*snort*
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 6:09 AM, GMoney wrote:
>
> Well that's easy:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4yBvvGi_2A
>
> quod erat demonstrandum.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 12:26 PM, William Bowen >wrote:
>
> >
> > "Evidence against" is asking the atheist to prove a negative. Ther
Well that's easy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4yBvvGi_2A
quod erat demonstrandum.
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 12:26 PM, William Bowen wrote:
>
> "Evidence against" is asking the atheist to prove a negative. There is no
> way to do that.
>
> Like it or not, the burden of proof is and always ha
"Evidence against" is asking the atheist to prove a negative. There is no
way to do that.
Like it or not, the burden of proof is and always has been on the
"believer." Present your evidence.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:07 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> What evidence against?
> On Aug 22, 2013 7:00
I sound like all the other self identified atheists I know.
On Aug 22, 2013, at 10:04 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> You sound more Possibilian that anything else -
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possibilianism :D
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Zaphod wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't believe i
You sound more Possibilian that anything else -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possibilianism :D
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Zaphod wrote:
>
> I don't believe in the existence of a god.
>
> I don't see any evidence for the existence of a god.
>
> If I found evidence of a god, I would change
I don't believe in the existence of a god.
I don't see any evidence for the existence of a god.
If I found evidence of a god, I would change my mind.
For all I know, this universe could have been the result of a gastro intestinal
disease of a giant turtle. I think the odds of that are about t
Who said anything about evidence against?
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 22, 2013, at 6:07 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
>
> What evidence against?
> On Aug 22, 2013 7:00 PM, "Zaphod Beeblebrox"
> wrote:
>
>>
>> No, I'm not an agnostic. I'm not saying its unknowable. I'm saying I see
>> no evidence
But that's what it is...that's what being Atheist means.
That you do not believe in the existence of any supernatural "God" being.
Not that you think there may be a small chance that one might exist.
It is a firm statement, hey I do not believe in this, it is absolutely not
possible.
"I'm not s
What evidence against?
On Aug 22, 2013 7:00 PM, "Zaphod Beeblebrox"
wrote:
>
> No, I'm not an agnostic. I'm not saying its unknowable. I'm saying I see
> no evidence for a god yet. But thanks for trying to tell me what I am :)
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Aug 22, 2013, at 5:53 PM, Vivec wrote:
An atheist sees no evidence of a god. An agnostic considers the question to be
unknowable.
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 22, 2013, at 6:01 PM, Jerry Milo Johnson wrote:
>
> I always used the definitions where an atheist thinks there is no God, and
> an agnostic just doesnt care.
>
>
>
~~
I think that is what Agnostic is.
It is that you can't know, so you aren't saying there is...but you also
aren't saying there isn't because you just can't know right now.
I think this was the position of Carl Sagan as well.
"An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone
So by yours and gels standards, all atheists know without a doubt that there is
no way that any god like entity could have any hand in the creation of the
universe.
Way to make a good straw man guys.
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 22, 2013, at 5:55 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> Thank you
> On Aug 2
I always used the definitions where an atheist thinks there is no God, and
an agnostic just doesnt care.
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffus
No, I'm not an agnostic. I'm not saying its unknowable. I'm saying I see no
evidence for a god yet. But thanks for trying to tell me what I am :)
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 22, 2013, at 5:53 PM, Vivec wrote:
>
> Then you are not an atheist, you are an Agnostic.
>
> On 22 August 2013 17:37, Z
Thank you
On Aug 22, 2013 6:54 PM, "Vivec" wrote:
>
> Then you are not an atheist, you are an Agnostic.
>
> On 22 August 2013 17:37, Zaphod Beeblebrox >wrote:
>
> >
> > let me repeat. Just because I don't share your belief that there is a
> god,
> > it does not mean I believe the inverse. It
Then you are not an atheist, you are an Agnostic.
On 22 August 2013 17:37, Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
>
> let me repeat. Just because I don't share your belief that there is a god,
> it does not mean I believe the inverse. It just means I don't share your
> belief.
>
>
No, saying it is unknowable would make you an agnostic. Saying you don't know,
means just that.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 22, 2013, at 4:42 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
>
> Because I don't know makes you agnostic right?
>> On Aug 22, 2013 5:41 PM, "LRS Scout" wrote:
>>
>> So how do you think
I think we need more evidence before we make that determination
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 22, 2013, at 4:41 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
>
> So how do you think the sentient life universe thing started?
> On Aug 22, 2013 5:38 PM, "Zaphod Beeblebrox"
> wrote:
>
>>
>> let me repeat. Just beca
Because I don't know makes you agnostic right?
On Aug 22, 2013 5:41 PM, "LRS Scout" wrote:
> So how do you think the sentient life universe thing started?
> On Aug 22, 2013 5:38 PM, "Zaphod Beeblebrox"
> wrote:
>
>>
>> let me repeat. Just because I don't share your belief that there is a
>> go
So how do you think the sentient life universe thing started?
On Aug 22, 2013 5:38 PM, "Zaphod Beeblebrox"
wrote:
>
> let me repeat. Just because I don't share your belief that there is a god,
> it does not mean I believe the inverse. It just means I don't share your
> belief.
>
>
> On Thu, Au
let me repeat. Just because I don't share your belief that there is a god,
it does not mean I believe the inverse. It just means I don't share your
belief.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:30 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> Faith there is no God.
> On Aug 22, 2013 5:23 PM, "Zaphod Beeblebrox"
> wrote:
>
Faith there is no God.
On Aug 22, 2013 5:23 PM, "Zaphod Beeblebrox"
wrote:
>
> yep, waiting for evidence just screams "faith"
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:15 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> >
> > So faith yeah
> > On Aug 22, 2013 5:14 PM, "Zaphod Beeblebrox" <
> zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com>
> > w
yep, waiting for evidence just screams "faith"
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:15 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> So faith yeah
> On Aug 22, 2013 5:14 PM, "Zaphod Beeblebrox"
> wrote:
>
> >
> > I've never tried to prove it. I've also never tried to prove that the
> > world was not created by midget donk
So faith yeah
On Aug 22, 2013 5:14 PM, "Zaphod Beeblebrox"
wrote:
>
> I've never tried to prove it. I've also never tried to prove that the
> world was not created by midget donkeys from planet of Psychedelia Minor.
>
> just because I'm an atheist also doesn't mean that I subscribe to every
> s
I've never tried to prove it. I've also never tried to prove that the
world was not created by midget donkeys from planet of Psychedelia Minor.
just because I'm an atheist also doesn't mean that I subscribe to every
scientific theory either. I don't know enough about quantum physics to
have a "
No it can't.
To control and coerce sure
Maybe insult the intelligence of.
However I say that being an atheist means you have faith it was not some
thing that started the ball rolling and I'm saying you can't prove that
anymore than Sam can prove God by whatever name.
I have a faith. But I know
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> see, there you go, you make it personal, then 10 messages later you ask me,
> "why are you taking this personally"
>
>
I was never talking about YOU earlier.
> Also, you said earlier I think religious p
see, there you go, you make it personal, then 10 messages later you ask me,
"why are you taking this personally"
Also, you said earlier I think religious people are fools, but yet now you
say it's similar to my "religion"... Hard to keep up with the argument
sweeps here Sam.
On Thu, Aug 22,
ooops, similar to your "lack" of religion.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Sam wrote:
> I said they don't believe others are fools. Similar to your religion, you
> just don't think or care what others are believing in unless it infringes
> on your rights.
>
> .
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013
I said they don't believe others are fools. Similar to your religion, you
just don't think or care what others are believing in unless it infringes
on your rights.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> What religion is it that doesn't b
What religion is it that doesn't believe the other religions are wrong?
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> My religion doesn't think of non-believers as fools.
>
> .
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
> zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > spoken l
Troll? Is that what you got out of this exchange? I was rather impressed
you were open to discussion without resorting to insults. Is this a record
for you?
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sam, I gotta commend you...you are one of
My religion doesn't think of non-believers as fools.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> spoken like a true believer..."It can't be my religion, because my religion
> is the right one"
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Sam wrote:
Sam, I gotta commend you...you are one of the best trolls around.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> I was talking about the guy that refused the job.
>
> And I still stand behind that comment. Kind of proud of it actually.
>
> .
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Zaphod Bee
I was talking about the guy that refused the job.
And I still stand behind that comment. Kind of proud of it actually.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sam, you were the one who made it personal by saying "If you are
> religiously
spoken like a true believer..."It can't be my religion, because my religion
is the right one"
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> That doesn't really play out. But it was cute.
>
> .
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
> zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
Sam, you were the one who made it personal by saying "If you are
religiously against
religion then you should not take the job. Until they cater to your
religious needs that is." -- inferring that atheist's have a religion.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> Nobody asked you to.
That doesn't really play out. But it was cute.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> some could say the same thing about your god.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> >
> > I believe the FSM is not real and was mad
Nobody asked you to. If I didn't have tea in my pocket I would be damn sure
I believe there is no tea in my pocket. If you don't want to commit that's
fine, don't file a lawsuit. These people did and they're the ones we're
talking about, not you.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Zaphod Beeble
some could say the same thing about your god.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> I believe the FSM is not real and was made up by a fool trying to insult
> people he didn't agree with.
>
> .
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Cameron Childress >wrote:
>
> >
> > On Thu, Aug
actually, no, I don't believe there is no god. Just like I don't believe
that my pocket contains "no tea"
Just because someone makes up a story, it doesn't mean I have to go around
affirming that I don't believe it.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> Do you believe there is no
what is it exactly that I'm believing?
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> Why is it that some atheists get upset when what the believe is a 'belief'?
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
> zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > we've hashed thi
I believe the FSM is not real and was made up by a fool trying to insult
people he didn't agree with.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Cameron Childress wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> > That should read 'when what they believe is labeled as a 'belief''
>
>
You're taking it personal. We were discussing atheists in general and even
more specifically the Gaylor's lawsuit about tax exemption. The FFRF is a
member of Atheist Alliance International's whose mission is to challenge
and confront religious faith, to strengthen global atheism by promoting the
Do you believe there is no God? Sort of like "If you choose not to decide,
you still have made a choice."
You believe religious people are wrong, I might even say you think they are
fools. But I'm not sure why this makes you angry.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
> That should read 'when what they believe is labeled as a 'belief''
I think most of the people who have this problem because they really see
Atheism as a total absence of belief - not an actual belief.
Sort of like saying "I don't believe th
Why is it that some atheists get upset when what the believe is a 'belief'?
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> we've hashed this over a bunch of times, but the atheism literally
> translates to "without gods", anti-theism would be "again
That should read 'when what they believe is labeled as a 'belief''
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
> Why is it that some atheists get upset when what the believe is a 'belief'?
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
> zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
we've hashed this over a bunch of times, but the atheism literally
translates to "without gods", anti-theism would be "against gods". I know
a lot of atheists who could care less what anyone else believes. They just
don't hold a belief in a god or gods. They aren't going out to
prosthelytize or
and yet you still classify it as a beliefyou are the epitome of someone
who can't think outside their belief system Sam. Does it occur to you that
some can actually not have a belief.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> 1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and pur
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the
universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency
or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often
containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
I could make
I think atheism could fit into #3 on Sam's list.
To be honest, hardcore atheists are as annoying (and frequently more
annoying) than even the most hardcore religious zealots out there. It goes
back to what I have been saying for a while, the closer you get to the
fringe, the less common sense the
ok, so which one do you think atheists belong to? Which one of those
classifications does not have a belief
sometimes I think religious people can't think any other way than in the
context of a belief.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> 1.a set of beliefs concerning the cause,
1.a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the
universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency
or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often
containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific
Religion: the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp.
a personal God or gods.
That argument about atheism being a religion reminds me of HGTG infocom
game where you carry "no-tea" as an item in your inventory. Of course, in
that it was meant to be comedy. Unfortunately, in
We're now in the second(?) iteration of this loop.
Take out the bad player not the entire team.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> yes, they can be.
>
> Pastor Rick Warren And The Tax Law
>
> http://www.rothgerber.com/showarticle.asp
It's not a lie if it's not an affirmation. If you are religiously against
religion then you should not take the job. Until they cater to your
religious needs that is.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> What other qualifications for o
Sounds very religious to have that kind of commitment against something. I
didn't realize it went that deep.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Vivec wrote:
>
> Sam, for someone who is totally opposed to the idea of God at a state
> level, it would be the equivalent of asking them to say Pra
yes, they can be.
Pastor Rick Warren And The Tax Law
http://www.rothgerber.com/showarticle.aspx?Show=1059
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Sam wrote:
>
> They say housing allowances for clergy are unfair, so the IRS issued it to
> them, making it fair. They refused and only want clergy to
What other qualifications for office do you feel it would be okay to lie
about?
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Sam wrote:
>
> I don't consider it an affirmation, but I understand if you do.
>
> .
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
> zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrot
Sam, for someone who is totally opposed to the idea of God at a state
level, it would be the equivalent of asking them to say Praise HItler at
the end of an oath.
What's so difficult to understand?
Some people have a fundamental opposition to the role of God in the laws,
constitutions, and operat
I don't consider it an affirmation, but I understand if you do.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> true, but the point was being made that it's okay if you don't believe
> because technically it's not lying.
>
> a lie is a lie regard
They say housing allowances for clergy are unfair, so the IRS issued it to
them, making it fair. They refused and only want clergy to not have housing
allowances. Do you feel housing tax breaks for clergy are abuses?
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmai
And that's a good thing.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> Moreover if you look at what can get written off, its astounding.
>
> Religious employees salaries are not taxed;
> Donations are tax free;
> tax-free land (exempt from property taxes) - upwards of 25% of ma
I was referring to the guy that refused the job because he had to say "so
help me God". If you don't believe, it's just a harmless phrase. You are
not affirming, just pleasing those that do believe.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
true, but the point was being made that it's okay if you don't believe
because technically it's not lying.
a lie is a lie regardless of how easy it is to expose.
If I apply for office in Texas and I affirm that I believe in a higher
power, is that not a lie just because it can't be proven easily
Completely different lawsuit even LOL
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/21/atheists-lawsuit-irs_n_3792145.html
-Original Message-
From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 10:41 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Feds say OK to atheists on religion
I don't have a link but I remember something like that happening to a
county commissioner in one of the Carolinas - he was removed from office a
couple of years ago when it was discovered he was an atheist.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
It is a lot easier, I think, to verify someone has a degree than verify
that they believe in some kind of deity.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The affirmation of a god in those laws is akin to a degree being a job
> qualification.
different article that was covering this aspect of the
suit...NM...
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 10:41 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Feds say OK to atheists on religion tax break
This is what baffles me: The gover
That is not how the article reads to me. To me it reads that they want to
exemption removed completely...for everyone.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> My assumption is that since they realized how the exemption was being
> wrongly ap
so do you also think that more stringent requirements for welfare are just
attacks on poor people?
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Sam wrote:
>
> The agenda is to hurt the Church. Plain and clear. I don't know why they
> are so against religion. If you really are an atheist, you wouldn't car
Moreover if you look at what can get written off, its astounding.
Religious employees salaries are not taxed;
Donations are tax free;
tax-free land (exempt from property taxes) - upwards of 25% of many cities
are church owned or owned by church related businesses, and are not subject
to property
The affirmation of a god in those laws is akin to a degree being a job
qualification. If I don't believe in the value of a degree, I could lie
and say I have one. Likewise with the affirmation.
Later when it's found out that I don't have a degree or that I don't
recognize a higher power, I coul
Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 10:41 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Feds say OK to atheists on religion tax break
This is what baffles me: The government says they can take a tax exemption,
but they do not want it. So, rather than simply not claiming the exemption
on
The agenda is to hurt the Church. Plain and clear. I don't know why they
are so against religion. If you really are an atheist, you wouldn't care.
The being sworn into office is a real issue, I agree. But the tax exempt
suit is an attack.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Scott Stroz wrote:
My assumption is that since they realized how the exemption was being
wrongly applied to them, they want to make sure it's not being applied
willy-nilly to any one who wants to call themselves a spritual leader.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> This is what baffles me:
You're not swearing you believe, you're just agreeing that if a fictional
character did exist he would strike you down. No sweat to a non-believer.
Unless of course an acknowledgement of any kind is as bad as a denouncement
from a believer.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox
This is what baffles me: The government says they can take a tax exemption,
but they do not want it. So, rather than simply not claiming the exemption
on their taxes, they take ti to court. Asinine. This is proof, to me, that
the extremes of any issue are completely devoid of common sense.
On Th
If they really wanted to avoid tax exempt status they just needed to say
mention tea party or conservatives. After reading the article, it looks
like they are just attacking religion. That's not being a very good
atheists now is it?
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> On
yes, but you made it sound like a legal protection. "it's not lying if you
don't believe". Would that be protection from perjury charges?
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Sam wrote:
>
> It's a human thing. Just because you swear to tell the truth doesn't make
> it so.
>
> .
>
>
> On Thu,
It's a human thing. Just because you swear to tell the truth doesn't make
it so.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> therein lies the problem with our political system ;)
>
>
~
: Zaphod Beeblebrox [mailto:zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 9:59 AM
> > To: cf-community
> > Subject: Re: Feds say OK to atheists on religion tax break
> >
> >
> > then, they should "pick themselves up by their own
> b
that's rich Sam...so, if I testify, and since I don't believe in god and I
swear to tell the truth, "so help me god", I can lie my ass off since I
don't believe.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Sam wrote:
>
> It's not lying if you don't believe. It's actually very harmless, unless
> your fai
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I don't have an issue with certain organizations getting tax exempt status
> if they're putting their money back into helping the community, churches
> included. I don't think that being called a churc
therein lies the problem with our political system ;)
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Sam wrote:
>
> You can lie your ass off either way. A few words won't change that is my
> point.
>
> .
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
> zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
community
> Subject: Re: Feds say OK to atheists on religion tax break
>
>
> While I think it is admirable that these people do not want to use the tax
> exemption, I don't understand why they wen tot court over it. Simply don't
> take advantage of it and be done with i
You can lie your ass off either way. A few words won't change that is my
point.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> that's rich Sam...so, if I testify, and since I don't believe in god and I
> swear to tell the truth, "so help me god"
: Thursday, August 22, 2013 9:59 AM
> To: cf-community
> Subject: Re: Feds say OK to atheists on religion tax break
>
>
> then, they should "pick themselves up by their own bootstraps"...seriously
> though, the church shouldn't enjoy tax exempt status just because the
&g
[mailto:zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 9:59 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Feds say OK to atheists on religion tax break
then, they should "pick themselves up by their own bootstraps"...seriously
though, the church shouldn't enjoy tax exempt status just becaus
that has actually been the party line of the GOP recently. But that was
actually a joke. The main point of my comment is that the individual
clergy members should qualify for lower income tax brackets and the lack of
paying taxes therein. The church should not. The church is a business.
If it
...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 9:30 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Feds say OK to atheists on religion tax break
While I think it is admirable that these people do not want to use the tax
exemption, I don't understand why they wen tot court over it. Simply don't
take advantage
That's not why they are tax exempt.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> then, they should "pick themselves up by their own bootstraps"...seriously
> though, the church shouldn't enjoy tax exempt status just because the
> clergy is poo
It's not lying if you don't believe. It's actually very harmless, unless
your faith is not acknowledging a certain higher being and this would cause
you to lose respect amongst the flock.
.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> it's not
Should we tell the same of those who might be victims of any welfare cuts?
That they should 'pick themselves up by their own bootstraps'?
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> then, they should "pick themselves up by their own bootstraps".
the question was asked "why do atheists need leaders"
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> Those laws are asinine, no doubt. But what do they have to do with the tax
> break Gaylord is fighting against?
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
> zaph0d.b33
then, they should "pick themselves up by their own bootstraps"...seriously
though, the church shouldn't enjoy tax exempt status just because the
clergy is poor. We have tax laws for lower income people. Don't they fall
into that category?
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
it's not just that, but lying to get into political office shouldn't be the
standard. What happens when it's found out you're an atheist?
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Sam wrote:
>
> OK, I see the point and these laws are unconstitutional. However, if you
> don't believe in God, why would
Those laws are asinine, no doubt. But what do they have to do with the tax
break Gaylord is fighting against?
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> http://ffrf.org/faq/state-church/item/14017-religious-tests-for-public-office
>
>
>
> On
I think these laws are asinine, but, I fail to see how they have anything
to do with the tax break Gaylord is fighting.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> From Wikipedia:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_against_atheists#United_States
>
> The constitutions
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
