Wednesday, December 18, 2013

Federal Judge Flunks History Lesson

Federal Judge Flunks History Lesson
Patrick Henry’s Give me liberty or death speech was “known as The Parson's Cause in the year 1763.”
Does this judge not know what prompted/inspired Patrick Henry to make THE SPEECH?  This speech that was pivotal and perhaps the single most important speech in American History.  Without this speech there would have been no Bill of Rights and likely No Constitution and No America as we know it.  A Preacher was beaten to death by the Agents of Government – read on and remember . . ..

Commentary RE!...Federal Judge Strips Religious Tax Exemption From Preachers, Declares It Unconstitutional
“U.S. District Court Judge Barbara B. Crabb of the Western District of Wisconsin ruled that the so-called “parish exemption,” which allows religious ministers to avoid paying taxes on the value of their housing granted to them by their religious employers, “violates the establishment clause” of the U.S. Constitution and must be discontinued.”

Discussion and Commentary by Bez7:
The decision is based on governments love of money – “Within the 43 page decision, the court cited that the tax exemption costs taxpayers billions.”]

1 Timothy 6:10 King James Version (KJV)

10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
The power to tax is the power to destroy!
“It is my contention that the axioms and principles set forth in support of this decision, if correct, apply to all taxation. That is, the power to tax any one by any government involves the power to destroy and that this power of government by taxation to destroy can defeat and render useless the power of individuals to create and preserve what they have created.”
Read more: http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/the-power-to-tax-is-the-power-to-destroy#ixzz2nm7ViG6q
Almost all can answer the question “What happened on July 4, 1776?”  A. “The Declaration of Independence”  But how many of you can answer the Question: “What was the Declaration of July 6, 1775?”  You will find the answer somewhere below.*
If you have never read Patrick Henry’s most famous speech or if has been a long time since you did I have included it below.  Take the time – READ IT NOW!
Then I ask you “Have we come full circle?”
When I was much younger, before 401C 3 designations were sold to the American public for Churches and religious organizations to have tax exempt status – an exemption they already had!  We were taught that the American Flag and the Christian Flag were to be displayed AT EQUAL HEIGHTS.  This was to proclaim that neither was superior in standing and authority but were co-equals in authority – each in its own sphere of influence and administration UNDER GOD. 
The early settlers came to America seeking religious freedom.  This country was dedicated in thanksgiving to God Almighty and evidence of His Hand of Blessing and Protection was undeniable through many decades in our early history.  America was founded on the firm foundations of Bible teaching and practice as proclaimed by Preachers of the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ.  And we prospered so long as We the People acknowledged that we were a nation UNDER GOD.  
In more recent years I have observed Churches with a single flag pole on their property with the American Flag flying above the Christian Flag and at first this struck me as offensive and wrong.  However, I have come to realize that when a church is organized under the 401 C 3 rules then this is a proper display of the fact that any church so organized is proclaiming that its creator is the STATE and NOT GOD.   It is proclaiming that it is subservient to the rules  of the CORPORATION first and God second.
In a society that has forgotten its roots, does not even teach the history and founding principles of our foundations to our youth and to immigrants, that celebrates “diversity” more than unity and “political correctness” more than truth then it is not surprising that a Federal Judge has ruled what formerly would have been unthinkable; indeed such a decision would have been declared a clear violation of the First Amendment.  The emphasis on avoiding an “establishment of religion” while ignoring “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” has turned the intent upside down.
Does this judge not know what prompted/inspired Patrick Henry to make THE SPEECH?  This speech that was pivotal and perhaps the single most important speech in American History.  Without this speech there would have been no Bill of Rights and likely No Constitution and No America as we know it.  A Preacher was beaten to death by the Agents of Government – read on and remember . . ..

Patrick Henry’s Give me liberty or death speech “known as The Parson's Cause in the year 1763.”
Patrick Henry
"...Virtue, morality, and religion. This is the armor, my friend, and this alone that renders us invincible. These are the tactics we should study. If we lose these, we are conquered, fallen indeed...so long as our manners and principles remain sound, there is no danger." ~ Patrick Henry
This page is a brief on Patrick Henry- the God-fearing Patriot. Patrick Henry's first oratory landmark was known as The Parson's Cause in the year 1763. This suit grew out of a Virginia law that was opposed by King George III of England. The law permitted payment of the Anglican clergy in money instead of tobacco whenever the tobacco crop was poor. Henry astonished the audience in the courtroom with his eloquence in promulgating the doctrine of natural rights, the political theory that man is born with certain inalienable rights. During the trial, he declared, that a king, by vetoing acts of the colonial legislature, "degenerates into a tyrant and forfeits all right to his subjects' obedience." This would not be the last time he would endear himself to the cause of the plight of the churchmen.
This lawyer, a former farmer and storekeeper, rode into Culpepper, Virginia in March, 1775. As he approached the center of town, he was disgusted and shocked by the sight that met his stare. In the middle of the town square, a man was lashed to a whipping post, his back was bloody and raw, being laid bare by the metal-tips of the whip that had persecuted him. Henry inquired of the crowd what the man did to deserve such a beating as this. The answer was that he was a Preacher of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, one of a dozen, who refused to take out a license to preach from the Anglican (English) church. The governor was under an edict from King George III to force all preachers to take the license and the 'renegade ministers' were put on trial - without the benefit of a jury. This particular minister had greatly resisted, declaring in court, "I will never submit to taking your license. I am controlled by the Holy Spirit, and authorized by God Almighty, and I will not allow you to control me by a license, no matter what you may do to me." This man, and his (11) fellow preachers, were all publicly flogged for their 'treasonous behavior' - they had resisted to blood  - and this man ... unto death. The beating he withstood was so brutal that the outraged Patrick Henry could count the man's ribs. The courage and thirst for liberty of this 'man of God' inspired Patrick Henry deeply. There is little doubt that the event blazed in his mind as he spoke a short while later the words that he would become most famous for - "give me liberty - or give me death." The text of his famous speech is included here in this historic brief so you may read of his love for liberty and trust in the Lord of Hosts.
On March 23, 1775, Patrick Henry attended the second revolutionary meeting of the Continental Congress held in St. John's church in Richmond, Virginia. Patrick Henry urged the colony to arm its militia and adopt "... a posture of defense...embodying, arming, and disciplining such a number of men as may be sufficient for that purpose." Without any reference notes, just prior to the final vote, Henry gave his inspiring oratory before men and God.
Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death               Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775.
"No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
How much closer are we to the fulfillment of the prophetic warning of President Ronald Reagan: “If this nation ever forgets that we are a nation UNDER GOD then we will be a NATION GONE UNDER”.
Have we come full circle?  Bez7
*ANSWER: The Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms was a document issued by the Second Continental Congress on July 6, 1775.

For further study go to these articles:
Thomas Jefferson“Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends [life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness] it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government...”  Thomas Jefferson

Disclaimer:  It is not my intent to encourage taking up arms against our government; instead, I do encourage Christians to get involved in the debate, to take up the weapons of our warfare that are spiritual:  2 Corinthians 10:4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Bez7
End comments.  /s/William Eason aka Bez7


Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 9:38 AM
Subject: Fwd: FW: WOW!!!...Federal Judge Strips Religious Tax Exemption From Preachers, Declares It Unconstitutional
Original---------- Forwarded message ---------to me 

Federal Judge Strips Religious Tax Exemption From Preachers, Declares It Unconstitutional

Posted Today, 09:21 PM
Federal Judge Strips Religious Tax Exemption From Preachers, Declares It Unconstitutional
Prepare for Christian right-wing rage. On Friday, a federal judge struck down a 1954 law that provided a hefty tax exemption to Christian pastors.
A federal court has declared a tax exemption for preachers unconstitutional.
In the court’s opinion, Judge Barbara Crabb of the Western District of Wisconsin wrote that 26 U.S. C. § 107(2) “violates the establishment clause… because the exemption provides a benefit to religious persons and no one else, even though doing so is not necessary to alleviate a special burden on religious exercise.”
Within the 43 page decision, the court cited that the tax exemption costs taxpayers billions. At least $2.3 billion has been stashed away by supposed “men of god” over a five year period between 2002 and 2007 alone.
According to the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), the organization that brought the suit, the tax exemption allowed “ministers of the gospel” to exclude a housing allowance from their income.
“Ministers may, for instance, use the untaxed income to purchase a home, and, in a practice known as “double dipping,” may then deduct interest paid on the mortgage and property taxes,” FFRF said in anews release announcing the court’s decision.
Furthermore FFRF noted what pastors often use the tax exemption for.
Quote
“Clergy are permitted to use the housing allowance not just for rent or mortgage, but for home improvements including swimming pools, maintenance and repairs,” FFRF states. “They may exempt from taxable income up to the fair market rental value of their home, particularly benefiting well-heeled pastors. The benefit extends to churches, which can pay clergy less, as tax-free salaries go further.”
Such tax exemptions rob taxpayers of billions of dollars..
In short, unlike most Americans who struggle to even keep their homes, pastors get a free ride from churches, which is then exempted from taxation so that they can use the money to make their own more extravagant. Basically, pastors are robbing taxpayers to improve their own lifestyles.
In the decades since 1954, this particular exemption has kept billions upon billions of dollars in revenues from the federal government. Such money could have paid for education, social programs that help the poor, health care, housing and other programs that improve the lives of Americans as a whole. Sadly, pastors have simply been allowed to pocket the extra cash for themselves all these years, even as many church leaders decry things such as the national debt today. That’s another thing the money could have been applied to all this time.
The tax exemption was passed by Congress in the 1950s along with other violations of the Constitution.
The exemption was sponsored by Congressman Peter Mack, who urged pastors be compensated by the US government for “carrying on such a courageous fight against this [godless and anti-religious world movement].” You would think words such as these would have come out of the mouth of a Republican, but oddly enough, Mack was a Democrat.
Of course, the fact that Mack was a Democrat is irrelevant. The point is that the law he supported is totally unconstitutional. As Crabb states in the ruling, “Some might view a rule against preferential treatment as exhibiting hostility toward religion, but equality should never be mistaken for hostility. It is important to remember that the establishment clause protects the religious and nonreligious alike.”
Such an exemption is completely unfair in our society. It bestows a governmental gift to Christian pastors for waging a crusade against atheists and non-believers. Why should pastors be given such treatment by the federal government when the rest of the American people do not? This is clearly a case of government respecting an establishment of religion, which is forbidden by the Constitution.
Of course, the exemption was passed in 1954 at a time when violation of the establishment clause ran rampant. In the same year, Congress mandated that “In God We Trust” be engraved on our money. Later that decade, the phrase became the national motto. The 1950s also saw the addition of “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance. All clearly refer to the Christian deity, and are all therefore unconstitutional as well.

This victory in federal court is a major one, but it’s still just a small step toward what must be done.
The ruling on tax exemptions is a major victory but just a small step toward eliminating the billions of dollars churches still receive.
But the “parsonage exemption” that was struck down on Friday is merely a fraction of tens of billions of dollars that churches rake in off the backs of taxpayers. According to the Washington Post, religious tax exemptions cost Americans over $82 billion every year. Religious groups also own property exceeding the amount of $600 billion. Imagine if no religion received such tax exemptions. $82 billion would be saved every year and could go toward things like health care, education, infrastructure, and paying off the debt. Or the money could simply be returned to the pockets of the citizens of this county. At a time when Americans are struggling to get by, I’m sure they’d welcome the relief such money would provide.
No religion in this nation should get a tax-free ride in this nation. Not all taxpayers share the same religion. Therefore, their tax dollars shouldn’t go to a church or religion they do not support. In other words, religious organizations should rely on their congregations for donations, not the federal government that is supposed to represent everyone regardless of what their beliefs may be. As Benjamin Franklin once said,
Quote
“When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support
it so that its professors are obligated to call for help of the civil power, it’s a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.”
~Benjamin Franklin, letter to Richard Price, October 9, 1780

Instead of taking care of religious organizations with taxpayer money, the federal government should use those revenues to care for the people who paid them in the first place. It’s not just the right thing to do, it’s the constitutional thing to do. This victory in federal court is a major one, but it’s still just a small step toward what must be done.


2 comments:

Dan said...

Does this Judge know that President Nixon signed into law Section 508 of the Internal Revenue Code in 1969, that Churches are NOT Required to be 501(c)(3) corporations!
They are EXEMPT, and ALL Judges Reject this Law to Mandate ALL information of a Church is to be Provided to the IRS, and THE UNITED STATES, INC. can tell a church what they can and can NOT Preach, which comes to ONLY those churches that support Government Totalitarianism can get political!
Kent Hovind in sitting in jail because he Obeyed the Law, Section 508, and the Government did NOT!

Tax Rate Schedules said...

Tax can destroy government officials and end up destroying regular workers but if it goes to the right project then it is a tax well spent.