Obama is weak. He won't stand up. He minces his words. People think that's smart. It's not. It's the opposite. He says the U.S. won't torture. He has his people draft language that leaves all the loopholes necessary so that under the Obama administration, the U.S. can go right on doing what it was doing before the highly immoral George W. Bush exposed everything. Obama has not issued a blanket order against U.S. involvement at all levels in any torture, illegal detention, abduction, and/or murder whatsoever.
Why do we have to live with such low standards? Do we have to live with them just because there are people who are sociopaths telling us we have to? We do not! I reject them. I tell them to their faces. You are not my leaders. I don't follow you. I won't do what you tell me to do. If you say torture or to go along with it by proxy, I tell you that you are headed for Hell and I'm not going with you on your terms or for your reasons no matter what you do.
We don't have to do what the sociopaths want. We don't have to do what a bunch of sick sadomasochists want.
To hell with having depraved leaders.
Why are you people following Obama or anyone like him? Why are you afraid to speak the truth with me? Why do you kiss the boots of the amoral, liars?
You think Barack Obama is a Christian as he claims? He is not a Christian. He isn't even remotely close. He's a bootlicking opportunist, servile to the global plutocrats who run the world's banking system &mdash evil system of mammon and usury that is going to come crashing down no matter how much dim optimism the mammon worshippers and Godless (those without the real spirit of righteousness) humanists think they can finagle out of the gullible, selfish masses.
Anyone who thinks the U.S. has tortured people to get information is dull. The U.S. tortures people for two reasons. First, the people who order and supervise torture are sadistic monsters. Second, they just want to put the fear in others to control them and large groups through fear of being taken and tortured. Do what we say, or we will torture you or have you tortured and imprisoned. Give into our mastery, our dominance. Say uncle, or we'll keep it up until you break no matter how long it takes. That's what it is. It's no more sophisticated than is a seven-year-old with a very deep mental disorder, the consequence of abuse not yet overcome.
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)