Are gay rights, including gay marriage, evolving?

Canon EF 28-70mm f/2.8L USM

02/27/2011 09:32:07 PM · #5351

Originally posted by johnnyphoto:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by johnnyphoto:
All I'm arguing is that the federal government cannot tax all religious organizations on a national scale for the political actions of one church. I've said this many times.

Which is what's so confusing, since no one here has suggested otherwise.

Not true. The way the discussion has developed as implied that folks here are referring to national scale taxation of the church. At any rate, even if folks weren't intending to suggest that, Ray suggested that very blatantly in the post right after yours.

Ah yes, Ray most certainly did do that... but, he was in the same corner as everyone else until such time as you trotted out the argument above, and it was only then that he came out with the latter statement to counter your belied that the federal government could not tax all religious organizations.

As an aside, surely you did not expect the good GeneralE to know what it was that I would be posting in the post following his.

Ray

Message edited by author 2011-02-27 21:37:39.

johnnyphoto

Canon EOS-450D Rebel XSi

02/27/2011 09:59:39 PM · #5352

Originally posted by RayEthier:

As an aside, surely you did not expect the good GeneralE to know what it was that I would be posting in the post following his.

Ray

No, I didn't expect him to know. But it was pretty ironic that you posted that immediately after GeneralE's post, wasn't it? I got a good laugh out of it :)

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

02/27/2011 11:02:36 PM · #5353

BTW, just to make it clear, a non-profit is not forbidden from political involvement, but rather they must not have it be a "substantial" part of its affairs. I know this because I'm the current president of the Oregon Society of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology. A statewide non-profit organization of all allergists in the state. Some members have wanted to push for much stronger lobbying efforts (given all the hub-bub going on with healthcare these days), so legal was asked and that was the answer we were given.

Obviously it's not a bright line of demarcation and the more you do the larger risk you would run. It sounds very much like pushing the rules on DPC. Anyway, I used to think the answer was that you could do zero lobbying, but that is not true.

Message edited by author 2011-02-27 23:03:13.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

02/28/2011 12:05:05 AM · #5354

Originally posted by RayEthier:

As an aside, surely you did not expect the good GeneralE to know what it was that I would be posting in the post following his.

Ah, that just shows how little you know ... ;-)

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

BTW, just to make it clear, a non-profit is not forbidden from political involvement, but rather they must not have it be a "substantial" part of its affairs ... I used to think the answer was that you could do zero lobbying, but that is not true.

You are correct (and I did say substantially the same thing earlier), however, there are some activities which are prohibited outright -- for example, AFAIK you cannot specifically endorse (or oppose) a candidate for office.

Message edited by author 2011-02-28 00:08:25.

Louis

Nikon D800

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

02/28/2011 12:20:11 AM · #5355

Are gay rights evolving? Actually, everything surrounding gay issues is evolving. Being homosexual is not impressive, and acknowledging one's own or another's sexuality in a way that makes sense seems unimportant.

For example, "King's Speech" producer Iain Canning, on accepting the Oscar win for best picture, thanked his cast, crew, parents, and especially his boyfriend, the main support in his life. Can anyone have imagined that such a thing would happen ten, even five years ago? Or that it would be so prosaic a thing? I'm old enough to still be impressed. Thank god for young people, for whom none of this matters, for whom this sort of thing will be a non-issue.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

02/28/2011 01:04:38 AM · #5356

Originally posted by Louis:

And the two men and a woman accepting an Oscar (I forget which one) collectively, and their spokesman (one of the men) thanking their three wives :-) Like you, I'm more than old enough to remember when this would have been beyond unthinkable...

R.

johnnyphoto

Canon EOS-450D Rebel XSi

Canon EF 28-70mm f/2.8L USM

03/02/2011 11:24:25 AM · #5357

This article of the Massachusetts Constitution is interesting. It sounds like the Massachusetts Legislature is allowed to tax political and religious bodies. Interestingly, the tax is not for the benefit of the state but for the benefit of the church. I don't know if this has ever actually happened but the Federal Government has never done anything to overrule it so it seems possible that it could happen.

"As the happiness of a people, and the good order and preservation of civil government, essentially depend upon piety, religion and morality; and as these cannot be generally diffused through a community, but by the institution of the public worship of God, and of public instructions in piety, religion and morality: Therefore, to promote their happiness and to secure the good order and preservation of their government, the people of this commonwealth have a right to invest their legislature with power to authorize and require, and the legislature shall, from time to time, authorize and require, the several towns, parishes, precincts, and other bodies politic, or religious societies, to make suitable provision, at their own expense, for the institution of the public worship of God, and for the support and maintenance of public Protestant teachers of piety, religion and morality, in all cases where such provision shall not be made voluntarily."
//www.malegislature.gov/laws/constitution#cp23s00.htm

03/02/2011 05:08:22 PM · #5358

I had a quick look at that document and would hazard a guess that the oath one has to swear to prior to taking office would be somewhat problematic if the person were anything but a believer of the Christian religion.

Similarly, I seem to recall that the taxation element you refer to is to the exclusive benefit of Protestants, which could be another area of contention...but I could be mistaken.

Ray

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

03/02/2011 09:43:01 PM · #5359

Huh? And what bearing on this thread? Meant for the other rant, perhaps?

Nullix

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

03/02/2011 11:37:21 PM · #5360

A little off topic, but more to do with that with that Westboro Baptist church.

Anti-gay church's right to protest at military funerals is upheld

Mean people suck...

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

03/03/2011 12:00:57 AM · #5361

Originally posted by Nullix:

Mean people suck...

And quite often get ahead much faster than nice people. Just the way of the world, sad to say.

Mousie

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f2.8D

03/03/2011 06:16:40 PM · #5362

Originally posted by Nullix:

A little off topic, but more to do with that with that Westboro Baptist church.

Anti-gay church's right to protest at military funerals is upheld

Mean people suck...

Mean people suck, but they have every right to do so. That's the price you pay for living in a mostly open society.

David Ey

Nikon D80

03/03/2011 08:42:52 PM · #5363

Well, it's official, two gay guys will be carrying me to my final resting place. I'd say there is a bit of evolution here.

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f2.8D

03/03/2011 08:50:19 PM · #5364

"Final resting place" may be a poor choice of words if you expect resurrection and/or eternal partying.

David Ey

Nikon D80

03/03/2011 08:52:54 PM · #5365

Only for my soul/spirit my friend. My body will be layed to rest to return to dust.

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

03/03/2011 09:03:25 PM · #5366

Originally posted by David Ey:

Only for my soul/spirit my friend. My body will be layed to rest to return to dust.

Then why was Jesus' tomb supposedly empty?

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

03/03/2011 09:21:15 PM · #5367

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by David Ey:
Only for my soul/spirit my friend. My body will be layed to rest to return to dust.

Then why was Jesus' tomb supposedly empty?

He was a special case :-)

R.

03/03/2011 09:48:38 PM · #5368

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

He was a special case :-)

If so, then he was also a liar since Jesus promised the same treatment for his followers... unless of course such quotes are unreliable. ;-)

Message edited by author 2011-03-03 21:48:50.

03/03/2011 10:30:58 PM · #5369

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:
He was a special case :-)

If so, then he was also a liar since Jesus promised the same treatment for his followers... unless of course such quotes are unreliable. ;-)

Now, now Shannon... be fair...you can't forget that "interpretation" thing. :O)

Ray

Message edited by author 2011-03-05 08:39:29.

Nullix

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

03/04/2011 10:48:44 PM · #5370

Originally posted by David Ey:

Well, it's official, two gay guys will be carrying me to my final resting place. I'd say there is a bit of evolution here.

I don't get it. Is there some "inside info" here?

David Ey

Nikon D80

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f2.8D

03/06/2011 10:37:51 AM · #5371

ha..I hope not. A little pre planning doesn't hurt though.

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

03/06/2011 12:52:34 PM · #5372

Originally posted by David Ey:

A little pre planning doesn't hurt though.

Better work fast. You don't have much time left.

Kelli

Canon EOS-D60

03/06/2011 01:03:44 PM · #5373

Originally posted by scalvert:

That's funny because that's how I always understood it to be as well. At the final judgement/armageddon/the end, everyone would get their bodies back. I used to drive people nuts as a kid asking what happened to the ones who were cremated. Would they get some non believers body instead to use for eternity since they wouldn't be using it anyway?