• 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!

About Televangelism

EMNofSeattle said:
The Catholic Church is not corrupt to the core.
Click to expand...

The Catholic Church is corrupt in every single last meaning of that word.

To it's core.

Irony.

Yay.

And I notice you're not answering for what you lied about. Clearly you're not Jesuit-trained.
 
Hari Seldon said:
It sure as hell is a subsidy. Towns have offered tax breaks to bring businesses in and it hasn't worked out, a major backlash in my area for giving away the store to bring in a certain business. R/E Taxes are how we fund our public schools, roads, local government etc. with the churches benefiting. No reason they can't kick in a little even if its a reduced rate. This has nothing to do with party, just economics. Funny you mention a foreclosure notice. A local Jewish congregation built a really nice and new synagogue in our town. They over estimated their congregation and ultimately turned it over to the town which now uses it for municipal offices, town hall, court...
Click to expand...

It sure as hell is not a subsidy, unless you’re a commie who views all money as inherently property of the state.

It has everything to do with party. Every single person who demands taxing religious institutions is an atheist liberal. This is not a bipartisan idea. It’s the furthest fringe of the left.

And if you charged churches a reduced rate you’d just come back later with the same “subsidy” horse**** you’re spreading now.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
The Catholic Church is corrupt in every single last meaning of that word.

To it's core.

Irony.

Yay.

And I notice you're not answering for what you lied about. Clearly you're not Jesuit-trained.
Click to expand...

I lied about nothing.

You haven’t even made an argument other then an unfounded assertion.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
The Catholic Church is not corrupt to the core.
Click to expand...

So the Pope didn't recall Cardinal Pell to Rome to 'sort out their finances' at a crucial point during the Police investigation into allegations of paedophilia and corruption?

It must have been a mass hallucination on the part of the Australians.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Those licenses are only for commercial solicitors. That law cannot be legally enforced against political and religious solicitors.
Click to expand...
I've heard of the political exception, but not of a religious exception. But if so, they would seem to be a travesty IMO. I'm no fan of either exception. But I suspect, at least where I'm at, that if allowed the excepted solicitors still would have to abide by regulations? Hopefully.

I once was doing political work canvassing a nearby suburb for a candidate that was not supported by this suburb's local officials, and I was unknowingly on the police chief's block. He had his local cops roust me, but I was able to hold my ground since my organization had us all registered as deputy registrars for the county election board.

They couldn't stand in my way as a registrar, so they ticketed and towed my car right in front of me for parking too close to a cross-walk (B.S., of course). Politics is tough around here.

Anyway, my house's former owner put the "non-soliciting" tag on my house front outside door. On the very rare occasion that someone shows-up knocking, I simply silently point to it from behind my storm door. Only once did a solicitor stay past that, so I asked them for their solicitor's license and their I.D. They had no idea what I was talking about.

I love people. I hate unsolicited callers or knockers.
 
Chomsky said:
I've heard of the political exception, but not of a religious exception. But if so, they would seem to be a travesty IMO. I'm no fan of either exception. But I suspect, at least where I'm at, that if allowed the excepted solicitors still would have to abide by regulations? Hopefully.

I once was doing political work canvassing a nearby suburb for a candidate that was not supported by this suburb's local officials, and I was unknowingly on the police chief's block. He had his local cops roust me, but I was able to hold my ground since my organization had us all registered as deputy registrars for the county election board.

They couldn't stand in my way as a registrar, so they ticketed and towed my car right in front of me for parking too close to a cross-walk (B.S., of course). Politics is tough around here.

Anyway, my house's former owner put the "non-soliciting" tag on my house front outside door. On the very rare occasion that someone shows-up knocking, I simply silently point to it from behind my storm door. Only once did a solicitor stay past that, so I asked them for their solicitor's license and their I.D. They had no idea what I was talking about.

I love people. I hate unsolicited callers or knockers.
Click to expand...

Regardless of your position on soliciting, the Supreme Court has ruled multiple times that first amendment speech cannot be regulated by these types of ordinances. The Jehova’s witnesses sued a town in Indiana like 20 years ago and the Supreme Court ruled that the regulatory apparatus on solicitors could Not apply to first amendment non commercial speech.

I used to volunteer on political campaigns, and I simply ignored no soliciting signs. If the cops tried to stop me I’d scream in estatic joy over the upcoming payday I’m getting.

Really people who get upset at religious or political solicitation are just selfish anti-social people. I love it when they come to my door.
 
NWO_Spook said:
So the Pope didn't recall Cardinal Pell to Rome to 'sort out their finances' at a crucial point during the Police investigation into allegations of paedophilia and corruption?

It must have been a mass hallucination on the part of the Australians.
Click to expand...

Well Cardinal Pell was the victim of terrible persecution.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
No, I would not like to buy the bridge you bought
Click to expand...

Well, you were gullible enough to buy into the persecution story, so I thought you'd fall for that one (btw, it's common knowledge among rational individuals that one cannot simply buy a bridge). Have you been caught before?

In my country, only the lunatic fringe promoted the persecution fantasy.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Regardless of your position on soliciting, the Supreme Court has ruled multiple times that first amendment speech cannot be regulated by these types of ordinances. The Jehova’s witnesses sued a town in Indiana like 20 years ago and the Supreme Court ruled that the regulatory apparatus on solicitors could Not apply to first amendment non commercial speech.

I used to volunteer on political campaigns, and I simply ignored no soliciting signs. If the cops tried to stop me I’d scream in estatic joy over the upcoming payday I’m getting.

Really people who get upset at religious or political solicitation are just selfish anti-social people. I love it when they come to my door.
Click to expand...
As happens too often between us, I couldn't disagree more here. I value my privacy. I do not welcome unsolicited solicitors. And quite honestly, most would likely describe me as social & extroverted. But I respect a man's privacy, and expect him to do the same for me. So, we very much disagree.
 
Rumpel said:
What is your impression: Is Televangelism there to spread the Gospel - or to make money - or both?

I have not had much experience with Televangelism.
I think you here in the US have more.
What is your experience?
Click to expand...

Poisoning the minds of Americans since Billy Sunday

The Jonesboro Church Wars

Jimmy Swaggart gets caught with prostitutes in a seedy motel and cries crocodile tears on national TV for sympathy.

Top Ten Religious Scandals

If there was a humane way to deny these criminals the air they breathe, it might be possible to talk me into supporting it.
 
Chomsky said:
As happens too often between us, I couldn't disagree more here. I value my privacy. I do not welcome unsolicited solicitors. And quite honestly, most would likely describe me as social & extroverted. But I respect a man's privacy, and expect him to do the same for me. So, we very much disagree.
Click to expand...

I don’t think knocking on someone’s door to talk to them is a violation of their privacy unless it’s like a stalking thing or something.

I understand politely asking people to leave if you don’t want to talk. What I cannot understand is people who get upset that someone tries to talk to them.
 
Chomsky said:
I can assure you those who's doors you knock-on believe it is the worst way. No one likes unsolicited solicitors, particularly those that proselytize.

I'm glad my local government requires solicitors to register and be regulated with stiff controls, including purchasing a solicitor's license they must present upon contact with the citizens or authorities. The licenses are strictly regulated, to the point of only being issued rarely and for extremely limited circumstances. Residents can place government-provided stickers to our front doors, proclaiming unlicensed solicitation is illegal and subject to law enforcement response.

I didn't know all this before I moved in, but now I love it! I literally go years without a solicitor knocking on my door, and that's the way I like. I highly recommend to those that don't have regs like this, they should try to get them. They're a Godsend.
Click to expand...

I'm sure those in Noah's time probably felt the same way...until the door of the ark shut closed and it started to rain...and rain...and rain...
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Those licenses are only for commercial solicitors. That law cannot be legally enforced against political and religious solicitors.
Click to expand...

True...we took it all the way to the Supreme Court...
 
Elvira said:
I'm sure those in Noah's time probably felt the same way...until the door of the ark shut closed and it started to rain...and rain...and rain...
Click to expand...

OF course, that's just a story.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
No, that’s not a subsidy. .
Click to expand...

Of course it's a subsidy. If there's a fire, they don't put it out themselves. If there's a shooting in the church, the pastor doesn't arrest the shooter. Most churches I've been in have running water, supplied by the city. The parishioners and the pastors use the public roads to get to and from the church.

The rest of us have to kick in extra so religious people can save money when they meet to worship Harry Potter. Or Jesus. Or whatever storybook character catches their fancy. It's ridiculous imo.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
I don’t think knocking on someone’s door to talk to them is a violation of their privacy unless it’s like a stalking thing or something.

I understand politely asking people to leave if you don’t want to talk. What I cannot understand is people who get upset that someone tries to talk to them.
Click to expand...

When the same group of churchies knocks on your door every single weekend, and refuse to honor your request that they never darken your door again, I think you get to answer the door dressed any way you want.

And because I have a video doorbell, I'll know next time they show up and I'll be prepared.

Jeff Hannibal Lecter.jpg
 
When Jehovah's Witnesses come to my door, I am always friendly to them - and they are friendly to me.
 
Elvira said:
I'm sure those in Noah's time probably felt the same way...until the door of the ark shut closed and it started to rain...and rain...and rain...
Click to expand...
Oh please, Elvira. No one wants to hear someone's proselytizing, particularly someone disturbing the peace of their abode to do it. Actions like this is not being considerate of others and their privacy.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
I don’t think knocking on someone’s door to talk to them is a violation of their privacy unless it’s like a stalking thing or something.

I understand politely asking people to leave if you don’t want to talk. What I cannot understand is people who get upset that someone tries to talk to them.
Click to expand...
I assure you, no one wants their privacy offended by someone disturbing them at their private residence with unsolicited proselytizing. You'd have to be competently tone deaf, to believe otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom