 |
|
|
|
April 4th, 2011
10:31 AM ET
Tax credits for religious school scholarships ruled constitutionalBy Bill Mears, CNN Supreme Court Producer WASHINGTON (CNN) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday tossed out a lawsuit challenging Arizona's tax breaks for voluntary donations benefiting private school scholarships, many of them Christian-based. The 13-year-old program provides dollar-for-dollar income tax credits for money given to "school tuition organizations," or STOs. The 5-4 ruling split along conservative-liberal lines. Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy said taxpayers challenging the program lacked "standing" to continue the suit. "If an establishment of religion is alleged to cause real injury to particular individuals, the federal courts may adjudicate the matter," Kennedy wrote. "The fact that (those challenging the program) are state taxpayers does not give them standing to challenge the subsidies that (the program) provides to religious STOs." The case involved a politically charged trifecta - taxes, religion and education. Some Arizona taxpayers challenged the program as unconstitutional because, they say, not-for-profit religious organizations award most of the scholarships and require children to enroll in religious schools. Those opponents said the state has effectively been funneling taxpayer money to religious schools through a third-party "front" group. The justices were divided over whether that represented a de facto "endorsement" of religion by Arizona. A key issue for the court was whether the tax credit meant the donated amount was the government's money or an individual's. The growing popularity of school choice plans around the country has raised fresh legal questions about whether Arizona's plan is religion-neutral, and whether parents have true decision-making power, free from government intervention. A federal appeals court ruled the decade-old lawsuit could proceed. In 2002, the Supreme Court separately upheld school voucher programs. Arizonans can receive a $500 credit ($1,000 for a couple filing jointly) off their state income taxes for contributions to school tuition organizations, which operate as charities. These organizations must spend at least 90 percent of money received on scholarships, and must offer them to students at more than one school. Parents would apply for the tax-credit funded scholarships at either a religious or secular school. In this ruling, Kennedy said the tax credit did not amount to a "government expenditure." "Awarding some citizens a tax credit allows other citizens to retain control over their own funds in accordance with their own consciences," he said. "Private citizens created private STOs; STOs choose beneficiary schools; and taxpayers then contribute to STOs." He was supported by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito. In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan said the majority "betrays" the vision of the nation's founders on the separation of church and state. "Today's decisions devastates taxpayer standing in Establishment Clause cases," she wrote. "The court's opinion thus offers a roadmap - more truly, a one-step instruction - to any government that wishes to to insulate its financing of religious activity from legal challenges. ... However blatantly the government may violate the Establishment Clause, taxpayers cannot gain access to the federal courts." Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor backed Kagan's views. State figures show more than 50 school tuition organizations had received about $400 million in contributions through last year. In 2009, the program provided 27,000 scholarships to 373 schools, with most going to students who would not have been able to afford to attend. An Arizona Republic newspaper investigation found that of the $54 million in scholarships awarded in 2008, 93 percent went to students attending religious schools. Four Arizona taxpayers had sued the state and some of the largest school tuition organizations. The plaintiffs are represented by various outside groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union. Taxpayers are generally limited in their ability to claim constitutional wrongdoing over government spending. A special class was carved by the high court 42 years ago - the so-called Flast exception– for some kinds of disputes related to the First Amendment's prohibition on government "establishment of religion." The current cases are Arizona Christian School Tuition Org. v. Winn (09-987) and Garriott v. Winn (09-991).
Next entry »The Take: Zakaria on the Quran burning
« Previous entryPetraeus condemns Quran burning as protests rage on
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Now the state of AZ can take control of any religious school that accepts the tax credit money. I wonder how many will accept the money if they are required to meet the AZ educational standards for science?
The government should pay for all private schools as American public schools have turned into a toxic trash can.
I disagree only for this reason. The government would further get involved! How long before private schools produce like public schools if the government is involved in a greater way?
If the government pays for "private" schools, then by definition they become public schools...
PraiseTheLard
If the government pays for "private" schools, then by definition they become public schools...
-------
We agree on something? I'm getting nervous now! But seriously that is my point exactly!
Steve (the real one) wrote: "We agree on something? I'm getting nervous now!
LOL... I'd bet we'd agree on quite a bit if could ever get over a couple of rather specific disagreements...
PraiseTheLard
Steve (the real one) wrote: "We agree on something? I'm getting nervous now!
LOL... I'd bet we'd agree on quite a bit if could ever get over a couple of rather specific disagreement
------–
you might be right!
Frederica, how can you know anything about American schools when you live in Southeast Asia?
Many parents disagree on what public school teach. We still pay the same tax. Private schols and home schools should be covered just as well. @Robert, what do you know about Southeast Asia? You fattened Westerners should do more to free slaves instead of traveling and polluting the Earth.
By "fattened," I usually mean being rich on the expense of poor nations, not obesity.
"tax breaks for voluntary donations benefiting private school scholarships, many of them Christian-based."
As an atheist, I have no problem with this program since the key word here is "scholarship" which means as Merriam-Webster's points out, a grant aid to a student or a fund of knowledge and learning. I'll admit, I dislike the thought my tax dollars would end up paying for some of the religious education at these schools, as much as conservatives dislike spending money on planned parenthood, but it is not the primary focus of the scholarships, which is teaching basic knowledge and skill's to our youth, which is a good thing by all accounts.
Agreed. As a Christian I would feel the same in the case of a school based on Atheistic beliefs; both would be trying to better the student.
What schools out there are based on atheistic beliefs? I've seen lots of religious schools, but no atheist ones. No, normal secular schools do not count.
Most parishes (e.g. Catholic, Episcopalian, Luthern) with schools, don't have this problem because the Sunday collection goes into the general, tax-deductable funding of the parish and some of the money is subsequently used for school support to include scholarships for those in need.
Will this funding of theologically-outdated schools of religion continue? Not much longer based on the following:
Recognizing the flaws, follies and frauds in the foundations of Islam, Judaism and Christianity by the "bowers", kneelers" and "pew peasants" will converge these religions into some simple rules of life. No koran, bible, clerics, nuns, monks, imams, evangelicals, ayatollahs, rabbis, professors/teachers of religion or priests needed or desired.
Ditto for houses of "worthless worship" aka mosques, churches, basilicas, cathedrals, temples and synagogues.
Glad to see you are well, Reality. I see you continue to quote agnostics, Gnostics and Diests reather than express an opinion founded self-actualized thought rather than wikipedia or Answers.com.
Some added self-actualized thoughts:
Only for the those interested in a religious update:
1. origin: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20E1EFE35540C7A8CDDAA0894DA404482
New Torah For Modern Minds
"Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred......................................................................................................................................
2. Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations (or “mythicizing” from P, M, M, L and J) and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a ma-mzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). An-alyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, ) via the NT and related doc-uments have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.
The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hitt-ites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics.
earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html
For added "pizzazz", Catholic theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".
Current RCC problems:
Pedophiliac priests, an all-male, mostly white hierarchy, atonement theology and original sin!!!!
3. Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley, Roger Williams, the Great “Babs” et al, founders of Christian-based religions or combination religions also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immacu-late co-nceptions).
Current problems:
Adulterous preachers, "propheteering/ profiteering" evangelicals and atonement theology,
4. Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.
This agenda continues as shown by the ma-ssacre in Mumbai, the as-sas-sinations of Bhutto and Theo Van Gogh, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, the Ft. Hood follower of the koran, and the Filipino “koranics”.
And who funds this muck and stench of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.
Current crises:
The Sunni-Shiite blood feud and the warmongering, womanizing (11 wives), hallucinating founder.
5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) – "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."
The caste/laborer system, reincarnation and cow worship/reverence are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism .
Current crises:
The caste system and cow worship/reverence.
6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."
"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"
Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circu-mstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb.
Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations, embellishments, lies, and myths surrounding the founders and foundations of said rules of life.
Then, apply the Five F rule: "First Find the Flaws, then Fix the Foundations". And finally there will be religious peace and religious awareness in the world!!!!!
airwx,
As per most contemporary NT scholars ( e.g. Raymond Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament, p. 654), I Timothy and T-itus were not written by the "deity" guided Paul but were penned by some non-deity guided, pseudo Paul.
And the Book of Revelation (not plural by the way):
"Nineteenth-century agnostic Robert G. Ingersoll branded Revelation "the insanest of all books".[30] Thomas Jefferson omitted it along with most of the Biblical canon, from the Jefferson Bible, and wrote that at one time, he "considered it as merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams." [31]
@Reality – You rely on the words of others, I see. How ironic.
Vaytin,
And does not everyone rely on the words of others in some form or another?
As noted previously: Summarizing some words based on rational thinking and extensive reading:
Jesus was a bit "touched". After all he thought he spoke to Satan, thought he changed water into wine, thought he raised Lazarus from the dead etc. In today's world, said Jesus would be declared legally insane.
Or did P, M, M, L and J simply make him into a first century magic-man via their epistles and gospels of semi-fiction? Most contemporary NT experts after thorough analyses of all the scriptures go with the latter magic-man conclusion with J's gospels being mostly fiction.
Obviously, today's followers of Paul et al's "magic-man" are also a bit on the odd side believing in all the Christian mumbo jumbo about bodies resurrecting, and exorcisms, and miracles, and "magic-man atonement, and infallible, old, European, white men, and 24/7 body/blood sacrifices followed by consumption of said sacrifices. Yummy!!!!
@Reality – Yet the irony remains.
While living amongst all your eminently quotable books, have you ever taken the time for independent verification or are the words of others "good enough" for you? You have fun with reiterations, yes, but in saying the same things you could be making the same mistakes as well. Acting like a push-button noisemaker doesn't necessarily convince anyone of your, ahem, "arguments" as some might call them.
What is there to rely upon in the words you post? What can we learn when you don't have a clear point but only use generic paragraphs you've tallied and pasted? All we learn is to ignore you. Don't you have anything to say other than your reiterations or whatever you call them?
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
airwx,
As per most contemporary NT scholars ( e.g. Raymond Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament, p. 654), I Timothy and T-itus were not written by the "deity" guided Paul but were penned by some non-deity guided, pseudo Paul.
And the Book of Revelation (not plural by the way):
"Nineteenth-century agnostic Robert G. Ingersoll branded Revelation "the insanest of all books".[30] Thomas Jefferson omitted it along with most of the Biblical canon, from the Jefferson Bible, and wrote that at one time, he "considered it as merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams." [31]
Actually...faith excludes nothing. Your concept is based on the need you have to be shown proof in the visible 3 dimensions and within time. My worldview construct includes those things which we cannot define in those dimensions. Since the original question included divinity, it automatically expanded the conversation outside of the physical. Your thinking that I have no experience has no basis in your knowledge of me. Scripture does address this, especially in Timothy, Corinthans and Reveations. Tradition is the weakest test in all things and is only used as a guideline.
@airwx – You say faith excludes nothing.
Yes, I have noticed that people of faith will believe the most obvious lies without question, so you are right enough about that. They will exclude nothing even if it is false, for they do not care about what is true or false but only see the world through their blind faith as they step into a pit.
Being led into a pit, you must surely have lots of interesting anecdotes for us, yes?
So you have experience in evaluating the truth and honesty of someone like Jesus from an outside perspective? How so?
Did you meet David Koresh or something? What experience do you really have in evaluating the claims of someone appearing on the scene like Jesus did? You don't, do you? Jesus could show up and you'd pooh-pooh everything he said if it didn't match up with your "scriptures" which were not written by Jesus. He could be pretty angry right now at the lies told about him in the Bible and you would have no way of knowing for sure, would you?
Have you asked him anything like that? Have you evaluated your own scriptures in the light of reason or experience?
I very much doubt it. Most people's faith is of the unquestioning variety even though every word is subject to a gazillion interpretations and translation errors.
Without questioning the veracity of scripture, you have no veracity of scripture to speak of. Your methods are fail.
Your generalizations are interesting. I agree that there are a gazillion translations. They fall into the realm of tradition for me, as most contain errors caused by tradition. I do my best to translate for myself. You might try it sometime....especially Gen 1:1-5. Your veracity comment tells me your age and educational level. Your point fails as a circular arguement.
No, the scriptures were not written by Jesus. Yes I do have a reasonable understanding of the history of the writings. Your comment is but a red herring.
I do have experiences that relate to the question. They actually are of supposed preachers who made wild claims. While their doctrinal teachings sounded good at their face, they were twisted versions of what I believed.
To declare that I have accepted something false without an indepth knowledge of me is the guilt by associaton ploy. You really need to study the sceptics handbook online.
I have a serious question for the religious amongst you. Let's say that a man has appeared who claims he is a divine presence, of God and sent by God to save the world and set it onto the true course. He looks like any ordinary human, is known to have what appears to be a normal family, speaks sincerely, and shows no obvious signs of insanity. A few among his small but growing group of followers claim to have seen amazing miracles, but he himself refuses to perform them as he says people must choose him freely. He may be Jesus returned, or he may be another David Koresh.
He speaks a positive and encouraging message, but it does quite not match any existing doctrine. He refuses to identify himself with any religion, and neither does he speak ill of any religion. No religion or denomination recognizes him as a prophet or messiah, or as being in any way divine. Some of your friends are swayed by him and are considering joining him, but most others are dismissive or even openly hostile.
What would make you believe in this person? What would you need to decide that he was divine?
@Arthur
Having been raised Catholic, the religion of hierarchical haberdashery, I would only be convined of this new prophet's veracity if he wore an enormous and preferably shiny hat.
The same way I came to my faith...using scripture, reason, tradition and experience...to test the tenants of his teaching.
@airwx – I think you misspelled "tenets" there.
@Vaytin Thanks..I'm not a great speller....that is why I married a secretary!!!
@airwx – So you would use "scripture, reason, tradition and experience" to "test" what he was teaching? I can only assume you mean "test" as in something not reasonable, traditional, based on scripture, nor based on your experience, for you have never met anyone like that (no experience), there is no tradition for "testing" new people like this, there is no scripture that addresses this, nor would reason work for you since your faith precludes reason, logic, proof, or actual facts. Yes? No?
Only airwx cared to comment on the original question? Ah, too bad. Just wondering about something. Not enough input to draw a conclusion. Thanks, airwx.
Doc, Blasphemy! Careful or you'll be sentenced to 50 lashes with a wet noodle, or worse, stale beer. Those residents of the Escape Vessel that you describe will require further study, though. A tax-exempt cross-disciplinary research fund will need to be set up.
RAmen
Scholarship donations to the school of His Noodliness the Flying Spaghetti Monster should definitely get tax credits. There is much to be studied in Pastafarianism and some of it is very subtle. Deep thinking and deep dishes are sometimes required. Essential study tools such as beer can be very expensive.
My religion's better than your religion.
May the sauce ever be with you.
RAmen
I love good spaghetti.
Again you heretical Pasafarians refuse to accept The Truth of J.R. "Bob" Dobbs! You must fear the Stark Fist of Removal and reject your pinkness now!
Does your starchy deity offer eternal salvation or triple your money back?
Of course not. All you get is a bowl of pasta.
Maybe your heaven has has a beer volcano and a strip.per factory, but I get to flee the destruction of Earth on the Escape Vessel of the Se/x Goddesses.
Cast off the oppressive noodly appendage! Burn your pirate costume and come learn the art of bulldada through exremeditation that is the birth right of all SubGenii.
Doc, Blasphemy! Careful or you'll be sentenced to 50 lashes with a wet noodle, or worse, stale beer. Those residents of the Escape Vessel that you describe will require further study, though. A tax-exempt cross-disciplinary research fund will need to be set up.
RAmen
(other post with same content was meant to go in as a reply here.)
@PeterVN
I'd volunteer for such an inter-faith study.
If nothing else, Pastafarians and SubGenii can agree that beer is good.
We have many disciplines to share with you Pasta folk, such as Sadofuturistics, Megaphysics, Scatalography, Schizophreniatrics, Morealism, Sarcastrophy, Cynisacreligion, Apocolyptionomy, ESPectorationalism, Hypno-Pediatrics, Subliminalism, Satyriology, Disto-Utopianity, Sardonicology, Fascetiouism, Ridiculophagy, and Miscellatheistic Theology.
Simply open your minds to "Bob" and you too can enjoy org/ies with as many genders and species as you desire! All Dobbs asks is $30.
If, however, you wish to protest the SubGenius way of life, it will cost $30 to register your complaint.
How much for a good plate of spaghetti?
I went to a bible college, my husband is currently working on his master's at a seminary, so I am the grateful student that a scholarship would be given. Private schools are very expensive, but those of us that choose to attend one made the decision based on very profound beliefs. Most of us that attend don't have financially comfortable families to pay our way through college and so we then have to depend on scholarships or just get in a ton of ridiculous dept by loans. Those folks that are so willing as to give out scholarships to students are giving out of their own free will. They are tax payers themselves and can do with their money whatever they please. So when they give to us, we are very grateful. Why punish a fellow taxpayer for giving their money to something good, like a child's education, by not wanting to give them tax credits? I am proud of those that voted to give the tax credits, and I am very grateful for them.
I could be wrong, but I believe that whatever funds (up to a specific limit) these folks donate to these schools counts as a credit against their state tax bill... In other words, that money would have gone to the state treasury rather than the school... So it really is a diversion of tax dollars to a specific – in this instance, religious – ent.ity.
Nope, I haven't done to CW those nasty things (you loved)I've done to you 8x/day.
CW – Here's some questions for you if you feel up to tackling some hard ones.
1. Can you communicate with your god or is your god one of presence only?
2. Do you equate emotions with accurate perceptions?
3. Can your god change physical things in this universe or is your god spiritual only?
4. How do you determine what your god wants, thinks, and feels?
5. If you rely on words written by human beings, how do you determine whether those words are "inspired" by your god or not?
6. What attributes does your god have and why do you believe that these attributes are accurate beyond a shadow of a doubt?
7. Under what circ.umstances would it be okay for someone else to lie about your god?
And
8. How would you be able to determine whether they lied or not? How do you know someone is lying to you?
In answering these questions (and others) for myself, I became an agnostic and eventually an atheist, so if your faith is not strong enough for you to face these questions, that is okay. You are not required to answer.
@ Vaytin,
Answers to your questions:
1. Yes I can talk to him at anytime...through prayer which is the most important way.
2. Not necessarily....the heart is the most deceitful thing in a man...if it is led by God then God can shape a man's perceptions
3. My God can do anything....so yes...nothing is impossible for him.
4. Through praying....fasting...spending time in his word. God even reveals what he wants with those he uses to speak to us.
5. You have to accept on "Faith" that God used man to write his good book. You have to have Faith to believe.
6. God is Love, merciful, compassionate,...etc. His word shows this beyond a doubt.
7. No one should lie about God....its wrong
8. Anything that is said can be compared to the scriptures in the Bible....that is the way.
Hope you find your way to God....the God of the Bible...he's waiting.
Sorry CW is unvailable at the moment, you may allow me to answer your questions.
1.) Througth Prayer
2.) No!
3.) All of the above (as He wishes)
4.) Through signs, promptings and revelations
5.) Throught faith
6.) Omnipotence, becoz I have faith in Him
7.) Yes! (God gave us free agency)
8.) If the words came from you and when you're the one speaking.
Thank you for calling have a great and blessed day.
@CW – Thanks for answering my questions to the best of your ability. What do you think about your answering machine?
@CW's answering machine – You call me a liar and yet you do not use your own name? Who's the liar here? Not me.
@CW
1) Isn't it a rather one sided conversation? If God is litereally talking to you, it may be time to seek psychiatric help.
2) If the heart is deceitful and faith is a feeling that comes from the heart (since it cannot be proven or rationalized), then is not possible that your faith is a deception?
3) God can do anything, but doesn't. He seemed to be a lot more demonstrative back when he flamboyantly parted the seas.
4) If he reveals what he wants through those he uses to speak to us, how do you which speaker is true? The Pope is the infallible mouthpiece of God, and so was David Koresh.
5) Again, faith is a poor way to make decisions. It is easily exploited by teh unscrupulous.
6) God is merciful and compassionate, though He wont' hesitate to kill entire generations (egypt's first born sons), civilizations (sodom, gomorrah), or indeed every living thing on the planet.
7/8) Would I be lying about your God if I all Him jealous and angry?
There is scripture describing Him as thus, negating the "God is Love" statements
@ Doc,
All I can say is that everyone NEEDS a relationship with God....including you. Yes he does speak...through scripture...through using people that come into your life or those who you may or may not be close to.
Doc...I just say the same thing....I can't prove it to you....Hope that God uses someone to help you change your life.
@ Vaytin,
Your welcome....I may or may not have gone as in depth as I could have but your welcome.
As for the CW's answeing machine...no problem...just someone playing again....
Hope you find the answers your looking for....Peace.
@CW – Peace is only possible in a limited way, but thank you anyway.
I am glad that the Muslims will also be getting taxpayer money to fund their religious schools.
Yeah, if it had been Muslim scholarships and schools, these same people would be sceaming bloody murder about it.
Religion: it's all about the money. And the power.
CW, I see you are still hooked on your failed idea of a personally involved god. So what about the Christian victims of the recent tsunami? Did your god forget them, or not have the bandwidth to help them? Pretty weak excuse for a god that you have there.
It's not hard to see that you are the fool. PraiseTheLard has it right.
Yet another step taken in the further dumbing-down of America.
In DOG we trust!!!
@ PraiseTheLard,
Yep...keep thumbing, moking and poking fun. One day you'll wish you could take back every word. As my pastor put it you had a holiday on April 1st
1 The fo-'ol says in his heart,
“There is no God.”
They are c-'rrupt, their deeds are vi-'le;
there is no one who does good.
2 The LORD looks down from heaven
on all mankind
to see if there are any who understand,
any who seek God.
3 All have turned away, all have become co-'rrupt;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.
Psalm 14
Nuff said....Peace.
Yeah, CW, that's the same pastor that tells you to face the wall and bend over.
CW, I see that you are still hooked on your failed idea of a personally involved god. So what about the Christian victims of the recent tsunami? Did your god forget them, or not have the bandwidth to help them? Pretty weak excuse for a god that you have there.
It's not hard to see that you are the fool. PraiseTheLard has it right.
PeterVN,
That is your take. No God didn't forget the tsunami people. In the Bible though it never never says that we are going to have a life of che-'rries. Like I said I'll believe in the Bible.
Nope! Admiral, I haven't done to CW those nasty things (you loved)I've done to you 8x/day.
Pastor, at least you are honest enough to admit to doing that to that admiral. I can't speak for whether he loved it though. You apparently do.
@CW – Not trying to be rude, but you appear to be worshiping your Bible there. The irony is amazing. You aren't supposed to worship anything but your god, right? Then why worship the words written in a book? Why not seek out your god instead?
I'm inferring that the tax credits go to the voluntary donor and not the school. This article wasn't written very clearly, but with the taxpayers in general having "no standing," I'm guessing that there is no government to school benefit from this law, just a tax break/credit for the donation itself.
@Nonimus
Yes, I agree with your take on this. The donation is made to the religious school. The tax credit is given to the person making this donation. The donation can be made to any religious school. So, the government is not favoring any religion over another. And as you pointed out, secular schools can also be donated to.
It is my belief that all religions, churches, faiths, ministries, whatever, should be taxed. The country is broke. We need the revenue. The money generated, could pay for public broadcasting, Planned Parenthood and all the programs for the children and the poor.
Cheers!
That's the way I read it as well.
@David Johnson – If religious orgs were taxed, then there would be no need for tax credits, right?
@Vaytin: I'm afraid I don't see the correlation.
@SeanNJ – Perhaps there isn't one. Why have tax credits in the first place? The religious right-wingers on the SCOTUS are indulging themselves, I believe, by being misleading about how tax credits work. If you pay less tax, that is a real lessening of revenue, which causes the rest of us to pony up more money to make up for your tax credit.
They had fun putting this out as a "lack of standing", as this allows them to avoid these th-orny questions where it becomes harder to mislead the public.
Tax credits for religious education is a de facto support of said instltutions and is therefore unconstltutional, yet if protesters don't do their homework the Justices can say "see? you didn't prove that you were personally injured by this law", hence the ruling.
Kind of garbled, but I hope you can see where I'm coming from.
@Vaytin – That was indeed garbled. You did not address the correlation between taxing religious organizations and the need for tax credits for same.
But one might as well ask why anyone gets any tax credits at all.
Our tax code is a pathetic mess, yet no legislators will touch it other than to add more nonsense to the tax code.
Taxes get higher for all, yet only the rich see any benefit. Now they can use their money to buy more favorable tax cuts to add to the ones they already enjoy. Money makes more money and the poor get poorer. What fun.
@Teppin – Thanks, I think. I give up. I am being too simple-minded about all this. And I should only talk about stuff I know about.
I was "winging" it, as they say. My bad again. Damn.
If they can receive "tax credits" they then should also be taxed, like everything else. They want to play in politics, then grant them their wish...all of it and then listen to them complain about how unfair it is.
"Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable."
"The penalty for laughing in a courtroom is six months in jail; if it were not for this penalty, the jury would never hear the evidence."
"All government is evil, and that trying to improve it is largely a waste of time."
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
GOOD!!!!! This is GREAT!!!! O well...can't wait to hear what all the non-believers and of co-'ar-'se the Atheist's are going to say.
Fine with this, really. Donations to secular STO's are similarly tax-deductible, and people who send their kids to religious schools are paying their local taxes to pay for local public education that they don't use anyway. Sounds pretty break-even to me.
@CW
Can't speak for all atheists, but I personally think this is a fine thing. I would not deprive any religion of their places of worship or their places of indoctrination. It is not the fact, that people worship, that bothers me. It is the fact, that they want to force their beliefs on the rest of the nation. The Christian Right is working hard to establish a theocracy, with Jesus as head of state. This is not acceptable to me. There is no more proof for the Christian god, than the Muslim or the Hindu or any other god.
Cheers!
@ David Johnson,
Can I ask you some questions?
1) Do you know God Loves you?
2) Since he does....let me ask would you follow him?
3) If not then why?....what would it take for you to follow him?
4) What has convinced you that God doesn't exist?
Just asking these questions....not trying to be smart or anything...just trying to understand.
@CW
You asked: "Can I ask you some questions?"
Reply: Yes, but I certainly don't have all the answers.
1) Do you know God Loves you?
Re: 1
Which god CW? There are many gods that people love, fear, pray to, and receive comforting feelings from. This is true now, and has been true since early times.
You asked: "2) Since he does....let me ask would you follow him?"
Re: 2
You are making two claims, but offering no evidence for either. You are assuming there is a god and that He loves me.
If I knew that a god exists, I would crawl on my hands and knees to follow him.
Which leads me to a quandary:
Why would the one true god leave room for confusion? If He exists, wouldn't He want everyone to know He exists and is the one true god? Then, people could decide whether to follow Him or not. But, there would only be one god to choose from.
You said: "3) If not then why?....what would it take for you to follow him?"
Proof, CW! Believers want faith and their beliefs to be equal to evidence. It can never be. I can believe, as people in Jesus' day did, that the earth is flat. I can have faith, that it is possible to fall off the edge. But neither my belief nor my faith can overcome the fact, that the earth is a sphere. Faith is worthless without evidence.
What would it take for you to believe, I have fairies living in my left shoe?
Would you believe that I do, simply because I said it was so? Wouldn't you ask me to supply evidence, to back up my claim?
What if I offered a book on the wants and worship of fairies? What if I cried and told you how the fairies had impacted my life?
What if I told you, you would be tortured for all eternity, if you did not accept my savior fairies?
You said: "4) What has convinced you that God doesn't exist?"
I found I could not account for all the evil and suffering in the world, if I posited an all good, all knowing and all powerful god.
I found that there are ~38,000 different denominations of Christianity. Many contradictory. All were derived from different interpretations of the bible. Why, wouldn't god have given man a bible that was not ambiguous?
I found the Christian concept of a Hell was not in keeping with a god that is all good (omnibenevolent). Why would a perfectly loving god create a place where people would be burned forever? How could a god that is all just and all moral, even conceive such a place?
People live a finite number of years. Only a finite number of sins could be committed in this lifetime. How can a sentence of eternal torture be just?
You said: "Just asking these questions....not trying to be smart or anything...just trying to understand."
I am not smart. I am also trying to understand.
Cheers!
@ David Johnson,
Thanks for answering the questions.
Let me address your concerns.
you said:
My question: "4) What has convinced you that God doesn't exist?"
I found I could not account for all the evil and suffering in the world, if I posited an all good, all knowing and all powerful god.
I found that there are ~38,000 different denominations of Christianity. Many contradictory. All were derived from different interpretations of the bible. Why, wouldn't god have given man a bible that was not ambiguous?
I found the Christian concept of a Hell was not in keeping with a god that is all good (omnibenevolent). Why would a perfectly loving god create a place where people would be burned forever? How could a god that is all just and all moral, even conceive such a place?
I say: David...I can't convince you.....just like if you really really really had fairies you couldn't convince me. The reason?...Faith...one has to have faith to believe. Second you had some question that you said make you wonder "why would a Good God do this? My answer is this....God created us...all he wants is obedience, worship, and for us to love one another. Believe me I have a lot of questions too....but...I won't ever get answers to those questions unless I'm obedient to his word and let him continue to change me. One day...One day our Lord will be present and all questions will be answered.
As far as proof...now I can only hope that our Lord will show himself to you through another person or in the actions of others so that you will see him. '
As far as the word of God is concerned...the only way to get the meaning is first read it daily...pray for wisdom...God will give wisdom to all that ask. His book isn't as confusing as people want to say....they just have to seek the truth and pray...Our Lord will reveal what he wants us to get out of his book if well will do this.
I know you have a lot of questions....I encourage you get some good christian brothers around you....ask God to reveal himself to you in a way that will change your life.
You say that God wants obedience and worship.
I say that the most preposterous notion that Ho.mo sapiens has ever dreamed up is that the Lord God of Creation, Shaper and Ruler of all the Universes, wants the saccharine adoration of His creatures, can be swayed by their prayers, and becomes petulant if He does not receive this flattery. Yet this absurd fantasy, without a shred of evidence to bolster it, pays all the expenses of the oldest, largest, and least productive industry in all history.
Don't you think that an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being would be a little beyond the va.garies of jealousy?
Doc Vestibule wrote: "Don't you think that an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being would be a little beyond the va.garies of jealousy?"
The Lard works in mysterious ways... Ours is not to question but to obey...