Rep. Baldwin Introduces Bill to Undo and Prosecute Bush-Cheney Crimes
Submitted by davidswanson on Sat, 2008-09-27 03:12.
After Downing Street.
In Christianity, there is accountability. Jesus laid out the progressive disciplinary steps. You go alone to the offender. If that doesn't work, you take several witnesses. If that doesn't work, you take it to the congregation. If that doesn't work, the offender is out of the body. You still treat him or her in accordance with the Golden Rule; however, you are to realize that the person is a heathen. How do you do both at the same time? How do you treat someone as you ought to want to be treated while at the same time treating him or her as a heathen?
How much faith are we to have in the Golden Rule? What is its power?
The measures advocated by U.S. Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin in the linked article are within the mundane, coercive system called American democracy. It isn't the same thing as the voluntary association known as the Church. Regardless, she is advocating for the reduction of evil. She's asking people voluntarily to sign on to her plan. Within the mundane (absent the divine having conflated yet with Earth), it is about as good as it gets.
It is preferable however that people finally come to realize that the American system is fatally flawed and no path to righteousness. You can't force people to know Godliness.
When Heaven and Earth conflate (New Earth and New Heaven), and they will, it will be when each and all have voluntarily seen and accepted the real light, the real truth that is giving and sharing all, total peace, and sexual purity that is harmlessness. That is true love and God the perfect.
Why do I link to such sites with such articles if they aren't Christian, per se? I do it to help highlight that the path followed by George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and all the other neocons is dead. It is pitch-black. There is zero light on that path. Dick Cheney has even openly advocated taking to the dark side (that's pure evil on his part coming right out of his mouth and heart).
Now, along come John McCain and Sarah Palin following very much in the footsteps of Bush and Cheney, maybe worse if that's possible, and it is. That's not to say that Barack Obama and Joe Biden have it right. They don't.
What you are seeing is a financial meltdown, because the whole system is evil. It's based upon selfishness, which is evil. Rather than struggling to get ahead in that evil system, we need to come together to pool efforts to bring forth the Christian Commons Project™.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)