Church builds $1 million mansion for Wright

[Gan]

Trinity United Church of Christ is building Barack Obama's controversial former pastor a million-dollar Tinley Park home complete with an elevator, whirlpool, butler's pantry, circular driveway and four-car garage, building plans show.

The four-bedroom home being built for the Rev. Jeremiah Wright is in the Odyssey Club neighborhood, which boasts some of Tinley Park's largest homes and a mix of town homes. It backs up to the Odyssey Country Club and golf course.

» Click to enlarge image
http://media1.suntimes.com/multimedia/032908wrighthouse.jpg_20080329_02_26_42_3-116-165.imageContent (http://javascript<b></b>:dc_popup_win('http://www.suntimes.com/business/867661,032908wrighthouse.fullimage', 'fullimage', 'toolbar=no,location=no,directories=no,status=no,m enubar=no,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,width=650,hei ght=650'))

Construction continues on the $1 million Tinley Park home Rev. Jeremiah Wright will move into after having it purchased by Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.

(Joseph P. Meier/STNG)


The mansion under construction is estimated to cost $1 million, a building permit shows. It will also feature a large family room with a fireplace and bar, a rubberized exercise room and a spare room for a future theater or swimming pool, building plans show.

Trinity United Church of Christ, 400 W. 95th Street, Chicago, is listed as the landowner on the permit.

The Rev. J. Bennett Guess, communications director for the United Church of Christ national office, said local congregations decide how to spend their own money. At Trinity, pastors spend cash based on the contributions to their church, he said.

"It is customary and appropriate in many Christian denominations, including the United Church of Christ, for local churches to offer housing provisions for retiring clergy, especially in cases where pastors have served long-term pastorates," Guess said in a statement.

"We support efforts by our 5,700 local churches to ensure that retiring pastors and spouses have continuing housing, adequate pension and health care, as an expression of our continuing appreciation for their years of service. Each local UCC congregation is free to honor a retiring pastor in ways it feels most appropriate to address the needs of that clergyperson's circumstances."

Wright, who has retired from preaching, could not be reached for comment. A business manager with the South Side church did not return a phone call seeking comment.

Wright has made national news as video clips of his controversial remarks surfaced, including one in which the pastor shouts "God damn America" for its treatment of minorities. Obama has denounced Wright's controversial statements.

http://www.suntimes.com/business/867629,CST-NWS-wright29.article#
___________________________________________

Amazing. I wonder how many poor people that would feed?

oh and

God Damn America - indeed.

[Parkbandit]

Eh.. I don't think this is such an indictment of Wright or Trinity.. but more for organized religions.. especially the big ones.

The time is WELL overdue to start taxing these organizations like the real businesses they are.

[Clove]

Eh.. I don't think this is such an indictment of Wright or Trinity.. but more for organized religions.. especially the big ones.

The time is WELL overdue to start taxing these organizations like the real businesses they are.LOL. I think our CEO would be pissed if all he got was a million dollar mansion.

[ElanthianSiren]

The time is WELL overdue to start taxing these organizations like the real businesses they are.

x2.

LR Hubbard pretty much sums the arguments for taxing religion well.

[Gan]

Eh.. I don't think this is such an indictment of Wright or Trinity.. but more for organized religions.. especially the big ones.

The time is WELL overdue to start taxing these organizations like the real businesses they are.

Yea, my disdain for organized religion is pretty well stated here - so I didnt even bother getting on that soapbox again.

[Lyonis]

LOL. I think our CEO would be pissed if all he got was a million dollar mansion.

I'm pretty sure your CEO does a bit more than duping donations out of the working poor :) To be fair, politics coming across the pulpit and shady leaders go across both aisles.

I think this is gonna hurt Obama bad especially since he is running on a "I have no experience but I'm a fucking awesome guy with character!" type platform. Even though this type of financial dealing is probably shared by the other candidates spiritual leaders.

Man, the 527 commericals are going to be entertaining that's for sure.

[CrystalTears]

Most churches spend stoopid amounts of money on construction and embellishment of the church. Exactly how does this particular one affect Obama?

I really hate politics these days.

[Clove]

I'm pretty sure your CEO does a bit more than duping donations out of the working poor :) To be fair, politics coming across the pulpit and shady leaders go across both aisles.

I think this is gonna hurt Obama bad especially since he is running on a "I have no experience but I'm a fucking awesome guy with character!" type platform. Even though this type of financial dealing is probably shared by the other candidates spiritual leaders.

Man, the 527 commericals are going to be entertaining that's for sure.Well he has as much experience as Hillary (probably more in terms of legislating if you consider his State experience). If you want experience, vote McCain. That being said, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't tax churches.

[thefarmer]

I'd settle for more open/public and accounting. Inaccurate reporting (possibly covering up shady spending) should result in the ability for the members to sue the board/leader, similiar to how public companies can work.

A amount goes to the pastor/preacher leader's pay.
B amount goes to petty cash for the leader.
C goes to church overhead.
D goes to charitable donations.
etc etc.

That way the members can decide if they should continue to donate (any or less) money to the church.

I'm not sure taxing them the same as businesses should be done, but some form of taxation for the larger churches should be done.

[TheEschaton]

Hey, at least after our priests retire from touching little kids, they retire to like, the attics of old churches.

-TheE-

[Lord Nelek]

The time is WELL overdue to start taxing these organizations like the real businesses they are.

QFT

I heard somewhere that an Atlanta church woman, I forget her name, made 95 million last year.

These televangelists are doing it for a profit, nothing more.

[Parkbandit]

Well he has as much experience as Hillary (probably more in terms of legislating if you consider his State experience). If you want experience, vote McCain. That being said, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't tax churches.

Obama was First Lady? WHA!?

And sweet Jesus.. did you see McCain on Letterman? The guy should have changed parties back in 2000 when he was so angry at Republicans. He REALLY instills great confidence in me whenever he speaks economics. 'I think this is, I know this is.. alot of smart people say this is serious..'

{insert facepalm here}

[Parkbandit]

QFT

I heard somewhere that an Atlanta church woman, I forget her name, made 95 million last year.

These televangelists are doing it for a profit, nothing more.


Religion has swindled more money from stupid people than anything else in the history of man.

"Hey.. this alien came here.. made this planet.. and now we worship him! Give us money to help spread the word!"

[Clove]

Obama was First Lady? WHA!?First Lady is an elected official with duties and responsibilities? WHA?!? I mean I'm sure she knows where the bathroom is in the White House and all, so it'll cut down on orientation- but no I don't consider her First Lady time experience.

[Parkbandit]

First Lady is an elected official with duties and responsibilities? WHA?!? I mean I'm sure she knows where the bathroom is in the White House and all, so it'll cut down on orientation- but no I don't consider her First Lady time experience.


Hey jackass.. if First Lady wasn't a real responsible position.. WHY WOULD SNIPERS BE SHOOTING AT HER!?

Apology accepted.

[Clove]

Hey jackass.. if First Lady wasn't a real responsible position.. WHY WOULD SNIPERS BE SHOOTING AT HER!?

Apology accepted.Because she's Hillary?

[Warriorbird]

Churches should definitely be taxed. With that said... a million dollar home (which isn't what it once represented) can be thought of as a sort of advertising for a church... when churches are judged based on pastor status.

[Parkbandit]

Churches should definitely be taxed. With that said... a million dollar home (which isn't what it once represented) can be thought of as a sort of advertising for a church... when churches are judged based on pastor status.

"Join our church! With your kind donations, we can put our pastor in this mansion!"

And let's not sugar coat anything.. this mansion is an abomination and a perfect display of what is wrong with organized religion.

[Warriorbird]

I don't particularly like it. I think that even if they were taxed these churches would be doing similar things though. From an other side of the aisle coin... you should see the homes the Falwells live in around here.

[Clove]

"Join our church! With your kind donations, we can put our pastor in this mansion!"

And let's not sugar coat anything.. this mansion is an abomination and a perfect display of what is wrong with organized religion.An abomination? Because they bought their pastor a nice house? Seriously, lay off the cool-aid.

[Gan]

what would jesus do?

[Warriorbird]

Be a Communist.

[Clove]

Apply for a Pastoral position at Trinity.

[Warriorbird]

Get deported.

[Clove]

Honestly. Other than the tax issue, why should anyone (let alone non-members) give a flying fuck how much they spend for their property?

[Gan]

Honestly. Other than the tax issue, why should anyone (let alone non-members) give a flying fuck how much they spend for their property?

Because a church of christ church buying a million dollar home kind of goes against a lot of what a church of christ church is supposed to stand for. Now if it were a country club.. sure. But not a church. Especially when alternative modest housing could be purchased for a lot less. It also doesnt consider that along with the house, [probably] comes a hefty retirement pension as well as a housing allowance that will pay for the considerable utility bills and upkeep.

If Pastor Wright were buying this with his own money - I wouldnt have an issue - because its his money.

Think of all the financial assistance that could be given back out to the community, to missions, etc. with the difference between the cost of this home vs. the cost of something more modest.

I'm suprised that you dont understand that.

[Clove]

I'm suprised that you dont understand that.I'm surprised you care. It's not my church. The church can stand for whatever it likes and buy whatever property its congregation approves of. I guess I'm strange like that. I don't tell other congregations what they should or shouldn't do. Not my problem.

Think of all the financial assistance that could be given back out to the community, to missions, etc. with the difference between the cost of this home vs. the cost of something more modest.Think of the assistance they could provide if they didn't buy a house at all? It's their budget and their decision. I'm willing to bet 10x that amount went into their community, however.

[Gan]

I'm surprised you care. It's not my church. The church can stand for whatever it likes and buy whatever property its congregation approves of. I guess I'm strange like that. I don't tell other congregations what they should or shouldn't do. Not my problem.
Think of the assistance they could provide if they didn't buy a house at all? It's their budget and their decision. I'm willing to bet 10x that amount went into their community, however.

I care because even though I'm not a fan of organized religion I still associate as being a Christian. When others of the same faith act like an idiot - I feel it reflects badly on me, so I let my voice be heard.

I care because this church specifically is using money that could go to missions that my church also contributes to - thats money they wont be getting - thus money that affects the premise and goal of said mission(s).

And lastly I care because that church specifically is acting more like a business giving their retiring leader a golden parachute. Because of it acting like a business I think it should be taxed like a business. Therefore, because its not taxed, it has a negative impact on the economy both locally and nationally which affects me in some miniscule way. Magnify that impact if and when this type of behavior is repeated across the US.

Yes, I care. And its not because I'm a racist or an Obama basher. ;)

[Warriorbird]

What's your opinion on megachurches/the "Prosperity" gospel in general then? They're pretty widespread. They make Trinity look small in some cases.

[Clove]

Yes, I care. And its not because I'm a racist or an Obama basher. ;)Yeah but it's not like we're giving press to (or having a conversation about) any of the hundreds of other congregations that do the same thing. If we're talking about taxing churches, I'm all for it. Tax them all. I don't want anyone (but the congregation) of my church telling it how to spend its money and I won't do the same to others.

They bought a house for a million dollars it's a big congregation, I doubt it meant any of their charities suffered for it and I don't think it's fair to assume such. Heck 20 years ago my church built a million dollar basketball court (and nobody closed the soup kitchen).

The story was written for your disapproval, but it seems we rarely ever ask, why should I disapprove?

[Gan]

Yeah but it's not like we're giving press to (or having a conversation about) any of the hundreds of other congregations that do the same thing. If we're talking about taxing churches, I'm all for it. Tax them all. I don't want anyone (but the congregation) of my church telling it how to spend its money and I won't do the same to others.
If the media decides to throw up an article depicting irresponsible church spending and I'll post it up for conversation. For now, this church happens to be under the microscope, so - it becomes a talking point. ;)



They bought a house for a million dollars it's a big congregation, I doubt it meant any of their charities suffered for it and I don't think it's fair to assume such. I dont think its fair to assume that charities couldnt use the money they decided to spend on a high luxury house. :)



Heck 20 years ago my church built a million dollar basketball court (and nobody closed the soup kitchen).
Apples/oranges.. .and I would disagree with that as well as label it as irresponsible spending on behalf of your church.



The story was written for your disapproval, but it seems we rarely ever ask, why should I disapprove?
:puzzled:

[Gan]

And to pre-answer the next talking point:

Median price of homes in the US for 2007: $313,000.00

http://www.census.gov/const/uspriceann.pdf

[Warriorbird]

Average home price in Chicago is about 600 grand.

[Clove]

I dont think its fair to assume that charities couldnt use the money they decided to spend on a high luxury house. :)Of course they could, so what? You can criticize any dollar not spent on a charity using that argument.



Apples/oranges.. .and I would disagree with that as well as label it as irresponsible spending on behalf of your church.


:puzzled:And the congregation would have told you (in a strictly Christian fashion) to fuck off, it's not your church or your decision.

[TheEschaton]

I think the Antichrist may very well turn out to be one of those pastors of the "Prosperity Gospel".

-TheE-

[Keller]

Clove wins yet another thread.

Keep it up and I might become an official fanboy!

[Gan]

What's your opinion on megachurches/the "Prosperity" gospel in general then? They're pretty widespread. They make Trinity look small in some cases.

The only allowance I give for mega-churches is that they can spend money on large places to meet and worship if they have the congregation demand to build it. IE - 2nd Baptist Houston, Lakewood Church - Houston... etc.

The rest of the offerings need to go to the outreach programs that the Church represents. IMO

[Clove]

And to pre-answer the next talking point:

Median price of homes in the US for 2007: $313,000.00

http://www.census.gov/const/uspriceann.pdfThink of how much a charity could do with 313k.

[Clove]

Clove wins yet another thread.

Keep it up and I might become an official fanboy!I don't know, it looks like I might have fucked up on point 9 of my 10 point oil pricing analysis. But personally I think point 10 made up for it.

[Keller]

The only allowance I give for mega-churches is that they can spend money on large places to meet and worship if they have the congregation demand to build it. IE - 2nd Baptist Houston, Lakewood Church - Houston... etc.

The rest of the offerings need to go to the outreach programs that the Church represents. IMO

What about ornate churches?

Size, sure. Why not just build a large warehouse and put out folding chairs?

[Gan]

Of course they could, so what? You can criticize any dollar not spent on a charity using that argument.
If money isnt spent on charity or outreach/missions as a church - then what is it to be spent on?



And the congregation would have told you (in a strictly Christian fashion) to fuck off, it's not your church or your decision.
And you think that will stifle criticism? And btw, if the Church belongs to the association where my church belongs to then by proxy it is my church, because they're led by the same organization. ;)

[Parkbandit]

Average home price in Chicago is about 600 grand.


Really? According to City-data.com, the average price of a house in 2004 (which you would expect the price to be higher than it is today.. ):

2004 (3rd Quarter) ACCRA Average House Price: $427,451


Like I said in my first post.. I don't think this is an indictment on Obama (even though he's donated plenty to this church) but more of organized religion in general. I just wonder if Clove would be so adamant about it being none of our business if we weren't talking about Rev. Wright. :)

[Gan]

What about ornate churches?
Again, a waste of money. Put the money where its needed.



Size, sure. Why not just build a large warehouse and put out folding chairs?
Why not? Unless the reason why you go to church is to be seen in a fancy building by other people...

[Warriorbird]

600 grand was a quote from a friend.

http://activerain.com/blogsview/382515/Chicago-Neighborhood-Average-Home

Says 525k for the neighborhood here.

[CrystalTears]

If you want to get butts in the seats, you make the seats and the atmosphere pleasant. :D

[Keller]

Again, a waste of money. Put the money where its needed.


Why not? Unless the reason why you go to church is to be seen in a fancy building by other people...

I think it is.

One of my majors in undergrad was religion, and therefore, I will never ever believe in god again.

But I will select a large, wealthy congregation in DC near my home to attend. So long as I can stand the congregation, I will become active in the church because it's one of the best networking opportunites available outside of the professional context.

[Gan]

Think of how much a charity could do with 313k.

Seriously???


Average home price in Chicago is about 600 grand.

Check your source.

The 2007 numbers for Chicago, IL... ~270k

http://www.realtor.org/Research.nsf/files/MSAPRICESF.pdf/$FILE/MSAPRICESF.pdf

[Clove]

If money isnt spent on charity or outreach/missions as a church - then what is it to be spent on?Big houses.

And you think that will stifle criticism?Of course you have a right to an opinion. It's just not really any our business. This is an eloquent example of why we have religious tolerance and freedom of religion. You don't have to participate in a church that doesn't share your beliefs or priorities.

And btw, if the Church belongs to the association where my church belongs to then by proxy it is my church, because they're led by the same organization. ;)You runnin' with the UCC now?

[Clove]

If you want to get butts in the seats, you make the seats and the atmosphere pleasant. :DThat's why my church has lapdance night.

[Keller]

I just wonder if Clove would be so adamant about it being none of our business if we weren't talking about Rev. Wright. :)

As a former semi-conservative, he just values free choice. If a church wants to spend its money on prostitutes for a massive gang-bang, I'm sure he'd say the same thing. Except he might pre-order the videotape.

[CrystalTears]

That's why my church has lapdance night.
Just because the stripper wears a cross doesn't make it a church.

[Warriorbird]

Lincoln Park's different than the full metropolitan mind you.

[Keller]

That's why my church has lapdance night.

Note: My post, below this one, was made prior to seeing this post! I'm just figuring Clove out!

[CrystalTears]

As a former semi-conservative, he just values free choice. If a church wants to spend its money on prostitutes for a massive gang-bang, I'm sure he'd say the same thing. Except he might pre-order the videotape.
I r want name of church now plz thx.

[Gan]

If you want to get butts in the seats, you make the seats and the atmosphere pleasant. :D
So much for going for the message. And that also throws out good old tent revivals. You've just identified one of the major reasons why I hate organized religion. Instead of church, just call it the sunday morning show...


I think it is.

One of my majors in undergrad was religion, and therefore, I will never ever believe in god again.

But I will select a large, wealthy congregation in DC near my home to attend. So long as I can stand the congregation, I will become active in the church because it's one of the best networking opportunites available outside of the professional context.
My hypocrisy only goes so far. :(

[Warriorbird]

I'd get religious for that sort of church.

[Clove]

As a former semi-conservative, he just values free choice. If a church wants to spend its money on prostitutes for a massive gang-bang, I'm sure he'd say the same thing. Except he might pre-order the videotape.Blu-ray or no deal. I like to see every wrinkle.

[Keller]

My hypocrisy only goes so far. :(

I can appreciate that.

[Clove]

Like I said in my first post.. I don't think this is an indictment on Obama (even though he's donated plenty to this church) but more of organized religion in general. I just wonder if Clove would be so adamant about it being none of our business if we weren't talking about Rev. Wright. :)Me neither, but I'm sure it will get paraded as one. And dude, if you had any idea how many churches there were in my town; well it wouldn't be difficult to conclude why I think we ought to tax them. But I don't really think what a church does or doesn't do with its donations is anyone's business but its congregation. Don't like it? Don't join it.

[Gan]

Big houses.
Evidentally.


Of course you have a right to an opinion. It's just not really any our business.
It is if the church claims its a Christian church. I'm a Christian too - and I have a problem with it.



This is an eloquent example of why we have religious tolerance and freedom of religion.
So I guess you're ok with Muslims not standing up and taking ownership of the Muslim religion when Muslim extremists perform acts of terrorism in the name of Islam? Its about ownership and responsibility. Another example, would you as a fraternity brother not stand up and denounce acts of irresponsibility by a brother chapter? Its not your chapter, why should you care?



You don't have to participate in a church that doesn't share your beliefs or priorities.
You're right, I dont. I do have to associate with belonging to the same belief structure, organization, and structure though. The link is still there, just not direct.


You runnin' with the UCC now?
I could be. ;)

[Clove]

So much for going for the message. And that also throws out good old tent revivals.You can get strippers in a tent, they just can't have piercings because their nipples get too hard.

[Gan]

So I guess you're ok with Muslims not standing up and taking ownership of the Muslim religion when Muslim extremists perform acts of terrorism in the name of Islam? Its about ownership and responsibility. Another example, would you as a fraternity brother not stand up and denounce acts of irresponsibility by a brother chapter? Its not your chapter, why should you care?


Let me be clear here before there is an invasion of obtuseness.

I'm NOT equating buying a million dollar home as the same as bombing innocent people in the name of Islam. I'm talking about the behavior of certain members of a group being called out by other members of the same group (group being defined in general sense or in direct relation sense) for acts of irresponsibility.

If the muslim example clouds your perspective, consider the fraternity perspective. The jist I'm getting at is that people of the same association need to, and should stand up and let others of the same association know if/when they feel they are acting against the best interests of the organization or irresponsible.

You see it all the time when other members of the same organization (like a political party) condemn the behavior of one of their own when that behavior crosses the line.

[Parkbandit]

600 grand was a quote from a friend.

http://activerain.com/blogsview/382515/Chicago-Neighborhood-Average-Home

Says 525k for the neighborhood here.

We were talking about average home price in Chicago.. not a specific neighborhood. I'm sure the average price in Chaval outside of Tampa is 5x the real average price of a home in the Tampabay area.

[Clove]

It is if the church claims its a Christian church. I'm a Christian too - and I have a problem with it.Well then denounce their Christianity if it means that much to you. What I see is a congregation spending their own money.

So I guess you're ok with Muslims not standing up and taking ownership of the Muslim religion when Muslim extremists perform acts of terrorism in the name of Islam?Sure. And if a UCC church commits an act of terrorism I'll be down on them. But this was a legal purchase of property for a church leader. Not blowing up a building. I don't really feel any responsibility to represent over that.

And I don't as long as they're exercising their right to assemble and worship legally. Lots of organizations call themselves Christians and most of them bear little resemblance to each other in behavior. I disagree with the restrictive tenets of the the more strict sects, but it's not my business to tell them what to believe. I disagree with Catholics (majorly). I disagree with Mormons (majorly). I disagree with JW's (majorly). But all of them consider themselves Christians and there isn't a damn thing I can do about it but say "no they're not". I don't think "well they call themselves Christians too" is a blanket license to tell others how to spend their money.

You're right, I dont. I do have to associate with belonging to the same belief structure, organization, and structure though. The link is still there, just not direct.And it's exactly this sort of disagreement (and sense of authority) between factions of Christianity that colonized the United States in the first place- and madated religious tolerance.

[Parkbandit]

Me neither, but I'm sure it will get paraded as one. And dude, if you had any idea how many churches there were in my town; well it wouldn't be difficult to conclude why I think we ought to tax them. But I don't really think what a church does or doesn't do with its donations is anyone's business but its congregation. Don't like it? Don't join it.


:rofl: Clearwater, FL is pretty much owned by Scientology.. all TAX FREE because this guy was a genius and suckered people into thinking his fiction was a religion.

If I knew then what I know now.. I would have opened up my own church.

[Warriorbird]

Robert Heinlein apparently told him to do it as a joke to sell more books. I wonder what he thought about it later.

I loved this bit


Scientologists contributing to the project are given a number of benefits depending on the level of their contributions, including "gold validation pins" and "Super Power rings", "exclusive membership to the Key Contributor Lounge in the new Mecca building created specially for these stellar contributors", and fee reductions or priority status for Super Power courses.[14]

[Gan]

Take the Bakers (Jim and Tammy Faye)
I had a huge problem with the 24k gold plated water fixtures in the bathrooms of their huge mansion - purchased with the funds donated from their followers in the name of religion. And voice that opinion whenever the conversation came up - be it to my church leaders or anyone else who happened to strike up that particular conversation with me.

I think if a church stands for worship and aid to its community then it should do just that. Churches sponsor ministries, outreach programs, shelter programs, etc. Thats what they do. I dont have a problem with a church having a huge building for worship - but when you fill that building with elaborate, expensive, and useless forms of idolatry that represent a trade off for the benefit of the community they are trying to be assistant to - then I have a problem. Thats why I see the purchase of a million dollar home (fully 700k plus higher than the average home price in that area) for a resigning pastor, then I view that as irresponsible. And because the church happens to affiliate itself with the same religion as I do, then I feel its my duty as a member of that organization to speak out against that kind of behavior.

If others agree with me, so be it. If not, so be it. If my opinion seems to be in the minority then perhaps thats an indicator that I belong to the wrong organization.

[Warriorbird]

I just want my Super Power ring.

[Celephais]

I wonder how much the Vatican cost... yes, the whole city.

[Daniel]

I wonder how much the Vatican cost... yes, the whole city.

Winner.

I wonder if anyone has the numbers on how much TCC puts into the community. It's a serious question, as I don't know and would be interested myself.

[Clove]

Take the Bakers (Jim and Tammy Faye)
I had a huge problem with the 24k gold plated water fixtures in the bathrooms of their huge mansion - purchased with the funds donated from their followers in the name of religion. And voice that opinion whenever the conversation came up - be it to my church leaders or anyone else who happened to strike up that particular conversation with me.Right. I just don't think it's news or for the general population to approve of. And hey, gold is great for plumbing fixtures- never corrodes. As for being a member of the church (or its chapter, congress, sect what have you) all anyone has EVER been able to do is... leave. If you piss off your chapter bad enough, they drop you from affiliation.

[mgoddess]

The time is WELL overdue to start taxing these organizations like the real businesses they are.

I shudder when I think about my church having to pay even more money than they do already...

Our main temple is located in a 100-year old, 3-story building in Joliet, IL (about an hour S/SW of Chicago). The boiler is very old and has been needing a $20,000 replacement job for a couple of years now, the toilets are 50+ years old, the plumbing & electrical circuits are all in need of repairs, etc. etc. (we've had many sewer and non-sewer leaks into our main shrine room). And yet, we're consistently $3k in the hole, every month, with bills piling up (*just* Temple bills). Our priests do NOT get paid, so they have to have outside jobs (our chief priest has been laid off multiple times), and many of our priests have debts up to their ears in health care (don't get me started on that, ugh).

I'm not saying taxing is a *bad* thing. I'm just saying that not ALL churches out there are the mega, spend all our money on our retiring pastor's million-dollar houses type places. If any sort of taxation is implemented, it should be a sliding scale... perhaps the amount and type of donations (comparative to how many people donated and how many people are in the church) should be taken into account when determining the tax?

[Celephais]

The problem is that they've brainwashed their congregation into thinking their only salvation is to continue dumping money into church coffers. The whole thing is based on the principle of faith or damnation... to a lot of people why on earth would they think it was worth risking their eternal souls because they don't know better.

[Clove]

If any sort of taxation is implemented, it should be a sliding scale... perhaps the amount and type of donations (comparative to how many people donated and how many people are in the church) should be taken into account when determining the tax?Why? If the little hippy church can't make ends meet, they go under like any other business. :D Seriously, if they can't pay taxes, why should the community carry their expense (in the form of higher taxes for the rest of us)?

[mgoddess]

If any sort of taxation is implemented, it should be a sliding scale... perhaps the amount and type of donations (comparative to how many people donated and how many people are in the church) should be taken into account when determining the tax?


Why? If the little hippy church can't make ends meet, they go under like any other business. :D Seriously, if they can't pay taxes, why should the community carry their expense (in the form of higher taxes for the rest of us)?

I'm not saying don't tax the church... just tax them less because they're a smaller church receiving fewer donations from fewer people.

And if they really want to implement it, they can implement higher taxes on the church community instead of every one... so the church members who aren't donating get higher taxes (compared to non-church members getting higher taxes).

*mutters something about capitalistic bullshit*

[Some Rogue]

So then we can start taxing all charities and stop giving deductions to people for charitable donations too?

[Parkbandit]

I'm not saying don't tax the church... just tax them less because they're a smaller church receiving fewer donations from fewer people.

And if they really want to implement it, they can implement higher taxes on the church community instead of every one... so the church members who aren't donating get higher taxes (compared to non-church members getting higher taxes).

*mutters something about capitalistic bullshit*

So if my company receives less customers this year.. can I get some tax breaks on the business property?

A Church is a business and should be treated exactly like every other business.

[Gan]

I wonder how much the Vatican cost... yes, the whole city.


Good LORD dont get me started on THAT soapbox.

I bet if you smelted all the gold found in Catholic Churches (and in the Vatican) worldwide you could feed a 3rd world country for a year.

[Clove]

So then we can start taxing all charities and stop giving deductions to people for charitable donations too?I don't see any reason why a charitable organization shouldn't pay at least, property tax. We can stop allowing deductions for charitable contributions, if we want to discourage charitable donations. I don't see what one has to do with the other, however.

[Parkbandit]

Good LORD dont get me started on THAT soapbox.

I bet if you smelted all the gold found in Catholic Churches (and in the Vatican) worldwide you could feed a 3rd world country for a year.

"A" 3rd world country?

"A" year?

LOL.. talk about your understatements.

[Clove]

Good LORD dont get me started on THAT soapbox.

I bet if you smelted all the gold found in Catholic Churches (and in the Vatican) worldwide you could feed a 3rd world country for a year.Naw, they'd glut the market.

[mgoddess]

You know, I give up... I'm going to just keep my little Socialistic dreams to myself.

*grumble*

[Parkbandit]

You know, I give up... I'm going to just keep my little Socialistic dreams to myself.

*grumble*

There are many other socialists here... and they are easy to find.

[Latrinsorm]

It is if the church claims its a Christian church. I'm a Christian too - and I have a problem with it.So Christianity according to Ganalon in review: Ostracizing someone for being weird - ok! A church spending money on a more expensive than usual house - WTF NO!!!!!!!!!!

[Keller]

There are many other socialists here... and they are easy to find.

There is only one ParkTroll... and he's impossible to miss. :welcome:

[Gan]

So Christianity according to Ganalon in review: Ostracizing someone for being weird - ok! A church spending money on a more expensive than usual house - WTF NO!!!!!!!!!!

No worse than you being a Christian and being gay. ;)

[Latrinsorm]

What is that even supposed to mean?

[Hulkein]

My hypocrisy only goes so far. :(

Tombstone... Although I think Doc might say "My hypocrisy goes only so far." Great movie.

[Daniel]

What is that even supposed to mean?

That Ganalon has a poor understanding of theology?

[Gan]

What is that even supposed to mean?

Thats my Christianity according to Latrin response.

[Gan]

That Ganalon has a poor understanding of theology?

Afterall, I only majored in Economics... not miracles.

[Gan]

Tombstone... Although I think Doc might say "My hypocrisy goes only so far." Great movie.

:)

+18 pts.

[Lyonis]

Most churches spend stoopid amounts of money on construction and embellishment of the church. Exactly how does this particular one affect Obama?

Just my opinion but I feel that everyone that is going to figure out Hilary is shady has already done so. A similar story about her just wouldn't be that damaging. Doesn't really do much knocking someone down that's already on their knees.

Now Obama comes across as the shining light, the new guy different than his peers, the savior of our political mess. A knock on his moral character seems like it would be far more devastating because it's really his selling point.



I really hate politics these days.

A wise man once told me, "You might as well laugh about it, if not you're gonna cry."

[Lyonis]

Tombstone... Although I think Doc might say "My hypocrisy goes only so far." Great movie.

I think it's, "My hypocrisy knows no bounds". And agreed, great movie.

I agree with Clove in the sense that our first amendment rights should protect these people to worship how they see fit. It's also well within my rights to think they're being swindled for donating to pastor's Benz as well as thinking those on the pulpit are crooks.

On a personal note, as someone who believes in God, I'd be scared accepting money in his name and even more cautious on what I used those funds for.

[Clove]

On a personal note, as someone who believes in God, I'd be scared accepting money in his name and even more cautious on what I used those funds for.That's right. He better not be doing anything freaky in God's jacuzzi.

[CrystalTears]

Now Obama comes across as the shining light, the new guy different than his peers, the savior of our political mess. A knock on his moral character seems like it would be far more devastating because it's really his selling point.
And as a former semi-conservative, I still don't see how what a pastor from his church said in sermons has anything to do with Obama's moral character when he isn't the one saying the "horrible" things that they feel Wright is saying.

[Parkbandit]

And as a former semi-conservative, I still don't see how what a pastor from his church said in sermons has anything to do with Obama's moral character when he isn't the one saying the "horrible" things that they feel Wright is saying.


My dad always used to say "Birds of a feather will flock together".. or "You are judged by the company you keep"

[Clove]

My dad always used to say "Birds of a feather will flock together".. or "You are judged by the company you keep"Huh, that must have been why the crucified Jesus then. Incidentally he isn't exactly "flocking" with racists.

[Parkbandit]

Huh, that must have been why the crucified Jesus then. Incidentally he isn't exactly "flocking" with racists.

Is this a suburb of Stanleyville?

[CrystalTears]

So now Obama is racist? Good grief.

[TheEschaton]

Believe it or not PB, I hang out with people I disagree with. One of my closest friends here is the president of the Federalist Society, but I'd be pissed if someone called me a Federalist.

[Clove]

Is this a suburb of Stanleyville?Hey, don't call me crazy just because you don't know the Gospels.

[Daniel]

So now Obama is racist? Good grief.

You must have missed that whole shit show where PB and his minions waxed poetic about how Nelson Mandela was racist against white people.

[Gan]

I guess I'm not a minion anymore. :(

[Clove]

I guess I'm not a minion anymore. :(As a former semi-conservative, I can tell you it's better to be a cheerleader than a minion.

[Celephais]

My dad always used to say "Birds of a feather will flock together".. or "You are judged by the company you keep"


So now Obama is racist? Good grief.

Not exactly siding with PB on this whole topic, but his father (who I'm assuming coined the proverbs prior to jesus' crux'in), is right. You are judged by the company you keep, which is dead on. And the birds of a feather one while less accurate, is the whole square is a rectangle, rectangle isn't a square kinda thing (Birds of a feather flock together, but that doesn't mean birds of different feathers can't flock together)

[Clove]

Not exactly siding with PB on this whole topic, but his father (who I'm assuming coined the proverbs prior to jesus' crux'in), is right. You are judged by the company you keep, which is dead on...See and I always thought you were judged by your actions.

[Celephais]

See and I always thought you were judged by your actions.
Little from column A, little from column B.

You should be judged by your actions, but people are idiots and judge you based on whatever the fuck they feel like. Now normally you shouldn't care what some idiot thinks of you, unfortunately if said idiot is casting a ballot, you do have to care.

[CrystalTears]

Not exactly siding with PB on this whole topic, but his father (who I'm assuming coined the proverbs prior to jesus' crux'in), is right. You are judged by the company you keep, which is dead on.
My grandmother would use those proverbs all the time, but the problem is that she was judging people based on pure opinion not facts. She would judge my friends, none of whom she knew, just because of how I was acting. Instead of focusing on my actions, she was blaming other people for my actions. And to me, that's just a copout.

So I take issue with judging someone based on the few words of someone they consort with. I'm sure Wright did far more good for his church than the word that hurt the easily offended. I'm sure if Wright never said anything wrong, no one would be saying what a saint Obama is because of how awesome his congregation is.

Judging Obama strictly on the bad around him and not for all the good is just hypocritical to me.

[Daniel]

Because you actually expect PB to be objective and reasonable about Obama?

[Hulkein]

I think it's, "My hypocrisy knows no bounds". And agreed, great movie.


Yes, he does say that. I believe he says both, though. Different parts of the movie.

[Parkbandit]

You must have missed that whole shit show where PB and his minions waxed poetic about how Nelson Mandela was racist against white people.

Really? Are you lik 100% positive I was involved in anything said about Nelson Mandela? Is this lik 100% positive I posted that racism is non-existant kind of 100% positive?

Please provide link. I'm actually not saying I didn't.. because I didn't check.. but I don't think I ever said one thing about Nelson Mandela in that thread.. but I'm not lik 100% positive like you seem to be.

[Clove]

Because you actually expect PB to be objective and reasonable about Obama?
I'm open minded about anyone of any party actually. It just happens to be that Democrats build their platforms about hating the rich, increasing taxes, handout programs to redistribute the wealth, etc... which I do not believe in to the extent they do.Talk amongst yourselves. :popcorn:

[Parkbandit]

Because you actually expect PB to be objective and reasonable about Obama?


Far more than you have been. I'm not polishing his halo like you have been.

[Gan]

Not exactly siding with PB on this whole topic, but his father (who I'm assuming coined the proverbs prior to jesus' crux'in), is right. You are judged by the company you keep, which is dead on.

/Agreed

[Parkbandit]

Talk amongst yourselves. :popcorn:

Yes.. because if you say anything negative about anyone, you clearly aren't being objective. But if you want to excuse off anything because you like the candidate.. then clearly you ARE the objective voice.

:rofl:

I'm beginning to think Sean2 was correct..

[Daniel]

Really? Are you lik 100% positive I was involved in anything said about Nelson Mandela? Is this lik 100% positive I posted that racism is non-existant kind of 100% positive?

Please provide link. I'm actually not saying I didn't.. because I didn't check.. but I don't think I ever said one thing about Nelson Mandela in that thread.. but I'm not lik 100% positive like you seem to be.

Pretty much.

Allow me:

:rofl:

[Lyonis]

And as a former semi-conservative, I still don't see how what a pastor from his church said in sermons has anything to do with Obama's moral character when he isn't the one saying the "horrible" things that they feel Wright is saying.

This was about the purchase of a million dollar home by the Church, not the statements made by Pastor Wright which I personally don't have a problem with. While I believe the statements to be mostly true, I can certainly understand how they could make someone feel uncomfortable. The right answer can be a harder sell than intuition might want you to believe.

Back to the home, the Church giving big pay outs to pastors is something that disagrees with my views on Christianity and what a pastor should be doing. This is not exclusive to Pastor Wright and I'm sure Keller has personally heard me go on a couple three rants about organized religion. It used to seriously piss me off listening to the pastor, who lives in a multimillion dollar home in the most expensive part of Santa Monica, receives a six figure salary, and drives a Benz, guilt trip someone that can barely afford to feed their family to donate to the church. I remember thinking why isn't the church helping these people? Not wanting to turn this into a theology discussion I'll leave that part at that :)

While you may not come to the conclusion that Wright is shady, I'm sure there will be many others that will side with you on this across the country, there are others like me that do. Now will I put a bad mark on Obama for this? I'm not really too sure. Do I flock him together with Wright?(Irony intended) Or do I think, that like Keller, he takes a mega Church for a great networking opportunity? I'm leaning toward the latter, but I do note that this is certainly not favorable press for Obama by any stretch. Now how much of a hit will he really take on this? No clue, but he's starting to look real Teflon Don with the shit they've thrown at him so far.


That's right. He better not be doing anything freaky in God's jacuzzi.

:rofl:

[Back]

Judging Obama strictly on the bad around him and not for all the good is just hypocritical to me.

I read this thread for a while and it did not even register with me that it was an attempt at Obama bashing. If it really was the OP’s intent to try to use this story as an attempt to portray Obama in a bad light...

failure

[CrystalTears]

Yes.. because if you say anything negative about anyone, you clearly aren't being objective. But if you want to excuse off anything because you like the candidate.. then clearly you ARE the objective voice.

:rofl:

I'm beginning to think Sean2 was correct..
You have really gone off the deep end. All this because some of us former semi-conservative people are considering voting for a democrat. You make me sad. :(

[Parkbandit]

Believe it or not PB, I hang out with people I disagree with. One of my closest friends here is the president of the Federalist Society, but I'd be pissed if someone called me a Federalist.

I'm not saying the only way to judge someone is by the company he keeps.. but it is usually a first impression. I understand your point though.. I hang out with more liberals than conservatives.. and the last thing I would want to be known as... is a liberal.

[LG422]

And to pre-answer the next talking point:

Median price of homes in the US for 2007: $313,000.00

http://www.census.gov/const/uspriceann.pdf


Median Prices of Homes in the US for 2008: $275,000.00

Source:
My ass
Though I suspect that will prove to be pretty close to accurate once the year is over..it could be and probably is based off of a number rolling around my subconscious from some figure I heard a talking head throw out recently.

[Gan]

I read this thread for a while and it did not even register with me that it was an attempt at Obama bashing.
It wasnt, hence it was not put in politics. That should have been evident in your initial readings (comprehension not included).


If it really was the OP’s intent to try to use this story as an attempt to portray Obama in a bad light...

failure

See above.

[Parkbandit]

Pretty much.

Allow me:

:rofl:


Oh.. then if you are lik 100% positive, I'm sure you have the post quoted and ready to go?

Feel free to post the quote here.

[Clove]

Yes.. because if you say anything negative about anyone, you clearly aren't being objective. But if you want to excuse off anything because you like the candidate.. then clearly you ARE the objective voice.

:rofl:

I'm beginning to think Sean2 was correct..:rofl: Right. Never acknowleging redeeming qualities while simultaneously pouncing on and exaggerating every flaw isn't what gets you labelled as unobjective.

[Parkbandit]

You have really gone off the deep end. All this because some of us former semi-conservative people are considering voting for a democrat. You make me sad. :(


I couldn't give two shits who you or anyone else on this forum are voting for to be honest. Hell, I will probably pull a Tamral (oldandforgotten) and not even vote. And if Obama makes Gore a prominent member of his staff.. I might just have to send him a vote for my business sake.

And I love that you enjoy the title of former semi-conservative... but I hope you don't see it as me putting you down. I'm a semi-conservative... so clearly I mean nothing bad about it.

[Daniel]

:rofl:

Abandon Ship!

[CrystalTears]

This was about the purchase of a million dollar home by the Church, not the statements made by Pastor Wright which I personally don't have a problem with. While I believe the statements to be mostly true, I can certainly understand how they could make someone feel uncomfortable. The right answer can be a harder sell than intuition might want you to believe.
This article was showcasing the actions of Obama's church, showing how "careless" this church and congregation is being with their money. It is all about pointing out perceived flaws of his religion.

If this were really an important issue, every religion would be pointed out as being careless with their contributions, not just a presidential candidate's religion.

[Back]

It wasnt, hence it was not put in politics. That should have been evident in your initial readings (comprehension not included).


See above.

Fair enough.

I agree that churches should be taxed, but how do you tax an institution built on tax-deductible donations? Charity is taught as being a virtue and Gluttony and Greed as sins. As long as there are gullible people in the world there is nothing that can be done about it really.

[Lyonis]

Yes, he does say that. I believe he says both, though. Different parts of the movie.

I think you're right, and just because it's awesome...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yDgkvWh3JQ


See and I always thought you were judged by your actions.

That's how I always thought it worked. Are some people going to judge you by your associations, especially as a politician? You bet. Same wise man once told me, "There's the way things should be, then again there's the way things are."

[Latrinsorm]

Thats my Christianity according to Latrin response.What I didn't get is why you thought that was an analogous response. Supposing I am gay for the sake of argument, Jesus doesn't have a problem with homosexuality. On the other hand, he went out of his way to bring in rather than further ostracize people on the margins of society, even going so far as to embrace heinous criminals (that is, people who actually did something wrong as opposed to people who contracted leprosy or were transsexual). In short, it's significantly worse to contradict a fundamental message of Jesus as a Christian than to have an orientation upon which he had no public opinion.

Also, am I alone in feeling that the more PB and Ilvane say the same sort of things about Sen. Obama the more I should vote for him (Obama)?

[Parkbandit]

:rofl: Right. Never acknowleging redeeming qualities while simultaneously pouncing on and exaggerating every flaw isn't what gets you labelled as unobjective.


Really? Are you lik 100% positive I've never posted that Obama is an engaging person who is an amazing public speaker?

So now that you just got shot down Daniel Jr.. please show me any post where you were objective with Obama. Objective doesn't just mean all the good.. it also means some bad. Show me where you've criticised something about Obama that is meaningful.. not like he wore white shoes after Labor day.

[CrystalTears]

And if Obama makes Gore a prominent member of his staff.. I might just have to send him a vote for my business sake.
And it could take away mine.


And I love that you enjoy the title of former semi-conservative... but I hope you don't see it as me putting you down. I'm a semi-conservative... so clearly I mean nothing bad about it.
Well yeah, I kinda did, and I'm clearly not the only one. I've always been semi-conservative, however you threw in that "former" part ever since I started liking Obama as a candidate and I didn't see the point if not to throw in a shot. But if you say it wasn't meant that way, then fine. :)

[Latrinsorm]

Are you lik 100% positive I've never posted that Obama is an engaging person who is an amazing public speaker?Following that with a reference to Hitler makes it at best pretty backhanded, wouldn't you say?

[Clove]

Fair enough.

I agree that churches should be taxed, but how do you tax an institution built on tax-deductible donations? Charity is taught as being a virtue and Gluttony and Greed as sins. As long as there are gullible people in the world there is nothing that can be done about it really.Easy. Same way you double tax corporate income. You do it. Although frankly I'm more in favor of taxing their property, not necessarily their income.

[Parkbandit]

:rofl:

Abandon Ship!

You are still looking for that post I assume. Once again.. making something up to better your debate point.. only to find out that it was an imaginary event?

You have a habit of saying shit that simply isn't true. You must be a real standup kind of guy in real life.

[Daniel]

Careful folks, the rabies is in full effect.

[Daniel]

You must be a real standup kind of guy in real life.

Yep. Just as I'm sure you're a shining example to your children on civility and objectiveness.

[Clove]

Really? Are you lik 100% positive I've never posted that Obama is an engaging person who is an amazing public speaker?I'm a 100% positive you compared him to Hitler in the same breath. That sort of gave it a different tone as when I compared his public speaking to Reagan and Clinton.

[Parkbandit]

And it could take away mine.


Well yeah, I kinda did, and I'm clearly not the only one. I've always been semi-conservative, however you threw in that "former" part ever since I started liking Obama as a candidate and I didn't see the point if not to throw in a shot. But if you say it wasn't meant that way, then fine. :)

I think I actually explained it after the first couple of D teamers were like "OMG!!!"

I doubt there is even ONE true conservative person on this forum. I'm probably the FURTHEST thing from a true conservative.. simply because I'm not dumb enough to believe in religion.

We should kiss and make up.. with our shirts off. ;)

[Back]

Following that with a reference to Hitler makes it at best pretty backhanded, wouldn't you say?

Godwined

[CrystalTears]

I doubt there is even ONE true conservative person on this forum. I'm probably the FURTHEST thing from a true conservative.. simply because I'm not dumb enough to believe in religion.
Aside from the religious aspect, sorry my friend, you are as right as they come.


We should kiss and make up.. with our shirts off. ;)
:lol: Well some things never change.

[Parkbandit]

I'm a 100% positive you compared him to Hitler in the same breath. That sort of gave it a different tone as when I compared his public speaking to Reagan and Clinton.


Now, now Daniel Jr.. Are you lik 100% positive that was the only time I said anything good about Obama? How about this.. for every criticism of Obama you have posted prior to this thread.. I'll post 2 where I've appreciated Obama.

You go first... because I can't find one single instance where you criticised Obama for anything.

[Daniel]

I'm sure Clove has better things to do than bang his head against the wall. All you'll do is obfusciated, deny and stretch the limits of reason and simple reading comprehension to make your point.

Besides, it's more fun to watch you run around like a rabid badger.

[Clove]

You go first... because I can't find one single instance where you criticised Obama for anything.Are you a 100% sure? Really PB it wasn't even all that long ago. You're the one that pointed to your "praise" of his public speaking ability. Explain yourself.

[Parkbandit]

I'm sure Clove has better things to do than bang his head against the wall. All you'll do is obfusciated, deny and stretch the limits of reason and simple reading comprehension to make your point.

Besides, it's more fun to watch you run around like a rabid badger.

I'm still waiting for the quotes chump. Until then, you are doing what you always do.. fabricate.

With the proficiency you do it here.. I can't imagine it's any different in your real life.

[LG422]

My dad always used to say "Birds of a feather will flock together".. or "You are judged by the company you keep"


To quote the bible:
Proverbs 13:20
He who walks with the wise grows wise, but a companion of fools suffers great harm.


You become like the people you associate with. Isn't it reasonable to assume that someone that has sucked at the spiritual tit of Reverend Wright for 20 years would have a world view that has at least been influenced by him? When that world view is that of a bigot that seeks the destruction of white men, maybe us honkies that all just want to get along should sit up and take note.

[Daniel]

Riiight

x2

[Parkbandit]

Are you a 100% sure? Really PB it wasn't even all that long ago. You're the one that pointed to your "praise" of his public speaking ability. Explain yourself.


Come on Clove.. if we're both considering ourselves to be objective about Obama.. show me ONE SOLITARY QUOTE where you posted anything criticising him for anything. ONE!

Here.. I'll even go first.


There's no spin here. It was a good speech. Like I've said so many times before.. he's an engaging speaker that you can't help but like. Most of the 'good' politicians can brilliantly speak. Clinton was one of the best. Obama is probably even better.


I disagree. Obama is one of the best speakers I've ever listened to.. he's engaging, he exudes personality and you really are almost forced into liking him. THIS is his greatest asset... not his ability to throw mud back at his opponent.

There is two quotes from me... now, let's just see your ONE quote.

[Parkbandit]

Riiight

x2

Wait.. I know. The internet is serious business.

Riiight.

[Parkbandit]

Damn.. found another one:


I actually agree. I was stirred when he said the part about red states, blue states.. we're the UNITED STATES. All too often, party candidates are bitching back and forth and forget we're one fucking country.

While I am not going to vote for this guy because he is far too liberal for my tastes, he does seem to be a geniune guy... which is more than I can say for the other 2 frontrunner 'guys' running right now... Hillary and Edwards. I used the term 'guys'.. because I'm not sure Edwards really is.

Still waiting on your one post Clove....

[LG422]

I think I actually explained it after the first couple of D teamers were like "OMG!!!"

I doubt there is even ONE true conservative person on this forum. I'm probably the FURTHEST thing from a true conservative.. simply because I'm not dumb enough to believe in religion.

We should kiss and make up.. with our shirts off. ;)


What I think is that you don't know what a true conservative is.
True conservatives are not MORALLY conservatives..if we are speaking of politics.
Political conservatism has to do with the government providing as little government as possible as set forth by the constitution and allowing the people to prosper on their own.


I am a true conservative and I have nothing to do with religion frankly.

[Clove]

...That being said, Obama ought to be criticized for his tap-dancing over the issue. He really ought to have been transparent. Now before this becomes a damning nail in his coffin please find me a politician at that level who doesn't tapdance and wriggle and lie and play word games when faced with a public scandal...
I'm concerned with Obama's health-care proposal and how effectively he can handle Iraq and Afghanistan. On the other hand I think he is a gifted speaker with the kind of leadership ability that can bring the bipartisan cooperation we need for real progress. Unfortunately, being a good leader won't help IF he doesn't have a good direction to lead people in and I'm still waiting for him to convince me that he has a plan with enough merit in it to set aside my present concerns.I criticized his tap dancing, his healthcare policy suggestions and his potential to handle national defense. How many do you owe me?

[Clove]

I actually agree. I was stirred when he said the part about red states, blue states.. we're the UNITED STATES. All too often, party candidates are bitching back and forth and forget we're one fucking country.

While I am not going to vote for this guy because he is far too liberal for my tastes, he does seem to be a geniune guy... which is more than I can say for the other 2 frontrunner 'guys' running right now... Hillary and Edwards. I used the term 'guys'.. because I'm not sure Edwards really is.Oh hai! Was this actually your first impression (based on his associations, I mean)?

[Daniel]

Wait.. I know. The internet is serious business.

Riiight.

Apparently

:rofl:

[Parkbandit]

I criticized his tap dancing, his healthcare policy suggestions and his potential to handle national defense. How many do you owe me?

Well done... and I apologize for believing you incapable.

I retract your sandbox :P

[Clove]

Well done... and I apologize for believing you incapable.

I retract your sandbox :PJust stop calling me Daniel Jr. and we can be friends :D

[Parkbandit]

Oh hai! Was this actually your first impression (based on his associations, I mean)?


Not sure I understand what you are saying. This wasn't my first introduction to Obama.. I've heard him speak quite a few times... and have always thought of him as a gifted speaker.

[Parkbandit]

Just stop calling me Daniel Jr. and we can be friends :D

In my defense, you implied I was unable to point out the good in Obama.. which I believe I've demonstrated that to be incorrect.

But I will never call you Daniel Jr. As I have proven.. it's tantamount to calling someone a lying piece of shit.

I apologize for calling you that :(

[Daniel]

:rofl:

As you have proven? Kinda like how you've proven that blacks commit 7 times more crimes than whites?

[Clove]

In my defense, you implied I was unable to point out the good in Obama.. which I believe I've demonstrated that to be incorrect.

But I will never call you Daniel Jr. As I have proven.. it's tantamount to calling someone a lying piece of shit.

I apologize for calling you that :(You did acknowlege he's a good public speaker which is pretty much the only praise I've given him too. Defending against what I hold as unfair criticisms/=to praise or an endorsement. I know that people will judge based on candidates associations, but that doesn't mean people ought to, unless they see a trend in a candidates' policy that is reinforced by the trend in their associations. I don't think Wright qualifies for this. Considering your general disdain for 1) Democrats (which I understand) 2) Religion (which I don't) you might understand how your objectivity could be questioned.

[NocturnalRob]

:rofl:

As you have proven? Kinda like how you've proven that blacks commit 7 times more crimes than whites?

i thought that was common knowledge

[CrystalTears]

Not sure I understand what you are saying. This wasn't my first introduction to Obama.. I've heard him speak quite a few times... and have always thought of him as a gifted speaker.
Because you mentioned first impressions.


I'm not saying the only way to judge someone is by the company he keeps.. but it is usually a first impression.
Had Obama been known to be racist in the eyes of some, and then they found Wright speaking and people put two and two together, then the first impressions would be more conclusive. However even now you still can't find racial views coming from Obama.

[Parkbandit]

:rofl:

As you have proven? Kinda like how you've proven that blacks commit 7 times more crimes than whites?

I'll give you this.. no matter how much someone points out your stupidity and fabrications.. you just keep coming, full steam ahead... in the same thread!

Some will call this retarded. Some will call it stubborness. I think it's both.

Seriously.. I have more respect for Ilvane now in political threads than you... and I didn't think that was possible for anyone to do.

[Daniel]

I'm wounded.

Really.

[Parkbandit]

I'm wounded.

Really.

You spelled "a fucking liar" wrong.

[Parkbandit]

Because you mentioned first impressions.


Had Obama been known to be racist in the eyes of some, and then they found Wright speaking and people put two and two together, then the first impressions would be more conclusive. However even now you still can't find racial views coming from Obama.

I've never said Obama was a racist.. but having Wright so close to him makes me question his judgement. I've never said Obama was a slum lord.. but having Rezko so close to him makes me question his judgement. Obama is running ON his judgement, making a key distinction between him and others.. saying that he had the better judgement on the Iraq war.

[Back]

I've never said Obama was a racist.. but having Wright so close to him makes me question his judgement. I've never said Obama was a slum lord.. but having Rezko so close to him makes me question his judgement. Obama is running ON his judgement, making a key distinction between him and others.. saying that he had the better judgement on the Iraq war.

Obama, for the most part, also surrounds himself with smart and rational people. You would not be one of them. Big surprise.

[Clove]

Obama, for the most part, also surrounds himself with smart and rational people. You would not be one of them. Big surprise.http://ihasahotdog.wordpress.com/files/2008/03/funny-dog-pictures-emo-pug.jpg

[Back]

:crickets:

[Parkbandit]

Obama, for the most part, also surrounds himself with smart and rational people. You would not be one of them. Big surprise.


You truly are an idiot.

[Lyonis]

:crickets:

You waited 6 whole minutes to post that pwning yourself and killing all the crickets.

You should stop before people think you're stupid and/or an attention whore.

[Back]

You truly are an idiot.

I’ve made no claims of being smart so you may not be far off the mark.


You waited 6 whole minutes to post that pwning yourself and killing all the crickets.

You should stop before people think you're stupid and/or an attention whore.

:crickets:

[Keller]

:crickets:

6 minutes later. Oh, the irony.

[Back]

I am actually ashamed of how many times I’ve posted today (day off). But fuck it, dude. Lets go bowling.

[Daniel]

You spelled "a fucking liar" wrong.

You forgot :rofl:

[Hulkein]

This article was showcasing the actions of Obama's church, showing how "careless" this church and congregation is being with their money. It is all about pointing out perceived flaws of his religion.

If this were really an important issue, every religion would be pointed out as being careless with their contributions, not just a presidential candidate's religion.

I didn't see this thread as anti-Obama. I saw it more as a thread showing off some hypocrisy in religion using a topical subject.

[Keller]

You truly are an idiot.

You forgot :rofl:.

[LG422]

6 minutes later. Oh, the irony.

That's enough for most men to have satisfying sex...twice...

[Gan]

Found a response from the UCC which is the organization overseeing the churches, including rev. Wright's.



The church referred FOX News to its denominational headquarters in Cleveland, which provided a statement of support:
“It is customary and appropriate in many Christian denominations, including the United Church of Christ, for local churches to offer housing provisions for retiring clergy, especially in cases where pastors have served long-term pastorates. We support efforts by our 5,700 local churches to ensure that retiring pastors and spouses have continuing housing, adequate pension and health care, as an expression of our continuing appreciation for their years of service. Each local UCC congregation is free to honor a retiring pastor in ways it feels most appropriate to address the needs of that clergyperson’s circumstances,” wrote the Rev. J. Bennett Guess, spokesman for UCC’s national office.

“This is about how these kinds of churches work,” notes Walsh. “These pastors who made big successful churches are real valuable commodities. Is it morally wrong? Well, Protestants don’t have the idea that their religious leaders should live modestly or aesthetically. We’re not talking Buddhist monks or Catholic priests here. There’s no tradition that says they have to live poor.”

Also note that the house is 10k sq. ft. and will be closer to 1.6m when completed.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/03/27/obamas-former-pastor-builds-a-multimillion-dollar-retirement-home/

I'll keep looking to see if I can find other reactions.

[Gan]

Short article from the American Thinker (never seen this blog before).



March 30, 2008
Reverend Wright's New Digs

Ethel Fenig

Clad in dashiki clerical vestments, Senator Barack Obama's (D-IL) pastor and mentor screamed about the evil of white folks and middle classness while promoting a black centered theology, all to the shouting and clapping approval of a large and growing congregation.

So where his new 10,340 square foot, $1.6 million house (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/03/rev_wrights_16_million_house.html) being built?



Wouldn't you know, the demographics of Tinley Park, IL (http://sweetness-light.com/archive/rev-wrights-new-neighborhood-is-only-13-black),a suburb of Chicago, which will soon count Reverend Jeremiah Wright Jr as a resident.. Steve Gilbert of Sweetness & Light reports:
The racial makeup of the village was 93.16% White, 1.92% African American, 0.13% Native American, 2.38% Asian, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 1.11% from other races, and 1.27% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 4.13% of the population.




The top five ancestries reported in Tinley Park as of the 2000 census were Irish (25.5%), German (23.1%), Polish (19.7%), Italian (14.3%) and Dutch (5.3%).[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinley_Park,_Illinois#cite_note-4) …

The residents' incomes are solidly middle class





The median income for a household in the village was $61,648, and the median income for a family was $71,858. Males had a median income of $50,595 versus $34,401 for females. The per capita income for the village was $25,207. About 1.1% of families and 2.5% of the population were below the poverty line, including 2.5% of those under age 18 and 3.6% of those age 65 or over.

Not that Reverend Wright is a hypocrite or a preacher who doesn't practice what he preaches of course.

[Daniel]

Keep in mind that UCC is a predominately white congregation.

[Parkbandit]

Keep in mind that UCC is a predominately white congregation.

I hadn't realized that Rev. Wright was the head of the entire United Church of Christ.. I had though he was only the Reverend of the Trinity United Church of Christ.

[Daniel]

Perspective FTL

[Parkbandit]

Perspective FTL

Just another excuse for you is all. Gan posted about this house and it's location.. and your best excuse is "Well, the entire church is mostly white". But Rev. Wright didn't talk in front of a mostly white denomination, did he. His sermons were at the Trinity Church in Chicago.. a predominately black congregation.

Here.. from their own website:

"We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian... Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization. God has superintended our pilgrimage through the days of slavery, the days of segregation, and the long night of racism. It is God who gives us the strength and courage to continuously address injustice as a people, and as a congregation. We constantly affirm our trust in God through cultural expression of a Black worship service and ministries which address the Black Community."


Sounds weird that they would only focus their energy on such a minor voice of the United Church of Christ like you imply.

[Daniel]

Why would that be weird?

It's a problem to be unashamedly black in a country where people question whether or not you are too black to be president?

Oh..I forgot...That's Racism. So was Nelson Mandela.

My bad.

[Parkbandit]

Why would that be weird?

It's a problem to be unashamedly black in a country where people question whether or not you are too black to be president?

Oh..I forgot...That's Racism. So was Nelson Mandela.


Now, now now Daniel. You were called out on your Nelson Mandela lie yesterday.. do you really want to go down that path again? Are you not only a liar.. but have the memory of a retard too?

And OMG! We better not talk about Trinity or Wright again.. or we must be a RACIST! Is that your only defense mechanism when debating anything?

Maybe we can get Ilvane in here to give us a real, intelligent discussion... I for one am tired of your same ol' song a dance.

So in recap:

Gan: Wright's house will be 1.6 million dollars and reside in a predominately white neighborhood.

Daniel: United Church of Christ is a predominately white church.

Me: But Wright didn't perform in front of the entire UCC, his sermons were held in Trinity Church of Christ, a predominately black church.

Daniel: Oh, you are just a racist.



My bad

Finally, some truth from one of your posts. It is indeed, your bad.

[Daniel]

I'd explain the significance of pointing out that UCC is a predominately white congregation when coupled with the astonishment that Reverend Wright would get a house in a white community despite hate mongering against white. However, that would require that you be able to read and comprehend. Something that we all know is a bridge too far for you.


Lol. Also, You exposed nothing.. notice that I didn't call you racist. I mocked your obnoxious refrain that only black people are racist towards white.


BTW you forgot :rofl:

[Parkbandit]

Lol. You exposed nothing.

BTW you forgot :rofl:

And you forgot either your "swoosh" commentary.. or the "Teh Internet r serious business" pic.

[Daniel]

It's "Woosh"

[Jesuit]

Found a response from the UCC which is the organization overseeing the churches, including rev. Wright's.



Also note that the house is 10k sq. ft. and will be closer to 1.6m when completed.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/03/27/obamas-former-pastor-builds-a-multimillion-dollar-retirement-home/

I'll keep looking to see if I can find other reactions.

It's perfectly fine for him to build a 1.6 million dollar house. He doesn't have to help poor black kids, white people do. After all, white people brought black people here, it's their job to feed them and educate them now.

[Clove]

I'm curious what the expectations are. Because of Wright's opinions are we saying he should only live among African Americans, or that he shouldn't have an expensive house?

[Daniel]

It's perfectly fine for him to build a 1.6 million dollar house. He doesn't have to help poor black kids, white people do. After all, white people brought black people here, it's their job to feed them and educate them now.

Are you familiar with the amount of money that UCC or TUCC puts into the local community?

[Gan]

I'm curious what the expectations are. Because of Wright's opinions are we saying he should only live among African Americans, or that he shouldn't have an expensive house?

Opinions? No, his opinions are his opinions.

Now if you mean his teachings? Well, what kind of teacher would he be if he did not prescribe to his own teachings? I find it ironic and a little hypocritical.

My greater concern is the fact that a church is spending 1.6m on a house for a pastor, when the average home pricing is ~270k in that region. Note I did not say subdivision - which is stupid to think that only this subdivision was available to buy a house in. Not that I have not already stated as much in previous posts.

The new part is seeing the UCC's ok with that kind of expenditure. If that isnt a wake up call to other member churches and congregations as to where the offering money should be spent, I dont know what to tell you. And because of this, I definately think a closer look at how churches are viewed with regards to taxation needs to be addressed.

[Lyonis]

Are you familiar with the amount of money that UCC or TUCC puts into the local community?

I'm sure it's substantial, at least I would hope so with them buying Wright such a expensive home. My question is, where does the money that TUCC puts into the local community come from? The congregation, which I would imagine is part of that community. So a more complete way to look at what is going on with the money is that it is taken from the community, filtered through the church bureaucracy, and whatever is left over after buying pastor a mansion, among other expenses, is given back. This is why when I feed people I do it directly. I pay enough taxes :)



The new part is seeing the UCC's ok with that kind of expenditure. If that isnt a wake up call to other member churches and congregations as to where the offering money should be spent, I dont know what to tell you. And because of this, I definately think a closer look at how churches are viewed with regards to taxation needs to be addressed.

Who is okay with that expenditure? Meaning who would make the decision to be okay with it or not? Other members of the Church government. It's not hard to see a possible bias in looking out for one's best interest there.

[Keller]

And you forgot either your "swoosh" commentary.. or the "Teh Internet r serious business" pic.

You forgot to answer any of the substantive issues Daniel brought up w/r/t your prior criticism. But that's not abnormal.

[Clove]

Opinions? No, his opinions are his opinions.

Now if you mean his teachings? Well, what kind of teacher would he be if he did not prescribe to his own teachings? I find it ironic and a little hypocritical.I think I'd go as far as ironic. I'd find it hypocritical if I knew his teachings included the evils of enjoying expensive property (which lately I've only ever heard from the -E-) or the evils of black folk living amongst white folk.

[Clove]

Who is okay with that expenditure? Meaning who would make the decision to be okay with it or not? Other members of the Church government. It's not hard to see a possible bias in looking out for one's best interest there.Sure but they have a responsibility to their congregations (and member churches) and if they ignore that, they lose attendees (and member churches) and that means less donations, etc.

[Lyonis]

I'm curious what the expectations are. Because of Wright's opinions are we saying he should only live among African Americans, or that he shouldn't have an expensive house?

When your web site says this...


We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian... Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization. God has superintended our pilgrimage through the days of slavery, the days of segregation, and the long night of racism. It is God who gives us the strength and courage to continuously address injustice as a people, and as a congregation. We constantly affirm our trust in God through cultural expression of a Black worship service and ministries which address the Black Community.

I think living in a disproportionately white neighborhood makes you a hypocrite.

http://www.tucc.org/

Don't skip the opening and watch the continent of Africa appear before you. This by itself doesn't bother me, but don't preach that and have your fellow blacks pay for you to live with whitey.

As far as his expensive house goes, I don't have a problem if he paid for it himself from money that didn't come from the coffers.

[Clove]

Yeah I don't get "segregation" out of that statement. I get irony (somewhat). The website pledges an intention to maintain their culture in respect to their Christianity and worship style. It continues with a pledge to confront racially motivated (or based) injustice. I don't see how that connects to "not living amongst other races (especially whites)" or "not having expensive property". It's my opinion that neither has much to do with addressing injustice or preserving your cultural style of worship (unless maybe whitey infects you with his whiteness when you move next door).

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Lyonis
I think living in a disproportionately white neighborhood makes you a hypocrite.

http://www.tucc.org/

Don't skip the opening and watch the continent of Africa appear before you. This by itself doesn't bother me, but don't preach that and have your fellow blacks pay for you to live with whitey.

As far as his expensive house goes, I don't have a problem if he paid for it himself from money that didn't come from the coffers.

There will be plenty of real estate for the black community to move into once his neighbors start to move out.

[Clove]

There will be plenty of real estate for the black community to move into once his neighbors start to move out.:rofl:That's what we said about our beach community once those guys from NJ started buying summer homes!

[Lyonis]

Yeah I don't get "segregation" out of that statement. I get irony (somewhat). The website pledges an intention to maintain their culture in respect to their Christianity and worship style. It continues with a pledge to confront racially motivated (or based) injustice. I don't see how that connects to "not living amongst other races (especially whites)" or "not having expensive property". It's my opinion that neither has much to do with addressing injustice or preserving your cultural style of worship (unless maybe whitey infects you with his whiteness when you move next door).

Fair enough.

A funny clip that kinda/somewhat/not really has to do with the discussion...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RszOkTkxixk

[Parkbandit]

I'm sure it's substantial, at least I would hope so with them buying Wright such a expensive home. My question is, where does the money that TUCC puts into the local community come from? The congregation, which I would imagine is part of that community. So a more complete way to look at what is going on with the money is that it is taken from the community, filtered through the church bureaucracy, and whatever is left over after buying pastor a mansion, among other expenses, is given back. This is why when I feed people I do it directly. I pay enough taxes :)



One of the reasons I do not give to any 'organized' charities. The people I WANT the money to go to it MIGHT get 5-10% of my donation after they pay for their CEOs, buildings, company cars, infrastructure, etc... One of the things we started doing is just paying someone's electric bill in one of the apartment complexes we service. I end up spending the same amount as I would giving to a charity.. except that I know every dime is actually going to someone who needs it.. not to help build someone a new mansion.

[Clove]

One of the reasons I do not give to any 'organized' charities. The people I WANT the money to go to it MIGHT get 5-10% of my donation after they pay for their CEOs, buildings, company cars, infrastructure, etc... One of the things we started doing is just paying someone's electric bill in one of the apartment complexes we service. I end up spending the same amount as I would giving to a charity.. except that I know every dime is actually going to someone who needs it.. not to help build someone a new mansion.QFT.

[Lyonis]

One of the reasons I do not give to any 'organized' charities. The people I WANT the money to go to it MIGHT get 5-10% of my donation after they pay for their CEOs, buildings, company cars, infrastructure, etc... One of the things we started doing is just paying someone's electric bill in one of the apartment complexes we service. I end up spending the same amount as I would giving to a charity.. except that I know every dime is actually going to someone who needs it.. not to help build someone a new mansion.

Exactly

[Gan]

Who is okay with that expenditure? Meaning who would make the decision to be okay with it or not? Other members of the Church government. It's not hard to see a possible bias in looking out for one's best interest there.
See Clove's answer. Thats what I would have said.

Sure but they have a responsibility to their congregations (and member churches) and if they ignore that, they lose attendees (and member churches) and that means less donations, etc.

There will be plenty of real estate for the black community to move into once his neighbors start to move out.
LOL Brutal.

One of the reasons I do not give to any 'organized' charities. The people I WANT the money to go to it MIGHT get 5-10% of my donation after they pay for their CEOs, buildings, company cars, infrastructure, etc... One of the things we started doing is just paying someone's electric bill in one of the apartment complexes we service. I end up spending the same amount as I would giving to a charity.. except that I know every dime is actually going to someone who needs it.. not to help build someone a new mansion.
/Agreed.

[Latrinsorm]

5-10% is a totally bs number. At least do a LITTLE research.

Also, I thought of a hilariously ironic result of this event that I hadn't noticed before: some of the people who (incorrectly) considered Wright a white-hating racist now consider him a hypocrite for living in a predominantly white neighborhood. Hilarity!

[Keller]

5-10% is a totally bs number. At least do a LITTLE research.

Also, I thought of a hilariously ironic result of this event that I hadn't noticed before: some of the people who (incorrectly) considered Wright a white-hating racist now consider him a hypocrite for living in a predominantly white neighborhood. Hilarity!

Hilarious in a depressing sort of way.

[Daniel]

5-10% is a totally bs number. At least do a LITTLE research.

Also, I thought of a hilariously ironic result of this event that I hadn't noticed before: some of the people who (incorrectly) considered Wright a white-hating racist now consider him a hypocrite for living in a predominantly white neighborhood. Hilarity!

Wait..So, you're saying people are grasping at straws in order to invalidate the campaign of Obama?

This wouldn't have anything to do with the discussion PB & Co had about Nelson Mandela being a white hating racist would it?

[Parkbandit]

5-10% is a totally bs number. At least do a LITTLE research.

Please tell me, then oh wise one.

Let's say I'm giving $10,000 to charity in 2008. Where am I going to give my money to people that:

1) Need it.
2) Don't use it for recreational purposes (drugs, alcohol, etc..)
3) Are actually disabled or elderly.. not lazy. Or don't have the brains enough to not bring 10 kids into this world without the means to support them.

Those are pretty much my 3 stipulations when donating. Are you about to tell me that if I sign over a check for $10,000 tomorrow, that more than $500-$1000 will actually meet those stipulations and actually go to people who need it? Don't just google up your 'research' and believe that must be the answer. People get charity all the time who don't need or deserve it.

My way ensures that I am helping people I believe actually need it.




Also, I thought of a hilariously ironic result of this event that I hadn't noticed before: some of the people who (incorrectly) considered Wright a white-hating racist now consider him a hypocrite for living in a predominantly white neighborhood. Hilarity!

I thought it was hilarious how you can say someone's opinion is incorrect. I'm pretty sure many people on this forum believe you to be a moron.. which is probably true.. but does that actually MAKE it true? Ok, maybe that's a bad example.. since you've given us so much evidence to support our opinion.

Hilarity indeed. Now take out one or two words from my post and skew it into anything you want.. it's what you do best.

[Parkbandit]

This wouldn't have anything to do with the discussion PB & Co had about Nelson Mandela being a white hating racist would it?

Oh, are you STILL posting this lie? Seriously Daniel, you have so little respect here.. maybe make up a new one today, since you used that one yesterday.. were called out on it.. and your best response was "Riiiiight"

[Daniel]

I bet you can't quote where I said that was my best response.

[Daniel]

Seriously Daniel, you have so little respect here.. "

The hilarious irony.

[Daniel]

Since I have 20 minutes to kill:


So, now Nelson Mandela is Racist and Anti Semitic?

*WoW*


So now it's not racist to sing a song about killing white people?

*WoW*

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/nelson-mandela-sings-about-killing-whites/2559888685

Bhulu is a word used to refer to the boers (Afrikaan word for white farmers)


What part of "It's only racism when it happens to someone who is black" are you still having trouble understanding.


I keep forgetting that. Now all we need for a true display of racial harmony is Obama, Wright, Mandela and Mugabe singing a quartet.


I'll save you the trouble of rebuttal
You are so stupid. I was obviously just making a comment that had no reference to the post I was quoting and not actually agreeing with the things being said. I'm surprised you have a job :rofl:

[Latrinsorm]

Wait..So, you're saying people are grasping at straws in order to invalidate the campaign of Obama?Perish the thought! (aka yes.)
Those are pretty much my 3 stipulations when donating. Are you about to tell me that if I sign over a check for $10,000 tomorrow, that more than $500-$1000 will actually meet those stipulations and actually go to people who need it?Yes, unless you consider children with debilitating cancer "lazy". That said, I think your issue lies more in the difference between these two criteria: "Where am I going to give my money to people that [n]eed it." vs. "My way ensures that I am helping people I believe actually need it.". I can't make you believe the truth, but I can point out that your beliefs have no correlation with that truth.
I thought it was hilarious how you can say someone's opinion is incorrect.This goes to what I was saying before: if someone takes an opinion on a factual matter, they can in fact be incorrect. It is a matter of fact whether Pastor Wright hates white people (he does not). It is a matter of fact whether all 'organized' charities pass at most 10% of their received donations to the alleged targets (they do not). Therefore, if you were to be of the opinion that Pastor Wright hates white people, you would be factually incorrect regardless of it being your "opinion".

Feel free to further complain that I'm "skewing" your posts rather than addressing or acknowledging any of the ways your "opinions" starkly contradict reality.. it's what you do best. :)

[Parkbandit]

Perish the thought! (aka yes.)Yes, unless you consider children with debilitating cancer "lazy". That said, I think your issue lies more in the difference between these two criteria: "Where am I going to give my money to people that [n]eed it." vs. "My way ensures that I am helping people I believe actually need it.". I can't make you believe the truth, but I can point out that your beliefs have no correlation with that truth.This goes to what I was saying before: if someone takes an opinion on a factual matter, they can in fact be incorrect. It is a matter of fact whether Pastor Wright hates white people (he does not). It is a matter of fact whether all 'organized' charities pass at most 10% of their received donations to the alleged targets (they do not). Therefore, if you were to be of the opinion that Pastor Wright hates white people, you would be factually incorrect regardless of it being your "opinion".

Feel free to further complain that I'm "skewing" your posts rather than addressing or acknowledging any of the ways your "opinions" starkly contradict reality.. it's what you do best. :)

AH.. it's clearly a reading comprehension problem you have (fact) Allow me.

There is a key difference to what you thought you read " It is a matter of fact whether all 'organized' charities pass at most 10% of their received donations to the alleged targets (they do not)."

And what I actually posted which was



One of the reasons I do not give to any 'organized' charities. The people I WANT the money to go to it MIGHT get 5-10% of my donation after they pay for their CEOs, buildings, company cars, infrastructure, etc...

I've bolded the important part so you can focus your energy there, since you obviously have a problem (fact) Now.. had I said "charities only pass on 5-10 percent of their money to their intended targets" (which I didn't) you would actually be correct. In this case though, you are not (fact).

I hope this cleared up your obvious confusion (fact)

[Parkbandit]

Since I have 20 minutes to kill:

I'll save you the trouble of rebuttal

You should have saved the 20 minutes.. then I wouldn't consider you a desperate loser who lies.. just a liar.

[Keller]

Ahhhh, Latrin misinterpreted your statement, huh?

Yet you put a laundry list of administrative costs and never once mentioned that the donations would go to lazy welfare mothers with 10-children who all have their own Benzo with spinnas'.

Sounds a lot like you're a pathetic fuck who pulls at straws to find semantic differences to not look like the pathetic fuck you are.

[Latrinsorm]

Not even the standards you claim are restrictive enough to cut the actual percentage transmitted to 10%, Parkbandit. This is also something that can be ascertained with a cursory amount of research.

However, this is putting the cart before the horse: you misinterpreted the quoted section of my post. "This goes to what I was saying before: if someone takes an opinion on a factual matter, they can in fact be incorrect. Therefore, if you were to be of the opinion" etc. I did not say "this is what I interpret you as saying", I stated a number of conditionals without declaring that you fell into their antecedents' bailiwick.

The only way to interpret that section of my post as referring specifically to you would be to claim you were the only person in the universe - I can assure you that this is not (factually) the case. :)

[Parkbandit]

Not even the standards you claim are restrictive enough to cut the actual percentage transmitted to 10%, Parkbandit. This is also something that can be ascertained with a cursory amount of research.

Source on that.. or is it your opinion you are posing as fact again?



However, this is putting the cart before the horse: you misinterpreted the quoted section of my post. "This goes to what I was saying before: if someone takes an opinion on a factual matter, they can in fact be incorrect. Therefore, if you were to be of the opinion" etc. I did not say "this is what I interpret you as saying", I stated a number of conditionals without declaring that you fell into their antecedents' bailiwick.

The only way to interpret that section of my post as referring specifically to you would be to claim you were the only person in the universe - I can assure you that this is not (factually) the case. :)

Don't even know which toilet to flush this shit in... you pick. I never said I was the only person in the universe (god.. what a dumb argument on your part).. I merely explained why I (there was the key word you were missing again.. I.. meaning me, not anyone else) do not give to organized 'charities'.

[Keller]

I don't know why you bother, Latrin. You are a better man than I.

[Daniel]

You should have saved the 20 minutes.. then I wouldn't consider you a desperate loser who lies.. just a liar.

Riiiight.

Thanks for proving once again that you lack any semblence of intellectual capacity.

[Back]

I don't know why you bother, Latrin. You are a better man than I.

Honestly, I don’t know why you or Daniel or anyone even bothers.

You’ve nailed down the formula he’s used for years... when cornered on a legitimate point it’s :rofl: + personal attack.

[Clove]

Honestly, I don’t know why you or Daniel or anyone even bothers.

You’ve nailed down the formula he’s used for years... when cornered on a legitimate point it’s :rofl: + personal attack.I'm trying to figure out what's wrong with how PB choses to engage in charity? Perhaps his view of churches and charities isn't fair- but it isn't like he's telling people not to go to them or not to donate to them. As I see it- he isn't generally satisfied with charities, so he prefers to give assistance directly. WTF is wrong with that?

[Gan]

I wrote a hundred dollar check to a leukemia society charity last month.

My wife paid for a struggling family's groceries while standing in line at a local super wal-mart last month.

Paying for the groceries was a more rewarding experience x 1000.

[Keller]

I'm trying to figure out what's wrong with how PB choses to engage in charity? Perhaps his view of churches and charities isn't fair- but it isn't like he's telling people not to go to them or to donate to them. As I see it- he isn't generally satisfied with charities, so he prefers to give assistance directly. WTF is wrong with that?

Nothing is wrong with his choice of whether or not to give to charities.

What's wrong is that he threw out a hyperbolic claim, was called on that claim, and in order to not look stupid himself (for making a hyperbolic claim to justify his giving/not giving), he proceeds to semantically strongarm Latrin into being "wrong".

He claims that a major inefficiency, one which he intended to include in the factors that resulted in 5-10% of charitable gifts ending up in the hands of those he believes deserve them, is the number of undeserving people that receive "handouts" from charities. Query, though, why that factor (which even I admit is possibly the largest contributor to wealth redistribution inefficiencies) didn't end up anywhere in his laundry list of "factors" from his original post. He's effectively massaged a semantic escape route.

But what's even more frustrating is that he made a good point (which many people in this thread agree with, myself included). All he had to do was say something like, "Maybe my number was pulled from thin air for effect, but it could be close to that number if you consider the number of undeserving people who receive benefits from charities." This response would have not only promoted civil discourse of his point, but it would have also avoided the last 20 posts of pointless bickering.

But he couldn't say that. That's not his instinct. He froths at the mouth when he sees any opportunity to laugh at someone else, call them stupid, or baselessly disagree.

[Back]

^^^ what he said.

[Clove]

But he couldn't say that. That's not his instinct. He froths at the mouth when he sees any opportunity to laugh at someone else, call them stupid, or baselessly disagree.Gotcha. This reminds me of the dialog we had over the E's comment about blacks having justifiable reasons to be angry at white people, but if white people were angry at blacks it's because they're racist.
But what's even more frustrating is that he made a good point (which many people in this thread agree with, myself included).That was a priceless sentence.

[Parkbandit]

Honestly, I don’t know why you or Daniel or anyone even bothers.

You’ve nailed down the formula he’s used for years... when cornered on a legitimate point it’s :rofl: + personal attack.

Who is cornered? The only cornering anyone has done is me pointing out Daniel is a piece of shit liar.. 3 times now in less than a week.

And seriously Backlash.. you should be the last one to judge ANYONE on these boards. Of course, you should be the last one to even post on these boards.. and look at you go.

And Keller saying someone is a better man than him.. well no shit. Personally, I would set my goal far higher than Keller as a yardstick for a man.

[Parkbandit]

Gotcha. This reminds me of the dialog we had over the E's statement about blacks having reasons to be angry at white people, but any white person with issues was simply being racist.

BINGO.

[Keller]

Gotcha. This reminds me of the dialog we had over the E's comment about blacks having justifiable reasons to be angry at white people, but if white people were angry at blacks it's because they're racist.That was a priceless sentence.


In what way does it remind you of that?

[Back]

And seriously Backlash.. you should be the last one to judge ANYONE on these boards. Of course, you should be the last one to even post on these boards.. and look at you go.

Do Not Judge Lest Ye Be Judged. Fair enough, PB.

[Clove]

In what way does it remind you of that?Well (as I recall) you said that the E misspoke and didn't really mean to be racist (although you agreed the statement as made, was racist) and that focusing on it distracted from the larger, more important discussion.

This sort of reminds me of that. If you think he pulled a number out of his ass, but his general point has merit- might have been a good time to say, "okay PB is full of shit on the percentage but he has a point in that..."

Grace is only gracious when it's free of bias.

And I know when PB (or a lot of other people around here, myself included) get in argument mode it's east to focus on the insults and bickering. By the same token, I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who's been frustrated at Latrin picking at a detail (for umpteen posts) without recognizing the general merit of the original point.

At the end of the day I don't see anything wrong with someone who thinks they can do more good by directly helping people in need (rather than contributing through a charity). I actually admire it that kind of behavior.

[Keller]

Well (as I recall) you said that the E misspoke and didn't really mean to be racist (although you agreed the statement as made, was racist) and that focusing on it distracted from the larger, more important discussion.

This sort of reminds me of that. If you think he pulled a number out of his ass, but his general point has merit- might have been a good time to say, "okay PB is full of shit on the percentage but he has a point in that..."

Grace is only gracious when it's free of bias.

And I know when PB (or a lot of other people around here, myself included) get in argument mode it's east to focus on the insults and bickering. By the same token, I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who's been frustrated at Latrin picking at a detail (for umpteen posts) without recognizing the general merit of the original point.

Point taken w/r/t bias towards PB.

But it's a quite different situation because TheE had posted that and people jumped his shit and he hadn't responded. That's why I intervened there.

Now, if PB hadn't picked a fight with Latrin before I showed up, would I have done the same for PB and said something like you suggested above? No. And you quite correctly assessed the reason.

[Warriorbird]

Personally, I would set my goal far higher than Keller as a yardstick for a man.

Because you can say all sorts of horrible things about somebody for years... but if somebody says anything about your children it's on!

[Daniel]

Who is cornered? The only cornering anyone has done is me pointing out Daniel is a piece of shit liar.. 3 times now in less than a week.



Keep telling yourself that.

Chump.

:rofl:

[Gan]

Because you can say all sorts of horrible things about somebody for years... but if somebody says anything about your children it's on!

Sorry, picking on other members here is fair game - thats a caveat for posting here. Children on the other hand are something else entirely. If you had children you might understand that better.

[Parkbandit]

Sorry, picking on other members here is fair game - thats a caveat for posting here. Children on the other hand are something else entirely. If you had children you might understand that better.

That was the 'last straw' so to speak. To believe that was the only reason would be incorrect.

[ViridianAsp]

I honestly don't believe smaller churches should be taxed, I don't believe there is any reason to tax a struggling church who is trying it's best to do good things in the community with it's tithes.

Larger churches? I'm all in favor of them being taxed, if you can build your damn retiring pastor a mansion, you've obviously got more than enough to spread good will.

[Keller]

Sorry, picking on other members here is fair game - thats a caveat for posting here. Children on the other hand are something else entirely. If you had children you might understand that better.


I'm only going to say it one last time because I don't feel like bringing more attention to it -- but it was about his obligations as a father/husband and not his daughters.

[Clove]

I honestly don't believe smaller churches should be taxed, I don't believe there is any reason to tax a struggling church who is trying it's best to do good things in the community with it's tithes.If they can't afford taxes, how much possible good could they be doing with their tithes? Would any good they're doing be offset by the higher taxes the rest of the community has to pay to offset their exemption?

[CrystalTears]

I'm only going to say it one last time because I don't feel like bringing more attention to it -- but it was about his obligations as a father/husband and not his daughters.
You pretty much called them whores. There was no need to bring his kids into it at all, frankly.

[Latrinsorm]

Source on that.. or is it your opinion you are posing as fact again?I do not post opinions as facts. Information is readily available as to how much money a charity actually gives charitably, for instance at this site http://www.charitynavigator.org/ . They even put the numbers into pie charts for you.
Don't even know which toilet to flush this shit in... you pick. I never said I was the only person in the universeOnce again, I said WOULD BE, not YOU DID. In retrospect, this was not a good idea on my part: if you didn't understand what a conditional was, then explaining it to you with another conditional doesn't really make sense. (And as I say that I realize I did it again!) I can't really think of any way to get past that at the moment, but I'll get back to you if I do.
As I see it- he isn't generally satisfied with charities, so he prefers to give assistance directly. WTF is wrong with that?I for one am not saying that Parkbandit's giving strategy is morally wrong. What I said was that his stated motivations are factually unsound.
At the end of the day I don't see anything wrong with someone who thinks they can do more good by directly helping people in need (rather than contributing through a charity). I actually admire it that kind of behavior.This is a fairly old philosophical problem: that of charity vs. justice. Buying a familiy groceries for a week is an admirable thing to do, to be sure, but by definition it lasts a week. No single person is going to change the inherent problems with the system - only by working in concert will lasting progress be made, and this is where "charitable" organizations come in. Instead of buying a ham (which again, to be clear, I'm not looking down upon), an organization can fund a school, clean up a neighborhood, etc. There is inefficiency inherent in this, but no long-term effect is going to appear worthwhile from a short-term perspective.

[Clove]

No single person is going to change the inherent problems with the system...No, but a single person can make a difference in another's life. Years ago one bag of groceries was exactly what my friend needed to get back on her feet.

[Daniel]

When you were desperate yourself?

[Peanut Butter Jelly Time]

...about a month ago, there was a vultite-alloy quarterstaff on playershops for 5m... If I was 16, and female, there would've been some messed up shit going down to earn that silver. Oh yeahhhh. As it stands, it was just me whining and watching someone else buying it. Still sexy in its own right.

(this entire post assumes you people still play the game, which is likely not the case. Anywho, continue your nonsense)

[Clove]

When you were desperate yourself?Go ask your mom.

[Daniel]

she wouldn't know

[Clove]

she wouldn't knowAre you a 100% sure?