ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Bill Maher's wavier

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46360

Report this Mar. 18 2012, 3:39 pm

Quote: chr33355 @ Mar. 17 2012, 7:19 am

Quote: padracin @ Mar. 17 2012, 7:08 am

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Mar. 12 2012, 7:58 pm

Quote: padracin @ Mar. 12 2012, 7:36 pm

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Mar. 12 2012, 5:30 pm

Quote: padracin @ Mar. 12 2012, 5:20 pm

>

>

>

>

>

>Further this regulation is a pretty minor point of theology for Catholics - nothing equivalent to the number of sacraments, the nature of the Trinity etc.  If ever there was an example of making your beachhead at the wrong place - the current fuss takes the cake. 
Does it really matter how minor or major the abuse of government is when it tells a religion that they are subserviant to the government and must change it's religious views to match and support a government?

This is what happened before and one of the largest reasons so many people fled to America - to escape this type of behavior.

 

  still - the current impasse was a weak example for defending the principle.  And while we're on principles - the Quakers have been here since the beginning of the Republic - over the years many quakers and other pacificists have tried unsuccessfully, to be relieved of the portion of their taxes that go to the DoD - they're being forced to support activities that are deeply repugnant to their religious beliefs.

 

In the case of the Quakers, the US Constitution specifically authorizes a defense department in the enumerated powers.  Article I, Section 8 - specifically authorizes taxation for the military.

 

but that doesn't answer my question - a few posts above you lament the government infringing on any religous principle not matter how minor as abusive.  Are you saying so long as its in the constitution its OK even if the religious principle is central to your religious beliefs?  I think the obvious answer is sometimes there's conflicts even within constitutionally derived principles - that's why we have courts.

 The problem with the Quaker arguement is that if the Quakers don't pay taxes they still get the benefits of protection from the Military such as National Guard assistance during natural disasters.

Exactly.  There are some roles for government - and protection from foreign invasion is one of them.  Most of roles the government has assumed - especially the last few decades - are not Constitutional.


FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46360

Report this Mar. 18 2012, 4:23 pm

Quote: chr33355 @ Mar. 17 2012, 12:34 pm

>Except the rich and the poor really don't recieve benefits from welfare.  The poor once accepting welfare are then trapped in a system that is not only set up to discurages self improvment it activly prevents it.  The rich lose potential employees with which to help grow buisnesses they own or invest in.
Yep.  I know several people who just refuse to work because they get perpetual money from the government (AKA "redistribution".)  They've been taught "In Government We Depend" instead of saddling up and getting to work.


 


I also just saw a segment by Alexandra Pelosi (yes, daughter of Nancy Pelosi) where she talks to people to get entitlements.  The first video was done in Mississippi who all vote Republican and hate Obama.  The second video was NYC and all vote Democrat and love Obama.  Both groups of people were equally absurd.


(The sad thing is, HBO was okay with running the first video, but didn't want to run the second one.)


Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: alfamav

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum