O'Rourke: churches should be taxed if they refuse to support gay marriage

1,071 Views | 37 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by quash
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Beto O'Rourke says churches should be taxed if they refuse to support gay marriage

Quote:

Beto O'Rourke said he thinks that religious institutions should be stripped of their tax-exempt status if they oppose homosexuality.

While at a CNN candidate forum about gay and transgender issues, moderator Don Lemon asked the 47-year-old former congressman whether he supported revoking the tax-exempt status for religious institutions such as churches, colleges, and charities, if they don't support gay marriage.

"Yes," O'Rourke responded, to much applause.

"There can be no reward, no benefit, no tax break, for anyone or any institution, any organization in America that denies the full human rights and the full civil rights of every single one of us," O'Rourke said. "And so, as president, we're going to make that a priority, and we are going to stop those who are infringing upon the human rights of our fellow Americans."
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/beto-orourke-says-churches-should-be-taxed-if-they-refuse-to-support-gay-marriage

Aliceinbubbleland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Does anyone really believe that gay dude Lemon didn't rehearse this with skaterboy prior to "Town Hall" They really aren't anything but softball questions.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Smart position for Beto to take......very clever .

Beto is marketing his candidacy to a Dem constituency possessing an ever increasing hostility towards Faith in general and Christians in particular.

2024 isn't that far away.



jimdue
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canada2017 said:

Smart position for Beto to take......very clever .

Beto is marketing his candidacy to a Dem constituency possessing an ever increasing hostility towards Faith in general and Christians in particular.

2024 isn't that far away.




Too bad for Beto that Mayor Pete has taken the mantle as the cool young hip progressive nationally within the party. Besides, Mayor Pete is actually gay which will be a big political plus for him over time.

Beto is the rich straight white guy from El Paso with the faux Mexican nickname which came in handy running for office in El Paso. He really is more of a boarding school Ivy League no accomplishment Hunter Biden kind of a guy who was born on third base and thought he hit a triple.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
jimdue said:

Canada2017 said:

Smart position for Beto to take......very clever .

Beto is marketing his candidacy to a Dem constituency possessing an ever increasing hostility towards Faith in general and Christians in particular.

2024 isn't that far away.




Too bad for Beto that Mayor Pete has taken the mantle as the cool young hip progressive nationally within the party. Besides, Mayor Pete is actually gay which will be a big political plus for him over time.

Beto is the rich straight white guy from El Paso with the faux Mexican nickname which came in handy running for office in El Paso. He really is more of a boarding school Ivy League no accomplishment Hunter Biden kind of a guy who was born on third base and thought he hit a triple.


All true.

Regardless, anti Christian rhetoric is on the rise and Beto is positioning himself ahead of the curve .

riflebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And they criticize Trump for being a bully...

trey3216
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aliceinbubbleland said:

Does anyone really believe that gay dude Lemon didn't rehearse this with skaterboy prior to "Town Hall" They really aren't anything but softball questions.
I wonder how far they rehearsed. 3rd base?
Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women, man.
jimdue
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canada2017 said:

jimdue said:

Canada2017 said:

Smart position for Beto to take......very clever .

Beto is marketing his candidacy to a Dem constituency possessing an ever increasing hostility towards Faith in general and Christians in particular.

2024 isn't that far away.




Too bad for Beto that Mayor Pete has taken the mantle as the cool young hip progressive nationally within the party. Besides, Mayor Pete is actually gay which will be a big political plus for him over time.

Beto is the rich straight white guy from El Paso with the faux Mexican nickname which came in handy running for office in El Paso. He really is more of a boarding school Ivy League no accomplishment Hunter Biden kind of a guy who was born on third base and thought he hit a triple.


All true.

Regardless, anti Christian rhetoric is on the rise and Beto is positioning himself ahead of the curve .


At some point, the Dems could be risking Catholic Hispanics and a lot of African Americans with this rhetoric. But there is probably not too much risk for the Dems with these 2 groups as long as Trump is around. Just like despite my many misgivings I have with Trump, there is not a chance in hell that I vote nationally for the party of AOC, Warren etc.
Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
trey3216
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
No man would marry/have children with a woman under the precursor that they'd get their kids free college because she's part Native American.
Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women, man.
riflebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
The essence of her answer was mocking a Christian man who believes in marriage between a man and a woman saying he would never find a woman to marry him anyway.

Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
riflebear said:

Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
The essence of her answer was mocking a Christian man who believes in marriage between a man and a woman saying he would never find a woman to marry him anyway.


It was a joke about a hypothetical person, snowflake.

She says you are free to practice your religious belief; you don't have the right to impose it on others by force of law. That is what you have a problem with.
witchmo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Can't fix stupid. Prima facie evidence: Beto. What a putz.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
Riiiiight....
LIB,MR BEARS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
jimdue said:

Canada2017 said:

jimdue said:

Canada2017 said:

Smart position for Beto to take......very clever .

Beto is marketing his candidacy to a Dem constituency possessing an ever increasing hostility towards Faith in general and Christians in particular.

2024 isn't that far away.




Too bad for Beto that Mayor Pete has taken the mantle as the cool young hip progressive nationally within the party. Besides, Mayor Pete is actually gay which will be a big political plus for him over time.

Beto is the rich straight white guy from El Paso with the faux Mexican nickname which came in handy running for office in El Paso. He really is more of a boarding school Ivy League no accomplishment Hunter Biden kind of a guy who was born on third base and thought he hit a triple.


All true.

Regardless, anti Christian rhetoric is on the rise and Beto is positioning himself ahead of the curve .


At some point, the Dems could be risking Catholic Hispanics and a lot of African Americans with this rhetoric. But there is probably not too much risk for the Dems with these 2 groups as long as Trump is around. Just like despite my many misgivings I have with Trump, there is not a chance in hell that I vote nationally for the party of AOC, Warren etc.
It is a guarantee that the Dems will overplay their hand. Guaranteed!
Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
Riiiiight....
You usually make a point about why you disagree and I usually learn something from your point. What am i missing here? That is here argument and is really what underlies Oberfell.

riflebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

riflebear said:

Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
The essence of her answer was mocking a Christian man who believes in marriage between a man and a woman saying he would never find a woman to marry him anyway.


It was a joke about a hypothetical person, snowflake.

She says you are free to practice your religious belief; you don't have the right to impose it on others by force of law. That is what you have a problem with.
Typical liberal name calling when they lose a debate.

It was a question - of course it was a hypothetical but she flat out mocked the person asking this (which is most Christians who believe this) by saying he is basically stupid in their beliefs and no woman would date or marry a guy w/ those beliefs.

It was an attempted mockery/slam on her part. Look at her walk away at the end and the entire crowd cheers. - Are you that naive?

She was fine w/ her answer until the very end.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

ATL Bear said:

Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
Riiiiight....
You usually make a point about why you disagree and I usually learn something from your point. What am i missing here? That is here argument and is really what underlies Oberfell.


If this was a nuanced conversation about Oberfell that would be one thing. It was a red meat toss to the "woke" crowd and an intended slam. Besides, monogamy is a Christian bedrock, and why US marriage has its current form, even with the gender caveat. But that wasn't tossed.
Carlos Safety
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

ATL Bear said:

Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
Riiiiight....
You usually make a point about why you disagree and I usually learn something from your point. What am i missing here? That is here argument and is really what underlies Oberfell.


What underlies Oberfell is another man.
YoakDaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cool Beto. Now do mosques.
Kyle
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canada2017 said:

Smart position for Beto to take......very clever .

Beto is marketing his candidacy to a Dem constituency possessing an ever increasing hostility towards Faith in general and Christians in particular.

2024 isn't that far away.
In 2024 they'll be suggesting Christians wear Yellow stars on their clothes so they do not trigger the woke crowd with their silly morals, ethics, and objective truths.
BusyTarpDuster2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

riflebear said:

Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
The essence of her answer was mocking a Christian man who believes in marriage between a man and a woman saying he would never find a woman to marry him anyway.


It was a joke about a hypothetical person, snowflake.

She says you are free to practice your religious belief; you don't have the right to impose it on others by force of law. That is what you have a problem with.
You are utterly clueless if you can't see that her mocking of a hypothetical person was intended as a slight towards the kind of people he represented. What would happen if she said that about a hypothetical muslim?
Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
riflebear said:

Booray said:

riflebear said:

Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
The essence of her answer was mocking a Christian man who believes in marriage between a man and a woman saying he would never find a woman to marry him anyway.


It was a joke about a hypothetical person, snowflake.

She says you are free to practice your religious belief; you don't have the right to impose it on others by force of law. That is what you have a problem with.
Typical liberal name calling when they lose a debate.

It was a question - of course it was a hypothetical but she flat out mocked the person asking this (which is most Christians who believe this) by saying he is basically stupid in their beliefs and no woman would date or marry a guy w/ those beliefs.

It was an attempted mockery/slam on her part. Look at her walk away at the end and the entire crowd cheers. - Are you that naive?

She was fine w/ her answer until the very end.
If that is what bothers you about her answer, you absolutely can't vote for Donald Trump. All he does is mockery. And 200x more severe than what you saw from Warren.
Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Booray said:

ATL Bear said:

Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
Riiiiight....
You usually make a point about why you disagree and I usually learn something from your point. What am i missing here? That is here argument and is really what underlies Oberfell.


If this was a nuanced conversation about Oberfell that would be one thing. It was a red meat toss to the "woke" crowd and an intended slam. Besides, monogamy is a Christian bedrock, and why US marriage has its current form, even with the gender caveat. But that wasn't tossed.
The first part of her answer was a blunt explanation of the argument for same sex marriage. It literally is the reason the law is the way it is. And I have never heard anyone from the one-man, one-woman give a convincing response.

The second part was the joke, I guess it is the part that has everyone on the thread all upset. Which is hilarious irony from a bunch of people who are either Trump supporters or who at least tolerate him. The man has literally built his political career on disparagement.

Anyway, I just don't perceive the comment as negatively as many do. I think she was just saying women are smarter than men about this stuff.
Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

Booray said:

riflebear said:

Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
The essence of her answer was mocking a Christian man who believes in marriage between a man and a woman saying he would never find a woman to marry him anyway.


It was a joke about a hypothetical person, snowflake.

She says you are free to practice your religious belief; you don't have the right to impose it on others by force of law. That is what you have a problem with.
You are utterly clueless if you can't see that her mocking of a hypothetical person was intended as a slight towards the kind of people he represented. What would happen if she said that about a hypothetical muslim?
I said it was a joke. Jokes often are at the expense of other people or groups of people.

She was saying the hypothetical person was taking a dumb position. That is her view. If its not a dumb position I would love for someone to explain to me how the fact that two gay men or two lesbian women can marry is ruining the hypothetical question asker's life.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

ATL Bear said:

Booray said:

ATL Bear said:

Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
Riiiiight....
You usually make a point about why you disagree and I usually learn something from your point. What am i missing here? That is here argument and is really what underlies Oberfell.


If this was a nuanced conversation about Oberfell that would be one thing. It was a red meat toss to the "woke" crowd and an intended slam. Besides, monogamy is a Christian bedrock, and why US marriage has its current form, even with the gender caveat. But that wasn't tossed.
The first part of her answer was a blunt explanation of the argument for same sex marriage. It literally is the reason the law is the way it is. And I have never heard anyone from the one-man, one-woman give a convincing response.
Q: What if I believe marriage is between one man and one woman?
A: Then just marry one woman.

We're assuming she was only addressing gay marriage, but the question is equally relevant to polygamy. Is her reasoning equally valid in that context?

NB: Citing the laws regarding gay marriage and polygamy won't answer the question of why the law is the way it is. Warren implies that it's because everyone can determine for themselves what marriage means. Is this true? Is it true for some and not others? Why?
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LIB,MR BEARS said:

jimdue said:

Canada2017 said:

jimdue said:

Canada2017 said:

Smart position for Beto to take......very clever .

Beto is marketing his candidacy to a Dem constituency possessing an ever increasing hostility towards Faith in general and Christians in particular.

2024 isn't that far away.




Too bad for Beto that Mayor Pete has taken the mantle as the cool young hip progressive nationally within the party. Besides, Mayor Pete is actually gay which will be a big political plus for him over time.

Beto is the rich straight white guy from El Paso with the faux Mexican nickname which came in handy running for office in El Paso. He really is more of a boarding school Ivy League no accomplishment Hunter Biden kind of a guy who was born on third base and thought he hit a triple.


All true.

Regardless, anti Christian rhetoric is on the rise and Beto is positioning himself ahead of the curve .


At some point, the Dems could be risking Catholic Hispanics and a lot of African Americans with this rhetoric. But there is probably not too much risk for the Dems with these 2 groups as long as Trump is around. Just like despite my many misgivings I have with Trump, there is not a chance in hell that I vote nationally for the party of AOC, Warren etc.
It is a guarantee that the Dems will overplay their hand. Guaranteed!


No guarantees in the slightest with 90% of the media promoting the Dems agenda .

Just look how easily the media has twisted Trumps telephone conversation even with the transcript of the exchanged released .

Propaganda works with repeated exposure.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

ATL Bear said:

Booray said:

ATL Bear said:

Booray said:

riflebear said:

And they criticize Trump for being a bully...


Snowflake.

The essence of her answer was that the government should not be able to impose a religious test to obtain the benefits our society offers, with a bit of humor added in.
Riiiiight....
You usually make a point about why you disagree and I usually learn something from your point. What am i missing here? That is here argument and is really what underlies Oberfell.


If this was a nuanced conversation about Oberfell that would be one thing. It was a red meat toss to the "woke" crowd and an intended slam. Besides, monogamy is a Christian bedrock, and why US marriage has its current form, even with the gender caveat. But that wasn't tossed.
The first part of her answer was a blunt explanation of the argument for same sex marriage. It literally is the reason the law is the way it is. And I have never heard anyone from the one-man, one-woman give a convincing response.

The second part was the joke, I guess it is the part that has everyone on the thread all upset. Which is hilarious irony from a bunch of people who are either Trump supporters or who at least tolerate him. The man has literally built his political career on disparagement.

Anyway, I just don't perceive the comment as negatively as many do. I think she was just saying women are smarter than men about this stuff.
There are many explanations given as to the one man/one woman relationship. To be as pithy as Warren, a gay man or woman could marry a person of the opposite sex and get the same benefit offered to everyone else prior to the law change. The fact they do not want to requires explanation as to the benefit of subsidizing their choice of relationship. I've yet to hear a sound argument for that. And the arguments I have heard would apply to plural marriage or any other type of human relationship.

Donald Trump likes to insult people. But the ones that people most have a problem with are his broad brush swipes. Warren took one at men and faith. Consider it under your Trump prism rather than as a tit for tat to Trump.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There should be no religious exemption.
Wilkes and Liberty 45
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

There should be no religious exemption.
What about secular non-profits?
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

There should be no religious exemption.
What about secular non-profits?

Sorry, no religious exemption for property taxes.
Something that wouldn't matter to the Church of Faith and Freedom
Wilkes and Liberty 45
JXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Since Beto doesn't care about the First or Second Amendments, I wonder when he'll call for quartering soldiers in our homes?
Aliceinbubbleland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

There should be no religious exemption.
What about secular non-profits?

Sorry, no religious exemption for property taxes.
Exactly. The sprawl of Second Baptist (why in the world would you want to be called "Second") is a corporation so far removed from the belief of separation of Church and State. Second is State.
Carlos Safety
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JXL said:

Since Beto doesn't care about the First or Second Amendments, I wonder when he'll call for quartering soldiers in our homes?
Without the First or Second, there is little to prohibit the quartering of soldiers in your home during peacetime.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Father Gregg asked our congregation to sign a petition today.

A petition to put the question of late term abortions on the ballot here in Colorado next year .

Apparently anyone can obtain an abortion up to the day of birth ....for any or no reason .

The petition asks that after a TWENTY TWO WEEK pregnancy....no abortions be allowed .



My wife and I signed it. Many parishioners didn't .

As one lady said ....it's pointless .

' Our society has become a society of death '.


She's right .


Churches are on the way out .


Page 1 of 2
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.