Senators Santorum, Joe Lieberman Offer Faith-Based Bill As Amendment

[David Zephyr]

Lieberman and Santorum together!

Was this already posted here?

Prepare to get sick.

http://santorum.senate.gov/pressreleases/record.cfm?id=218757

[saltpoint]

1. Puke City.

[Pale Blue Dot]

2. If they love each other so much maybe they should get married. nt

[Viking12]

12. :)

[dsc]

3. I have to say I see no problem with this

It allows people like me who could never itemize to write off my contributions to charities. This seems like a win win to me.

[Kenneth ken]

8. maybe

Why don't you itemize? I didn't use to because I didn't have enough deductions to equal the 'standard deduction'. So, unless you already itemize, or contribute enough to surpass what you take in a standard deduction, it still wouldn't benefit you.

I'm not outright opposed to this; but it does open a door to future discrimination as to which charitable organization would be deductible v which wouldn't. Ever more micromanaging of tax policy. I'd much rather see the entire tax code rewritten, and simplified.

Of course, I'd also like to see the government do a better job of spending my tax dollars on helping needy families, and individuals rather than producing an unending supply of weapons.

[dsc]

15. Yes it would

that is the whole point. There would be a seperate line on the tax return for charitiable donations after the standard deduction was already taken.

[stepnw1f]

4. F*n with Seperation of Church and State is

the wrong idea. Messin' with the most sacred document in this country is a major sin. You have your god, I have mine! Where's Malloy when I need him?

[caledesi]

5. Memo to Joe: Go home joe. nt

[connecticut yankee]

9. Thanks, but no thanks

we really don't want him here.:grr:

[NightTrain]

19. You said it, my fellow Nutmegger!

Piss off, Lieberman!

[salin]

30. Ya'll gave us Sen. Weicker... one of the

few Republicans on the Hill I found to be more liberal than many democrats. I know he teed some folks off with that income tax thing when he was governor... but could ya rig it that you send him back instead of Joe - at least Lowell is now an I and would probably vote with the dems a tad more... and I can't imagine him ever cosponsoring a bill like this.. along side Santorum.

[seabeyond]

6. deleted

:)

[DianeG5385]

7. Can we please ask Joe to move on?

I think Gore made a huge mistake picking Lieberman. He is a liability to the Dems as he is much more interested in playing footsie with the pubs and is aligned with their issues. Why is he a Dem?

[Leilani]

10. Barf!!!

Has Joe done anything to help Dems?


Has he even endorsed John Kerry?

[Disturbed]

11. Ho Jo

Why does he bother to stay in the Dem party? The Repugs would welcome him with hugs and kisses.

[OneBlueSky]

13. I think that the charitable works that churches and individuals do . . .

is great . . . but it should remain entirely voluntary and not be subsidized by the taxpayers . . . particularly when we're running multi-billion dollar deficits . . . the separation of church and state has served this nation well since its inception, and I see no reason to change it now . . . this is just one more step toward the neocon theocracy envisioned by the PNAC folks and their ilk, and Lieberman should be ashamed of himself for supporting it . . .

[David Zephyr]

16. Yes.

:thumbsup:

[PurityOfEssence]

14. Who needs gummint? We gots biniss n' religion.

Hell, you got all the organized thievery and subjugation you could ever need between the two; why bother with this expensive duplication of services?

This is so precisely against the letter and spirit of Article One that it's obscene; the act of endorsing religion--not a particular one, mind you, but the concept itself--is AGAINST THE LAW. It proclaims that this particular guess is BETTER THAN OTHERS, and hence, makes all non-adherents inferior.

Beyond the favoritism of their particular brand of fantasy, it's also a handy engine for financial and political support.

Dr. Johnson was wrong; patriotism isn't the last refuge of a scoundrel, religion is.

[David Zephyr]

17. PurityOfEssence, How We Agree On This.

Still one more assault of Jefferson's wall of separation. I am surprised that there are people here at the DU who can not see this.

In light of the current lawsuit by the ACLU against the "Salvation Army" for discriminatory employment practices while receiving public (tax) funds, what are folks here at the DU not seeing?

I understand that even Bill O'Reilly is supporting the ACLU's lawsuit against the "Salvation Army".

I guess the lure of a "tax cut" or "tax break" hold greater power than the love of liberty. Perhaps, it is now wonder after all that Bush got his tax cuts through Congress with Democrats voting for it --- the lure of tax cuts seems to trump concerns of social and econmic justice everytime.

:shrug:

[LeahMira]

21. I think the goal...

... is to end that duplication of services, but with the government out of the services and the services totally in the hands of the faith-based groups.

Recall, please, that these Republicans can't find it in the Constitution that the government is supposed to take care of these sorts of needs.

[maxanne]

18. an unholy alliance

to be sure. We must fight to keep the wall of separation between church and state. Joe Lieberman is an embarassment to our party.

[Vladimir]

20. What do you expect

rubbing with santorum can often leave one smelly and disguisting to others...

:evilgrin:

V

[Malva Zebrina]

22. I don't have a problem seeing it

and I never have had a problem seeing it. I have watched this for at least ten years. It is "religion creep" in my description.

Once that wall of separation is bridged, freedom of religion will be a thing of the past--those who do not see that--those who would have their religion be funded by the government, are the ones who will lose that freedom first.

The rest of us atheists will just have to pay for their religion. They will, in truth, give up their autonomy to the government as they become more dependant upon the government welfare should bills like this become more complicated and there is no reason to think they are not leaders to another more involved type of goverment funding. Bush has said he wants it--he will get it because no one questions or wants to piss off religion. It is not "respectful"

Not many will turn away government money, I suspect. It is the way of human nature and religious people are as human as anyone. They may be against George Bush and they may be proud liberals, but the temptation to have the money will be proven to be too tempting to avoid--especially if that church is hurting and needy.

[David Zephyr]

23. Good Post and Solid Commentary, Marianne

But then, we are very much in the shrinking minority, aren't we?

:hi:

[KoKo]

24. Well........all I can say is "Barf on them both!" Others have hashed this

out with good comments about this. All I have to say about Lieberman and Santorum is :puke:

Sorry....it's what I think about them. (I won't go into the Liberman/Dodd thing which led to Millions of Americans getting soaked during the "Bubble" and even today about that SEC thing, and Santorum with his sanctimonious RW litany of lies).

Disgusting the both of them...

[David Zephyr]

26. Dare I Say, Amen, KoKo?

Disgusting is the operative word.

[KoKo]

31. On another thought, living where I do and getting invited to "Seminars

about Revelations on postcards which show "Devils, and Monsters and all manner of evil from hell on the front (sort of some Gothic Horror of Evils from Hell by the artist) in my local city (which I've been tempted to attend with my "Who Would Jesus Bomb Signs from IW Protests...forget the grammatical "who" for "whom"...because where i live no one would know the difference) I really think about Santorum as someone who should move to my neck of the woods in NC where he would be welcome, if the could sell Real Estate and be involved with the "Hurricanes" or the "Wolf Pack."

Then, there's the postcard I got today inviting me to the "Lifepoint Church" which meets in my local movie theater which they rent for services every Sunday. They say a quote from their postcard today in my mail:

Lifepointe is not your ordinary everyday church. The music rocks, the messages are relevant, the people are real,. It is a place where you are encouraged to be yourself and everyone is welcome. We know it's not always easy to find a church you can call home. So, if you've been looking for a real church with something for everyone in the family...you've found it. Check us out. You will like the difference. Visit us on the web at: www.lifepointechurch.org

Then at the bottom left on the postcard there's a Coupon! It says: "Have a drink on Us!" Present this at the movie theater and enjoy a FREE mediium drink (a $2.50 value) with the purchase of a medium popcorn! ...Limit 2 per coupon.

Now.....wouldn't all of us like to have a church experience like this?

This is what we are up against. These fundie churches appealing to the disenfranchised "unchurched" (as my Episcopal friends call these folks) who are searching for a church which fits their lifestyle.

Heck...for popcorn and fee coke wouldn't many check this out? It sounds like fun with "music that rocks." No "Choirs and ancient organ music" which has a ring of "traditionalism." No, it needs to be Contemporary. Just because that isn't MY TRADITION or where I'm at in my religious experience should I deny some sense of relgious foundations to families that don't like what they view as "Stuffy?"

:shrug: :shrug: I haven't checked out their website, but maybe some of you would like to see what they are about. Maybe they are the True Future of the Church in America...again :shrug:

On Edit: Not trying to hijack this thread with religious post here, DZ but should "churches" like this be getting tax exemptions? If they start a school should they be "non-profit." How do I know? I'm a "protestant." Maybe back during the "Reformation" I would have been viewed the way I view these "start-up's" and would have wanted funding. But, they seem to do fine without the funding. I guarentee this "church" will have a huge building within a year here while my little Episcopal Church goes begging for funding just to find a new minister/priest. Who knows....

[waldenx]

25. if Kerry had sponsered this you people would love it

hypocrites.

[David Zephyr]

27. Sorry, But You Are Wrong.

Ask the Kerry supporters if David Zephyr would hesitate to criticize John Kery.

But John Kerry on his worst day is a better lawmaker than Joe Lieberman on his best.

[Physicist]

28. atheist groups should apply

Atheists should apply for this program if it gets passed. And under current rules, they could discriminate against Christians who apply for employment in the program.

[David Zephyr]

29. Welcome to the DU, Physicist.

What a mess this "faith based" lawmaking is creating!

[ContinentalOp]

32. hmm...

So could I write off contributions to the Republican or Liberatarian parties? I consider their free-market agenda to be entirely "faith-based". As far as I see it nothing is based more on faith and less on evidence than supply-side economics!