--- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "John" <jr_esq@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This message might invite more scrutiny by the CIA of TMO's 
> > > > intentions aside from spreading vedic knowledge.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > It mighta also invite the scrutiny of the IRS.
> > > 
> > > Aren't some churches getting their tax-exempt status reviewed 
> because 
> > > they've been playing politics as of late?
> > > 
> > 
> > TMO isn't a registered church.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it isn't.
> 
> But it does have tax-exempt status...and my invoking churches wasn't 
> because they were churches per se but because churches also have tax-
> exempt status.
> 
> Lobbying groups are not tax exempt.
> 
> 

A congratulatory notice isn't lobbying.

Stupid perhaps. Offensive perhaps. Lobbying, no.


Lawson

Reply via email to