• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

President Obama's seven states of grief over gay marriage

Yeah, so keep the state out of OUR CHURCH and OUR organizations!

Not a problem. Tell your church to pay taxes and quit asking for federal $'s for your programs. Or at least when receiving federal $'s quit using the handing out of those funds to evangelize those receiving your federally funded or federally deductible "charity" work.
 
Last edited:
I think we need to tax religious organizations. I guess such logic is a "war on religion." Oh wells.

Only if they are "for-profit"...
 
I, as a Catholic, don't want the government in my Church, and I agree the Church should forgo taking federal funds if it does not want to be told what to do. I have no objection to that. I have a problem with the government going into our schools, adoption agencies, into our Church in general, and threatening us telling us we must hand out birth control in our colleges, and we must give health insurance to our church employees. Why should the govt have any say in such things? Separation of church and state, remember?
 
I, as a Catholic, don't want the government in my Church, and I agree the Church should forgo taking federal funds if it does not want to be told what to do. I have no objection to that. I have a problem with the government going into our schools, adoption agencies, into our Church in general, and threatening us telling us we must hand out birth control in our colleges, and we must give health insurance to our church employees. Why should the govt have any say in such things? Separation of church and state, remember?

If the church acts as a functionary of the government (education, adoption, healthcare), then they should abide by government requirements for such.
 
Call it what you want, but you're full of it if you think it's an irrational fear given what has already happened to religious organizations all over - adoption centers, shelters, food pantries, etc. from the government umbrellaed under this administration!

I know what has happened and there is a big difference between keeping religion out of government and forcing religions to perform a certain religious rite for someone that they don't approve of.

Don't believe me? How's this?

Kentucky Church Bans Interracial Couples - ABC News

Do you have any evidence, specifically dealing with either church attendance or religious rites or something of this sort, that shows that the courts would even be likely to force churches to wed same sex couples or any couples that they don't approve of for that matter? That is what JOPs are for, to wed those who can't or don't want to be married by a church/religious organization.

You are being naive or ignorant to believe that legal marriage for same sex couples would force churches to wed same sex couples. It is against the Constitution to do so. As I said, the very most that the government could do is prevent all religious people from signing the legal marriage license at all. This is highly unlikely to happen however since it means a lot more that the government would have to do.

Oh, and the stuff you mentioned dealt with a church receiving government money to help run those things and still not being willing to meet government regulations in doing so and they were state laws, not federal.
 
^^ Since you either take SS or will, I think govt employees should start dictating your every move. They should have a say in what you spend any govt $ received on - what you eat, what you drink. If you're overweight, stay off the soda. (I actually WISH the govt would do that sometimes, since it's frankly embarrassing how overweight America is.) It's much easier to do that to a religious group as a whole than it is individuals, isn't it? Slippery slope, huh?
 
I know what has happened and there is a big difference between keeping religion out of government and forcing religions to perform a certain religious rite for someone that they don't approve of.

Don't believe me? How's this?

Kentucky Church Bans Interracial Couples - ABC News

Do you have any evidence, specifically dealing with either church attendance or religious rites or something of this sort, that shows that the courts would even be likely to force churches to wed same sex couples or any couples that they don't approve of for that matter? That is what JOPs are for, to wed those who can't or don't want to be married by a church/religious organization.

You are being naive or ignorant to believe that legal marriage for same sex couples would force churches to wed same sex couples. It is against the Constitution to do so. As I said, the very most that the government could do is prevent all religious people from signing the legal marriage license at all. This is highly unlikely to happen however since it means a lot more that the government would have to do.

Oh, and the stuff you mentioned dealt with a church receiving government money to help run those things and still not being willing to meet government regulations in doing so and they were state laws, not federal.

You do know that the constitution can be and has been amended, right? You're not a Tea Partier, are you?
 
^^ Since you either take SS or will, I think govt employees should start dictating your every move. They should have a say in what you spend any govt $ received on - what you eat, what you drink. If you're overweight, stay off the soda. (I actually WISH the govt would do that sometimes, since it's frankly embarrassing how overweight America is.) It's much easier to do that to a religious group as a whole than it is individuals, isn't it? Slippery slope, huh?

The difference being is that I paid taxes. The church did not. When I get money from the government, it's a return of investment. When the church gets money from the government, it's a handout.

So you'll have a hard time making the logic work to support your position and accordingly cannot reach the slippery slope argument.
 
Sigh, I'm not interested in debating my personal views especially with people who dismiss them as naive or ignorant. Nobody here is going to change my mind; I use these forums 90% of the time to express my thoughts. Whatever you think of my views and political opinions, you're clearly the ones who are way out of touch with how breadbasket America believes. See the original post again, especially if you steamrolled over it in the first place in order to hurriedly dispatch your naysaying sentiments.
 
You do know that the constitution can be and has been amended, right? You're not a Tea Partier, are you?

Do you really think that it will be as a way to force churches to wed people they disagree with? I don't. I wouldn't support such a thing either. From what I have seen, many of the most recent proposed Federal Amendments are from the anti-ssm people or those who want to define life as beginning at conception. There is not any news on any Amendment to force churches to perform a religious rite for anyone. Pretty sure most people see that as a blatant slap in the face to freedom of religion.
 
Sigh, I'm not interested in debating my personal views especially with people who dismiss them as naive or ignorant. Nobody here is going to change my mind; I use these forums 90% of the time to express my thoughts. Whatever you think of my views and political opinions, you're clearly the ones who are way out of touch with how breadbasket America believes. See the original post again, especially if you steamrolled over it in the first place in order to hurriedly dispatch your naysaying sentiments.

It's not naive or ignorant, just not logically consistent.
 
The difference being is that I paid taxes. The church did not. When I get money from the government, it's a return of investment. When the church gets money from the government, it's a handout.

So you'll have a hard time making the logic work to support your position and accordingly cannot reach the slippery slope argument.

How do I know you pay taxes? I'll have to see your W-2 before I'll take that to the bank... *Again*, I support the taxing of religious institutions. 100%.
 
How do I know you pay taxes? I'll have to see your W-2 before I'll take that to the bank... *Again*, I support the taxing of religious institutions. 100%.

But until they are taxed, they don't get the same standard.

And as an American citizen, I'm taxed on everything. A church, is not.
 
But until they are taxed, they don't get the same standard.

And as an American citizen, I'm taxed on everything. A church, is not.

Again, how do I know that? Not. all. Americans. pay. taxes = the point you keep casually glossing over. Why don't you answer this: why is this administration nosing their way into our Church for $ when no others in the past have?

*Yawn,* this has been amusing, but this woman from one of the 7 States of Grief has to get ready for Mass. Sorry to give all you far lefties so much grief from Ohio. Prepare yourselves because you've seen nothing yet. I don't know about the other 5 States of Grief, but guaranteeed, Ohio and Florida are going to rock your boat right out of the water! :mrgreen: (Note: I didn't say Holy water. Contrary to liberal popular belief, we don't own the U.S.)
 
Who's doing that? It's more like the other way around. Everyone who was interviewed among the patrons of the food pantry that was shut down, that I read about in the Columbus Dispatch, liked having the OPTION to pray and took no offense to be asked. How is that forcing religion on anyone? Give examples, please, of what you mean by your statement.

What food pantry is this that you are talking about? The only thing I can find about a food pantry being shutdown written in the Columbus Dispatch involved one that had fire, safety, and health code issues and had nothing to do with prayer.
 
What food pantry is this that you are talking about? The only thing I can find about a food pantry being shutdown written in the Columbus Dispatch involved one that had fire, safety, and health code issues and had nothing to do with prayer.

I recall that it was located in Indiana. It was a few weeks ago - really shouldn't be that hard to find since it was a national story. Note, also, that that story is one of many in an explosion of like cases.
 
I recall that it was located in Indiana. It was a few weeks ago - really shouldn't be that hard to find since it was a national story. Note, also, that that story is one of many in an explosion of like cases.
Another tale you can't document....no surprise.
 
Also, dabateman, I'm not really following you on why paying taxes should exempt you from the government scrutiny that you apparently feel we all should enjoy. Let's assume you pay your fair share of taxes. Do you use federal or state resources of any kind? Have you passed over a bridge lately, drove down a state highway? Jogged through a public park? Are you planning on giving your SS back to the govt? Because those are govt resources, not your's, and I think if you use them, by your own logic, you need the govt on your tail. If you're overweight, drop the Twinkies. I think you should live on a healthy diet and exercise if you don't do so already. If you're unhealthy, or you're older and have health issues, I, as a taxpayer, don't want to pay for your medical bills under Obamacare. I don't want MY insurance rates going up because of YOU. Hey, I pay taxes. It's my money. You're taking it, so I should have a say. If not me, there should be govt appointees licensed to come into your home. You get how this is a slippery slope?
 
This must be it....

The food pantry issue arose after an inspection last winter by Gleaners Food Bank of Indiana, which runs the program for the Indiana Department of Health and ensures compliance with federal guidelines. Inspectors noted that pantry staff members asked recipients whether they wanted to pray. They reported that to state officials, who determined the practice was a violation of the federal rule. "The guidelines are no religious (activity) or teaching can be required for providing services," Gleaners spokeswoman Carrie Fulbright said.
Because many food pantries have ties to churches, the state suggested to faith-based operations that they offer brochures or establish a separate room for prayer while complying with regulations.
Brock bristled at the call to stop the prayers, but he worried about having enough food to feed the 300 or so people who show up each week for help. The federal aid accounts for about 15% of the food distributed by the pantry, Brock said.
Brock said the pantry workers weren't violating the rules because no one was ever required to pray. "We still give food to people," he said, "even when they say they don't want to pray."
Officials from Gleaners, the state and the U.S. Department of Agriculture have been working to find a solution that meets the requirements of the law and Brock's commitment to his faith. Brock said he "is strongly leaning toward" signing a compromise that would allow his program to again receive food items through the federal program if it made the offer to pray after recipients receive their food, instead of before.
Food pantry's prayers violate federal rules

Paul Brock, founder of Community Provisions of Jackson County, met a Wednesday night deadline for an agreement that will allow the food pantry to once again receive free food items through the federal program. State officials removed the pantry from the program this month after Brock refused to end the long-standing practice in which volunteers asked if they could pray with the recipients.
"I'm glad this is finally over," Brock said Thursday. "I need to get back to work."
Indiana food bank reaches compromise on prayer
 
Last edited:
Another tale you can't document....no surprise.

WTF, seriously? You really can't be that lazy that you can't type a few characters to find an article.... Indiana Food Pantry's Prayers Against Federal Regulations, But Compromise Might Be On Horizon

S. Indiana pantry loses food over prayer invitations - WSBT-TV

Now, tell me, what are all the tales I can't document since I've been posting here for a total of 2 days, and not mentioned any other new stories? Dumb@ss, gawd....
 
WTF, seriously? You really can't be that lazy that you can't type a few characters to find an article.... Indiana Food Pantry's Prayers Against Federal Regulations, But Compromise Might Be On Horizon

S. Indiana pantry loses food over prayer invitations - WSBT-TV

Now, tell me, what are all the tales I can't document since I've been posting here for a total of 2 days, and not mentioned any other new stories? Dumb@ss, gawd....
No, do you think that you can keep making claims without backing them up and telling others to find your stories?

I found it and posted it BEFORE you did. As far as your past claims, this is the second one you have made that I have personally commented on where you did not back it up, the first was your claim of posting a list of problems you had with Obama that no one could counter.


As far as this bogus non-story, the food bank is getting FEDERAL DOLLARS, if they can't FOLLOW THE FEDERAL RULES, then they should not get the DOLLARS

f'n DUH.
 
Last edited:
WOW, give this boy a cookie! He can do an internet search! Now, *crosses fingers*, can you grasp the cusp of the issue? *Not holding my breath for this one.*
Like I said, I found your non-story for you that you couldn't be bothered to find when you made your pointless, empty claims.
 
Again, how do I know that? Not. all. Americans. pay. taxes = the point you keep casually glossing over.

False. Every single American pays taxes unless they consume absolutely nothing. You pay taxes on EVERYTHING you buy. You are asking me to prove that water is wet. :roll: If you don't know water is wet or that all Americans pay taxes, you might as well pray for guidance to an educational facility. Or better yet, go buy yourself a soda and see if you aren't taxed.

Why don't you answer this: why is this administration nosing their way into our Church for $ when no others in the past have?

No, in previous administrations it was the Church nosing their way into the state. Turn about is just fair play.

*Yawn,* this has been amusing, but this woman from one of the 7 States of Grief has to get ready for Mass. Sorry to give all you far lefties so much grief from Ohio. Prepare yourselves because you've seen nothing yet. I don't know about the other 5 States of Grief, but guaranteeed, Ohio and Florida are going to rock your boat right out of the water! :mrgreen: (Note: I didn't say Holy water. Contrary to liberal popular belief, we don't own the U.S.)

Far lefties? If you think my argument is far left, you have no idea what the left contains.
 
Back
Top Bottom