Oh, and as far as what you are thinking? Obviously, it’s “let’s bash Der Trihs”, since you haven’t done anything else in this thread. And looking back at your posting history, bashing me seems to be almost all you do when we happen to post in the same thread.
So, they broke “the Law”. When can we expect to read that their tax exempt status has been revoked oh mighty “ex-spurt”?
Mind, the LDS church can or cannot defend itself as it wills, it needs or wants no help or hindrance from me. But comments like yours are as asinine as was your military “service” and your self proclaimed expertness.
Oh! You noticed! And looked up my posting history on a website dedicated to fighting ignorance? Tell ya anything? What else can I say, I’m lazy and bashing is just too easy.
I was thinking that I need to get off this computer and get the lawnmower fixed because the grass is starting to get high. Paranoid enough, Der?
How about answering the insinuation that you can read “Jerkoff Jones’” (or anyone else’s) mind?
It’s not “spreading” the fault in the sense of reducing the responsibility of the prime actors. Either here or there, people who personally do violence are always responsible for their own actions.
That doesn’t mean that a moral liability can’t also attach to instigators or provocateurs from afar.
This is false. Non-profit organizations, including churches, can engage in a great deal of political speech and activism without any threat to losing their status. The biggest prohibition that 501(c)(3) orgs face is the prohibition of endorsing or seeming to endorse individual candidates. The LDS did no such thing (Prop 8 was an issue, not a candidate).
These organizations are also allowed to lobby in order to influence legislation (i.e. Prop 8), but may only spend a very specific portion of their resources. This is left purposefully vague by the IRS (they use the term “substantial part of its activities”).
Cite?
joke
Of course, it makes sense for us to spend more time on the critique of our own countrymen in each case. It’s our duty: we have more influence on our own American culture, more chance of averting future stupidities local to ourselves. Also, it’s our self-interest: regardless of who started any given round of stupidity, it’s the actions of our countrymen that may be seen as reflecting us, and for which we may take the retaliatory heat.
ENOUGH. The personal commentary in this thread is geting out of hand. Stick to arguing the issue (Pator Jones’ responsibility in the unrest in Afghanistan) and stop with this kind of ridiculoussness:
Pastor Jones is a douche, but what he did is legal and should stay that way.
That there are religious fanatics in another part of the world is not his problem nor his fault.
OH HELL YEAH!!
As long as it’s legal.
So is phelp"s bullshit.
I’ve lived my whole life (untill the last few years) with this exact attitude. Got me a whole hell of a fuckin’ shit lickin’ cool ass destiny to look forward to.
I live in the same part of the world as this fuck-shit and if I didn’t have control of my facilities I’d burn his sorry fuckin’ ass right down to the ground.
Yeah, I guess I’d be one of the religious fanatics you refer to, but on this side of the world. I guess the difference is I’m not willing to take a life in my Gods name.
You can’t see beyond 2 feet in front of you? You can’t see what your actions cause? Fuck Off And Die!!!
And I’m Fuckin’ sick of all of it.
(not directed at you personally SITNAM but FUCK ME RUNNIN’ !!! You just happened to say what I needed to hear.)
I’d just like to say that I am surprised by this type of moderation in the PIt, but I FULLY SUPPORT IT. Even though I was one of the offendeing parties. If this is something we can come to expect in the future as SOP, I think it will improve discussions greatly. Even in the Pit.
I figured that since I have seeked to have you benefit from my observations in the past, which have been more corrective in nature, I thought I should commend you as the opportunity arose.
I really do think this is a great call. Well done.
Out of curiosity: is this a one-off ruling on this topic, or are personal commentary/ad hominem statements no longer appropriate for the Pit?
Good question. If it’s a one-off ruling it sucks. If it’s laying down the law that if there’s a discussion going on, that posts that simply insult the other poster are off limits, I like it. Of course, one could always start another pit thread where the subject is so-snd-so’s profound stupidity, crazy, etc.
Since US and California tax laws are way beyond my expertise I won’t comment on how much (if any) money/ time/activities a church can do without losing tax exempt status. I won’t even comment on whether it was Joe and Mary Q. Mormon doing the “politicking” or the LDS itself.
My point is that, if you’re figthing for what you think is good and you think it is really important, you would risk losing tax exempt status gladly particularly if it is a specific bad-loser move.
The rules:
“The BBQ Pit is the forum for rants about the outside world or quarrels between posters - often the first turns into the second. . . .”
Sorry, I thought we were in GD. I was reading the GD equivalent of this thread and this one at the same time and got confused. Nevermind. :smack:
My military service was “asinine?” What the fuck?
I’ll let it slide this time, but if you do it again, I’m bannin’ ya.
The bifurcation confused me too, so I decided to stay at the kids’ table.
Well whatya know…you do something brilliant and it turns out that it was a mistake. 