IRS Strikes Deal With Atheists To Monitor Church Sermons & Homilies

[DrLeftover]

And then there was:

"The reality is, President Obama better be in some black churches real soon clapping his hands, singing Amazing Grace and waving that right hand because the black vote is going to be very critical and apathy may win this election if we don't get on the ground," Pastor Bryant warned.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/05/10/black_pastor_obama_better_get_to_black_churches_soon_to_prevent_voter_apathy.html

 

[+paradox]

@liberty...

france was the only reason why washington won the war...

even before washington was sought out and hired as the commander-in-chief of the rebel army, it wasn't an army... it was not structured, was not organized, etc. etc.!

you're just assuming that preachers had an impact on people's decisions on fighting the british...

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

@liberty...

france was the only reason why washington won the war...

even before washington was sought out and hired as the commander-in-chief of the rebel army, it wasn't an army... it was not structured, was not organized, etc. etc.!

you're just assuming that preachers had an impact on people's decisions on fighting the british...

No France and Spain sent limited arms and supplies to us throughout the war. Washington always complained France never put any real commitment into French troops to help. And the French Ships did help at slowing down the shipments for the British army but the real action happened at the end of the war. Yes they helped end the war but it would have just taken years longer with more gorilla tactics that beat the British Army from General Nathanael Greene in Georgia and South Carolina before the war even ended.

And the French were not responsible for turning Washington's army into a fighting force. It was a German man named Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben. He is the father of the American Army.

 

[+paradox]

@liberty...

france was the only reason why washington won the war...

even before washington was sought out and hired as the commander-in-chief of the rebel army, it wasn't an army... it was not structured, was not organized, etc. etc.!

you're just assuming that preachers had an impact on people's decisions on fighting the british...

No France and Spain sent limited arms and supplies to us throughout the war. Washington always complained France never put any real commitment into French troops to help. And the French Ships did help at slowing down the shipments for the British army but the real action happened at the end of the war. Yes they helped end the war but it would have just taken years longer with more gorilla tactics that beat the British Army from General Nathanael Greene in Georgia and South Carolina before the war even ended.

france was the main reason why the war ended...

now you can speculate if france never helped that washington would have won anyways, but that's all speculation and a far-fetched one at that...


And the French were not responsible for turning Washington's army into a fighting force. It was a German man named Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben. He is the father of the American Army.

i never said france was responsible for turning washington's army into a fighting force... i said when washington took charge of the america army, it wasn't even an army... washington made the army what it was for the most part...

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

@liberty...

france was the only reason why washington won the war...

even before washington was sought out and hired as the commander-in-chief of the rebel army, it wasn't an army... it was not structured, was not organized, etc. etc.!

you're just assuming that preachers had an impact on people's decisions on fighting the british...

No France and Spain sent limited arms and supplies to us throughout the war. Washington always complained France never put any real commitment into French troops to help. And the French Ships did help at slowing down the shipments for the British army but the real action happened at the end of the war. Yes they helped end the war but it would have just taken years longer with more gorilla tactics that beat the British Army from General Nathanael Greene in Georgia and South Carolina before the war even ended.

france was the main reason why the war ended...

now you can speculate if france never helped that washington would have won anyways, but that's all speculation and a far-fetched one at that...


And the French were not responsible for turning Washington's army into a fighting force. It was a German man named Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben. He is the father of the American Army.

i never said france was responsible for turning washington's army into a fighting force... i said when washington took charge of the america army, it wasn't even an army... washington made the army what it was for the most part...

And I am not assuming it absolute fact the preachers made the difference in the war. They inspired the people to rise up for freedom. It is not even a question without them the war for freedom would have never happened.

I can speculate with good evidence since the French brought limited help on land and the leaders of the revolution knew there lives and fortunes for there loved ones would be gone. The war would have continued. Plus the British people and parliament were absolutely sick of the war years in on how much it was costing.

The way you put that sentence to together it read like you were implying that without the French we would have never had a organized army.

 

[+paradox]

@liberty...

france was the only reason why washington won the war...

even before washington was sought out and hired as the commander-in-chief of the rebel army, it wasn't an army... it was not structured, was not organized, etc. etc.!

you're just assuming that preachers had an impact on people's decisions on fighting the british...

No France and Spain sent limited arms and supplies to us throughout the war. Washington always complained France never put any real commitment into French troops to help. And the French Ships did help at slowing down the shipments for the British army but the real action happened at the end of the war. Yes they helped end the war but it would have just taken years longer with more gorilla tactics that beat the British Army from General Nathanael Greene in Georgia and South Carolina before the war even ended.

france was the main reason why the war ended...

now you can speculate if france never helped that washington would have won anyways, but that's all speculation and a far-fetched one at that...


And the French were not responsible for turning Washington's army into a fighting force. It was a German man named Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben. He is the father of the American Army.

i never said france was responsible for turning washington's army into a fighting force... i said when washington took charge of the america army, it wasn't even an army... washington made the army what it was for the most part...

And I am not assuming it absolute fact the preachers made the difference in the war. They inspired the people to rise up for freedom. It is not even a question without them the war for freedom would have never happened.

I can speculate with good evidence since the French brought limited help on land and the leaders of the revolution knew there lives and fortunes for there loved ones would be gone. The war would have continued. Plus the British people and parliament were absolutely sick of the war years in on how much it was costing.

The way you put that sentence to together it read like you were implying that without the French we would have never had a organized army.

actually, it didn't, not even close...

they were separate sentences talking about different thing, and it's clearly and simply put together in that way just for that reason of not having any confusion, but of course you would confuse it some how...

 

[Webster]

@liberty...

france was the only reason why washington won the war...

even before washington was sought out and hired as the commander-in-chief of the rebel army, it wasn't an army... it was not structured, was not organized, etc. etc.!

you're just assuming that preachers had an impact on people's decisions on fighting the british...

No France and Spain sent limited arms and supplies to us throughout the war. Washington always complained France never put any real commitment into French troops to help. And the French Ships did help at slowing down the shipments for the British army but the real action happened at the end of the war. Yes they helped end the war but it would have just taken years longer with more gorilla tactics that beat the British Army from General Nathanael Greene in Georgia and South Carolina before the war even ended.

france was the main reason why the war ended...

now you can speculate if france never helped that washington would have won anyways, but that's all speculation and a far-fetched one at that...

And the French were not responsible for turning Washington's army into a fighting force. It was a German man named Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben. He is the father of the American Army.

i never said france was responsible for turning washington's army into a fighting force... i said when washington took charge of the america army, it wasn't even an army... washington made the army what it was for the most part...

And I am not assuming it absolute fact the preachers made the difference in the war. They inspired the people to rise up for freedom. It is not even a question without them the war for freedom would have never happened.

I can speculate with good evidence since the French brought limited help on land and the leaders of the revolution knew there lives and fortunes for there loved ones would be gone. The war would have continued. Plus the British people and parliament were absolutely sick of the war years in on how much it was costing.

The way you put that sentence to together it read like you were implying that without the French we would have never had a organized army.

actually, it didn't, not even close...

they were separate sentences talking about different thing, and it's clearly and simply put together in that way just for that reason of not having any confusion, but of course you would confuse it some how...

Not to interrupt things here, my friends, but what are we talking about again?

 

[+paradox]

What are your thoughts on churches being involved with politics?

If they want to get involved in politics...I say let 'em.
Just tell 'em to give up their tax exemptions and I wouldn't have a problem with it.
...and for the record, that applies to all churches, not just the ones on the right.

The churches have been Americas motivators and spiritual leaders to win the revolutionary war, the civil war and so on. The Churches were and still are in many cases Americas way of helping the people who need a hand up instead of a hand out like the American government does now at the destruction of our society.

I have no problem with the churches speaking there mind in politics. But what I do have a problem with is if they are not helping the community they live in and is still taking the tax break. I have no problem with strict rules in that regard.

actually, a lot of religious people and churches were loyalists to the crown...

^ this i believe...

and then liberty said more stuff that wasn't accurate so i had to enlighten him with truth...

 

[Webster]

What are your thoughts on churches being involved with politics?

If they want to get involved in politics...I say let 'em.
Just tell 'em to give up their tax exemptions and I wouldn't have a problem with it.
...and for the record, that applies to all churches, not just the ones on the right.

The churches have been Americas motivators and spiritual leaders to win the revolutionary war, the civil war and so on. The Churches were and still are in many cases Americas way of helping the people who need a hand up instead of a hand out like the American government does now at the destruction of our society.

I have no problem with the churches speaking there mind in politics. But what I do have a problem with is if they are not helping the community they live in and is still taking the tax break. I have no problem with strict rules in that regard.

actually, a lot of religious people and churches were loyalists to the crown...

^ this i believe...
and then liberty said more stuff that wasn't accurate so i had to enlighten him with truth...

The reality, Justice, was that many churches supported each side of the Revolution...but if you want, we'll leave you and Liberty to hash out the historical details...

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

What are your thoughts on churches being involved with politics?

If they want to get involved in politics...I say let 'em.
Just tell 'em to give up their tax exemptions and I wouldn't have a problem with it.
...and for the record, that applies to all churches, not just the ones on the right.

The churches have been Americas motivators and spiritual leaders to win the revolutionary war, the civil war and so on. The Churches were and still are in many cases Americas way of helping the people who need a hand up instead of a hand out like the American government does now at the destruction of our society.

I have no problem with the churches speaking there mind in politics. But what I do have a problem with is if they are not helping the community they live in and is still taking the tax break. I have no problem with strict rules in that regard.

actually, a lot of religious people and churches were loyalists to the crown...

^ this i believe...

and then liberty said more stuff that wasn't accurate so i had to enlighten him with truth...

Said nothing inaccurate and am waiting on that enlightening.