EPISCOPAL SYNAGOGUE OF SATAN, BARON COHEN ABUSIVE, HARRY POTTER DOUBLE STANDARD
The Episcopal Church decided on Friday, July 17, 2009, to bless same-sex unions where civil partnerships are recognized by the given states. That comes on the heels of their decision to ordain openly homosexual men and women. Well, that does it. That church is utterly doomed. It's the synagogue of Satan. There's no doubt about that now.
Meanwhile, you have homosexuals deliberately massing on Mormon property to stage mass-kiss-ins it's being called. Apparently there is some dispute about what happened to spark it. The Mormons said that a couple of homosexuals were groping each other and swearing and such and were roughed up a bit by security guards.
Then you have the movie by some homosexual named Baron Cohen where he went around trying to trap people into being confronted by him taking off his clothes in person or showing a video of him stripping.
I read one account where he targeted U.S. Congressman Ron Paul and another where he targeted a Palestinian in Palestine. When I read about those incidences and also saw that his movie is being called a "hit," it just confirmed that the world is still going down deeper into the darkness.
This sort of thing is going to harden hearts more and more. It will cause wrath. This Cohen has a wish to be abused. He's a sadomasochist. He enjoys inflicting pain, and he's looking to goad someone into beating him up.
His actions actually constitute criminal assault, although I don't advocate people playing into his illness. People shouldn't reward him for his abusing people and making the world a darker place either. Buying movie tickets to watch him do that sort of stuff to others is only making things worse. It's a sign of the times. Hard-heartedness is rampant and increasing.
Also, the new Harry Potter movie is being billed as a blockbuster. After reading about all the Jews who love it because the villain is blond to allude to Hitler's Aryan racism, I just think that's such a double standard considering what Jews are doing to Arab Palestinians. ("Harry Potter and the 'Half-Blood' Jews," by Naomi Pfefferman. The Jewish Journal and JewishJournal.com. July 15, 2009.) Stereotyping blonds that way is not helpful. Of course, the old wizard is a homosexual according to the author. She announced that just to proselytize to the youngest children, who will come to regret the libertinism of those who are now leading the world astray. What an evil mind! It's no mere harmless thing that she writes about black magic. It all goes together.
Well, this life is a sieve, this planet is partly a prison for criminally insane souls, and the inmates are mundanely in charge.
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)