On Sat, 22 May 2004 12:44:48 -0400, JDG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 09:57 PM 5/18/2004 -0500 garydenton wrote: > Uhhh..... under exactly what basis is "tax-exempt status" a, quote, "right?"
> I found nothing in your quoted article about attempts to "disenfranchsie" > Unitarians. As near as I can tell, Unitarians still have the full > vote/franchise in Texas. > > >First they came for..... > > Uhhh.... Gary there's nobody coming for you or the Unitarians - at least so > far as you have stated. > > JDG First, apologies for spelling errors. Spell check is no longer automatically applied in my new email software. Second, It is a right to have all religions treated equally and not make some classified as "not a religion." Third, I was using disenfranchise to mean "to deprive of the rights of a citizen." That is more than voting rights. The equal exercise of rights of religious worship is one of those rights. To grant some religions and not others tax exempt status is to devalue those rights. The right to spend money untaxed is a right that has been granted to religious institutions in this country. To have religious donations not go as far for non-approved religions is a discrimination on the basis of religion. While it is not of the same magnitude as requiring the wearing of special markings, this is a diminishment of religious rights not seen since the founding of our country. Fourth, what are you denying? That this is not discrimination? That the quote only applies after they start hauling groups to concentration camps and not the harassment and the discrimination that started the decade before? Curious, Gary #1 on Google for religious news
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
