UPDATE Thursday, December 03, 2009: I had told Google Blog Search that if they stopped censoring me, I'd say so on this Blog. As of this "UPDATE," Google Blog Search is now showing 1,967 posts as indexed and linked. () That's up again from only 4 at one point. Therefore, I'm adding this update.
1,967 is not all of the posts, but it seems that perhaps they are slowly re-indexing the site. I give them the benefit of the doubt. I haven't looked to see if they are avoiding "controversial" posts.
Thanks! and I didn't even ask. As for food, I walked to the store yesterday and carried a bag home. I'm okay. Thanks for caring.
I wish everyone could get some food. I know the superrich are starving people on purpose. It's disgusting. I hate their way! I often think about hungry people and think of you handing out paper plates of food at the park to destitute American Indians. You know, they've tried to make doing that illegal. I've tried to imagine someone (a police-state officer) coming up to you telling you whom you can and cannot feed, whom you can and cannot call to your table. It makes me sad to think about the evil minds that have actually passed such laws (sort of teary eyed), but I thought you showed a good heart doing that. I was impressed and obviously, have never forgotten.
It's really bad how much more hardhearted the world is becoming. I know there were always hardhearted types around and in high places, but the greed and violence-loving and the depravity that has worked to ruin us all is just so much more prevalent. I know that my Christian Commons idea would have gone over several decades ago. People come and read the idea and the vast, vast majority just hate it. It's amazingly bad. I've had a few out of literally tens of thousands of visitors who have said it's a good idea, but they don't join together to make it happen. I think it defines the times.
Google is heavily censoring me. They've stopped showing some of my results in blog searches. It's on account of the politics of the two boys/men who created Google. Traffic has fallen off dramatically. It's intentional because they hate what I'm standing for.
I didn't like the Google concept from the get-go. I didn't like it that people could buy their way to the top. Search results were vastly more tuned to exact content no matter how unpopular before Google came along and started filtering by lowest-common-denominator popularity that content providers purchased (purchased popularity; dumbing down). I would really like to see a search engine come back where brains prevailed rather than mammon.
Anyway, I'm not going to let them get me down about it. I'll do my best in this world to say how it really ought to be and try to live it too, but if no one else wants to go there, I'll take it with me when I leave. I'm so glad God lets me repent. I was so bad I can't remember how low I fell. That's weird to those who are made ignorant by hardened hearts. I know you get that.
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)