Bells
Staff member
Basic and intrinsic human rights is now propaganda?Don't atheist demonize religion and do the same things, or is the dual standard in effect so this is different by their own definition? This entire article is about demonizing all of religion because someone dared to speak out against the propaganda. Jesus would say you can see the speck in the other person's eye but not the log in your own eye.
Religious organisations are tax exempt, in that they don't pay tax. Which is why they are so wealthy and why the heads of such religions are able to afford private jumbo jets and multiple million dollar homes. Not to mention they often qualify for payments from the State, money that comes from people and organisations (including homosexuals no less) actually paying their tax and contributing financially to the betterment of society. So one could question why rich religious organisations can remain tax exempt while people living on or below the poverty line still have to keep paying tax. How or why is this moral?We should change the tax code to exempt religion from having to pay for the social mops needed to prop up immorality.
Liberals do. Religious organisations do not.If all behavior is relative, their should not be extra social costs to prop up immorality, and the liberals should be willing yo pay their own tab.
If there is extra social cost, such behavior is not relative. Inferior plus extra cost equals an illusion of relative.
If we place moral and immoral on a scale, these do not weigh the same, so they are not equal. The side with immorality requires so much more propping up. Why do you think it takes a circus of propaganda and force law to prop up homosexuality? Without mops it is not sustainable.
Considering it is the side with what you deem to be immorality that is paying their taxes through the nose and religious organisations do not do so even voluntarily and instead, prefer to make money and not contribute to society, perhaps you can explain why organisations which demonise and abuse homosexuals and who are often propped up by tax dollars paid for by homosexuals and heterosexuals, should be allowed to enjoy the comforts of their exemptions? For example, why should these individuals be allowed to maintain a tax exempt status?
They are abusive and offensive. They demonise and harass homosexuals and their families, not to mention anyone they deem to be a worthy target. Everyone they do target for abuse pay tax dollars that allow these people to be allowed to stand on a nice clean street, and enjoy the services that tax dollars often pay for - such as police protection, emergency hospital or paramedic care, fire brigade. Is this moral? Should a homosexual person be forced to pay tax to allow these individuals to stand on the street to spout hatred and hateful and bigoted propaganda? How exactly is this moral? How is this equal? I would say the side that is immoral and that is propped up are the ones who enjoy tax exemptions while benefiting from the tax paid by those they abuse and demonise and terrorise.