The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

  • Hi Guest - Did you know?
    Hot Topics is a Safe for Work (SFW) forum.

Mormons Stole Our Rights

What little remaining respect I had for the Mormon Church is now forever and irrevocably gone, as I don't expect them to change their hostile and bigoted views anytime soon. I just signed the petition as well.

The Mormon Church isn't the only entity that should lose its tax-exempt status. So should the many churches who urged, begged and cajoled their congregations to vote for Republicans - which is, indeed, intervening in the election of CANDIDATES which is even more expressly forbidden than campaigning on issues.

Is Focus On the Family a tax-exempt organization? Are they considered to be a church? My guess is YES on both, though they don't actually host congregations as such, but it's only a guess. I'd like to know for sure.

If racial rights were left up to the states, most of the states would STILL have laws against inter-racial marriage, as well as some states having laws against voting, integration, etc.

Clearly something federal needs to happen, and removing the tax-exempt status of the Mormon Church is indeed something that can be done federally.
 
I particularly appreciated, these offerings from Josher:

Originally Posted by josher
By your logic ALL gay rights organizations, which by definition are not for profit and tax exempt, would lose their tax exemption, if they continued to lobby.

also

Originally Posted by Harke the Heretic
I'd like to see Mormonism punished for this. What are the other options?

Josher, replied

Whether I agree with their viewpoint or not, I would never contemplate "punishing" anyone for exercizing their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and political association. The only exception to these rights involve people who engage in or support violent activity to achieve their goals.

I fully support marriage equality for all Americans.

I wholeheartedly condemn any attempts to limit others' peaceful expressions of free speech.

The federal courts, including the US Supreme Court, have ruled without exception, that as long as churches do not endorse political candidates, they have the right to lobby on social issues, just as every other tax exempt organization does.

Such an amendment to the California constitution (which has no chance of ever making it to the ballot let alone passing in a general elction) would be unconstitutional at the federal level.
 
Kennyworth said:
I'm all for it,as I've said before.

But lets not stop at the Mormons.They got their cue from their Christian counterparts.

Hell,the Catholic Church has been in the hating game for centuries,and has long aided oppressive governments.

The Evangelicals are another obvious choice as well.

The bottom line should be if they are talking/influencing/ordering their ''flocks'' on how to vote,they are in violation of the law,and should lose the ''right'' to legally evade paying taxes.

I think it's a bullshit law in the first place.Make all those hypocritical mofo's PAY UP.
Click to expand...

Let's show the haters, that we can learn from their hateful behaviour, by being more hateful than they.

Clearly, the haters have won when we stoop to their level. Count me, out.

Such hypocrisy!
 
Kennyworth said:
What's hypocritical about it? Why is insisting they obey the law "stooping to their level.".

Obeying what law? Proposition 8 repealed a California law. The citizens of California cast their ballot. No laws have been broken.
Stooping to their level would include repealing their right to marry,removiing laws that protect individuals based on their religion..

Imitating the worst behaviour of those who voted Yes, merely confirms that the gay community is willing to learn from the haters. Hate, should never be repaid with hateful actions.

But if you wanna talk hypocrites,I 'm not the talking about how I love them ,but actively work against their interests.

I support active action in support of same gender marriage. I do not support hate filled rhetoric, or attempts being made to deny the opposition their democratic right to vote as they please. Their conscience driven right not to support gay marriage, should be protected.

I never claimed to have any love for thses scumbags..They love me but hate "my sins"..Fuck them.

So you keep reminding us.

I think they are just little more than money laundering schemes that prey on ignorance and superstition and they cause more misery than they've ever worth.

Your highly subjective opinion, is noted. Others may disagree, with you.

No one is forcing you to sign.You can love them if you want..Count me out.

I support petitions, and public displays of peaceful witness to our right to be treated with equality under the laws of the land.

I say make their lives just as miserable as they make want to make ours.

Repay hate, with hate? Some example, you set?

I've about had it with these maggots.

I prescribe a mug of chamomile tea, to settle your nerves.

.
Click to expand...


He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself.

--Thomas Paine
 
One question.

Would churches even survive anymore if they were required to pay taxes?
 
According to the IRS info I read at the bottom, the Mormons pretty-much ran their ship into the iceberg themselves.

One question: Are non-Americans allowed to sign also?
 
The church has tried to push us around. They fought against gay marriage here in Canada and we (Canadians) and our government (former PM Jean Chrétien) fought back.

It can be done.
 
Kennyworth said:
Amendment XIV
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Click to expand...

Well now, this is interesting. I'm no legal scholar, either (I'm not even American), but the passage I put in bold seems to forbid taking away people's rights. Does that mean that Prop 8 isn't even legal?
 
BigDestiny said:
Well now, this is interesting. I'm no legal scholar, either (I'm not even American), but the passage I put in bold seems to forbid taking away people's rights. Does that mean that Prop 8 isn't even legal?
Click to expand...

Great point and one of the arguments used in the legal claim against Prop 8:

Legal Groups File Lawsuit Challenging Proposition 8, Should It Pass
LEGAL PAPERS CLAIM INITIATIVE PROCEDURE CANNOT BE USED TO UNDERMINE THE CONSTITUTION'S CORE COMMITMENT TO EQUALITY FOR EVERYONE

SAN FRANCISCO — The American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal and the National Center for Lesbian Rights filed a writ petition before the California Supreme Court today urging the court to invalidate Proposition 8 if it passes. The petition charges that Proposition 8 is invalid because the initiative process was improperly used in an attempt to undo the constitution's core commitment to equality for everyone by eliminating a fundamental right from just one group — lesbian and gay Californians. Proposition 8 also improperly attempts to prevent the courts from exercising their essential constitutional role of protecting the equal protection rights of minorities. According to the California Constitution, such radical changes to the organizing principles of state government cannot be made by simple majority vote through the initiative process, but instead must, at a minimum, go through the state legislature first.

The California Constitution itself sets out two ways to alter the document that sets the most basic rules about how state government works. Through the initiative process, voters can make relatively small changes to the constitution. But any measure that would change the underlying principles of the constitution must first be approved by the legislature before being submitted to the voters. That didn't happen with Proposition 8, and that's why it's invalid.

"If the voters approved an initiative that took the right to free speech away from women, but not from men, everyone would agree that such a measure conflicts with the basic ideals of equality enshrined in our constitution. Proposition 8 suffers from the same flaw — it removes a protected constitutional right — here, the right to marry — not from all Californians, but just from one group of us," said Jenny Pizer, Senior Counsel with Lambda Legal. "That's too big a change in the principles of our constitution to be made just by a bare majority of voters."

Full text at lambdalegal front page:

http://www.lambdalegal.com/
Click to expand...
 
This is better.

Follow the link on this page to send the IRS Form 13909 and lodge an official complaint with them. You can do so anonymously if you wish by checking a box on the form.

http://lds501c3.wordpress.com/
 
Kennyworth said:
I disagree w/you Kallipolis..

For starters,I don't belive that the people should ever get to vote on whether or not one segment of society is deserving of rights or not..

I'm no Constitutional Law scholar but I agree with those who belive that the whole prop 8 argument offends the 14th Ammendment.There is not a lot of verbal clutter there....

Amendment XIV
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Equal protection under the law..Seems clear enough.Why are there laws for straight people and different laws for gay folk?
Honestly though,I think we're putting the cart before the horse on this issue.I think it would be better to focus on things like employment and housing discrimination first.But I guess unlike dozens of U.S States,California has worked that out already.

My problem with this is that the right to marry in California EXISTED and it was taken away.That's why people should fight it.They should fight it on several fronts.

First,fight it in court,based on the legality of it even being put to a vote in the first place.I don't recall a vote about whether blacks should have the right to marry white people.It was recognized as an unjust law and it was repealed without consulting the public.

The second thing I think we should do, is identify the enemies of human rights,and attack them with equal ferocity.In America these days, that means going after the money.Like Bush said when he outlined his war on terror, ''cut the head off of the snake.'',by going after their money.

I think it's unlikely we'll be able to freeze the assets of the various churches that insist on inserting themselves into politics by funding oppressive measures.But there is a possibility, if enough pressure is exerted, their tax exempt status can be reviewed and eliminated.

Protesting outside their tax exempt bastions of hate is another tool,that should be used with vigor and without reservation.Shame these people,(if it's possible) let them and their children look into the eyes of those they've hurt for no reason.

Voting is not against the law,but when a Church is behind perpetuating the most backwards stereotypes and peddles mis-information,and threatens the souls of belivers with eternal fire if they don't vote ''right'',then ,I belive that's when they violate the IRS codes that shield them from paying they're taxes.To me at least,it was clear they've(Mormons /Catholics) broken the law.We punish law breakers in our society.They too should be punished.

I also belive people should have a "conscience driven right not to support gay marriage"..I just don't think they have ANY right to vote on the legitimacy of anyone else's relationships.No more than I have a right to vote on whether religious people should be sterilized.
Click to expand...

i'm in 100% agreement with you.
 
I found this little snippet interesting on that website, and I will bold what they bolded as well:

Section 501(c)(3) describes corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literacy, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in section (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distribution of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.
Click to expand...

Now I don't know what was "otherwise provided in section h," but if they weren't "influencing legislation" then slap me silly and call me a dumbass, because it sure looked like it to me.
 
we should all make it our personal missions to shag as many of those cute mormon boys in their little black suits as possible - i think that is the kindest way of saying NO fuck you :P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top