Posted on 04/28/2015 5:01:40 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
Tax exemption isn’t the issue here. Bakers and printers and bed-and-breakfasts aren’t tax exempt. Non-discrimination law is going after everyone.
I suppose then Mr. Solicitor General, that we can look for the Brady Campaign to lose its 501(c)(3) status for undermining freedoms SPECIFICALLY ENUMERATED in the Bill of Rights and upheld by SCOTUS.
Even if you’re free from your IRS chains, the Gaystapo will come after your children. If you teach the Bible to your kids, the Gaystapo will punish you for homophobia and child abuse.
Just wait.
” Tax exemption isn’t the issue here. Bakers and printers and bed-and-breakfasts aren’t tax exempt. Non-discrimination law is going after everyone.”
Correct, and the Obama thugocracy will show us no mercy.
This is a subtle fear mongering. Churches that buy into a contract with the feds have to honor the contract. Churches that don't, don't.
The most important issue within this case is the possibility the court will rule that a word previously defined within the legal system can be changed at the whim of either the court or the agitated masses.
The Constitutionally minded better catch on to this idea pretty quick, because if you can REDEFINE marriage within law, you can REDEFINE ANYTHING within law...
Listen closely, this isn't about men lying with men or women and women or whatever. It's about taking
From Blacks Law, 4th ed:
MARRIAGE. Marriage, as distinguished from the agreement to marry and from the act of becoming married, is the civil status, condition, or relation of one man and one woman united in law for life, for the discharge to each other and the community of the duties legally incumbent on those whose association is founded on the distinction of sex. 1 Bish.Mar. & Div. § 3; Collins v. Hoag & Rollins, 121 Neb. 716, 238 N.W. 351, 355; Allen v. Allen, 73 Conn. 54, 46 A. 242, 49 L.R.A. 142.A contract, according to the form prescribed by law, by which a man and woman, capable of entering into such contract, mutually engage with each other to live their whole lives together in the state of union which ought to exist between a husband and wife. Shelf. Mar. & Div. 1; Seuss v. Schukat, 358 III. 27, 192 N.E. 668, 671, 95 A.L.R. 1461.
And making it mean something totally new.
As I've mentioned before, people shouldn't have an issue if it's to be something like Garriage or Homoarriage that defines the same sex or other statistically insignificant out of the ordinary human relations and how they interact with society, but if they are going to insist on altering a legal definition that has lasted literally several millennia they need to be fought to the point of blows, because once they demonstrate they can change that words meaning, they can go after ANYTHING.
Marxists don’t like organized religion. Karl Marx
Now Obama doesn’t like organized religion. A Marx-lite
Right to assembly went away, now you have to file for permits and pay local tax fees. Freedom os speech went away, because you can be sued or riots can happen if you speak your mind. Freedom of the press went away long ago, and the big presses are owned by the corporations. Now freedom of religion. The Left Wing “democrat” party has almost completed it’s agenda of eliminating our basic rights. And Bush didn’t do so well with the Patriot Act, which took away rights. Soon our country will resemble Nazi Germany as we slip further into fascism
In which case, ALL that money and federal FORCE of law will cause many churches to fail and believers to run to the catacombs. Not supporting gay whatever will be criminalized.
Millenia of civilization worldwide reduced to his dicta.
When “sexual orientation” (really, what is that, and does anything go?) was given the same status as race, ethnicity, colour, religion, this was bound to be the result.
There is no such thing as sexual orientation. There is normal man/woman attraction, and there are various perversions. When these perversions (which are clearly sin, according to Scripture) are given protected status, then there will be a major battle.
So it’s true the 2nd coming is coming soon. No joke
I truly hope so. Maranatha.
I have no doubts whatsoever that homofascists will be at the forefront of the persecution of Christians before Christ returns.
Just like their fascist gun laws - we will not comply!
The.
Lord.
Cometh.
Soon.
“Obama’s Lawyer: Religious Institutions May Lose Tax-Exempt Status If Court Rules For Gay Marriage”
American patriots: Leftist judges may lose their breath while hanging from lampposts.
Note -
Not only is it completely unnecessary for any church to seek 501c3 status, to do so becomes a grant of jurisdiction to the IRS by any church that obtains that State favor. In the words of Steve Nestor, IRS Sr. Revenue Officer (ret.):
"I am not the only IRS employee who’s wondered why churches go to the government and seek permission to be exempted from a tax they didn’t owe to begin with, and to seek a tax deductible status that they’ve always had anyway. Many of us have marveled at how church leaders want to be regulated and controlled by an agency of government that most Americans have prayed would just get out of their lives. Churches are in an amazingly unique position, but they don’t seem to know or appreciate the implications of what it would mean to be free of government control."from the Forward of In Caesar's Grip, by Peter Kershaw
You have to decide what you’re willing to lose when it hits you. It’s hard.
Very hard.
Then if you want to get legally “married”, find a government authorized JP to do it for you.
That way traditional Marriage can still be preserved without gov't interference.
I don’t know what I’ll do if my family is threatened. It hasn’t happened yet. I live in a bubble where either people agree with me or it doesn’t come up (like at Weight Watchers).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.