Religion

Doctor/Patient? Lawyer/Client? It is trickier. That is not absolute at all. Example. If I know a client is committing fraud? I am actually REQUIRED to remove myself (Fire the client) and report as privilege does not attach. Also? Mandatory reporting rules apply to Doctors, whether the patient agrees or not. Violation of either of those rules can result in loss of license and arrest.

 

Take this in another direction as we are going in circles.

Is it time for the US to address who gets "Tax Exempt" religious status? Example. Is SCIENTOLOGY a "Religion" or a Cult. Hell. I can (and have, this one is a fun Moot) make a case that Mormons are a Cult that took hold when some were not paying close attention in the US.

I applogize to any Mormons here. But this is all your actual story and it is kind of "cultish". Man find GOLD PLATES and a stone. But only HE can use the stone to translate the plates. If you take all copies made of his ONE translation out of his sight and ask him to translate it again? it wont be exactly the same (HOLY F. As in he has to write what he REMEMBERS and it wont be word for word!). Whole bunch of weird things about Angels the Bible, that Jesus and God supposedly wrote, dont know about or mention, coming to him. Multiple Marriage (much as you deny it that did not go away until FIFTY PLUS YEARS AFTER SMITH DIED and 13 after Young died). Your LEADER was shot by a mob after being taken from jail waiting for his TREASON TRIAL. There are still cult offshoot elements of you LDS Church who Polygamy and marry unacceptably.

 

It doesn't matter if a group is considered to be a religion or a cult. If they are able to meet the requirements to get Tax Exempt Status, then whether or not the group is a legitimate religion is moot, as you say. In order to revoke a groups tax exempt status, you need to prove that they don't qualify. It doesn't matter if they're Scientologist (Definitely a cult), Mormons, Catholics, Muslims, Hindu, or Uncle Bob's Holy Barn. If there is a problem, then the qualifications are the problem, not the group.

There was a woman, in Santa Monica who started a religion where you gained enlightenment by having sex. You donate to her church and you received enlightenment with sex. I believe she was an ex-prostitute (technically). The owner of the company I worked for, rented the beach house she used, to her.

 

Oh no. Scientology is an issue because they use that status to dodge David Miscavich getting served. And how they dodge laws.

No religion should have Tax Exemption.

 

If a group or an organization qualifies for tax exempt status, then they should get tax exempt status. If you disagree, then you should attack the law, not attack the group or organization. Everyone will take advantage of the law whether its for tax exemption, building codes, or running a business. Only an idiot business owner is going to say, I could use this portion of the law to save millions in taxes, but I'll just pay the taxes anyway, I'll add a couple of million just to be fair. If the law is wrong or allows exception then fix the law not the people using the law.

 

missing three 0s. What you wrote in #s is 60 million. Words 60 billion.

[Thank you-fixed-Dane]

 

As long as people blame the religion or organization, and not the law, I will oppose them even if I dislike the religion or organization. I hate false accusation and false blame. I believe in fairness and justice, some people only care about their side.

 

So, again, just using the RCC as an example. If ANY OTHER ORGANIZATION outside religion did the the level of cover up they did on these abuse cases? They would have been slammed with pile of RICO charges. But because "Sanctity of the Confessional" is a "tenent" we let them ignore conspiracy after the fact charges?

 

I am not a fan of the RCC. But they haven't done anything different than Hollywood, our Government, Schools, Corporations, other Religions. Singling out one group or organization and making it sound like they are the only perpetrators is disingenuous. Making it look like RCC is the only ones guilty is what I find to be unfair. If you(general you) want to say that the RCC is an example of what is being ranted about, I would not object, I may even agree.

 

The difference is this. Weinstein did what he did. His company is in shambles and being sold off. The RCC did what they did in Nassau County. Now they are crying poverty and saying they have to file for bankruptcy because they have to pay these settlements. With TENS OF MILLIONS IN ASSETS. And a million or so to pay out. To hold services? The RCC does not need acres of property, pounds of golden crosses, THREE CATHEDRALS. They can sell the land. Hold services in smaller churches and easily pay what is owed. But it is not only being entertained but likely to pass that these settlements will be lowered to "Save the Doceses" from having to make any real changes to assets. No one can show me where in the Bible Jesus said "to worship you must have a large cathedral with many golden objects to honor me". I can show you something about golden objects in Exodus though.

Also, I will show how religion is held special. Scientology? Has been all but shown to have INTERFERED with the Masterson case back when it was first investigated years ago. Danny the person is on trial now. Scientology? The authorities seem AFRAID to go after. You have to assume because it is a religion.

 

I saw an interview where an author talked about their writer's group getting together and discussed religion. And L. Ron Hubbard bet he could start a religion with a ridiculous premise and have it be successful. So came about the creation of Scientology.

Point out that the RCC is an example of what you are arguing against, instead of being the only cause, then I can except it. And by leaving out anyone else you are inferring that the RCC is the only one. I'm for fairness, not for playing favorite.

 

It is the EASIEST example as they had the most public issues recently. But Scientology is about to catch up with a possible International Human Trafficking case on the Horizon.

I heard a great line on a Youtube short. Judaism was founded by a man named Avrhm. That became Avroham. That became Abraham. Christianity by a man named Yehoshua. No F'ing idea where that became Jesus and not Joshua like every other Yehoshua in that book, but whatever. Islam by Mohammed. That language has not evolved since then so same. But is still 2000 years old or so. Now....... Mormons? John and Bringham. Normal everyday names (one for the time). Scientology? Your supposed religion was founded by RON. It is a cult guys. Your founder was named RON. He had a drivers license. Was PHOTOGRAPHED. Was on TV. Its a CULT.

 

I not arguing that Scientology is not a cult. I would argue that Scientology is not Christian. Among the majority of Christians, Mormonism is not considered part of Christianity. I've met some people that would exclude Jehovah's Witness's too.

 

The Christians I KNOW are? Are usually not the GOOD ones? They are the preachy ones. Because I know they are Christians. Because it is their whole personality.