Should churches in America be used as polling places...

[Kenny]

Like I said, those who don't accept the muzzle.

Praise God we live in a free country and don't have dictators like you.

The unholy alliance between Trump and the shmoozing pseudo-Christians.

Ohhhhh... they have to be people who vote like you! Got it

and below

FAKE NEWS... I NEVER SAID THOSE THINGS!

I know that anger many times skews our thinking and perspective.

 

[Kenny]

Teaching from the Bible is not prohibited. Saying "Vote for this Candidate, Jesus likes him better" on the other hand is, when said entity enjoys the free ride from the government which is tax exemption.

I agree...

I am not a Republican, I am not a Democrat, I am not a Libertarian etc...

I am a Christian so WWJD...

Would Jesus vote for termination of a 6 month gestation baby? Or would he vote for a 6 month gestation termination of life? Vote Jesus with supportive scriptures.

(Added) Would Jesus want to stifle the sharing of the Gospel or want freedom to share the Gospel? Vote Jesus.

All legal and very spiritual

 

[David1967]

I agree...

I am not a Republican, I am not a Democrat, I am not a Libertarian etc...

I am a Christian so WWJD...

Would Jesus vote for termination of a 6 month gestation baby? Or would he vote for a 6 month gestation termination of life? Vote Jesus with supportive scriptures.

All legal and very spiritual

Exactly. None of that would violate any law.

 

[SugarOcean]

...for public elections?

This is a common practice in Red states but not in California.

I think this is a Republican Christian Right strategy.

Does this practice violate the First Amendment?

Personally, I don't think any private property is appropriate for usage as polls.

Public elections belong in public places as public schools, police stations, fire stations, state college campuses, etc.

I like polling places to be on college campus especially because young American students and older students too can be exposed directly to the political process and might be more likely to vote if it is convenient to get to the polls.

I don't think Jesus Christ would like secular matters as politics in His Father's temple. We all know the money-changer/house of thieves story in the bible.

Yes.

 

[Left Coast]

...for public elections?

This is a common practice in Red states but not in California.

I think this is a Republican Christian Right strategy.

Does this practice violate the First Amendment?

Personally, I don't think any private property is appropriate for usage as polls.

Public elections belong in public places as public schools, police stations, fire stations, state college campuses, etc.

I like polling places to be on college campus especially because young American students and older students too can be exposed directly to the political process and might be more likely to vote if it is convenient to get to the polls.

I don't think Jesus Christ would like secular matters as politics in His Father's temple. We all know the money-changer/house of thieves story in the bible.

I live in Cali, and I've also worked at polling places a few times. Plenty of churches are used as polling places here, I've worked one that was at a Lutheran church. I've also voted in a Southern Baptist church. As long as they're following the rules and not posting anything politically partisan, I don't care. It's not a right-wing conspiracy.

 

[David T]

Oh my confusion about my art.. Here is my art. Without it there is no society. I BUILD BUILDINGS As such please dont treat what we do AS GODS TEMPLE. Its a house nothing more. beautiful isnt it!!!

As a builder i KNOW what actually is Gods temple and it has no walls and follows no laws science does not determine it religion does not determine it and is unbounded absolute. It determines everthing. Including my art. This is where i sit to get a reality check in gods temple HOME!

 

[Terry Sampson]

FAKE NEWS... I NEVER SAID THOSE THINGS!

Hmmm, you're absolutely correct. You didn't and I never actually thought you did. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of first replying to your post and, before posting my reply, replying to dianaiad, with the result that comments from her message were included in my message and attributed to you. I'll have to remember that next time I have something to say to two or more people.

NEW TOPIC.

• In my message #30, I wrote: "You know as well as I do, most evangelical Christian churches believe the Bible applies to everything and that they'll give even a whore-mongering president a "mulligan" (free pass) when it suits their interests. That's why I say: "Tax them!"
• In your message #31, you wrote: "All not-for-profits?"
• In my message #34, I wrote: "Like I said, those who don't accept the muzzle."
• And in your message #42, you wrote: "Praise God we live in a free country and don't have dictators like you."

Which leaves me wondering: what are you talking about, brother? I'm not a dictator. I'm not even an elected official. I'm a citizen of the U.S. exercising his right to free speech. And I'm saying, If any non-profit wants to maintain its very liberal, non-taxable, tax status under the current U.S. tax laws AND members want to make tax-deductible contributions to that non-profit AND hear political speeches from the pulpit, it's time to end the free ride the non-profit and its members are getting and tax both in the same manner that taxable entities are taxed. You, as a preacher , and members of your congregation could exercise your right to speak till Jesus comes and you all could pay taxes till you die or Jesus comes, whichever occurs first, ... just like I do.

• Also in your message #31, you wrote: "Why the anger?"
• In my message #34, I wrote: "The unholy alliance between Trump and the shmoozing pseudo-Christians.
• In your message #42, you wrote: "Ohhhhh... they have to be people who vote like you! Got it."

Where did I suggest that churches with members who vote like me should be allowed to retain their non-profit status while carrying on activities prohibited under the tax code? Nowhere did I suggest anything of the sort. Let a muzzled non-profit have non-taxable status; and let an unmuzzled non-profit pay taxes, regardless who its members vote for. Got it? Or do your pecuniary interests still obstruct your critical thinking skills?.

 

[Father Heathen]

Oh good grief everything has to be some freaking
conspiracy.

Notice BTW how your "on campus" is a leftist strategy?

Honestly, people in America!!

The fact that religion plays a part in U.S. politics and that churches partake in activism is hardly a conspiracy.

 

[Shad]

...for public elections?

This is a common practice in Red states but not in California.

I think this is a Republican Christian Right strategy.

Does this practice violate the First Amendment?

Personally, I don't think any private property is appropriate for usage as polls.

Public elections belong in public places as public schools, police stations, fire stations, state college campuses, etc.

I like polling places to be on college campus especially because young American students and older students too can be exposed directly to the political process and might be more likely to vote if it is convenient to get to the polls.

I don't think Jesus Christ would like secular matters as politics in His Father's temple. We all know the money-changer/house of thieves story in the bible.

A number of churches rent or open the property for a number of community services and activities. This isn't unusual in smaller communities with limited public space. I only take issue if the church is trying to use property rights to place it's influence closer to the polling stations thus voters than the normal citizen can. IE all political "influence" when the station is up is done off property as normal citizens not property owners. This is typical covered in contracts anyways.

Colleges are not neutral ground these days and have higher population thus a greater chance at influence than a lone church.

 

[Augustus]

I think this is a Republican Christian Right strategy.

Nah, it happens all over the Western world.

Making it more convenient to vote boosts number of low income voters, and using churches make it more convenient to vote as there's lots of them so people can vote closer to home.

Personally, I don't think any private property is appropriate for usage as polls.

Public elections belong in public places as public schools, police stations, fire stations, state college campuses, etc.

I like polling places to be on college campus especially because young American students and older students too can be exposed directly to the political process and might be more likely to vote if it is convenient to get to the polls.

Dunno about America, but in Europe there often are polling places on campus, but this is only convenient for students. For everyone else something more local is better.

The only consideration for polling places should be "How can we make it as easy as possible for people to vote?"

 

[Kenny]

Hmmm, you're absolutely correct. You didn't and I never actually thought you did. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of first replying to your post and, before posting my reply, replying to dianaiad, with the result that comments from her message were included in my message and attributed to you. I'll have to remember that next time I have something to say to two or more people.

LOL... I knew what happened because I have done it too but I couldn't let it pass.:
In case you didn't know, if you just pretend like you are going to copy a portion, it will automatically ask you if you want to quote it and it will keep the right person quoted.

NEW TOPIC.

• In my message #30, I wrote: "You know as well as I do, most evangelical Christian churches believe the Bible applies to everything and that they'll give even a whore-mongering president a "mulligan" (free pass) when it suits their interests. That's why I say: "Tax them!"
• In your message #31, you wrote: "All not-for-profits?"
• In my message #34, I wrote: "Like I said, those who don't accept the muzzle."
• And in your message #42, you wrote: "Praise God we live in a free country and don't have dictators like you."

Which leaves me wondering: what are you talking about, brother? I'm not a dictator. I'm not even an elected official. I'm a citizen of the U.S. exercising his right to free speech. And I'm saying, If any non-profit wants to maintain it's very liberal, non-taxable, tax status under the current U.S. tax laws AND members want to make tax-deductible contributions to that non-profit AND hear political speeches from the pulpit, it's time to end the free ride the non-profit and it's members are getting and tax both in the same manner that taxable entities are taxed. You, as a preacher , and members of your congregation could exercise your right to speak till Jesus comes and you all could pay taxes till you die or Jesus comes, whichever occurs first, ... just like I do.

Mostly because of your "most evangelical Christian churches" and "mulligan".

1) It is narrow in scope (strictly Christian)
2) The reality that "most" is a statement with not statistical proof or value
3) You give the Republicans an "F" and omit all the "mulligans" on the Democratic side

That is what dictators do. Give false data, vilify a certain group while promoting themselves as the "righteous one".

• Also in your message #31, you wrote: "Why the anger?"
• In my message #34, I wrote: "The unholy alliance between Trump and the shmoozing pseudo-Christians.
• In your message #42, you wrote: "Ohhhhh... they have to be people who vote like you! Got it."

Where did I suggest that churches with members who vote like me should be allowed to retain their non-profit status while carrying on activities prohibited under the tax code? Nowhere did I suggest anything of the sort. Let a muzzled non-profit have non-taxable status; and let an unmuzzled non-profit pay taxes, regardless who it's members vote for. Got it? Or do your pecuniary interests still obstruct your critical thinking skills?.

1) Because the context is #30 as in all Christians and then call them shmoozing pseudo-Christians as if, "if you voted Trump - support Trump in any way - you voted wrong and are acting wrong".
2) In our neck of the woods, we pray for both Democrats officials as well as Republicans whether they are doing right or wrong.
3) It omits the reality that however bad Trump has projected, it doesn't take away the fact that he has also done good.

 

[Terry Sampson]

• In your message #42, you wrote: "Praise God we live in a free country and don't have dictators like you."
• In my message #47, I wrote: "Which leaves me wondering: what are you talking about, brother? I'm not a dictator. I'm not even an elected official. I'm a citizen of the U.S. exercising his right to free speech."
• And in your message #51, you cite my "sins" and conclude: "That is what dictators do. Give false data, vilify a certain group while promoting themselves as the "righteous one".

You are woefully confused. So much so that you've confused me with Trump. He's the President. I'm not. He vilifies many more people than I do, and he especially vilifies "treasonous Democrats" while promoting himself as the "protector and savior" of the nation. He's the dictator you ought to be castigating. I, on the other am dust of the earth and no one important, who--because I am a U.S. citizen under the Constitution--has the right to express my opinion any way I want, any time I want, and anywhere I want (barring, of course, earthly moderator intervention.) The fact that you vilify me, accusing me of citing false data and data with no statistical proof or value, with an air of "better-than-you" self-righteousness, makes you as close or closer to the thing that you think I am. Which, by the way, misses the mark. My position is this: let non-profits who accept the muzzle have their tax-exempt status; and let those that reject the muzzle lose their tax-exempt status.

• In my message #47, I wrote: "Where did I suggest that churches with members who vote like me should be allowed to retain their non-profit status while carrying on activities prohibited under the tax code? Nowhere did I suggest anything of the sort. Let a muzzled non-profit have non-taxable status; and let an unmuzzled non-profit pay taxes, regardless who its members vote for."
• In your message #51, you wrote: "1) blah, 2) blah, 3) blah."

It gives me great comfort to see that you have as much, or more difficulty, than I do coloring within the lines.

• The context was NOT "all Christians"; that's why I didn't quantify the pseudo-Christians I had in mind.
• Who did I have in mind? Trump and evangelicals - Google Search
• As for your comment: "It omits the reality that however bad Trump has projected, it doesn't take away the fact that he has also done good", I say: "Good?" Would your definition of "good" allow you to acknowledge that few among the unrighteous have not done good?
  
• Mark 10:17-22. And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me. And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.

It should be as clear to you as it is to me that you and I have several irreconcilable differences, and there's nothing else to say at this time. I'm done.