« Mix Mutt | Main | The Reading of a Song »

The 11th Commandment

California is a wacky place, isn't it?

Not the kind of wacky that lives in Eastern Washington, mind you, but pretty wacky nonetheless.

Take God, for instance (please). It seems that the Unholy State of Things in the Unholier State of California, has “activist” judges daring to proclaim that children should be free of coercion by the government. How dare they?!? Have they no shame? At long last, Sirs, have you no shame?

Activist judges who refuse god. Who refuse to embrace god's statements that marriage shall be only between a penis and a vagina. Activist judges who, decades ago, decided that the tribes of earth should be allowed to intermingle.

And now, they've just gone too far. Now, these California Hippies have said that children have—areyousittingdownforthisbecauseyoushouldbe—the right to be “free from a coercive requirement to affirm God.”

It's like they think Americans have the freedom of their own religion or something.

Hera and Hermes protect us! The Californians have gone mad!

•••

Because, ohwhythefucknot:

I pledged my endtable
Cuz I'm such a fag
And the Unrivaled God of Biscuits
And to the Republicans
Whom we can't stand
Rhythm Nation
Underwear
And flibbertigibbets appalled.


Technorati Tags




TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.godofbiscuits.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1314

Comments

If you're hip to this... check out the summary of the Elk Grove Unified School District vs. Nudow case over at Oyez Project's podcast feed. ( http://www.oyez.org/ )

Nudow brought a case against the school district, claiming that their practice of forcing ( or coercing ) kids to say the pledge, with the words "under God" violates the establishment clause of the 1st ammendment. The district court dismissed the case, indicating they didn't think Nudow had standing before the court ( Nudow is a non-custodial parent. ) The appeals court reversed the district court saying that even non-custodial parents have some say in their children's religious up-bringing (in this case Nudow's athesist tendencies should be respected.)

What did the supremes do? Well... listen to the podcast and find out. Really good argument on both sides...

I pledge I'll eat gents

to the unbridled state of orgasmic joy,

and to the free rub or lick, for which, dicks stand.

One gay son,

oversexed,

a libertine with lust touch for balls.

The Catholic Church must pay !

After this past Sundays' (Oct. 2, 2005) event by the Catholic Church collecting signatures inside the building, regarding the initiative petition to end same-sex marriage in Massachusetts. This IRS regulation, continues on with regards to the 501 status, therefore, its time the tax paying Americans takes action to ensure that the Catholic Church loses it 501 status.

The tax exemption status of religious organizations (501(c)(3) status ). It is very obvious that the Catholic Church does not qualify for this status any more. The church is actively attempting to influence legislation.

In general, no organization may qualify for section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying). A 501(c)(3) organization may engage in some lobbying, but too much lobbying activity risks loss of tax-exempt status.

Legislation includes action by Congress, any state legislature, any local council, or similar governing body, with respect to acts, bills, resolutions, or similar items (such as legislative confirmation of appointive office), or by the public in referendum, ballot initiative, constitutional amendment, or similar procedure. It does not include actions by executive, judicial, or administrative bodies.

An organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation.

Organizations may, however, involve themselves in issues of public policy without the activity being considered as lobbying. For example, organizations may conduct educational meetings, prepare and distribute educational materials, or otherwise consider public policy issues in an educational manner without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status.

Whether an organization’s attempts to influence legislation constitute a substantial part of its overall activities is determined on the basis of all the pertinent facts and circumstances in each case. The IRS considers a variety of factors, including the time devoted (by both compensated and volunteer workers) and the expenditures devoted by the organization to the activity, when determining whether the lobbying activity is substantial.

Under the substantial part test, an organization that conducts excessive lobbying activity in any taxable year may lose its tax-exempt status, resulting in all of its income being subject to tax. In addition, a religious organization is subject to an excise tax equal to five percent of its lobbying expenditures for the year in which it ceases to qualify for exemption.

Further, a tax equal to five percent of the lobbying expenditures for the year may be imposed against organization managers, jointly and severally, who agree to the making of such expenditures knowing that the expenditures would likely result in the loss of tax-exempt status.

Organizations undertake voter education activities by distributing voter guides. Voter guides, generally, are distributed during an election campaign and provide information on how all candidates stand on various issues. These guides may be distributed with the purpose of educating voters; however, they may not be used to attempt to favor or oppose candidates for public elected office.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)