Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (60435)	12/7/2002 6:08:04 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The whole point is John, that all churches COULD get into politics IF they want to lose their tax emempt 501c3 status... They could pay property and all the other taxes if they want. The problem is: Most churches want to retain their tax exempt status. Therefore, the church body, as an entity, needs to stay OUT of politics. They can't have it both ways. But currently, looks like they can and do. I'm sure there will be more about this .....and I hope it's soon.

To: JohnM who wrote (60435)	12/7/2002 7:20:53 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

John, in this case, I do believe, the Council of Churches was merely making a public service announcement expressing the views of most Americans to the president, in response to the president expressing his views unchallenged to the American public. There's a precedent for this in those govt. public service announcements, wherein the anti drug ads declaring that drug money supports terrorism. Churches then countered with ~ don't drive SUVs as they waste gas, which money supports terrorists.