dangerous"?

inappropriate:

Not appropriate; unsuitable to the particular case; unfitting, improper.

dangerous:

Fraught with danger or risk; causing or occasioning danger; perilous,
hazardous, risky, unsafe.

Do you think these words are synonyms?

On Thursday, October 17, 2013 6:42:46 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:

I didn't say religious polling places were "dangerous," you did. But I

do believe they are completely inappropriate as polling places for

several reasons, including my feeling that voting at a church is a

violation of the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment?

How can voting at a church or religios facility violate the right of and for a US citizen to lawfully bear arms?