Special interestThe LDS church should lose it's tax exempt status for it's substantial monetary donations to the Yes on Proposition 8 cause.
      – Mattslc, 2008-11-14 at 21:26:05   (10 comments)

On 2008-11-14 at 21:26:43, Mattslc wrote...
Not sure if you guys followed this but I thought i'd throw it out there anyways.
On 2008-11-14 at 21:31:05, Lee J Haywood wrote...
Not really, but I did see this. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/politics/cal/la-2008election-california-results,0,1293859.htmlstory?view=8&tab=0&fnum=0
On 2008-11-14 at 21:38:09, Lee J Haywood wrote...
Of course, proposition 8 should never have been raised in the first place. It's also surprising to see proposition 7 on renewable energy shot down - California is supposed to be a leader in that sort of thing.
On 2008-11-15 at 00:24:52, BorgClown wrote...
I didn't know about the LDS church, and the Proposition 8, I had to look up what it referred to (gay marriage). I agree completely, in fact, I think that every profitable organization should be taxable, be it a Church or a corporate.
On 2008-11-15 at 00:27:38, BorgClown wrote...
More like anti-gay marriage, the proposition supports "traditional marriage"
On 2008-11-15 at 00:39:00, BorgClown wrote...
As a coincidence, there's a new TV ad who encourages people to faithfully give the tithe. Gosh, Church leaders are such a freeloaders.
On 2008-11-15 at 07:33:07, Despicable wrote...
I believe that all marriages by the church and the state is an imposition on a couples freedom to unite, without having a third party's involvement in the arrangement. The churches that officially involves itself in the politics of the nation is violating the constitution mandated, separation of church and state, and if they insist on doing so they should have their tax exemption taken away.
On 2008-11-15 at 10:53:36, Lee J Haywood wrote...
Since it's permissible to marry without involvement by the church, their involvement is largely political and not part of the core issue. The question is whether or not same-sex marriage should be allowed, or a civil union in its place, is one of discrimination. I foresee that it will become commonplace for same-sex couples to marry in regions that permit such unions, and that failing to recognise the legality of their documentation in other regions will be sufficiently foolish that acceptance will gradually spread. Once a majority of nations accept it, the zeitgeist will have progressed to its logical conclusion as it has for discrimination in other areas.
On 2008-11-16 at 00:44:22, Patofeo wrote...
@Lee J Haywood: agree with you on 8, but 7 was ill-conceived and along with prop 10 (termed big 'wind and big 'solar'). They were nothing more than gimmicks
On 2008-11-17 at 17:56:00, Baslisks wrote...
If a church makes more money the nit needs to sustain it's self then it should be taxed. They could easily ask their worshipers to do community service and volunteer service to help break some taxes but they should still pay their dues.