(01-24-2019 11:31 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:22 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 07:53 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Dan Levin
‏
Verified account

@globaldan
2h2 hours ago
More
I'm a New York Times reporter writing about #exposechristianschools. Are you in your 20s or younger who went to a Christian school? I'd like to hear about your experience and its impact on your life. Please DM me.



https://twitter.com/globaldan/status...70101283110915

Is Levin a Jewish name?

Quite possibly. But that is really irrelevant. I doubt a practicing Jew would be going hard after practicing Christians. Just my experience that this seldom happens. But as with children of protestants who have gone awry in the public schools system, those who choose to be atheists really spend a lot of their time attacking Christians, Jews, or any other faith based group of people. For those who claim there is no God they sure spend a lot of time attacking adherents. I find they tend to be narcissistic angry people who want approval and are too obnoxious to get it. So they just lash out in hate. Atheists come in all varieties including Jewish ones, but most of them are recent graduates of public high schools and state universities where the vitriol and labeling of people of faith is standard fare. Carrying out their teachers' beliefs makes them feel intelligent and important.

It matters because if Sean O'Conner said #exposejewishschools that would be banned.

I see what you are arguing now. The way you asked the question it seemed to be singling out Jewish people as the protagonists. What you are saying is once again some things may be attacked and some may not, even though they are essentially equivalent scenarios. Yeah, there's a lot of that going around. But that's what happens when you set aside some as hate crimes, but not others. It's why none of those laws serve a good purpose. If somebody is attacked for their beliefs the punishment should be the same. If someone is killed then that's murder. There's no need to distinguish some as hate crimes and others as not. Murder is murder, citizens are citizens, and rights either belong to all or none.

Hate crimes are silly. I am curious if a New York Jew, who texts #exposechristianschools, who works for the NY Times has an agenda against White Christianity. I mean we area talking Blacks and Natives who verbally attacked minor kids in DC and this is the response.

And my point was that in the Soviet Union there were many atheists who were of Jewish lineage. In the U.S. there are many people of Jewish lineage who are not practicing Jews who are atheists. The ACLU had a lot of like that when I was younger.

The point I was making is that I've worked closely with Synagogues, Temples, Churches, etc, and I've never known any of them to attack each other's right to worship, or ridicule each other publicly. Are there some offshoots from mainline churches that would be anti-Semitic? Yes. I'm not saying there aren't. But those would be in the vast minority. There are probably some sects within Judaism that are. But the overwhelming majority are not.

What there is a boat load of are people of Christian lineage and Jewish lineage who are atheists, or claim to be, who spend a whole lot of time attacking people of faith. Just because they are of a particular lineage doesn't mean that their faith group of heritage is doing the attacking. You have to be careful in making that distinction.

If there is a person of Protestant lineage who attacks Catholics, but they are a non believer, it doesn't mean that Protestants are attacking Catholics. It means one claiming to be a non believer is attacking them.

My point to Stinkfist was that true atheists don't waste their time attacking what they don't believe exists. So it's probably not even fair to call those who do attack people of faith atheists. They are just non believers who like to call attention to themselves. But none of them is doing it in the name of a particular religion.

(01-24-2019 11:40 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:33 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  If they receive taxpayer benefits, while simultaneously discriminating, then they're fair game.

We're paying for it, one way or another.

huh.......

freedom of religion and freedom of speech is now a problem????

holy gee whiz with whipped cream on top of a pecker.....

I'm guessing ewe can relate to that....

Freedom of religion and freedom of speech doesn't mean that they should be able to make everyone else pay higher taxes for them.

We tax FOX News. Doesn't mean they don't have freedom of speech.

(01-24-2019 11:51 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:42 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:33 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  If they receive taxpayer benefits, while simultaneously discriminating, then they're fair game.

We're paying for it, one way or another.

All religious institutions discriminate, so do non profit gay groups.

every day of the week....

Certainly, the Gay country clubs, Gay schools, Gay polo clubs, Gay hunting clubs, and Gay churches with property valued over 1,000,000 and paying over 24,000 per year in housing allowances/parsonage expenses should pay the same property tax rate as the Mega Churches and Private discriminatory schools




And I'd like to remove all taxfree status for any group spending anything on politics, including churches, UNIONS, and liberal and conservative 501c3 and 501c4s.

Gays belong to all of the above.

(01-24-2019 11:33 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  If they receive taxpayer benefits, while simultaneously discriminating, then they're fair game.

We're paying for it, one way or another.

----

I think that all discriminatory entities, including private golf clubs, should pay property tax and have no tax free treatment for salaries or housing allowances. In return, they have a right to discriminate. But if its' a private club, or a private school, its really someone else's private property. Everyone else shouldn't be paying higher property and income taxes (and in Texas - higher UTILITY rates too) simply to cover for someone else's private plaything.

I'd be willing to allow for an exception for a 24,000 dollar housing allowance tax free per FAMILY for pastors and 1 million dollars tax free in property taxes, indexed for property prices in various locations.

Nobody cares what your bigoted opinion is.

(01-24-2019 11:55 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:31 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:22 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Quite possibly. But that is really irrelevant. I doubt a practicing Jew would be going hard after practicing Christians. Just my experience that this seldom happens. But as with children of protestants who have gone awry in the public schools system, those who choose to be atheists really spend a lot of their time attacking Christians, Jews, or any other faith based group of people. For those who claim there is no God they sure spend a lot of time attacking adherents. I find they tend to be narcissistic angry people who want approval and are too obnoxious to get it. So they just lash out in hate. Atheists come in all varieties including Jewish ones, but most of them are recent graduates of public high schools and state universities where the vitriol and labeling of people of faith is standard fare. Carrying out their teachers' beliefs makes them feel intelligent and important.

It matters because if Sean O'Conner said #exposejewishschools that would be banned.

I see what you are arguing now. The way you asked the question it seemed to be singling out Jewish people as the protagonists. What you are saying is once again some things may be attacked and some may not, even though they are essentially equivalent scenarios. Yeah, there's a lot of that going around. But that's what happens when you set aside some as hate crimes, but not others. It's why none of those laws serve a good purpose. If somebody is attacked for their beliefs the punishment should be the same. If someone is killed then that's murder. There's no need to distinguish some as hate crimes and others as not. Murder is murder, citizens are citizens, and rights either belong to all or none.

Hate crimes are silly. I am curious if a New York Jew, who texts #exposechristianschools, who works for the NY Times has an agenda against White Christianity. I mean we area talking Blacks and Natives who verbally attacked minor kids in DC and this is the response.

And my point was that in the Soviet Union there were many atheists who were of Jewish lineage. In the U.S. there are many people of Jewish lineage who are not practicing Jews who are atheists. The ACLU had a lot of like that when I was younger.

The point I was making is that I've worked closely with Synagogues, Temples, Churches, etc, and I've never known any of them to attack each other's right to worship, or ridicule each other publicly. Are there some offshoots from mainline churches that would be anti-Semitic? Yes. I'm not saying there aren't. But those would be in the vast minority. There are probably some sects within Judaism that are. But the overwhelming majority are not.

What there is a boat load of are people of Christian lineage and Jewish lineage who are atheists, or claim to be, who spend a whole lot of time attacking people of faith. Just because they are of a particular lineage doesn't mean that their faith group of heritage is doing the attacking. You have to be careful in making that distinction.

If there is a person of Protestant lineage who attacks Catholics, but they are a non believer, it doesn't mean that Protestants are attacking Catholics. It means one claiming to be a non believer is attacking them.

My point to Stinkfist was that true atheists don't waste their time attacking what they don't believe exists. So it's probably not even fair to call those who do attack people of faith atheists. They are just non believers who like to call attention to themselves. But none of them is doing it in the name of a particular religion.

JR I know what you are saying, however if Sean O'Connor says #exposejewishschools does the NY Times let that happen?

(01-24-2019 11:51 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:42 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:33 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  If they receive taxpayer benefits, while simultaneously discriminating, then they're fair game.

We're paying for it, one way or another.

All religious institutions discriminate, so do non profit gay groups.

every day of the week....

Certainly, the Gay country clubs, Gay schools, Gay polo clubs, Gay hunting clubs, and Gay churches with property valued over 1,000,000 and paying over 24,000 per year in housing allowances/parsonage expenses should pay the same property tax rate as the Mega Churches and Private discriminatory schools




And I'd like to remove all taxfree status for any group spending anything on politics, including churches, UNIONS, and liberal and conservative 501c3 and 501c4s.

I personally would like to see the elimination of ALL tax free status groups.....

that ends all this bs....

I keep trying to tell ewe I don't care about your gayness or any others....

however, you continuing to bring up muh gay feels is another animal....

line 4 is always applied when ewe respond by sucking on that 'vein'.....

(01-25-2019 12:00 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:55 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:31 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:22 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  It matters because if Sean O'Conner said #exposejewishschools that would be banned.

I see what you are arguing now. The way you asked the question it seemed to be singling out Jewish people as the protagonists. What you are saying is once again some things may be attacked and some may not, even though they are essentially equivalent scenarios. Yeah, there's a lot of that going around. But that's what happens when you set aside some as hate crimes, but not others. It's why none of those laws serve a good purpose. If somebody is attacked for their beliefs the punishment should be the same. If someone is killed then that's murder. There's no need to distinguish some as hate crimes and others as not. Murder is murder, citizens are citizens, and rights either belong to all or none.

Hate crimes are silly. I am curious if a New York Jew, who texts #exposechristianschools, who works for the NY Times has an agenda against White Christianity. I mean we area talking Blacks and Natives who verbally attacked minor kids in DC and this is the response.

And my point was that in the Soviet Union there were many atheists who were of Jewish lineage. In the U.S. there are many people of Jewish lineage who are not practicing Jews who are atheists. The ACLU had a lot of like that when I was younger.

The point I was making is that I've worked closely with Synagogues, Temples, Churches, etc, and I've never known any of them to attack each other's right to worship, or ridicule each other publicly. Are there some offshoots from mainline churches that would be anti-Semitic? Yes. I'm not saying there aren't. But those would be in the vast minority. There are probably some sects within Judaism that are. But the overwhelming majority are not.

What there is a boat load of are people of Christian lineage and Jewish lineage who are atheists, or claim to be, who spend a whole lot of time attacking people of faith. Just because they are of a particular lineage doesn't mean that their faith group of heritage is doing the attacking. You have to be careful in making that distinction.

If there is a person of Protestant lineage who attacks Catholics, but they are a non believer, it doesn't mean that Protestants are attacking Catholics. It means one claiming to be a non believer is attacking them.

My point to Stinkfist was that true atheists don't waste their time attacking what they don't believe exists. So it's probably not even fair to call those who do attack people of faith atheists. They are just non believers who like to call attention to themselves. But none of them is doing it in the name of a particular religion.

JR I know what you are saying, however if Sean O'Connor says #exposejewishschools does the NY Times let that happen?

No. And I got that. The NYT is another matter. I was just saying Levin might have been of Jewish lineage, but was most likely not a believer.

(01-25-2019 12:06 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-25-2019 12:00 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:55 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:31 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I see what you are arguing now. The way you asked the question it seemed to be singling out Jewish people as the protagonists. What you are saying is once again some things may be attacked and some may not, even though they are essentially equivalent scenarios. Yeah, there's a lot of that going around. But that's what happens when you set aside some as hate crimes, but not others. It's why none of those laws serve a good purpose. If somebody is attacked for their beliefs the punishment should be the same. If someone is killed then that's murder. There's no need to distinguish some as hate crimes and others as not. Murder is murder, citizens are citizens, and rights either belong to all or none.

Hate crimes are silly. I am curious if a New York Jew, who texts #exposechristianschools, who works for the NY Times has an agenda against White Christianity. I mean we area talking Blacks and Natives who verbally attacked minor kids in DC and this is the response.

And my point was that in the Soviet Union there were many atheists who were of Jewish lineage. In the U.S. there are many people of Jewish lineage who are not practicing Jews who are atheists. The ACLU had a lot of like that when I was younger.

The point I was making is that I've worked closely with Synagogues, Temples, Churches, etc, and I've never known any of them to attack each other's right to worship, or ridicule each other publicly. Are there some offshoots from mainline churches that would be anti-Semitic? Yes. I'm not saying there aren't. But those would be in the vast minority. There are probably some sects within Judaism that are. But the overwhelming majority are not.

What there is a boat load of are people of Christian lineage and Jewish lineage who are atheists, or claim to be, who spend a whole lot of time attacking people of faith. Just because they are of a particular lineage doesn't mean that their faith group of heritage is doing the attacking. You have to be careful in making that distinction.

If there is a person of Protestant lineage who attacks Catholics, but they are a non believer, it doesn't mean that Protestants are attacking Catholics. It means one claiming to be a non believer is attacking them.

My point to Stinkfist was that true atheists don't waste their time attacking what they don't believe exists. So it's probably not even fair to call those who do attack people of faith atheists. They are just non believers who like to call attention to themselves. But none of them is doing it in the name of a particular religion.

JR I know what you are saying, however if Sean O'Connor says #exposejewishschools does the NY Times let that happen?

No. And I got that. The NYT is another matter. I was just saying Levin might have been of Jewish lineage, but was most likely not a believer.

As far as I know it doesn't work that way. Lineage is everything.

(01-25-2019 12:02 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:51 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:42 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:33 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  If they receive taxpayer benefits, while simultaneously discriminating, then they're fair game.

We're paying for it, one way or another.

All religious institutions discriminate, so do non profit gay groups.

every day of the week....

Certainly, the Gay country clubs, Gay schools, Gay polo clubs, Gay hunting clubs, and Gay churches with property valued over 1,000,000 and paying over 24,000 per year in housing allowances/parsonage expenses should pay the same property tax rate as the Mega Churches and Private discriminatory schools




And I'd like to remove all taxfree status for any group spending anything on politics, including churches, UNIONS, and liberal and conservative 501c3 and 501c4s.

I personally would like to see the elimination of ALL tax free status groups.....

that ends all this bs....

I keep trying to tell ewe I don't care about your gayness or any others....

however, you continuing to bring up muh gay feels is another animal....

line 4 is always applied when ewe respond by sucking on that 'vein'.....

No arguments from me either on tax paying. A charitable gift needs to be charity, not a tax deduction. We have too many posing as humanitarians that are actually just gaining notoriety as generous people when in reality all they are doing is offsetting tax liability.

BTW: Most denominational churches should pay their share of the Pastor's SSI, but they don't. Most ministers pay 15.3% SSI plus income tax. And if that pastor lives in a parsonage, mance, or rectory then they have to pay SSI on the fair market rental of that dwelling, its furnishings, etc. They would be much better off building equity in their own home. The denominations don't care and let them shoulder the burden and leave them without equity. When many retire they can't afford a home because their salary never kept up with the inflation of real property. It's sad.

I knew of a denomination that took up an endowment to help their pastors who had retired before salaries of the clergy started rising so much. A 5 million dollar endowment was raised for 1 small region of that denomination. The clergy that were still active argued about how to distribute that money until most of the elderly guys who had served in the 60's died out. Then they said, "Oh, we no longer have anyone to give it to." So it was absorbed by the denomination.

They should pay taxes on buildings, real property left to them in wills, contributions after overhead, and should be treated as any corporate entity.

(01-25-2019 12:09 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-25-2019 12:06 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-25-2019 12:00 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:55 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:31 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Hate crimes are silly. I am curious if a New York Jew, who texts #exposechristianschools, who works for the NY Times has an agenda against White Christianity. I mean we area talking Blacks and Natives who verbally attacked minor kids in DC and this is the response.

And my point was that in the Soviet Union there were many atheists who were of Jewish lineage. In the U.S. there are many people of Jewish lineage who are not practicing Jews who are atheists. The ACLU had a lot of like that when I was younger.

The point I was making is that I've worked closely with Synagogues, Temples, Churches, etc, and I've never known any of them to attack each other's right to worship, or ridicule each other publicly. Are there some offshoots from mainline churches that would be anti-Semitic? Yes. I'm not saying there aren't. But those would be in the vast minority. There are probably some sects within Judaism that are. But the overwhelming majority are not.

What there is a boat load of are people of Christian lineage and Jewish lineage who are atheists, or claim to be, who spend a whole lot of time attacking people of faith. Just because they are of a particular lineage doesn't mean that their faith group of heritage is doing the attacking. You have to be careful in making that distinction.

If there is a person of Protestant lineage who attacks Catholics, but they are a non believer, it doesn't mean that Protestants are attacking Catholics. It means one claiming to be a non believer is attacking them.

My point to Stinkfist was that true atheists don't waste their time attacking what they don't believe exists. So it's probably not even fair to call those who do attack people of faith atheists. They are just non believers who like to call attention to themselves. But none of them is doing it in the name of a particular religion.

JR I know what you are saying, however if Sean O'Connor says #exposejewishschools does the NY Times let that happen?

No. And I got that. The NYT is another matter. I was just saying Levin might have been of Jewish lineage, but was most likely not a believer.

As far as I know it doesn't work that way. Lineage is everything.

We aren't going to agree on this. Karl Marx was of Jewish lineage. He didn't claim to be a practicing Jew. Therefore his political beliefs defined him, not his lineage.

(01-24-2019 07:53 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Dan Levin
‏
Verified account

@globaldan
2h2 hours ago
More
I'm a New York Times reporter writing about #exposechristianschools. Are you in your 20s or younger who went to a Christian school? I'd like to hear about your experience and its impact on your life. Please DM me.



https://twitter.com/globaldan/status...70101283110915

Is Levin a Jewish name?

I honestly hope to God that doesn't matter. To anyone.

First read of this, who's gunna guess the article is cherry-picked to reflect some kids "bad experiences" (Happens at every school, in every County, in every State, in the entire nation) and does little to speak to the good works these schools (and many others, including ours) do, not only in education, but in volunteering, building playgrounds, cleaning up open land or the river banks, feeding people, making Santa fun again, bikes for tykes, whatever.

The left never stops. The constant encroachment.

The Rust Never Sleeps.

(01-24-2019 11:33 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  If they receive taxpayer benefits, while simultaneously discriminating, then they're fair game.

We're paying for it, one way or another.

----

I think that all discriminatory entities, including private golf clubs, should pay property tax and have no tax free treatment for salaries or housing allowances. In return, they have a right to discriminate. But if its' a private club, or a private school, its really someone else's private property. Everyone else shouldn't be paying higher property and income taxes (and in Texas - higher UTILITY rates too) simply to cover for someone else's private plaything.

I'd be willing to allow for an exception for a 24,000 dollar housing allowance tax free per FAMILY for pastors and 1 million dollars tax free in property taxes, indexed for property prices in various locations.

Yea, good thing you don't make the rules. or much sense. or, uhhhh anything else.

Thx for the contribution though, white, privileged, private school white boy.

You're a caricature. Sorry.

Private schools are one place the liberals cant indoctrinate children with the socialist, America hating non-sense that goes on in public schools. The media is going to run w/ the narrative that these are bad hate filled places. There will be calls for them to be banned, etc. The kid also had on a MAGA hat and now those are deemed offensive and people are getting "triggered" when they see them. Even have idiots equating them to KKK hoods.

All of this makes me want to send in a donation to my private Christian alma mater and wear my red hat in public even more.

(01-24-2019 11:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 07:53 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Dan Levin
‏
Verified account

@globaldan
2h2 hours ago
More
I'm a New York Times reporter writing about #exposechristianschools. Are you in your 20s or younger who went to a Christian school? I'd like to hear about your experience and its impact on your life. Please DM me.



https://twitter.com/globaldan/status...70101283110915

Is Levin a Jewish name?

Quite possibly. But that is really irrelevant. I doubt a practicing Jew would be going hard after practicing Christians. Just my experience that this seldom happens. But as with children of protestants who have gone awry in the public schools system, those who choose to be atheists really spend a lot of their time attacking Christians, Jews, or any other faith based group of people. For those who claim there is no God they sure spend a lot of time attacking adherents. I find they tend to be narcissistic angry people who want approval and are too obnoxious to get it. So they just lash out in hate. Atheists come in all varieties including Jewish ones, but most of them are recent graduates of public high schools and state universities where the vitriol and labeling of people of faith is standard fare. Carrying out their teachers' beliefs makes them feel intelligent and important.

You only know about the atheists that are very public about it. There are plenty more that tend to not even think about it much, much less talk about it, in their daily lives.

(01-25-2019 12:02 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:51 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:42 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:33 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  If they receive taxpayer benefits, while simultaneously discriminating, then they're fair game.

We're paying for it, one way or another.

All religious institutions discriminate, so do non profit gay groups.

every day of the week....

Certainly, the Gay country clubs, Gay schools, Gay polo clubs, Gay hunting clubs, and Gay churches with property valued over 1,000,000 and paying over 24,000 per year in housing allowances/parsonage expenses should pay the same property tax rate as the Mega Churches and Private discriminatory schools




And I'd like to remove all taxfree status for any group spending anything on politics, including churches, UNIONS, and liberal and conservative 501c3 and 501c4s.

I personally would like to see the elimination of ALL tax free status groups.....

that ends all this bs....

I keep trying to tell ewe I don't care about your gayness or any others....

however, you continuing to bring up muh gay feels is another animal....

line 4 is always applied when ewe respond by sucking on that 'vein'.....

Tax free status is about encouraging private charity. Taxing them means supporting more government.

(01-25-2019 08:54 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-25-2019 12:02 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:51 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:42 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  All religious institutions discriminate, so do non profit gay groups.

every day of the week....

Certainly, the Gay country clubs, Gay schools, Gay polo clubs, Gay hunting clubs, and Gay churches with property valued over 1,000,000 and paying over 24,000 per year in housing allowances/parsonage expenses should pay the same property tax rate as the Mega Churches and Private discriminatory schools




And I'd like to remove all taxfree status for any group spending anything on politics, including churches, UNIONS, and liberal and conservative 501c3 and 501c4s.

I personally would like to see the elimination of ALL tax free status groups.....

that ends all this bs....

I keep trying to tell ewe I don't care about your gayness or any others....

however, you continuing to bring up muh gay feels is another animal....

line 4 is always applied when ewe respond by sucking on that 'vein'.....

Tax free status is about encouraging private charity. Taxing them means supporting more government.

or one could state it's a coffee cup continually filled with corruption...

ref: clinton foundation

I’m all for off setting tax liability with charitable giving. Even the worst charities generally do better than government. If I won the lottery the IRS would lose a bunch comparatively speaking.....

So his big plan is to use twitter DM's as sources?

Yeah, about that. Anyone else ever been on twitter? The majority of one's followers usually fall within one's own ideological circle; which automatically places a lot of bias there... then there's the fact he's soliciting for DM sources. What a joke.

(01-25-2019 02:28 PM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  So his big plan is to use twitter DM's as sources?

Yeah, about that. Anyone else ever been on twitter? The majority of one's followers usually fall within one's own ideological circle; which automatically places a lot of bias there... then there's the fact he's soliciting for DM sources. What a joke.

It is the worst type of fishing imaginable.