More Distortions, Half-Truths Published Against Real Liberal Christian Church, Christian Commons, & Tom Usher

There is a comment on www.realliberalchristianchurch.org site details - Technorati against the Real Liberal Christian Church and Tom Usher (me). I have attempted to post a full reply, but Technorati is refusing to post it. Perhaps it was too long. Perhaps URL's should have been in the form of HTML links (per their comment rules, even though their system renders long URL's that do not break their theme). Therefore, here is my full reply. It is my intention to supply the URL on Technorati and in the form of a correctly formed HTML link (I did that, as you may see by the screen shot immediately below):

Technorati Review Comments

"Maximillien Robespierre" wrote of the Real Liberal Christian Church and this author:

...appears to back Western imperialism in most conflicts....

That statement is complete falsehood. I have been very clear throughout in my call that the West not use violence, period.

I have also made very clear that if they are going to use violence under the UNSC "Responsibility to Protect" concept, then they will be, and are, doubly hypocritical if they do not apply it everywhere.

...appears to support George Soros and considers it progress for Soros-funded NGOs to dislodge authoritarian rulers in the Middle East, Asia, and East Europe.

You will note this statement indicates that "Maximillien Robespierre" therefore supports "authoritarian rulers in the Middle East, Asia, and East Europe" and considers their "dislodging" to be regression.

In my writings, I have said plainly that wherever "authoritarian rulers" are removed that neoliberals not take their places but that the people as a whole should make the decisions concerning such things as contracts for mineral extraction and how the proceeds are spent.

I have, for instance, been completely opposed to Qaddaffi's dictatorial lordship over the oil wealth of Libya. I have called for the Libyan people to decide collectively with each Libyan having an equal say, not more say for those with money or neoliberal connections.

As for George Soros, I take his statements and positions one at a time and within context. I am not a capitalist and do not fully endorse George Soros's prescriptions for the economy. Given the choice between laissez-faire capitalism and George Soros's Keynesian and somewhat Post-Keynesian positions, however, certainly George's positions are the less onerous. I am wholeheartedly anti-Koch Brothers.

I have called for United States Notes (USN), which are interest and tax free, to replace Federal Reserve Notes. I have said that USN be used to pay off the National Debt. I'm original in saying that USN should be pegged to real productivity measured in real-time so there will be no inflation or deflation. You may read about my proposals on the RLCC site. I am for economic democracy, not plutocracy. In the longer run, I am for a moneyless system. All of these positions are spelled out in great detail on the RLCC-CCP (Christian Commons Project) site.

...holding their leaders to a seemingly higher standard than the governments of the EU.

Has this person bothered to research my statements on the Real Liberal Christian Church website concerning the policies and practices of the various US administrations down through history and my position on Britain and it's support for Bush-43's various wars? Has he bothered to read my statements concerning Barack Obama and the lies about Iran's nuclear-weapons program? Has he read my statements concerning the Georgian War?

I was in favor of the French position in the UN vs. Bush-43's in the run up to the invasion of Iraq. I have made clear that I favor France's social-welfare system and health-care system over that of the US. I have though been critical of France concerning its poor treatment of non-violent Muslims in France and a number of other things. The shift to supporting Bush was appalling. Obviously, my criticism concerning hypocrisy in applying RtoP applies directly to France. I have also been clear about my views concerning Germany and it's economic policies towards Greece and others. I won't belabor this here.

Is "Maximillien Robespierre" a Stalinist?

Has "Maximillien Robespierre" conferred with me on any of this? If so, where and when and what did he ask and what were my responses before he decided to post his false statements.

In addition, you will note that "Maximillien Robespierre" is a handle. If it is his real name, then I would like to see where he has an open identity with it.

...a new Christian denomination (led by, yes, the author based on a vision purported to have come directly from God). However, it has only amassed about $55 in donations over a few years.

How can one begin a Christian denomination without leading that effort? Also, if anyone bothers to read the post on the site "About Our Name," that person, if he has sense and understanding, will see that it is not a "new" denomination but a clearing up of what Christian means.

Christians know that God is within. If I have been moved within to begin the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project, then am I to turn around and say that God has had nothing to do with it? What a preposterous thing upon which to attack me. Of course, certain atheists would deny me regardless. Other atheists, however, would see the illogic in "Maximillien Robespierre"'s comment. Clearly, he has little comprehension about Jesus's true Christianity.

As for how much money the RLCC has, that amount isn't known by "Maximillien Robespierre." He is going by PayPal donations on the site. PayPal is not the sole source of donations. The amount the RLCC has is not and was not $55 as of the date "Maximillien Robespierre" posted his "review" comment on Technorati.

Regardless, if we are to gauge the rightness or wrongness of a cause based upon donations to it, then which cause has received the most in donations and is "Maximillien Robespierre" willing to then say that, that cause is the best? Causes he hates have receive more in donations than causes he loves, but is he bright enough to think about that before he writes unsubstantiated comments attacking the Real Liberal Christian Church and me?

Isn't that right, Thomas Smitherman?

It's really sad that people are such twisters. When will they see the light?

Donate


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)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in United States Notes. Bookmark the permalink.