Todd’s American Dispatch: Feds forced churches to get baptism permits. Meanwhile Muslims evidently do not need permits to wash their feet in the same rivers.
Todd’s American Dispatch: Feds forced churches to get baptism permits. Meanwhile Muslims evidently do not need permits to wash their feet in the same rivers.
This website uses cookies.
View Comments (22)
After the obama experience, is should be clear to all but the most indoctrinated communists faithful that we cannot afford another leftist idiot in national office. But, as this is the NE where the majority of people have .lost common sense, I suppose we can already call him senator.
Even though I'm not a Christian, or a member of any religion at all, I hate to see discrimination against the religions that aren't causing problems. Which would be any religion other than Islam.
That being said, since churches don't pay taxes, I see no reason why they shouldn't pay for the ability to use government property for their religious ceremonies. Of course, I would include ALL religions in that, not just Baptists, not just Christians.
Why should the "Church" have to pay for the use of government property, it's entire membership already pays taxes? The "Church" is not an LLC and forcing the "Church" to pay for the use of a so called 'free' public facility or property is asking the membership of said "Church" to pay a double tax for the same property the government deems to allow other 'special interest' groups, charities, organizations and religious affiliations to use for free. We conducted a general revolt against King George III for doing something very similar to the colonies! The founders, to a man, saw taxing the "Church" as taxing God himself...what arrogant 'cheek'! You don't have to believe in God, but for goodness sakes, don't give any 'Government' that singular satisfaction, because when you do, you end up with the kind of asshats we have squatting in public offices all over this nation today!
Beat me to it. I was going to say pretty much the same thing in your first sentence. Church members pay state, local taxes.
Some of the churches that use local bodies of water are probably the ones that can't afford a fancy baptismal behind the pulpit like some of the bigger churches. Many small community churches do well to pay utilities and upkeep on top of a building and property payment. I know, I belong to one that has been struggling to put back enough money to pave their gravel parking lot for a long time.
If any other organization wants to use the park property for an organized event, they have to pay for a permit, whether their members pay taxes or not. As I said, I'm against discrimination, in either direction.
Personally, I'm not a fan of the whole idea of "permits" to begin with. That's just another word for asking permission to use something that belongs to you to begin with. However, when something has been made "official" in the eyes of the local bureaucrats, then it has certain rights. Without a permit, there would be no lawful reason I couldn't walk up in the middle of the baptism, stand in the water, and pick my nose. Hey, it's my park too, right? Get a permit for an area, and it's "yours."
I'm seeing your point and it's a good one and BTW baptisms are a public acknowledgement of a commitment in faith and if a congregation wants to use a public facility for this they should be prepared to get a permit for that purpose, especially if they wish to use some popular park or facility. However, it is not the state's right or constitutional mandate to tell people that they can't use a public facility of any kind because it violates the state's constitution, or because it violates some ficticious "separation of church and state clause" the libtards are so famous for throwing up in everyone's faces. If a state were to have such a clause it would, by its very nature, be unconstitutional and would violate the 1st Amendment and I'm certain no such clause exists in any state constitution...except in some libtards empty head.
I'm not against having somebody get a permit to use a public facility, because that helps in its maintenance and up keep. What I am upset about is the ham fisted hypocricy of a government that denys one group access to public property, based on religion, but turns a blind eye to the public use of the same said property by another group based on religion. The assault is against Christians and Christianity and it is blatant and it is inexcusable.
I'm seeing your point and it's a good one and BTW baptisms are a public acknowledgement of a commitment in faith and if a congregation wants to use a public facility for this they should be prepared to get a permit for that purpose, especially if they wish to use some popular park or facility. However, it is not the state's right or constitutional mandate to tell people that they can't use a public facility of any kind because it violate the state's constitution, or because it violates some ficticious "separation of church and state clause" the libtards are so famous for throwing up in everyone's faces. If a state were to have such a clause it would, by its very nature, be unconstitutional and would violate the 1st Amendment and I'm certain no such clause exists in any state constitution...except in some libtards empty head.
I'm not against having somebody get a permit to use a public facility, because that helps in its maintenance and up keep. What I am upset about is the ham fisted hypocricy of a government to deny one group access to public property, based on religion, but turn a blind eye to the public use of the same said property by another group based on religion. The assault is against Christians and Christianity and it is blatant and it is inexcusable.
That's a good argument if that's the case.
"In Olympia, Wash., a church was denied a permit to hold a baptism at Heritage Park a few weeks ago. Their request was rejected because the attorney general said the religious sacrament was a violation of the state constitution."
"But while the government cracks down on public expressions of the Christian faith, they are embracing public expressions of the Islamic faith – many times at taxpayer expense."
"Universities across the nation are spending thousands of dollars to install foot baths so Muslim students can wash their feet before their five-times-a-day prayers."
"A number of airports have spent public tax dollars to provide foot-washing basins for Muslim taxi drivers. One Arizona airport went so far as to provide prayer rugs."
The last ten or so paragraphs make a valid point that “Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion.” John Adams
No leeway for Christianity, but plenty of overt support for a cult.
As I said, I'm against discrimination, at least against groups that aren't causing problems. I don't think there should be Muslim foot washing stations in a public facility any more than I think there should be statues of Christ on the cross. People should take care of these things on their own.
The DENYING of permits is a whole different situation than the requiring of permits.
Time to secure three cement blocks to each elected progressive and baptize them in the Atlantic.
3 wouldn't be enough weight, 3 jetty rocks would be better.
That would be a waste of good cement blocks, how about those overpriced solar panels we all got stuck with?
Food for thought there...
Hazardous Waste?
They're onlyy hazardous when they're at work trying to protect us from ourselves, but they are a waste all the time.
So, instead of going for a Baptism, make it a church picnic, with swimming. If someone happens to be near the preacher and he dunks them while praying, no harm done!
Onward, Christian soldiers!
Marching as to war,
With the cross of Jesus
Going on before.
Christ, the royal Master,
Leads against the foe;
Forward into battle,
See his banners go!
At the sign of triumph
Satan's host doth flee;
On, then, Christian soldiers,
On to victory.
Hell's foundations quiver
At the shout of praise;
Brothers, lift your voices,
Loud your anthems raise.
Onward, then, ye people;
Join our happy throng.
Blend with ours your voices
In the triumph song:
Glory, laud, and honor
Unto Christ, the King.
This through countless ages
Men and angels sing.
Like a mighty army
Moves the Church of God;
Brothers, we are treading
Where the Saints have trod.
We are not divided;
All one body we:
One in hope and doctrine,
One in charity.
All part of Quagmire's war on Christians, any remaining doubt that he's a mooslem asshole?
What makes me so mad about all of this is that these Federal bureaucrats seem to feel entitled to their blind hypocrisy, they don't even see the malignant injustice of it all. Just following policy and orders, no need to think about what they're doing, because if the government says it's okay, then it must be okay. The Nazi leadership that didn't immediately suicide just before the fall of the Third Reich said something similar during the Nuremburg Trials and at least 21 of those asshats were found guilty and were either executed, or imprisoned, some for life. I think we should take a page from history and see if it can't be repeated for this new crop of socialist elite.
Kind of have mixed emotions on this.
On the one hand, Missouri elected and re-elected an ignorant stupid, unpatriotic bitch to the US Senate so, they get what they deserve.
On the other hand, I would be happy to support the few remaining decent people left in Missouri. If that means fighting agents of the government, I am ready.
The Untied Stated was once a Christian nation, until the great closet muslim came along, $25,000 so muslims can wash their feet but demand permits to Christan who want to be baptized, government has gone 100% stupid, if muslims want to wash their goat loving feet let them use the urinals or carry their own water.