I understand you wanting churches to pay taxes, but how would they get the money?

 

How do they now?

 

Lure people into giving money by playing on their guilt.

 

Stop trying to demonize the church, their intentions are good.

 

 

 

No. Helping people and charity yes, but taking advantage of peoples' fears, indoctrinating children with ridiculous stories, trying to force their scripture into law, condemning condom use and refusing to pay taxes at the same time?

 

 

 

Not so good.

 

 

 

1. They don't pay taxes because atm they're government funded.

 

 

 

2. As for law, you got me on that one.

 

3. They don't take advantage of fears, at least not mine. In the years I've attended my church I've never heard a word from them about hell.

 

 

 

4. The church didnt condem condom use, the Pope did.

 

 

 

5. What rediculous stories? There are two kinds of things in the Bible, historical fact, and stories made to teach lessons.

 

1. What happened to seperation of Church and State?

 

2. Yep.

 

3. What's it like being one in a million?

 

4. The Pope is the elected voice of the Church.

 

5. Noah's Ark, Garden of Eden, David & Goliath, not to mention the whole walking on water thing.

 

 

 

1. Government has no voice in Church, or vice versa, they're just getting the funding.

 

 

 

4. But his word isn't law when it's obviously complete bull. Condoms spread AIDS? Wtf?

 

 

 

5. Those fall into the teach a lesson category. And doom, no, they do not claim those stories are true, just the story of Jesus, which is historical fact.

 

 

 

*sigh* I'm done arguing religion. It always ends up the same, with a big war of "my beliefs are better than yours."

 

Lure people into giving money by playing on their guilt.

 

Stop trying to demonize the church, their intentions are good.

 

 

 

No. Helping people and charity yes, but taking advantage of peoples' fears, indoctrinating children with ridiculous stories, trying to force their scripture into law, condemning condom use and refusing to pay taxes at the same time?

 

 

 

Not so good.

 

 

 

1. They don't pay taxes because atm they're government funded.

 

 

 

2. As for law, you got me on that one.

 

3. They don't take advantage of fears, at least not mine. In the years I've attended my church I've never heard a word from them about hell.

 

 

 

4. The church didnt condem condom use, the Pope did.

 

 

 

5. What rediculous stories? There are two kinds of things in the Bible, historical fact, and stories made to teach lessons.

 

1. What happened to seperation of Church and State?

 

2. Yep.

 

3. What's it like being one in a million?

 

4. The Pope is the elected voice of the Church.

 

5. Noah's Ark, Garden of Eden, David & Goliath, not to mention the whole walking on water thing.

 

 

 

1. Government has no voice in Church, or vice versa, they're just getting the funding.

 

 

 

4. But his word isn't law when it's obviously complete bull. Condoms spread AIDS? Wtf?

 

 

 

5. Those fall into the teach a lesson category. And doom, no, they do not claim those stories are true, just the story of Jesus, which is historical fact.

 

 

 

*sigh* I'm done arguing religion. It always ends up the same, with a big war of "my beliefs are better than yours."

 

It's not however historical fact that jesus walked on water, there is proof that a person a lot like what we know jesus of existed, but no proof of any of what he did.

The problem with the whole "let the church and state be separate" when it comes to who they allow to get married is that (ironically) marriages recognized by the church have more benefit opportunities than civil unions.

The problem with the whole "let the church and state be separate" when it comes to who they allow to get married is that (ironically) marriages recognized by the church have more benefit opportunities than civil unions.

 

 

 

Which is bullshi

4. But his word isn't law when it's obviously complete bull. Condoms spread AIDS? Wtf?

 

 

 

what the pope said was to the effect of "condoms will not help stop the aids epidemic because it will just cause more people to have sex which will indirectly lead to more unsafe sex and so on"

 

 

 

Not to say the pope is correct, but what you stated was an intentional, blatant, and false spinning of what he said.

 

 

 

The problem with the whole "let the church and state be separate" when it comes to who they allow to get married is that (ironically) marriages recognized by the church have more benefit opportunities than civil unions.

 

 

 

Then equalize the legal benefits.

3. What's it like being one in a million?

 

 

 

:P I could tell ya.

As a History major and a future History teacher, I have to say that there are almost no historical facts in the bible. None.

The problem with the whole "let the church and state be separate" when it comes to who they allow to get married is that (ironically) marriages recognized by the church have more benefit opportunities than civil unions.

Then equalize the legal benefits.

I don't even see why marriages recognized by the church have any legal benefits to be honest, since that doesn't coincide with the purpose of marriage in the eyes of the church.

 

 

 

So yeah, move all legal benefits to civil unions only, then we can let the churches marry whoever they want.

The problem with the whole "let the church and state be separate" when it comes to who they allow to get married is that (ironically) marriages recognized by the church have more benefit opportunities than civil unions.

Then equalize the legal benefits.

I don't even see why marriages recognized by the church have any legal benefits to be honest, since that doesn't coincide with the purpose of marriage in the eyes of the church.

 

 

 

So yeah, move all legal benefits to civil unions only, then we can let the churches marry whoever they want.

 

 

 

I believe in america you still need the certificate from the court for marriage to be legal. I do agree with the sentiment, the main thing here is that anyone should be allowed the legal marriage rights but churches can choose to recognize whatever they want.

As a History major and a future History teacher, I have to say that there are almost no historical facts in the bible. None.

 

 

 

*points and laughs*

 

 

 

That's all I have to add here.

The problem with the whole "let the church and state be separate" when it comes to who they allow to get married is that (ironically) marriages recognized by the church have more benefit opportunities than civil unions.

Then equalize the legal benefits.

I don't even see why marriages recognized by the church have any legal benefits to be honest, since that doesn't coincide with the purpose of marriage in the eyes of the church.

 

 

 

So yeah, move all legal benefits to civil unions only, then we can let the churches marry whoever they want.

 

This. Civil unions should be the only partnerships that gain legal standing, recognition, and benefits. A marriage should be extracurricular, similar to a baptism; churchgoers would have it done, but there's really no point.

 

 

 

Edit: I'm sorry Sly, I was under the impression that it was physically impossible to part a sea and that the garden of eden doesn't exist. I must be horribly misinformed. :roll:

 

 

 

*points and laughs*

 

 

 

That's all I have to add here.

 

Do you realize that almost all of the New Testament was written over 100 years after it happened and most of the "historians" that claim to be primary sources have either been refuted as completely false or never existed in the first place.

this thread is so gay

this thread is so gay

 

:lol: i'm guessing thats a joke. Who cares if it's gay. Gay never did any harm to us. The word itself never did any harm.

this thread is so gay

 

:lol: i'm guessing thats a joke. Who cares if it's gay. Gay never did any harm to us. The word itself never did any harm.

 

 

 

gay could also mean happy.

 

 

 

I'm gay for these new marriage laws!

 

There must be some truth to Noah's Ark. Nearly everyone from around the world has an account of a global flood occurring. It just doesn't happen that everyone in the world makes up the same story.

 

 

 

If there was a huge global flood wouldn't we expect things to be at different levels in the strata all over the world instead of continuously finding fossils and rocks fitting perfectly into their respective orders of age along the timeline of evolution going back billions of years?

I still stand by what I said. Never in human history has everyone made up the same story. It just doesn't happen. There are only like 2 cultures in the world that don't have a story about some sort of global flood.

Almost every civilization in history has some sort of reference to dragons, so using your logic, there must have been dragons on Earth at one point, right?

Almost every civilization in history has some sort of reference to dragons, so using your logic, there must have been dragons on Earth at one point, right?

 

Yes. There could have been a creature called a dragon. As for if they breathed fire, i'm not so sure. Dragons are a legend, a tell that may have roots in history but is overly exaggerated.

 

a legend, a tell that may have roots in history but is overly exaggerated.

 

Just like every story in the bible.

 

a legend, a tell that may have roots in history but is overly exaggerated.

 

Just like every story in the bible.

 

Hello Mr. Biased.

 

a legend, a tell that may have roots in history but is overly exaggerated.

 

Just like every story in the bible.

 

Hello Mr. Biased.

 

Biased or not, he's right.

 

a legend, a tell that may have roots in history but is overly exaggerated.

 

Just like every story in the bible.

 

Hello Mr. Biased.

 

Biased or not, he's right.

 

I never said that the bible was not. Though not every story in the bible is a legend. I'll keep that to myself though. Might (will) offend someone.

As a History major and a future History teacher, I have to say that there are almost no historical facts in the bible. None.

 

 

 

*points and laughs*

 

 

 

That's all I have to add here.

 

 

 

Ah, Sly Wizard.

 

 

 

Everything you post is either full of blatant strawmen, you calling a logical fallacy where it doesn't apply (therefore strawman), or just pure rhetoric.

Just like every story in the bible.

 

There's a reason why most people find them parables. But, I guess it isn't a terrible source to sorta see what life was like in 0th-century Palestine and Israel.

There were many stories in the bible that never happened. Dreams, parables, crucifixion of christ.

 

 

 

:thumbsup: