Comments on: Separation of church and state? Pastor Brad Brandon thumbs his nose at it.

By: Rob

Rob — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 22:38:22 +0000

@StephanieZ:

I’d also expect someone with the nym to know that Jefferson is the one who coined that phrase and used it in his letters indicating that it was his intent.

By: anthrosciguy

anthrosciguy — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 21:22:05 +0000

Bob, here’s the deal. I, and every other American, is paying for Pastor Brad Brandon’s microphone. Even though I am an atheist, I pay for his church. And I ask very little in return, only that he obey the laws — and especially the Constitution — of the United States of America. If Pastor Brad Brandon wants to let me off the hook for paying for his church, he can legally endorse anyone he wants from his pulpit. But Pastor Brad Brandon doesn’t want to do that; he wants the privileges without the responsibility; he wants my money but he doesn’t want to follow the law that allows him to take that money.

By: Stephanie Z

Stephanie Z — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 20:05:38 +0000

I would think that someone who wanted to claim Jefferson’s name would also be willing to claim his description of the First Amendment. Of course, I’d also expect Thomas Jefferson to know that “never mind” is two words.

By: Clark Ketchum

Clark Ketchum — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 12:26:04 +0000

Alas, Bob is representative of a large group of our fellow citizens that do not understand, let alone have read our Constitution. I’ve been meeting a lot of these folk in the last year or two, too lazy to think for themselves about the consequences of ignoring the separation clause of the first ammendment. Religions exist to push themselves as the one true way (contrary to what your local religious authorities will tell you). To give them undue political power has, historically, been a recipe for disaster. Our founding fathers knew this and wished for us to avoid the problems and bloodshed they witnessed in European history.

By: Charles Sullivan

Charles Sullivan — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 08:41:05 +0000

Now is the time to to nail them for breaking the law.

By: jaf

jaf — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 01:55:27 +0000

As stated by others above, Bob, you missed the point.
Tax-exempt status is a privilege, and other groups that have that privilege are required not to endorse any candidates.

Also, I would like to let you know the difference between “it’s” and “its.”
It’s = it is. Its = possessive form of it.

Good grammar is useful if you want to make your point look valid.

By: MadScientist

MadScientist — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 01:48:31 +0000

@Bob: The state cannot speak for any church, otherwise that is a violation of the constitution. The state however is obliged to keep churches out of politics and some of the church privileges (such as the tax exemption clause) are, by contract, dependent on the church staying out of politics.

When Obama says the muslims have every right to put up their building in NYC, he’s not speaking for any church, he is supporting the constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion. That is one case of the intent of the amendment working pretty much as originally envisioned. We have a case of people wanting to suppress other people’s right to worship whatever skyfairy they please and we have government officials telling the mob that they’re not allowed to do suppress those people.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 01:09:30 +0000

Bob, the pastor is totally in his rights to talk about whatever he wants to talk about any time he wants to.

Even endorsing candidates from the pulpit is in his rights. Totally.

But, it does invalidate his tax status, which is a privilege. A privilege he has abused.

I am one among a growing number of taxpayers who are tired of paying taxes for these churches, many of which are essentially big business free riding on their tax status. I was in a church the other day that was a conference center. It was hosting a conference for a medical group that had nothing to do with churches. Just a paying customer getting a more competitive rate because the company providing the services does not have to pay taxes on their land.

Your blog tagline talks about extreme integrity. I’m not convinced you’d know it if you saw it.

By: Bob Butler

Bob Butler — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 00:55:29 +0000

I have to agree with the pastor, it seems to be one sided. The Church can not speak about politics but the State can speak about the church. I wonder if you would be so aggressive if he had spoken at a ball game or at a community BBQ. It is only because he is a pastor that you tar and feathering this guy.